The plotline was promising and novel: a dysfunctional bachelor must find his soulmate after he's already died. Production values were surprisingly high for this low-budget film. The biggest problem was an amateurish script that was intermittently predictable, redundant and woefully inadequate. The movie would also have benefitted from a male lead with more charisma and authenticity. Christina Ricci was fine.
70 Reviews
An honest review from an IMDB Top Reviewer
A_Different_Drummer17 June 2021
10/10? Not a chance. The film starts with a 4 minute monologue from the protagonist Michael (played by Andy Karl) as he sets up his backstory to the audience. This is a critical component of the film, almost a litmus test, because you need to decide right away if your idea of entertainment is having Karl's voice in your ear for the next 2 hours. If not, stop right there. If you are OK with it, then writer/director Harry Greenberger will offer a film which looks and feels more like a stageplay; and, if you get to the end, will offer you some insights on the real nature of LOVE. The entire production screams LOW BUDGET INDIE, suggesting that "Hereafter" (orig. Released as "Faraway Eyes") is more of a watch-on-an-overseas-flight film than anything else. Only Ricci shines -- she literally never gives an uninteresting performance. Those fake 10/10 reviews are demeaning to the production and the audience both.
A Hallmark movie in another universe.
TxMike10 January 2022
This is a novel concept for a story, when you die you remain in a type of limbo until you find a real soul mate among the other dead "single" people. The problem is the script, it is written by an amateur who has little imagination for interesting dialog. As a result he frequently tosses in disingenuous dialog and vulgar language as if that would make it seem edgy.
The current rating of 5 out of 10 is about right, it is somewhat substandard compared to other movies. But for me the high point easily was Christina Ricci who plays Scarlett, a soul who greets the newly deceased and tells them what their task it.
My wife and I watched it at home, streaming on Amazon. Except for the lackluster script and too much talking during most of the middle, we actually enjoyed the viewing. In fact it has many of the elements of a Hallmark story. The concept, in the hands of a more accomplished script writer, could have been an excellent movie.
The current rating of 5 out of 10 is about right, it is somewhat substandard compared to other movies. But for me the high point easily was Christina Ricci who plays Scarlett, a soul who greets the newly deceased and tells them what their task it.
My wife and I watched it at home, streaming on Amazon. Except for the lackluster script and too much talking during most of the middle, we actually enjoyed the viewing. In fact it has many of the elements of a Hallmark story. The concept, in the hands of a more accomplished script writer, could have been an excellent movie.
Almost good...
julie-130-41895618 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This movie had potential to be a really good film but it never hit the marks. Dialog, acting and humor was just off the entire time. If it was just a little better at every turn it would have been a great movie but it just fell short the entire way through. Too many bad choices with direction, lines etc. Just not a great film at all. Watchable if you are extremely bored with nothing else on, but not worth your time otherwise. Bummer because it had potential.
Cliche, and trying too hard
sjschluet3 March 2022
The writing, the music, the trying-to-be-dramatic scenes-- they just did not feel genuine. There were a few good moments, but overall it dragged on. The portrayal of what romance or falling in love is was disappointing, and the characters' behavior and choices toward the end of the movie will leave you mumbling at the screen "why don't you just..."
It was mildly entertaining, and maybe if you relate to the main character (and I'm sorry if you do) you'd enjoy it more, but it would only be on my watchlist if I'm really getting the the bottom of the barrel.
It was mildly entertaining, and maybe if you relate to the main character (and I'm sorry if you do) you'd enjoy it more, but it would only be on my watchlist if I'm really getting the the bottom of the barrel.
Proof of a few things . . .
info-907018 January 2022
1 - That Actors (Writers and Filmmakers) constantly do stories about, well Actors and themselves. They are way too impressed with themselves and think they are interesting enough for the rest of us to care about these endless expressions of being, well, Actors.
2 - New Yorkers constantly do stories about, well New Yorkers and themselves. They are way too impressed with themselves and think they are interesting enough for the rest of us to care about these endless expressions of being, well, New Yorkers -- otherwise, with the ability to pretty much blink themselves to another place, why in the hell would they stay there? Being in NY city for a possible eternity is in itself, close enough to being in hell!
3 - Short sighted people really do believe that the foolishness we live on this plane, carry on throughout the entire universe on all levels of existence. How can anything be so short-sighted?
4 - That men who have no ability to communicate in life will be equally as daft and absurd in an afterlife, and still make zero sense! Dear God let's hope not.
5 - That childish, misogynistic screenwriters will still be calling grown women 'girls' even in the afterlife, and not have graduated to any new level of understanding or respect. Again, Dear God let's hope not.
6 - That mediocre filmmakers can still get funding for mediocre films, while too many brilliant filmmakers struggle unfairly and ridiculously to get their films done.
7 - That grown men are still fascinated with sneaking peaks at naked women in inappropriate places as if they are grown-ups, when in fact they are just simple-minded pre-adolescent boys.
8 - That the logic you create in a film, no matter how implausible, can then become even more implausible when you change your own logic from scene to scene.
9 - That well known actors like Christina Ricci will deliver any kind of idiotic lines given to her. I guess that is a professional, huh?
10 - That Writer/Director Harry Greenberger has big time connections, and we pray he becomes a better filmmaker.
11 - That the Music Director has a promising future as does the Cinematographer, hopefully.
2 - New Yorkers constantly do stories about, well New Yorkers and themselves. They are way too impressed with themselves and think they are interesting enough for the rest of us to care about these endless expressions of being, well, New Yorkers -- otherwise, with the ability to pretty much blink themselves to another place, why in the hell would they stay there? Being in NY city for a possible eternity is in itself, close enough to being in hell!
3 - Short sighted people really do believe that the foolishness we live on this plane, carry on throughout the entire universe on all levels of existence. How can anything be so short-sighted?
4 - That men who have no ability to communicate in life will be equally as daft and absurd in an afterlife, and still make zero sense! Dear God let's hope not.
5 - That childish, misogynistic screenwriters will still be calling grown women 'girls' even in the afterlife, and not have graduated to any new level of understanding or respect. Again, Dear God let's hope not.
6 - That mediocre filmmakers can still get funding for mediocre films, while too many brilliant filmmakers struggle unfairly and ridiculously to get their films done.
7 - That grown men are still fascinated with sneaking peaks at naked women in inappropriate places as if they are grown-ups, when in fact they are just simple-minded pre-adolescent boys.
8 - That the logic you create in a film, no matter how implausible, can then become even more implausible when you change your own logic from scene to scene.
9 - That well known actors like Christina Ricci will deliver any kind of idiotic lines given to her. I guess that is a professional, huh?
10 - That Writer/Director Harry Greenberger has big time connections, and we pray he becomes a better filmmaker.
11 - That the Music Director has a promising future as does the Cinematographer, hopefully.
Thought provoking 6.75/10
quabalah6921 June 2021
I enjoyed this movie, it posed questions thst made you think and feel in a new way, always a good thing. The writing was a little off, some things didnt tie up and the end seemed a little confused, I would never have guessed it was an indie film, however overal it was well filmed and acted and generally a good watch.
Meh, plot was bland, story was worse.
sethcohn-112 January 2022
Sorry fellow reviewers, Christina Ricci was nothing special in this film. The story failed to be consistent, and the ending felt forced.
When the best friend watching nudes is the best part of the movie, you need a better script.
When the best friend watching nudes is the best part of the movie, you need a better script.
Needed more polish, but pretty good, overall
warren-8723512 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I actually rather enjoyed Faraway Eyes. It's got an interesting premise, and it manages pretty well on a clearly low budget. The acting from the two leads is good, and Christina Ricci is suitably 'otherworldly' in her limited role.
One scene that I felt stood out was when the lead character is in his apartment with his family, as they remove his belongings and deal with their loss. The feelings of the mother and father felt genuine and heartfelt.
Often Hollywood destroys good material by filtering it through a committee, but in this case I can't help but think a little more refinement and polish would have helped soften those rough edges.
Harry Greenberger has to be applauded for both writing and directing, but I felt the script sorely needed a little more softening, and the directorial style and cinematography needed to veer a bit further away from the stereotypical look that's over used these days (lots of handheld, desaturated colours, etc). It's an attempt to give it a more 'realistic' or even 'gritty' feel, but it wasn't overly suited to this film, and sometimes it also comes over as a bit too 'made for TV'.
The soundtrack likewise feels out-of-place. It tries to be more trendy/arty and instead merely serves to take you out of the story.
I can see where Harry Greenberger was going, to make it less like a typical Hollywood romance, but there's a reason the best romances have a lighter, softer touch. The subject matter works best with that. It needed to pull back on the cruder lines, make the lead a little more sympathetic and interesting (and perhaps less obnoxious in places), and use a softer, more heartfelt soundtrack.
Having said all that, in most respects this is still a great little low budget film. The main premise does have some issues, particularly around how such an afterlife would function (which the writing at least acknowledges at the beginning, with a few questions by the lead, even though they aren't answered), but if you can get past them, it's certainly a thoughtful little diversion, and it doesn't avoid what many will perceive as a 'Hollywood' ending. Without that, it would've felt hollow and pointless. All-too-often, writers think they're being clever by avoiding a 'Hollywood' ending, and instead end up with something that has become every bit as cliched, but simply less satisfying. In this case, at least you don't feel robbed of the necessary resolution.
One scene that I felt stood out was when the lead character is in his apartment with his family, as they remove his belongings and deal with their loss. The feelings of the mother and father felt genuine and heartfelt.
Often Hollywood destroys good material by filtering it through a committee, but in this case I can't help but think a little more refinement and polish would have helped soften those rough edges.
Harry Greenberger has to be applauded for both writing and directing, but I felt the script sorely needed a little more softening, and the directorial style and cinematography needed to veer a bit further away from the stereotypical look that's over used these days (lots of handheld, desaturated colours, etc). It's an attempt to give it a more 'realistic' or even 'gritty' feel, but it wasn't overly suited to this film, and sometimes it also comes over as a bit too 'made for TV'.
The soundtrack likewise feels out-of-place. It tries to be more trendy/arty and instead merely serves to take you out of the story.
I can see where Harry Greenberger was going, to make it less like a typical Hollywood romance, but there's a reason the best romances have a lighter, softer touch. The subject matter works best with that. It needed to pull back on the cruder lines, make the lead a little more sympathetic and interesting (and perhaps less obnoxious in places), and use a softer, more heartfelt soundtrack.
Having said all that, in most respects this is still a great little low budget film. The main premise does have some issues, particularly around how such an afterlife would function (which the writing at least acknowledges at the beginning, with a few questions by the lead, even though they aren't answered), but if you can get past them, it's certainly a thoughtful little diversion, and it doesn't avoid what many will perceive as a 'Hollywood' ending. Without that, it would've felt hollow and pointless. All-too-often, writers think they're being clever by avoiding a 'Hollywood' ending, and instead end up with something that has become every bit as cliched, but simply less satisfying. In this case, at least you don't feel robbed of the necessary resolution.
A bad film
rmmil12 December 2021
There's a recent trend in "bound for Amazon Prime" films I've noticed lately: One "name" actor / actress, then a bunch of people you've never heard of before.
Such is this film. I'm assuming it's for budgetary reasons, get a "name" to get the film produced, then hope for the best.
This film type only works when the story does. Here Afrer does not "work" mainly because the protagonist is insufferable. Whoever thought opening the film with the smarmy exposition by the lead (that goes on way too long) made a poor choice. I'm assuming there are those who won't make it past that point.
The rest of the film is a bore, lots of talking, not much doing. Again, the lead casting could have been better.
Christina Ricci was fine, but something tells me this film would've been a lot better had they not blown 95% of the budget on her salary.
Such is this film. I'm assuming it's for budgetary reasons, get a "name" to get the film produced, then hope for the best.
This film type only works when the story does. Here Afrer does not "work" mainly because the protagonist is insufferable. Whoever thought opening the film with the smarmy exposition by the lead (that goes on way too long) made a poor choice. I'm assuming there are those who won't make it past that point.
The rest of the film is a bore, lots of talking, not much doing. Again, the lead casting could have been better.
Christina Ricci was fine, but something tells me this film would've been a lot better had they not blown 95% of the budget on her salary.
ethereal and unique
deefabulous18 June 2021
I'm a huge Christina Ricci fan so I automatically love anything she's in, but this movie caught me off guard in a good way. It's really different, it makes you think about life and love in an honest, realistic way. It's not like any other movie I've seen, uniquely strange and beautiful. The french actress that plays Honeybee is so stunning, I can't keep my eyes off of her, and she's also an amazing actress. And of course, Ricci never disappoints. Michael is also a lovable, imperfect character, very funny and full of life. It's a visually stunning love letter to New York too, I love the production design and cinematography.
I wish it was better
johnpmoseley14 November 2021
Its premise is very accurate about how it feels to find or not find love - like the universe itself is welcoming or rejecting you. A couple of the reviews here call it offensive, the idea that you have to find your soulmate to get to heaven. I think they're shooting the messenger. It isn't fair and that's just like life, if not death.
The execution is ropey. Feels like it could have been better, but was rushed or something, but there are just so many problems. In particular, we know from the moment the guy meets the girl what's going to happen and it's simultaneously a bad resolution and much too easy - and no amount of histrionic running around, of which there's a lot - can hide that.
The execution is ropey. Feels like it could have been better, but was rushed or something, but there are just so many problems. In particular, we know from the moment the guy meets the girl what's going to happen and it's simultaneously a bad resolution and much too easy - and no amount of histrionic running around, of which there's a lot - can hide that.
Terrible backing music
joepentony26 August 2021
"Made For TV" quality
maxvox-969191 March 2022
I can accept that it's a fantasy story about what happens to you when you die, and even the underlying completely made-up premise that souls can only pass on to the "afterlife" in pairs. But there are two fundamental failings.
One, the absurd, forced inconsistencies. A stalker, who keeps coming around tormenting a woman WOULD be reported to the police, even if they cannot yet arrest him. Each unwanted visitation would trigger another police report, eventually a no-stalking order, and an arrest. And people wandering through the an interim state after death seeking their soulmate wouldn't just be telling each other to buzz off. People seek company and something to do, even with people who aren't their "soulmates".
--- And two: Can we all just give up and admit that Christina Ricci is a lousy actress? She dead-panned her way to stardom with films like The Addams Family and Sleepy Hollow, but she only gets away with it because she can be dull, dark, and unemotional. Unfortunately, she is no different when she NEEDS to have some sort of personality, which makes her portrayal as some sort of inter-life guide in this film a plastic flop.
One, the absurd, forced inconsistencies. A stalker, who keeps coming around tormenting a woman WOULD be reported to the police, even if they cannot yet arrest him. Each unwanted visitation would trigger another police report, eventually a no-stalking order, and an arrest. And people wandering through the an interim state after death seeking their soulmate wouldn't just be telling each other to buzz off. People seek company and something to do, even with people who aren't their "soulmates".
--- And two: Can we all just give up and admit that Christina Ricci is a lousy actress? She dead-panned her way to stardom with films like The Addams Family and Sleepy Hollow, but she only gets away with it because she can be dull, dark, and unemotional. Unfortunately, she is no different when she NEEDS to have some sort of personality, which makes her portrayal as some sort of inter-life guide in this film a plastic flop.
Wasted Potential
soraderyu14 March 2022
It was a gross disappointment with a limit viewpoint and weak, contradictive script. With its depressing perspective of how both life and the "hear after" it gives a grim view of the writers interpretation of the afterlife. They spend the entire movie telling you it "doesn't work that way" only to change their minds at the end. The characters were dull and it was difficult to find yourself invested their success. It lacks passion and hope. But the most disappointing aspect was the shallow nature of the plot implying the pointlessness of it all. It could have been so much more.
Such a "meh" movie.
kassiedwarika6 October 2022
If you had 2 hours and literally nothing better going on... sure you could put this movie on, maybe in the background while you do a hobby or something. The dialogue feels really forced and cringey a lot of the time. The main guy in the movie is the biggest weak point, he lacks charisma. This movie is also not doing anything unique in any way, after I finish this review I'm pretty sure I will never think of it again. IMDB is requesting a 200 more characters. If you haven't seen the TV show "the good place" I would recommend watching that or this 1998 Japanese movie called "after life" or that black mirror episode "hang the DJ". I think all those suggestions have an interesting take on the afterlife and on romance in a way that is much more dynamic content.
I enjoyed the soundtrack
carolinetsouto22 November 2021
For real, the first 30 min are slow, i literally slept over it. But i gave it another try and it's an okay movie, entertaining at least.
Avoiding spoilers, I'd say that the movie is not a total waste of time for how the soundtrack fits it and for calling up attention for a serious matter, that literally could change someones life. But don't wait for an amazing script or logical twists.
Avoiding spoilers, I'd say that the movie is not a total waste of time for how the soundtrack fits it and for calling up attention for a serious matter, that literally could change someones life. But don't wait for an amazing script or logical twists.
Dumb ass story
gemead27 January 2022
What moron wrote this pile of poop juvenile story? Initially the talk-fest had some merit but toward the end, the lines became absurd, not simply a poorly written tale, like something we may have composed when we were in JR High school, but just not believable. You have been warned!!
Infuriatingly Dull
garym-1211225 June 2021
This movie is so awful that I felt it my civic duty to create an acount purely to warn others against seeing it.
So badly scripted that I found myself yelling, "People don't ****ing speak like that!" repeatedly at the screen.
Andy Carl throws a lot of energy at the complete lack of script playing one of the most unsympathetic protagonists to hit the screen this year, but seems incapable of doing anything but pout, when his character has lines to declaim.
Nora Arnezeder (last seen in Zack Snyder's Army of the Dead) has a commanding screen presence, but this is wasted here, in a part that is little more than a badly written Manic Pixie Dream Girl without the mania.
Michael Rispoli, as Angelo, is the only vaguely amusing character in this film that dares to call itself a comedy, as the friend and fellow ghost of Carl, who's solution to the boredom of the afterlife, is to hang around women's changing rooms - but even this joke soon wears out, becoming rapidly creepy and over played.
At least Christina. Ricci has the decency to look vaguely embarrassed by the whole thing, every time she appears.
Congratulations to the director, Harry Greenberger, on getting so many friends and relatives to create IDMB accounts and give this movie ten star reviews. Don't be fooled by them, this film is, at best dull and at worst infuriating. You have been warned, the two hours spent watching this dirge are two hours you'll never get back.
And Greenberger? Please, you gave it a shot, but maybe, you're just not meant to write and make movies.
So badly scripted that I found myself yelling, "People don't ****ing speak like that!" repeatedly at the screen.
Andy Carl throws a lot of energy at the complete lack of script playing one of the most unsympathetic protagonists to hit the screen this year, but seems incapable of doing anything but pout, when his character has lines to declaim.
Nora Arnezeder (last seen in Zack Snyder's Army of the Dead) has a commanding screen presence, but this is wasted here, in a part that is little more than a badly written Manic Pixie Dream Girl without the mania.
Michael Rispoli, as Angelo, is the only vaguely amusing character in this film that dares to call itself a comedy, as the friend and fellow ghost of Carl, who's solution to the boredom of the afterlife, is to hang around women's changing rooms - but even this joke soon wears out, becoming rapidly creepy and over played.
At least Christina. Ricci has the decency to look vaguely embarrassed by the whole thing, every time she appears.
Congratulations to the director, Harry Greenberger, on getting so many friends and relatives to create IDMB accounts and give this movie ten star reviews. Don't be fooled by them, this film is, at best dull and at worst infuriating. You have been warned, the two hours spent watching this dirge are two hours you'll never get back.
And Greenberger? Please, you gave it a shot, but maybe, you're just not meant to write and make movies.
There's a good film in there somewhere. It came
jc-1590023 April 2024
There's a good film in there somewhere. It became much more alive once the female character came into the storyline, the scene in Central Park and the scenes after were well played and engaging, thanks to the skills of the two leads, and felt like something from a completely different film compared with first scenes of the movie. This section showed it potential - it also looked great - I really feel the film just needed a ruthless script editor, to be 30 minutes shorter, and have lots cut except some (tonally improved) early scenes to set up the premise, peripheral characters cut except the main two characters, keeping the stalking sub-plot. But hey, my opinion only and I still enjoyed it as a whole.
Really Bad
vanesabeck18 March 2022
Funny, quirky, Indie allegory for modern love
imdb-4528118 June 2021
A funny, quirky, Indie allegory for modern love in the city. If you can accept the tongue-in-cheek premise that you must have a soul mate to pass into the afterlife, you'll get the analogy of what it so often feels like to be single in the modern world.
I saw the film when it premiered Cinequest in San Jose as 'Faraway Eyes'. Then Covid hit and the marketing of the movie was paused. Now, re-named, 'Here After', the movie is a charming date-night flick and I'm glad to see it getting the wider release it deserves.
The movie isn't BIG budget, but if you like Indie movies that aren't plastic-wrapped predictable big studio movies, then 'Here After' is worth your time.
I saw the film when it premiered Cinequest in San Jose as 'Faraway Eyes'. Then Covid hit and the marketing of the movie was paused. Now, re-named, 'Here After', the movie is a charming date-night flick and I'm glad to see it getting the wider release it deserves.
The movie isn't BIG budget, but if you like Indie movies that aren't plastic-wrapped predictable big studio movies, then 'Here After' is worth your time.
Interesting Writing
doonerm6 January 2022
There's great writing and then there's interesting writing, so my rating of this film is on being interesting rather than great. A good amount of spiritual awakening might be in order as well. Perhaps something to watch between meditation and work. The acting is extremely competent with the material, which is actually a compliment to all the actors working with the interesting rather than great writing. For anyone that appreciates "interesting" knowing ahead of time this film does not achieve greatness, then this is the film for you.
Unimaginative romance
supermellowcali18 June 2021
As if written by a young child, this is a straight up romance without any surprises or creativity. Christina Ricci is great but (yawn) if you've seen the trailer, you've seen the movie. The premise, btw -- find your soul mate or cease to exist -- is not only thoughtless but maybe even objectionable.
One of the worst movies I've seen
dedlegs7 February 2022
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
