★ 1 / 10
I've watched a lot of dumb movies, but
tmdb28039023
I've watched a lot of dumb movies, but never had I seen one that defends the notion of 'ignorance is bliss' as zealously as After the Dark. Director John…
I've watched a lot of dumb movies, but never had I seen one that defends the notion of 'ignorance is bliss' as zealously as After the Dark. Director John Huddles sets the action, such as it is, at an international school in Jakarta; specifically in Mr. Zimit's (James D'Arcy) class.
Zimit's is ostensibly a philosophy class, but it might as well be called 'Exposition 101'. “Do we feel like recapping some of our favorite thought experiments?,” Zimit asks rhetorically on the last day of school to his 20 students, some of whom proceed to do exactly that, also explaining what each experiment consists of.
Now, a classroom is as good a place for an Info Dump as you’ll ever find, but this feels like something more appropriate for the first day of school, not the last; this unfortunate timing turns this into a transparent case of As You Know.
Anyway, someone mentions the infinite monkey theorem: “if you put a monkey at a typewriter and let him bang away at it forever, he'll eventually, almost surely, completely randomly type out the entire play of Hamlet, word for word.” I'd make the obvious joke about how that’s the way this movie was written, except I'm convinced a monkey could do a much better job, and it wouldn't take forever either.
All of this is just a preface to Zimit's own thought experiment, which is a mix of Survivor, Big Brother, and Dungeons & Dragons. Basically, there is a fallout shelter with a capacity of ten people and the class must decide which ten go in and which 11 — counting Zimit — are left out, based on the fictional professions that Zimit randomly assigns them.
This exercise is done thrice, and the repetition only succeeds in highlighting how stupid the movie and its characters really are. For example, Zimit states about the shelter’s inhabitants that “They cannot share oxygen. Every cubic centimeter of breathable air here, once the outer door is sealed, comes from these compressed tanks. This place has been designed to hold 10 people for a year; one more person means death from hypoxia” (to save time, everyone pictures the exact same shelter).
Additionally, the specifications established in the first exercise carry over into the second and third; e.g., the code to open the shelter door at the end of the year is always the same number. Despite this, the class decides that "we need a pregnancy as soon as possible ... produce a healthy baby during the course of the year of confinement" because "having children becomes the No. 1 job after the apocalypse." Guys, have you already forgotten that "one more person means death from hypoxia"?
These characters are nowhere near as smart as Huddles would have us believe, especially James (Rhys Wakefield), boyfriend of Petra (Sophie Lowe); when it becomes apparent that she and Zimit are going to have to repopulate the planet by themselves, James reacts as if they are actually going to have sex (a reaction that makes no sense even within the simulation, considering he’s supposed o be gay in it).
Fortunately for James, Petra likes them dumb, and to this preference is that we owe everything we see here; Zimit, with whom Petra has been cheating on James, believes "he's not smart enough for you." Thus, the whole thing is just a juvenile attempt to expose James’s lack of intelligence, which in turn doesn’t speak very highly of Zimit’s own cranial capacity.
This Petra is something else, by the way; first she plays with Zimit's feelings, and then gets offended that he, philosophy professor and all, is still as human as the next guy and takes her stringing him along personal.
From what we see of James, he wouldn't react much more maturely if he found out about Petra's duplicity, but she rationalizes keeping the truth from him thus: “Punishing [James] doesn't make sense because he doesn't know about us. I'm not sure he needs to know. Especially after how you behaved today.” How she has behaved, however, doesn’t trouble her in the least.
All things considered, After the Dark's message is that “being smart isn't everything,” which is exactly what a fool would say. What else is there apart from intelligence? Physical beauty fades, and sense of humor can only take you so far. I, for one, would never date a person who thought this movie is any good at all.
Read full review
★ 7 / 10
A Thought-Provoking and Underrated Sci-Fi Gem
muzotime_UZBEK
John Huddles' "After the Dark" (2013) delivers an absolutely fascinating and intellectually stimulating sci-fi thriller, immersing viewers in a unique…
John Huddles' "After the Dark" (2013) delivers an absolutely fascinating and intellectually stimulating sci-fi thriller, immersing viewers in a unique philosophical thought experiment about survival and morality. The film excels in its ambitious premise, challenging its characters and the audience to confront difficult ethical dilemmas in a post-apocalyptic scenario. The ensemble cast, featuring a group of philosophy students, delivers compelling performances, each embodying distinct viewpoints and vulnerabilities. Its strength lies in its intelligent script, which sparks genuine debate and introspection, and its willingness to explore complex questions without easy answers. Instead of a typical disaster movie, it offers a fresh, unforgettable, and endlessly rewatchable cinematic experience that prioritizes ideas over action.Is it worth watching? Absolutely. "After the Dark" is a must-watch for those who appreciate intelligent sci-fi, philosophical discussions, and films that dare to be different. It's a truly unique and thought-provoking experience.
Read full review
★ 7 / 10
It's a thought experiment, so light up your brain because you are the students!
w_save_90
Its actually true when they say, if you don't understand it you probably wont like it. Maybe this could spoil a little bit the movie, but it's necessary to…
Its actually true when they say, if you don't understand it you probably wont like it. Maybe this could spoil a little bit the movie, but it's necessary to allow everyone to understand the movie, making them aware they failed the thought experiment! My assessment for the movie is actually positive. It's not exempt of flawless. Maybe the narration is too focused on some sex scenes and even visually ones which could be effectively removed without changing the story and keeping focused the audience. Even the questions raised during the lecture where debated too briefly just because to give to even the most ignorance spectator the tools to solve the riddle! Moving beyond this flawless and reviewing the story you can easily understand at half the movie that the thought exertion is not only requested to students but even to you. The envision of the apocalypse was not less than their life! The big question which is at the basis of the movie is: WHO WILL YOU TAKE WITH YOU DURING YOUR LIFE? Will you surround yourself with smart people, intelligent, maybe scientists just to purse higher objectives and catch all possible opportunities but keeping emotions, amusement and recreational experiences out of your life or will you live your life like a human being? Not only making it dominated by logic but even emotions and precisely philosophy! The thought experiment at the beginning is carried only in one direction but soon, the smartest among them! Realize that there is something more! something that the professor is trying to force them to leave. The final is simply the realization of the importance of what you will put in your life, your loves or just your work accomplishments... Now watch again the movie and keep in mind all those things, you will start to debate even on your own life, not only what choices are made by the students in the movie...
Read full review
5.6/10
24.8K
•••
Love it dont listen to all the bad review