Name: Kirby John Leswe Teacher: Kevin Luna

Course: 1ST yr. ABCOMM Subject: INTROPHILO

Movie Review in After the Dark

For me this film was trying to seriously thinking a philosophical question and resulting
into no clear message. Despite of this movie it is not making sense in philosophy in the real
world it is established initially in logic. And one thing it is has a lot of characters that established
and interesting. I thought that this movie was provoking. This movie is full of scenarios in
classroom with a bunch of high school seniors. This scenario is so very interesting and while I
watch the movie ill enjoyed it. And every scene in the movie is full of philosophical thinking.
And every several students are seemingly cruel in the nature based on their thought
experiment but unfortunately after participating they are all blackmailing in their grades. And
while I watch the movie I see that this movie is collective the imagination of the students to
become hypothetical. For me this movie/film is so very gorgeous in the way imaginable. And
the place that they see in their imagination is the same but different climate.
And there was a debate of the student in the movie above their chosen slot in the banker, as
well as Mr. Zimit as the wild card. Mr. Zimit encouraged every student to make the decision in a
logical based. And they tell one by one on their future occupation but of the student shoot on
head because of his future occupation the poet. And the teacher said the there’s no way a poet
is worthy of a slot. And the students became see that this is a unfair and arbitrary, so that Mr.
Zimit points to act out of emotion, and in this case Mr. Zimit fear to keep him in outside and
they used logical. In the outside he reveals the code because of his occupation the bunker
builder, and he also created the code is required. On the back of each occupation card there are
some more details about of that person, is complicating in their situation. But suddenly the
ending of this movie was so very boring because the teacher gave a very weird feeling in the
whole movie at the very end, and the philosophy teacher tells his student that they must
choose 10 people from among their group to take shelter during the nuclear holocaust and
reboot the human race. Several students object to the seemingly cruel nature of this thought
experiment, but after blackmailing them into participating by threatening their grades, they all
agree to give it a go. The film jumps into their collective imagination to show us the
hypothetical scenario they’ve created, as they debate whether a structural engineer, a chemist,
a doctor and a US Senator are of more value than a gelato maker, a harpist (without a harp), a
fashion designer or a poet. Zimit shoots the poet between the eyes before he can even make a
case for his life, reminding them that logic should be the guiding principle in their decision
making. They make choices that seem in line with what most of us would pick, but after seeing
Zimit kill all of those who were not picked, ostensibly to save them the pain of death by nuclear
apocalypse, they decide to lock him out of the bunker. Only after they do this, however, does
he reveal that he’s the only one with the code that will allow them to leave after a year,
meaning that their decision resulted in their death. However, that was only the first iteration of
the experiment, as Zimit resets the scenario and adds a wrinkle. The bunker group will now be
required to reproduce in order to repopulate the planet, and also that each student has
another defining characteristic in addition to their job. The carpenter is sterile, and
theoretically of no use repopulating the planet. The opera singer also speaks seven languages
and could communicate with other bunkers in other countries, but also has throat cancer that
will remove her ability to speak in three years. The doctor may or may not have contracted
Ebola on a recent humanitarian mission. The soldier has an eidetic memory and the chemist is
gay. Decisions are made once more, although the process is more complicated, but Zimit’s
actions when confronted with some of the emotional actions from the students starts to make
them wary of his goals in this experiment. As secrets are revealed and the situation is reset
once again, it becomes a battle of wills between teacher and students, leading to both
interesting and unexpected turns as things play out. he film is simply gorgeous in every way
imaginable. Huddles wisely shot on some spectacular locations, including the Candi Prambanan
in Indonesia, which give the film both a grounding in the world outside of the classroom while
also giving it a sense of otherworldliness. The design of the bunker, such a key aspect of the
film, is exceptionally well done, feeling believable but also plush and exciting. Everything from
the costuming (which changes for each iteration) to the cinematography to the stellar score by
Jonathan Davis and Nicholas O’Toole fits perfectly together and makes the film a feast as much
for the eyes and ears as the mind and heart. I really wish that After the Dark had gotten the
full release I feel it warranted. (I also wish they’d stuck with the original title, The Philosophers,
which was much better.) I doubt, a high-concept, conceptually science fiction independent film
with no big-name actors could have found much of an audience, but it deserved a chance. I
would have loved seeing this in a dark theater on the big screen, where its visuals would have
been even more impressive, and hearing the audience’s reactions, but I guess that’s not going
to happen. Still, I’m glad that it’s at least available for people to see in one way or another. So,
few movies these days dare to be creative or original, or even attempt to tackle big themes. I
expect to see debates about philosophy, ethics, logic and morality on TV on Star Trek, but in
very few other places, and to top all of that off with an interesting and well-crafted story is truly
special. I may have had to wait a while for After the Dark, but it was worth the wait.
Writer/Director John Huddles has crafted a clever, exciting, tense and meaningful film, that has
been advertised as a “thriller” though I think that’s a vast oversimplification. There are some
thrills to it, but the whole time we know that what we’re watching is simply the dramatization
of an academic exercise and that no one is in real danger, meaning that the thrills aren’t the
purpose of the story.

Cast:
James D’arcy as jack
Cinta Luara as Utami
Sophie Lowe as Petra
Bonnie Wright as Georgina
Rhys Wakefield as James
Erin Moriarty as Vivian
Daryl Sabara as Chips
Katie Findlay as Bonnie
Mala Mitchell as Beatrice
George Blagden as Andy
Toby Sebastian as Russell
Jacob Artist as Parker
Hope Olalde Wilson as Omosede
Philippa Coulthard as Poppie
Darlus Homayoun as Toby
Abhi Sinha as Kavi
Taser Hassan as Nelson
Natasha Gott as Yoshiko
Summary:
At an international school in Jakarta, a philosophy teacher challenges his class of
twenty graduating seniors to choose which ten of them would take shelter underground
and reboot the human race in the event of a nuclear apocalypse.