What’s It About
A returning war veteran, stricken with PTSD, unwittingly gets trapped with his teenage sister on Boston’s Tobin Memorial Bridge as a heavily weaponized group of ex-military revolutionist take everyone hostage.
MOVIESinMO REVIEW
The complexity of military service comes through very clearly in the persona of James, underlining the moral ambiguity presented to those serving. Whereas the idea of military intervention to preserve peace does seem oxymoronic—in much the same way that promoting abstinence through sex would—the strategic value of having combat-ready personnel cannot be put in doubt. The tricky part lies in defining acceptable parameters for military action, especially in weighing mission objectives against civilian life. The media’s treatment of casualties reflects a jarring disparity: civilian deaths bring about moments of outrage and condemning headlines, while fallen soldiers are all too often relegated to statistics. Even those who survive, like Eric, prove that returning home doesn’t guarantee healing or support. The movie doesn’t intentionally set up James as a sympathetic antagonist, but his change into someone who could commit war crimes was partly built by what he went through and what the military demanded from him. His rank as captain creates interesting questions—does his rise through the ranks imply consistent distinction in carrying out orders, or simply aptitude in accomplishing goals no matter the price? The entire supporting cast, barring a few major actors, is really peripheral to the storyline. Characters like Madeline, though 16 and possibly carrying a big emotional stake in her potential death, exist as a plot device to turn up the volume on James’ villainous arc. Similarly, Samantha, while central to several compelling action sequences, lacks depth beyond her primary function as an action catalyst. Though provided with a backstory, it feels superficial. This shallow character development permeates much of “Aftermath.” The film’s action sequences frequently defy logic, undermining its attempts at serious drama. Take the opening bridge sequence: criminals attempting to free their imprisoned associate inexplicably begin by damaging their own position and randomly targeting civilians, only belatedly focusing on their actual objective – the police van. Such narrative decisions trade credibility for spectacle. On a technical level, the production exposes its shortcomings in erratic scene transitions and missing visual information between camera angles. The dialogue usually comes off as stilted, with characters making statements that directly oppose their apparent motivations. For example, the lead announces his indifference to the presence of bodies while actively looking out for his sister’s safety. This logical position should promote more cautious action. Despite these shortcomings, the performances exceed expectations for a low-budget action film. Dylan Sprouse, Megan Stott, Dichen Lachman, and Mason Gooding (whose vocal similarity to his father, Cuba Gooding Jr., proves remarkably striking) approach their roles with blockbuster-level commitment. While their performances elevate the material, they can’t entirely compensate for the subpar visual effects and formulaic script. The movie also uncomfortably tries to handle complex geopolitical themes by setting an American character’s interference in a forced marriage against another’s involvement in mass casualties. This clunky commentary is heavy-handed, simplistic, and outright detached from the rest of the narrative. In short, “Aftermath” occupies a strange middle ground between mindless spectacle and serious drama, never truly succeeding at either. While not entirely without merit, it struggles with logical inconsistencies, underdeveloped characters, and tonal confusion. The committed performances and occasional effective action sequences prevent it from being completely dismissible, but they’re insufficient to recommend the film beyond its value as unintentional entertainment.
OUR RATING – A COMPLICATED 3