gpeltz Nicely done, Twenty Years After (2008) Directed by Jim Torres, who also co wrote it with Ron Harris. Spoiler ahead, It's a post apocalyptic tale, somewhat picking up the plot from Children of Men (2006) Sarah, played by Azura Skye, is pregnant, her husband was killed. A lone voice, broadcasting from a portable transmitter, is Michael played by Joshua Leonard, Sarah's desire is to have the child born in a "Better Place" than the war torn landscape, Michael and Sarah join a rag tag group, Reg E Cathey plays Samuel, the entertaining mystic. There are a whole slew of other characters, mostly going along for the ride. Some are intent on kidnapping the newborn baby, these are the bad guys, we can tell because they are never filmed with warm colors.I find it odd saying that in this movie, the plot does not matter, it is the impression that is of importance.The gritty last gasps of a world, that might be beyond the ability to clean up it's own act after us humans foul things up, (Shades of Wall-e 2008) The tone is on par with the other apocalyptic film, The Road (2009) By the way, sad to say but all these other films I mention, were all better. One thing I liked, The plot device of using a broadcast, to set the scene for the upcoming action, This was a device used to great effect in the Walter Hill 1979 classic, The Warriors. it works here as well. Another thing I liked, the use of music was effective. not so much a great score, but rather a evocative sound design with an emphasis on acoustic. One could stretch and mention biblical parallels, The woman is Sarah, she is comforted by Samuel who tells her that her child is going to be special. The plot played with the idea, but in the end dropped it for a more broad and less mystical "Special" There are a lot of nice touches throughout the film, by no means a thrill a minute blockbuster. What did I not like, over convoluted plotting, I never did find the "bad guys" back story that interesting. production of cigarettes, or at least of markets to sell tobacco seem to be taken for granted, as well as the availability of gas. and electricity. If you can put these points on the back burner and just enjoy the flow, you might find yourself entertained. Looking at the reader reviews on IMDb. it seems there were many who did not like this movie. They gave it terrible reviews. Not I, I give it Seven out of Ten "True to it's vision", Stars .

Joel Waite A 3.5 rating goes to those films that have acting from a high school play, crappy special effects, and a weak story. This film may be a bit slow, but it's not overly so. The acting may not be Hollywood, but it's rather decent. The bad rating is probably in part because it's not an action film. This is more a 'day in the life' story. As they say; 'combat is 90% boredom and 10% shear terror', and so this story goes. The bad rating might also be because the bad guys story isn't strong and distinct, with each character not fully fleshed out. This makes the overall story weak. Add in the slow pace and there you have it..Generally it was interesting, and it deserves at least a 5.3 rating.

jaddis01 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!

Ron Beebe 1. Acting: Deplorable, except the black guy know-it-all with the funky trashed ear 2. Editing: atrocious. As the movie tried to play through 3 to possibly 4 story lines, I literally felt like I was given ADHD because I could not physically sit through the end of the movie. The blue bottle tree becoming yet another uneventful side story was the last straw. That and the fully intact F150 in the cave with no wheels??? I mean c'mon! The KICKER is that this movie was shown on the redbox cover display as if it belonged up there with the "Best of '08" selections. You want to see a great movie from this year (or 07???) that will stick with you for many, many weeks? See no country for old men, and this time TLJ does NOT steal the movie. You'll see. But back to my limited synopsis. This movie sucks so bad it HAS to get at least ONE razzie!