Watch
Hereafter

Hereafter

2010
Drama, Suspense/Thriller
2h 9m
Clint Eastwood directs this supernatural thriller about three very different people and their responses to death, including a hesitant American psychic named George (Matt Damon) who may be able to help the others find answers and peace. Marie (Cécile De France) is a French journalist caught up in the aftereffects of the devastating 2004 tsunami, while in London, young Marcus (Frankie McLaren) seeks to contact his deceased twin brother.
Your probable score
?

Hereafter

2010
Drama, Suspense/Thriller
2h 9m
Your probable score
Avg Percentile 39.04% from 1223 total ratings

Ratings & Reviews

(1223)
Compact view
Compact view
Rated 22 Jan 2011
4
13th
Morgan's script - which is really hanging by a thread - strips what could've been a really interesting film of any kind of ambiguity. Performances lack conviction as lines, mostly a collection of cheesy, cringe-worthy dialogues, are delivered in stilted expositions (I'm looking at you kid). Unlike a good wine, Eastwood doesn't get better with age.
Rated 23 Oct 2010
55
45th
I think Clint Eastwood is trying to convince himself there's something after death.
Rated 01 Mar 2011
30
15th
Eastwood fails in so many ways with this annoyingly simplistic plot and make-you-wanna-vomit story collision. The first scene was great, but from there on it just spiralled downward and its amazing how someone, somewhere in production didnt go: "What the hell are we doing here, and what are we trying to tell?" With that said, Eastwood is still a skillfull director who knows his handywork and that saves it from hitting rock bottom!
Rated 22 Oct 2010
55
39th
Eastwood is a skilled director. He makes the right choices here, engagingly telling a story about a tricky subject with patience and precision. Observant, yet somewhat superficial. It's unlikely to offend anyone because Clint doesn't seem to have anything more radical to say than that death is tabu. That's probably for the best, though, because subtlety isn't exactly the guy's strong suit.
Rated 08 Nov 2010
85
85th
Eastwood explores many themes here, many complex relationships, and traverses them so superbly and with such poise; he may very well be the best director in Hollywood today. I also loved how he shows his own conflict; I don't think he's a personal believer in the so-called "hereafter", or those that claim to be able to communicate with those that have passed (I think that's fairly obvious), but as a device, BAM, there's someone who CAN. A director that pushes himself. What more can you ask for?
Rated 15 Jan 2011
50
38th
Should be so much better than it is, though it's still solid work by Eastwood who just can't seem to make a bad movie even when he's not on form. The French subplot should have been stripped entirely and rewritten - I fail to see what it adds. Branches off in other subplots as well, either leaving them hanging or piling on too much. Not enough of George (y'know, the most interesting person in the film), and far too many falsely "substantiated" allusions to the real-world reality of the premise.
Rated 23 Jan 2011
4
24th
Eastwood is getting senile. Also - the people, who green-light such a pretentious nonsense. The effects were not so bad though.
Rated 27 Feb 2011
1
12th
One of Clint Eastwood's worst movies ever. The Oscar nominated effects are bad for 1995, forget 2010. The plot is ridiculous and stupid and involves Matt Damon touching people's hands and then me being bored. It just seemed like an easy film to digest for light minded and boring people to enjoy. Matt Damon and Clint Eastwood should work but 2 cinematic nothings have proved that they don't mix well.
Rated 12 Mar 2011
20
2nd
A list of words starting with the letter H: Horrible... Hideous... Horrendous... Hereafter... Hell...
Rated 23 Apr 2011
10
8th
Empty meaningless, and unmemorable.
Rated 15 May 2011
30
17th
What surprises most about Eastwood's latest is that it in style and theme differs from what made him one of the most exciting directors in the 00's. It's hard to imagine that this is the same guy who made you weep and laugh and weep again through a whole decade - and what's more regrettable is that Hereafter probably will be an unwashable stain on Eastwood's otherwise impressive oevres.
Rated 02 Oct 2011
55
27th
Did the collaborators of this film have a strong visual intent before filming this? It's a very cumbersome watch. The connections between the three subplots were weakly tied and unconvincing; partnered with a weak script, forced acting (though Damon is great!), and a concept that should have been myterious and ambiguous enough to engage an audience but unfortunately comes across as superficial. Eastwood's direction is beautifully excuted, but that alone could not rescue this hokey meander.
Rated 01 Jul 2013
55
20th
It's not a bad movie, but it's not really good either. I wasn't sure what they were trying to build towards....and in the end it was nothing.
Rated 12 Oct 2010
78
28th
Playing with some interesting ideas, but unfortunately the ending seems to compromise the whole thing.
Rated 17 Oct 2010
10
9th
"Clint Eastwood crafts a Babel all his own with Hereafter, a trifurcated tale of death, grief, and the great beyond that finds the director succumbing to eye-rolling corniness." - Nick Schager
Rated 24 Oct 2010
50
23rd
We wait too long for the final, somewhat unsatisfying and rushed, result.
Rated 25 Oct 2010
70
63rd
could have done without the conspiracy shit
Rated 25 Oct 2010
80
67th
It uses its slow, deliberate pace to tell a story much like -- as someone else said -- Babel does, only I liked this more than I liked Babel. 2 of the 3 stories really fascinated me, but the one with Marie I wasn't real thrilled about (except for the amazing beginning). It doesn't offer a lot of solace, or answers, by the end but it leaves you wondering, and basking in the beauty of what you've just seen.
Rated 25 Oct 2010
90
93rd
Amazingly simple but superbly told tale. In fact if this had been animated with a Disney label, it could have been rated G. But the action, after the incredible opening, is subdued which eliminates most of any teen/early 20's audience. It's close to Eastwood's best film. The only real glitch is the assumption that there is indeed a hereafter, but that's irrelevant to the direction the story takes us--in this world. The journalist's "conspiracy" is only subconscious social momentum.
Rated 01 Nov 2010
2
14th
Asking us to explore the big questions would have been a lot more effective had the film's own depiction of them not been so deathly boring. Among the worst of both 2010 and Eastwood's filmography.
Rated 16 Nov 2010
100
51st
very good very good cast very good plot 10 out of 10
Rated 18 Nov 2010
75
50th
In avoiding a thesis statement for this film, Eastwood takes a chance that people will feel gypped in his refusal to take a position about death and the afterlife. I can see that: I mean, why make a film that explores what happens when we die if not to say something meaningful about it? I submit that Eastwood does take a position here, and it is the one that makes the most sense: "I don't know."
Rated 20 Nov 2010
78
38th
This is a humane film about a complex topic. As others have said, it isn't entirely successful as a film nor does it say anything terribly profound about whatever is after Here, but at least it participates in the human conversation. And if you like "inaction movies" like me, you'll bless Mr Eastwood's patience in this one. That said, the recreation of the 2004 tsunami was superbly done and beautifully paced for emotional impact.
Rated 01 Dec 2010
1
0th
Hereafter is really full of half-thoughts. As with Woody Allen's You Will Meet a Tall, Dark Stranger, it's difficult to tell if this film confronts belief or if disbelief simply is being given the upper hand.
Rated 06 Jan 2011
45
9th
Clint, fearless, never does the same thing twice -his direction here is assured and potent. I just wish he had chosen a better script. P. Morgan, who wrote some fine political dramas, seems out of his depth here -"Hereafter" is disjointed and packed with some embarrassingly bad dialogue and pedestrian characters. The acting, although decent, is unable to elevate the stiff material. In the end, the film seems to be leading nowhere. Despite Eastwood's remarkable efforts, this is a failure.
Rated 10 Jan 2011
80
41st
Good, sad, but it can't be compared to others Eastwood's movies.
Rated 10 Jan 2011
82
35th
Filme interessante, ótimo roteiro, ótimas atuações, ótima trilha sonora, ótima direção.
Rated 23 Jan 2011
53
40th
Everybody is nice, twins are bad actors and there is an instance of spectacularly poor plot exposition. Despite that, it was enjoyable.
Rated 25 Jan 2011
69
23rd
You kinda have to be in the right mood to appreciate this movie. Maybe if I was feeling gloomy, melancholic and philosophical that day I would've enjoyed it. Nevertheless, a good movie should put you in the mood it wants no matter what your current emotional state is.
Rated 25 Jan 2011
60
62nd
Good film.
Rated 26 Jan 2011
60
53rd
Great performances, bad script.
Rated 31 Jan 2011
75
47th
Very good movie! I was expecting more but Clint is one of my favorite directors so I get his style. He is very contemplative. He takes his time. The tsunami sequence is frighteninly beautiful.
Rated 17 Feb 2011
81
93rd
Clint Eastwood's master-class shows off once again, in this beautiful document about what happens hereafter. A few amazing performances, and some very painful scenes... Won't be film of the year, but will be quite close (once again)...
Rated 18 Feb 2011
50
14th
eita filminho chato
Rated 24 Feb 2011
68
48th
Angenehm ruhiger Film, gerade zu Beginn einige beeindruckende Bilder. Stellenweise zu plakativ. Leider keine neuen Erkenntnisse oder Denkanstöße gewonnen, was zur subjektiven Abwertung führte.
Rated 28 Feb 2011
50
23rd
Story is okay, acting ranges from okay to great, but the biggest problem with this movie is the pacing. It really drags and doesn't seem to be going anywhere at all most of the time. The ending was one of the worst I've ever seen, it reminded me of Lost in translation, and actually seems to draw a bit from that horrible film.
Rated 28 Feb 2011
43
34th
You supposed to see this film only because of stunning opening scene. Or the sexy moment when Matt Damon was feeding blind folded Bryce Dallas Howard. Unfortunately there was nothing else to praise about. The script's got potential, but Peter Morgan managed to build up only stiff and soap opera discussions out of it. The beginning of the movie managed somehow through, but more closer we get the end, more mediocrity we've got.
Rated 28 Feb 2011
40
18th
I loved three beginnings, I like one middle (psychic's) and dislike the other two, and I hate "three" endings. The plot declines more and more along the course of the narration. Worst Eastwood's I've seen.
Rated 01 Mar 2011
60
35th
An odd one from director Clint Eastwood, this rambling fantasy film, opening with loud, detailed special effects, only rarely convinced me of its supernatural bonafides. Mostly I wondered when the three protagonists would finally meet. Not until the last 15 minutes; and then, surprise! It's a love story! Hmmm.
Rated 01 Mar 2011
67
32nd
3 beautiful stories about afterlife (all intersect at the last 15 minutes of the movie; very rushed) Overall the movie has a very slow and boring pace. The script is primary school level which keeps the movie very superficial even some parts are very well directed. Wonderfully executed opening sequence with the Tsunami (both the CGI and the scenes of the woman`s near-death experience)
Rated 05 Mar 2011
73
31st
A disappointment. Prefer Damon in action flicks.
Rated 05 Mar 2011
52
34th
neat but quite flawed. and what an opening scene.
Rated 07 Mar 2011
59
29th
Psisik gucler-olumle yasamin ortasi-kesisen hayatlar...
Rated 14 Mar 2011
38
39th
Great directing cannot save this triple-layered subplot train wreck...even though each of the subplots are so lethargically paced that when they collide head-on, the resulting dramatic explosion is more like a poprock snapping in your mouth.
Rated 14 Mar 2011
65
53rd
Hereafter most certainly does not deliver on the promise of greatness glimpsed in the opening half hour, but is far from a failure. Great direction from Eastwood and a great performance from Damon gives a crappy script an aura of respectability the material doesn't deserve, and makes for a highly watchable film even as the story fizzles to nothing.
Rated 18 Mar 2011
75
37th
Matt Damon, Cecile Defrance and Frankie McClaren are stand outs in a film that seemingly goes nowhere. Despite the acting showcased the film is just a giant question of what happens after we die, but there is no answer and so the film seems relatively pointless. It could have easily been better and actually went a little further in exploring what happens in the afterlife. Eastwood fails to impress me and that is probably the first time he has done that
Rated 18 Mar 2011
10
0th
Shame on you Clint Eastwood!!!!
Rated 21 Mar 2011
60
42nd
- pretty good
Rated 24 Mar 2011
4
13th
Terrible script. The French subplot was garbage. Eastwood did alright given the material, he created some good moments here and there - but overall not good film.
Rated 10 Apr 2011
60
42nd
Well directed movie about an interesting topic that unfortunately doesn't tell anything at all. In the end it just leaves you cold and a bit irritated by ending that way because you have the feeling that we're still in the first act and the story will start soon.
Rated 10 Apr 2011
60
21st
Clint Eastwood doing Iñárritu with supernatural story
Rated 10 Apr 2011
69
33rd
A lot of great ideas that didn't really go anywhere.
Rated 10 Apr 2011
70
40th
Handles the subject matter well and has some interesting concepts, but it just didn't feel like a whole lot happened here.
Rated 17 Apr 2011
70
76th
One of the few movies where I rank it much higher than the PSI. It is more of a drama than anything else. The opening scene is amazing, incredibly well done. I liked all the 3 stories and how they (inevitably of course) connected to each other. Maybe because it feels more European than American this film is not well liked by the Criticker community. Anyway, fuck em. I enjoyed it.
Rated 24 Apr 2011
70
10th
Weak. After the initial 10 minutes (tsunami scene) it was pretty boring and weak. I expected a lot more from Damon, spielberg, and eastwood.
Rated 09 May 2011
95
91st
Wonderful, deeply moving meditation on life and death. Eastwood unexpectedly borrows a BABEL-like narrative style, but makes it definitively his own. Damon and Howard are stand-outs in the cast; the resolution of their relationship is unbearably poignant. Tactfully sets the story against real-life disaster scenarios, and uses an effective agnostic POV to explore the deeper layers of the story. Jacobi's cameo is the only odd note in an otherwise stellar entry to Eastwood's impressive canon.
Rated 26 May 2011
80
77th
With an unexpected theme, Eastwood returns with another quality work. Here are the stories of three people whose lives have been particularly touched by the mysteries of death. Although the script make clear its position on the afterlife, the strength and beauty of this work are in the way it shows how we deal with loss and with the idea that one day we will face the end of our existence in this world. The human experience itself and their subtleties are the focus of this beautiful film.
Rated 28 May 2011
75
44th
The first hour and a half of Hereafter are very strong, but the ending, however sweet, is too complacent to offer any real poignancy.
Rated 15 Jun 2011
50
31st
For a supernatural thriller it is very down to earth...
Rated 21 Jun 2011
3
8th
I'm a Eastwood fan, but there's no salvaging Morgan's screenplay. It's as if he got the inspiration by watching an episode of "Ghost Whisperer" or something. It thinks it's being profound, when it's actually exploiting every cliché in the book ("It's not a gift, it's a curse" - I mean, really?). The tsunami sequence was impressive, I'll give it that much, but it's not enough to elevate it.
Rated 27 Jun 2011
65
52nd
A film with the usual quality of Clint Eastwood. The problem is, in this time, the story and theme of the film are weak. Still, the director extracts the maximum.
Rated 27 Jun 2011
30
16th
Pointless and hollow--surprisingly so, coming from a director as normally assured as Eastwood. Ostentatiously ponderous and nowhere near as profound as it thinks it is. Doesn't really have anything meaningful to say despite its gestures to the contrary, and its three story elements don't finally come together with any sort of cohesion. They just sorta do, and the movie's just sorta there, and after two dull hours, it just sorta ends. Like life, I guess, sorta.
Rated 29 Jun 2011
60
22nd
Quite an interesting idea but the realization leaves much to be desired. It feels like for the most part of the movie it cannot make its mind what it will be about.
Rated 01 Jul 2011
55
44th
Feels much like a concept wasted. Watching "Hereafter" is frustrating, as it fails to make the most of its considerable assets, with the cumbersome script severely limiting the effectiveness of both the subject matter & performances. The three strand plotline feels awkward too, with each plot restricting the depth of the other, so when they converge it feels clumsy, & the casting in London is truly awful! I didn't hate it though & thought Damon was terrific & Clint's photography was great.
Rated 09 Jul 2011
75
67th
A solid movie. It's nothing groundbreaking but I enjoyed it. The three subplots are all interesting, but I didn't like the way they all ended up intersecting. They needed to focus more on Matt Damon's characters than the others as well, because he is both the best actor in the film and was the most intriguing character.
Rated 12 Jul 2011
63
35th
Good execution, especially Clint's directing, but the story is quite bland. Lots of wasted potential there.
Rated 05 Sep 2011
75
46th
One of the weaker, but still very good.
Rated 05 Sep 2011
30
7th
Supernatural thriller ? there is nothing thrilling, nor supernatural about this movie other than the first 5 minutes, which suck you in to the film (no pun intended). However, nothing else comes close to this brilliant scene, and the three narrative strands meander to a quite stunningly banal conclusion with the common link being a (different) connection to the 'hereafter'. As with any film of this type, I suspect your overall enjoyment will be lessened or heightened by your own personal beliefs
Rated 17 Sep 2011
60
62nd
Hereafter isn't an excellent film, but it kept me involved enough to want to see more of it. It opens well, and leaves on a similar note, although far less violent, and has you exit the film with more questions and thoughts than you had going in. Regardless of whether or not the plot and the characters stick with you five minutes after the film ends, there's a good chance that you will take something deeper from this film. For that, and a solid plot of three stories, I say it's worth a watch.
Rated 18 Sep 2011
63
34th
After the initial attention grabber, movie forgets to be interesting for large periods of time. At one point leading you to question, "Wasn't Matt Damon supposed to be in this?". There are some solid performances though, from Damon, De France and Howard in particular.
Rated 10 Oct 2011
35
9th
This movie spins its wheels and then sputters out at the end without having gone anywhere. There's no conflict, the characters don't change, and no one accomplishes anything. Worst of all, it has little to say about its central subject.
Rated 09 Nov 2011
65
35th
65.000
Rated 15 Nov 2011
79
88th
Eastwood at his best. Damon also.
Rated 06 Feb 2012
70
34th
This one was massively misrepresented in the trailers, but there's still some stuff worth watching even if it is wholly different from what one would expect and makes no attempt to shed any light on the topic. I could have cared less about the french chick, but the other two leads were pretty stand up.
Rated 23 Feb 2012
40
15th
Imagine if Malick were retarded; he might have made this film instead of Tree of Life.
Rated 16 Apr 2012
84
87th
This is another great film by director Clint Eastwood. The script is excellent, it gives us three distinct and interesting characters. The script makes you care about the characters and the three leads give excellent performances. I highly recommend this welll made drama.
Rated 26 Jun 2012
10
5th
Pointless. None of the stories connected well at the end. God, I was just so bored. Such a disappointment, Clint Eastwood.
Rated 03 Sep 2012
76
43rd
Not as bad as many people say. Eastwood going again for something different and Damon is one of the few actors in the world who cat take mediocre parts and lift them to a higher level. This is one I would recommend to certain people and steer some I know away from it because of their preconceptions
Rated 30 Nov 2012
60
44th
Though I found Hereafter meandering and occasionally sentimental, I couldn't help but admire Clint Eastwood's ambition in taking on-headfirst-the greatest fact of human existence.
Rated 04 Dec 2012
83
33rd
underrated and worthy of a bigger audience....bryce dallas howard was amazing.....
Rated 19 Jan 2013
58
36th
Semi-engaging plotting. Leads pretty much nowhere.
Rated 24 Jan 2013
75
40th
Ultimately, Hereafter asks more questions about the afterlife than it answers, but that's okay because it's not so much about the afterlife as it is about how people deal with its concept. Most seem to dislike this but all I know is that it kept me interested all the way through, made me contemplate in ways only the most powerful films can. Top-notch direction from Eastwood and acting from Damon yet again.
Rated 25 Feb 2013
60
15th
I really didn't care for this movie too much. The acting was just ok. The direction was good by Eastwood but the story was just lacking. It really felt like they were going for a "Babel " feel, they just didn't pull it off well. They had the movie split into 3 different stories and in 3 different countries. It was about death and how different people deal with it. It also had a bit of supernaturalness to it. It sounds good on paper but the movie itself is really uninspiring.
Rated 03 Jun 2013
40
19th
Not everything Clint Eastwood touches is gold. I think only one of these story lines ended up being interesting (of three, mind you).
Rated 23 Jul 2013
50
9th
ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Rated 26 Aug 2013
5
18th
A promising start - all three stories were interesting and had potential but didn't really develop and the issues raised weren't explored. It maintained interest but could have been better and more purposeful.
Rated 05 Oct 2013
63
27th
62.500
Rated 08 Mar 2014
52
10th
I completely forgot about this movie and thats because aside from the beginning it is entirely forgettable. Damon's part was interesting but it didn't really go anywhere. I just don't get the movie really. it has an insane beginning and then for the rest of the movie you're waiting for something else like it but it never happens. I think the title refers to the beginning. 'hereafter the movie will be boring'
Rated 11 Aug 2014
90
81st
It's not about heaven. But there is suspension of disbelief involved, as it's about what comes after and how that affects the living, a subject that Eastwood pursues with his trademark straightforward style, and gently creates such a fine line between fate and certainty that rings so true with the uncertainty of life. I'm an atheist, but all I ask of a film is to deal with its subject matter intelligently, which Eastwood always does.
Rated 14 Aug 2014
68
55th
This film was original, breathtaking and daring for the first 30 minutes or so. Then we get to see that the story simply does not evolve and my attention started to fade away. The film is good and solid, but ends up to be nothing very special despite of the attention grabbing beginning.
Rated 22 Nov 2014
60
28th
Kinda boring. Didn't seem too coherent. Not a huge fan of this film.
Rated 06 Sep 2015
40
22nd
Saw this in the theater five years ago and completely forgot about it until just now. So, highly forgettable.
Rated 23 Sep 2015
2
16th
Funny story. I swear to god I'm not making this up. It's probably the weirdest thing to happen in my life. I got out of the hospital, I had been in a bicycle accident, got a concussion, and was amnesic for a couple days. I knew I saw a movie called Hereafter right before I rode my bike, but couldn't remember what happened in the movie. So I showed the theater clerk my hospital papers and they let me see it again for free. Turns out its about someone who hits their head and gets amnesia. WTF!
Rated 02 Nov 2015
70
41st
The first couple of acts of this make for an extremely slowly-paced yet somehow compelling hangout movie, where not much happens but you just fall into its rhythms and want to keep watching these characters. Honestly I could have watched a whole movie of Howard's character trying to get through to Damon's; the actors have a surprising amount of chemistry, and the food-tasting scene is quite extraordinary. It makes the supposedly romantic ending seem like a bit of a wet fart in comparison.
Rated 02 Sep 2017
40
32nd
Thriller??? I beg to differ. Better title: "Afterlife, Actually", complete with adorable, mature-beyond-his years child actor. But sadly, no Bill Nighy.
Rated 01 Jun 2018
57
16th
56.00+.61 = 56.61.
Rated 23 Feb 2024
42
10th
Despite some interesting ideas, Hereafter feels more like an unfinished movie than it does a worthwhile commentary on life and death.

Collections

(23)
Compact view
Showing 1 - 23 of 23 results

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...