“At the age I am now, I just don’t have any interest in going back and doing the same sort of thing over and over, that’s one of the reasons I moved away from westerns,” Eastwood recently told the LA Times. “The question about what happens after we die is something that we all ask and when I read the script by Peter Morgan it was so intelligent and I knew right away that I wanted to do it.”
Well, I guess you can’t fault Clint for trying something different. Hereafter, which opens up on October 22, follows three “battered souls searching for answers about the afterlife” – a psychic (Matt Damon), a young London boy (Frankie McLaren), and a French journalist (Cécile de France) who have all dealt with death heavily in some aspect of their lives.
“It’s a spiritual story but there are no real religious connotations to it,” Eastwood went on to say about his film. “The [major religions] are kind of unsatisfying to the kid in our story because he’s looking for something that can answer his questions. He wants a straight answer and he can’t seem to find anything from people who turn out to be either psychics looking for a fast buck or people just talking … you don’t really see movies like this these days that have a spiritual aspect or a romantic aspect. And it is romantic. These days you have a lot of movies about people jumping on each other in the sack but we don’t have that. This is more about attraction.”
Now, after having heard from the man himself, I have just one thing to say: the trailer hasn’t sold me on it. I love Clint more than I don’t though, so I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe it just is strange to see something like this coming from him. I don’t know. It premieres at TIFF though, so I am sure we are going to here plenty more about it in the coming days.
Seems like another ending where “good things” happen to people in the after-life. Good people, a completely irrelevant ideology that ignores basic truth of almost all religion – certainly Christianity (does anyone read and understand the Bible anymore?), that being “good” does not give us the power to wipe out our sin nature, our rebellion, or self-deciet. But working our way, being good, that’ll get you to the “light” or something that gives you a warm fuzzy feeling… Please…
The huge question about God vs no God, or a spiritual after-life vs none at all, is: Where did all this come from? Just gasses appear magically and poof, a big bang? Where did this much stuff just magically come from?
A. It had to be created, right?
B. Who or what created it?
If it created itself, then physical stuff is God? Yeah, materials and gasses are god… Just go make yourself and idol of wood and start worshiping it instead. Ugh…
If it was created, again, who or what created it? Then who or what created that thing that created everything?
It goes on and on forever. Creation of anything requires intelligence, that’s a philosophy 101 deal.
So there had to be a beginning but what created even that – a beginning?
It’s enough to drive one crazy, because it just keeps going back further and further to infinity.
Those who say that origin material just existed, that’s 3-year-old magical thinking. To say “we’ll never know” is a smokescreen answer in denying talking about logical creation of materials, thus a creator of those gasses, that material.
God always being. Creating time. Does that make any sense? Certainly not from a timeline perspective. But gasses that just magically appeared, make any more sense? Not even in the remote.