Movie Review Hereafter

Hereafter (2010) 

Directed by Clint Eastwood

Written by Peter Morgan

Starring Matt Damon, Cecile de France

Release Date October 22nd, 2010

Published October 21st, 2010

At 80 years old it appears that Clint Eastwood is ready to start a conversation about death. He's touched on the subject before, in both “Million Dollar Baby” and “Gran Torino,” but that conversation has mostly expressed his futile desire to control his destiny and decide how he goes out. In his new drama “Hereafter” Eastwood begins a conversation about the afterlife that some will find fascinating and others will find unsatisfying.

Matt Damon is ostensibly the star of “Hereafter” as George, a former psychic turned factory worker. George had a very successful business talking to the dead with books and his own website but the inherent sadness of what he did finally forced him to give it up. Now, George keeps to himself out of fear that if he even brushes someone's hand he may pick up some psychic connection to the dead. Needless to say, this has put a crimp in his love life.

Across the globe a French journalist named Marie Lelay (Cécile De France) is on vacation in some unnamed Asian country when it is devastated by a massive tidal wave. Marie is nearly killed and experiences a near death experience. When she returns to Paris to resume her life she finds herself plagued by visions of the hereafter and wanting to know for sure if she had indeed experienced death and proof of an afterlife.

Similar thoughts consume a British youngster named Marcus (Frankie/George McLaren) who has just lost his twin Brother Jason (George/Frankie McLaren). Jason was 12 minutes older and the leader to George's follower personality. Without Jason calling the shots George is unmoored and desperate to find a way to contact Jason in the hereafter. After he is removed from his junkie mom and placed with a nice foster family, George continuously runs away to seek psychics, mediums and any other crackpot promising a glimpse of the afterlife.

These three stories will eventually coalesce into one story in one location and it's a rather jarring use of deus ex machina on the part of director Clint Eastwood and Oscar nominated screenwriter (Peter Morgan). You can forgive the forced and mechanical way the plot trips into one space but it's not easy and requires some serious heavy lifting on the part of star Matt Damon.

Damon is the key to much of what works in “Hereafter.” He plays his psychic wound with a deep, soulful longing that is highly compelling and yet another example of Damon's exceptional talent as a character actor and a movie star. Damon carries off George's ability as a medium with a believable solemnity and sadness. He doesn't want this gift but wields it with care and sensitivity and you believe in it because he does.

French actress Cecile De France is an astonishing beauty in her elegant French-ness. She is both aloof and alluring. Less interesting are the young twin actors Frankie and George McLaren. It's not their fault really. Rather, it's the feeling that placing a young boy in this role feels a little emotionally suggestive. It feels like a dramatic shortcut to cast someone so young in such an emotional role.

None of the actors gets much help from the story which is basically nonexistent. “Hereafter” is not really a story so much as a cocktail party conversation starter for existentialists and true believers alike. Do you believe in the hereafter? What do you think it's like? Is there life after death? Can you talk to the dead? Are dead relatives waiting for you on the other side?

The conversation starts and each of the characters in “Hereafter” seems to have a perspective but what you really want is a definitive idea of what Clint Eastwood believes and that is just not there in “Hereafter”. Mr. Eastwood is comfortable touching off the conversation but when it comes to offering a definitive point of view on the hereafter Eastwood backs away and leaves the audience to attend to the major questions on their own.

There is nothing wrong with this approach; it's certainly a fascinating conversation. However, when it comes to raising these questions in a film it raises an expectation in the audience that the filmmaker will offer some kind of declaration of belief. We want answers and Clint Eastwood is not interested in giving an answer, just posing the questions and fobbing the conversation off on us as we walk out of the theater.

In the end it's not unfair to feel that Clint Eastwood cops out on the big question: What do you think the afterlife will be like Clint? With him being unwilling to answer the question “Hereafter” the movie feels aimless and adrift. Damon's ability to speak to the dead certainly hints at what the director believes the hereafter is like but the film hedges on just what heaven is like or even if there is a heaven. Where exactly are these souls in the hereafter? Earth? Heaven? Some strange abyss? What religion does this version of the hereafter adhere to?

Since we are talking about Clint Eastwood, an artist of the highest order, I will not assume a commercial motive behind the vagary of “Hereafter” and this version of the hereafter but if it were any other director who offered such a vague notion and failed to address any kind of religious order when talking about the hereafter one would certainly have to consider a commercial motivation. 

So, do I recommend “Hereafter?” It's a good question and one I've been wrestling with since I watched it. The answer is; kind of. Clint Eastwood is a masterful director and even his vague notions about the afterlife are populated by fascinating characters and elegant images. There is an overwhelming feel to “Hereafter;” the film casts a compelling shadow over the audience. At the end however, it's hard to escape the feeling that Eastwood chickened out. He wanted this conversation but is unwilling to commit his own true feelings about life after death to the big screen.

There is a fascinating divide in opinions developing over “Hereafter”. Older film critics are embracing the film while younger critics have been rejecting it. I am 34 years old and fall somewhere in the middle. I'm not so close to the grave that I spend much time thinking about death but I am not the young whippersnapper who believes in his unending invincibility. I am open to the conversation begun in “Hereafter” but I am not interested in vague notions, I want someone to be direct about their feelings on this issue and Eastwood is not being direct in “Hereafter” and that leaves me wanting more from this otherwise highly compelling film.