After The Dark 2014

Amazon Instant Video

Available in HDAvailable on Prime
(51) IMDb 5.7/10
Watch Trailer

A philosophy teacher challenges his graduating seniors to choose which ten of them would take shelter underground and reboot the human race in the event of a nuclear apocalypse.

Starring:
James D'Arcy
Runtime:
1 hour, 46 minutes

Available to watch on supported devices.

By placing your order, you agree to our Terms of Use. Sold by Amazon Instant Video.

Product Details

Genres Drama
Director John Huddles
Starring James D'Arcy
Studio Signature Entertainment Ltd
BBFC rating Suitable for 15 years and over
Rental rights 48 hour viewing period. Details
Purchase rights Stream instantly and download to 2 locations Details
Format Amazon Instant Video (streaming online video and digital download)

Customer Reviews

2.9 out of 5 stars

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful By Woosher on 7 Mar. 2015
Format: Amazon Instant Video Verified Purchase
This film gets offv to quite a promising start, with high production values in evidence and an interesting premise involving a philosophy class engaged in an elaborate apocalyptic reworking of the 'balloon debate'. Sadly the premise, while initially engaging, effectively kills the piece as a drama, primarily because we know that there is no need to suspend disbelief or take any outcome to heart, precisely because it is a series of dramatised 'thought experiments'. As a satisfying exercise in philosophy, it also fails because (dare I say it) not enough thought has been put into it, with flawed or incomplete reasoning apparent in each of the three iterations. Right at the death there is a hurried, almost frantic attempt to get us to care about two or three of the main protagonists, but it is too little too late.

James Darcy is just about as convincing a philosophy lecturer as the script allows. Sophie Lowe was excellent in her beautiful understated ethereality. The locations and sets are sumptuous and the camerawork is quite a few notches above competent. Not a waste of time by any means, but one is left with one's very own thought experiment about how it may well have delivered much more on its early promise.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful By Lark TOP 1000 REVIEWER on 12 Mar. 2015
Format: Amazon Instant Video Verified Purchase
I have to say I really, really liked this feature.

Its a philosophical class' final day, the movie manages to illustrate succinctly and well, with more than just dialogue a lot of great philosophical thought experiments, dilemmas or ideas, such as the infinite monkey cage, ie that monkey's could randomly write Shakespeare or Plato's Cave or utilitarian experiments about the greatest good of the greatest number and sacrificing lives to save lives versus moral absolutes.

The scenes cut between the class room and the imagined back drops of nuclear shelters in different regions of the world, I thought that the acting was good, despite not knowing any of the actors, some of whom I really hope to see in movies again, they were brilliant, although I believe the role of the teacher was perfect for Benedict Cumberbach and the actor reminds me of him actually. The scenery and cinematography are brilliant too. So its a movie which wins in a number of ways, its as cerebral as it is watchable.

There is a plot line about homosexuality I didnt quite understand as to why it was included, at one point it is imaginary and relates to a philosophical question of procreation and survival post-atomic holocaust, which I thought was fine, although I thought the sex scene unnecessary, but when it re-emerges later in the class room with someone being outed I didnt think it made sense at all.

The final thought experiment was excellent, in so far as it featured a selection of candidates which was so, so counter intuitive but vital for less strictly logical or rationalistic premises but humanistic principles.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful By Dominic B. on 23 Feb. 2015
Format: Amazon Instant Video Verified Purchase
Definitely not the film as advertised, but well crafted ,well acted, highly engaging. I was expecting zombie trash and i got something interesting, very different, intelligent. Well worth the time.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful By Thomas Taylor on 1 Jan. 2015
Format: Amazon Instant Video
I'd actually give it 3.5 stars 4 perhaps.

The concept is original, barring a few plot holes and inconsistencies it makes for a good thought provoking film.
One of its best points is undoubtedly the flaws in the movies plot. As this movie revolves around the whole concept of a philosophy lesson turned apocalyptic simulation revolving on logical thought and decision making. It stimulates and provokes you to think and possibly discuss (if not watched alone) not only the happenings of the movie but the plot inconsistencies which add to the philosophical debate as a whole.

(I'm not the most articulate in my native language therefore this may not make sense even though I know what I'm on about :p )
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Format: Amazon Instant Video Verified Purchase
I didn’t like any of the three scenarios in the film so I would have my scenario like this here:

7 billion people of our planet's population reduced down to last 21 people. You need to make a decision not saving 11 of them when you know each person worth 333.33 million people? It's the hardest decision but a one you have to make.

I first need to identify the utmost priority here which is to re-populate. Honestly when we are only 11 that's the only best thing we could do. A structural engineer useless when no bricklayers or steel workers there. Carpenter might be useful if there will be woods but we are not sure of it.

So choosing people based on their profession? Big mistake. We will mostly rely on survival instincts there like finding water, hunting, cooking, finding food sources which most healthy human beings are able to do. We should save so many books in the banker because this the best way to pass on previous human knowledge at those moments. Everybody there know how to grow crops and read a book will we learn other expertise from these books like printing money, governing, building engines, melting iron, farming, calculus when we are able to do so.

We are looking for gene diversity. 6 women 1 man will give more babies but less gene pool. Their children won't be able to marry each other. To get the maximum diversity in the gene pool you need equal number of men and women. The best ratio for me is 50:50. This way their babies can marry each other and re-populate the planet successfully with minimum genetic disorders. The next question is who of 11 out of 21 do we choose? We will need to choose the healthiest males and females. But 11 is an odd number so it has to be 6 men or 5 women or 6 women 5 men, either way will work out the same.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again

Most Recent Customer Reviews