IMDb > 20 Years After (2008) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
20 Years After (2008) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 21 comments in total 

30 out of 42 people found the following comment useful :-
Low Budget / Bad Story / Bad Acting / Terrible...., 25 September 2008
1/10
Author: Mark LeD from United States

I am not against low budget films and when I caught a screening of this movie I was actually a little excited. The excitement quickly turned into agony as I forced myself to sit through it. The story was just plain boring, the acting was less then convincing and the effects were cheesy. There were parts that made no sense and didn't have anything to do with the story. I could see they tried to develop the characters but it was done so poorly and confusing that it just became a complete train wreck.

This reminded me of something that a High School drama club would have put together....

Was the above comment useful to you?

25 out of 35 people found the following comment useful :-
by the book low budget, 29 September 2008
4/10
Author: Jo Farmer from Germany

I read the comments on this movie here before I saw it, so I expected nothing - and was pleasantly surprised. It's actually not that bad, suffers the same flaws that bothered nobody in "Children of Men".

Yes, the acting is sometimes bad, but not without it's moments: Reg E. Cathey gave a good performance, for instance. Acting is not the problem of this movie; directing and sound (effects) are.

As I said, I was pleasantly surprised and watched all through it, which I don't do on REALLY bad flicks. I'm giving it 4/10 because it had it's moments but I couldn't honestly recommend this to any of my friends (unless there is really nothing else at hand), who are not such nutters about movies as I am.

Was the above comment useful to you?

33 out of 53 people found the following comment useful :-
Read This First, 26 September 2008
1/10
Author: chrismichaeld from United States

First off I had to fill out a app here to comment on this as this movie is terrible. The people that made this should be ashamed of themselves including every actor, the writer(s), director, and who ever produced this and said they would invest in this. It really didn't make any sense. The person who wrote this was trying so hard to make the dialog artistic that the entire screenplay and interaction of the characters is painful to watch. Because of a nuclear blast and a some type of weather disaster (of which they don't name or explain in the movie) technology such as automobiles, computers, telephones cease to exist. Oh and everyone in the future becomes a trashy hippie according to this film. Not to mention you will notice that the entire movie is filmed in the same field. The lowest you can rate a movie here is a ONE which this movie did not deserve.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
Beware!, 7 January 2009
2/10
Author: jaddis01 from United States

I went to a red box, saw the cover (which looked interesting), and thought I'd give it a shot. From the beginning until the end it was one big snooze fest. The mediocre acting was all that kept this film slightly afloat. I've never commented on a movie here before, but I had to register to warn the public. It is a boring and pointless story. It was as interesting as finding a box of a strangers old home movies and sitting through them thanking heaven that you are not friends with these people. I cannot believe money was wasted on this movie, i.e., the cost to make it, rent it, even the electricity needed to play it. The character build up was all this movie had going for it and it failed. A big snore!

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Lets leave this wasteland for another wasteland, 4 November 2008
2/10
Author: frequency-2 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Most of the acting was interesting and done well. The story was a real drag that is a little difficult to pin down.

I would say it's mostly about some sort of romantic idea of the radio being a way people communicate. There's a pregnant woman whose main reason for leaving one place to go to another to give birth is to get away from her mother, because I didn't see any advantage for her ending up in an abandoned city.

The sci-fi premise just doesn't work. Whatever happened 20 years ago is not made clear in relation to why no children have been born. So the impetus of Sci-fi is cut off at the knees and is never even partially explained as to what happened beyond some sort of limited nuclear war.

I could live with that sort sort of premise, that nobody know what happened, but the world in the film just didn't look that bad, even at the end when they got to the city.

I spose it was meant to be ironic that the woman who wanted not to have her baby in a cave or in a basement ended up giving birth in an underground parking garage, but it came off more to me that that was all the set the production could afford at that point.

The movie does establish a sense of mood...but it's kinda sleepy coming down from smoking a dooby mood.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
This is going nowhere really slow …, 23 April 2009
3/10
Author: Great-Cthulhu from Germany

One can't help but wonder how on earth anybody could read the script of this dross and then participate. Because, the actors are not half bad (for a movie of this category) and, while still in the land of zero budget, the overall look was okay too.

This flick's biggest problem is the storyline, or to be frank, the absence of one. Things just happen here, then there, the characters move from point A to B – its all very random and I really could not grasp the idea behind this whole sorry effort. It just makes no sense.

Watching this movie left me kinda blank in the head, like having tried to read a book in a language I don't understand.

Had the makers of 20 Years After bothered with a coherent story, this could have been okay – so it is just a way to waste 1.5 h of your life (in a very boring fashion).

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
My Review, 5 November 2008
2/10
Author: joemamaohio from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

20 years after the world comes to an end, Sarah (Azura Skye) is pregnant and about to give birth to the first baby in 15 years. She is pursued by people who want her baby, and she tries to find the mysterious voice on the radio (Joshua Leonard), who could help her.

Think "Children of Men" only without the great acting, effects and storyline. All this film is is a boring, lackluster hour and a half of worthless crap. Azura Skye was hardly in the film, and when she was acting, it was so quiet and monotone that it lacked any sense of urgency. And Michael (Leonard) is your typical end-of-the-world antagonist who talks about how life was like before it all happened. I would've loved to see what happened, I bet it would've been way more entertaining.

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Obviously Low-Budget but all in all Pretty good show., 15 April 2009
8/10
Author: rmp4 from United States

I can only assume this was a low cost production compared to your run of the mill Block Buster Titles, but as I am not one to turn away from a movie simply because it doesn't have awesome Hollywood cinematics poured into it, I rented this at my local video store. I was pretty impressed, the acting was actually really good IMO, and I liked the all around feel of the movie as it flowed along. There isn't much for special effects here is the only knock I guess you could really harp on, but I rank story quality over eye candy myself. I have actually researched the name "Jim Torres" after seeing this to check out more films he has directed, as a movie can only be as good as its director.

Was the above comment useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
92% Bad, 14 November 2008
2/10
Author: BoulevardPark from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Let's start with the positive: Far and away, the best thing in this movie is Tara Nevin's AWESOME performance of "Stars Fell on Alabama". And Azure Skye is very nice to look at. The story leaves way too many questions not only unanswered but not even acknowledged. Like "What really happened?". "How come everyone is so clean and groomed if the water is (and has been for 20 years) full of toxins?" All the exposition comes in one big clump at the end, and it's totally non sequitur. Imagine a slightly less ridiculous explanation for everything than in Silent Hill. A guy who looks like he could be Lionel Richie's gay brother goes blathering on about some pseudo magical nonsense as he leads a pack of refugees into what seems to be a latter day low budget Burning Man camp. Bah! Once the movie got that far along I was only looking for more good music. When the ending comes, it's abrupt and hokey/smarmy, as if the filmmakers suddenly ran out of money or they just realised that it was a lost cause.

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
I wanted to poke my eyes out with a spoon, 14 October 2008
1/10
Author: rmhoman from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

okay where to start, first of all the story was jagged and discombobulated it had no rhythm what so ever. the special effects were absolutely appalling the acting was wooden and ridiculous. there were scenes that were cut weird and didn't make sense. for example a truck scene where the vehicle moves five feet and then there is a 2 sentence argument between the lead actors which i can only guess was added to show tension but failed miserably. At times the writing was artsy and then at times shallow and riddled with clichés. I can not fathom how this film won 3 awards they must have been bought. not only do I give one star to the movie but also one star to the film festivals who endorsed this garbage.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history