"Nach all den Jahren", which means "After all these years", is a German television movie from 2013, so it has its seventh anniversary this year. Maybe, depending on when you read thhis review, it already had its tenth anniversary. So what is more embarrassing? That these 1.5 hours actually got made or that tehy are still shown on national television so many years later. Tough call. Your GEZ money at work though. That much is safe. Another very valid response would be that it took indeed two writers to come up with the story and screenplay here, which proves that they are both utterly free of talent because otherwise they would have at least recognized each other's mistakes, but truth is that they really brought out the worst in each other apparently. Annd it surprises me a bit because their bodies of work are not horrible or anything. Weak maybe, but not as catastrophic as they sometimes are with these ARD Degeto films. Still the outcome here proves their complete absence of talent. That much is safe. As for director Rowitz, there is nothing better to say. Also active for a long time already before this film, also with some terrible projects in body of work, but also some tolerable, really good ones not really, so this film here is definitely among the worst he has done. As for the cast, the inclusion of lead actress Simone Thomalla is telling enough. Completely talentfree for year, no decades. And yet they want audiences to like her characters so much all the time despite this woman being unable to get through a single degree of range and versatility. But the one thing she is reliable with is delivering the same face expression for the entire film. But hey, at least she is delivering more of an erotic component than 99% of the others. There is always talk about sex etc. when she is at the center of the story. Is this a good thing? No. It's even more cringeworthy than the rest. Of course, there is also always men interested in her. And she is a power woman, one who manages to bring up three children in this very scenario and still have a lot of professional success. In other words, a woman who can exist on her own, does not need men in her life, but for the sake of happy endings, she still always ends up with one. But only after this man proves worthy of our strong emancipated Thomalla by constantly humiliating himself and sucking up to her, so they get a chance to be with this amazing goddess. The man is definitely not the boss in this film. In these films. Degeto is almost always anti-male. The actor with the "welcome" task to fulfill the job this time is Sven Martinek, who may be a bigger clown than he is on his trademark series. While he is begging for Thomalla's character's attention, we find out by some of the kids that he is pretty handsome. Of course he is. He must be at least semi-deserving of Thomalla's character. And here and there he has a moment when we see he is a leader, like what he managed professionally or when he is doing some physical work in the garden, which almost feels like the prologue of some cringeworthy adult film, or when he tames the pretty strong (and scary) family dog. Of course, this dog can also only be really tamed by a leader like Thomalla and the way how she talks to the dog that it needs to remind her is sooo embarrassing. So actually very accurate because it is just as embarrassing as Thomalla's acting for example in a scene when she forgot an important date. Of course, this only happens to her because her life is so full and not because she is reckless. As for the very small parts, you got Eyron and Winkler in here. The latter died pretty recently by the way. Well, what can I say about his character here. He is a doctor. But when asked about medical aspects, he just sits there and jokes around with the patient. Nuff said with how credible and authentic this film is.
Frequently with these films, you see from the child actors how bad/good they are. And here "bad" is still an understatement. There is not too much I want to say about the two girls. The older one literally vanishes, the younger one is a running gag with how she finds boys and romance gross. However, the son. He is in the center of a story that is linked to his father, namely he thought daddy was dead, but he is really live. So Thomalla's character did not only lie to the boy, but even to the boy's father. For 15 years(!) or so. How charming. How likable. But with a brief mumbled statement from her on one occasion that maybe she did not make the right choice, everything is alright again. Guess, what? I disagree. I think this massive lie alone turns her into an extremely unlikable character. But the female lead in these kind of films shall never be criticized, right? She has many bad moments. The actress, the character with how he was written and sometimes both. Don't even get me started on when he climbs through the window on one occasion and is called a burglar or so by another character. And what is Thomalla's character reaction. She slaps him. Pretty roughly. How emancipated. Always fun to hit males in these films. Also he is the son of an elderly woman and while raising three kids, while managing to be successful with her work (get to that in a minute), she also took care of a non-related old woman. Oh my God. What a saint this woman. Now, let's lose a few words on her job. She is a writer. Writing trashy cheesy romance novels apparently, but she is struggling because she is suffering from writer's block. This is also a key element of the story here. And it feels so ridiculous how we see Thomalla's character swear at the screen of her computer on several occasions. So fake. So written. So unauthentic. The consequence is that this feels acctually really offensive to people who really suffer from writer's block. Those in real life. Who completely lose their source of income and maybe their existential basis. Who could lose their apartment. These are the ones basically mocked by Thomalla's character. And even more so by the screenplay. Of course, there is additional pressure with her boss threatening to fire her. That poor amazing woman. But hey, the solution is right around the corner because once Martinek's character takes all three kids out of the house for once is the moment where she all of a sudden has a breakthrough and comes up with quality material again. Well, "quality material", but I guess that one is self-explanatory. And don't even get me started on the oh so funny sequences when we have Thomalla depicted as a a woman working in the field of medicine and of course she is also there constantly approached by love-hungry men. Must be her amazing curves. I don't even know what to say. Also where are the Klitschko brothers' lawyers when you need them. Could they not have prevented this mess from happening with some copyright claim or so? Oh well, I guess in that case they simply would have used voiceover for a different name foor the canine. And probably in a way where you could realize it's voiceover. Okay I think I made myself clear why this is such a terrible film. I could list another dozen (probably two dozens) scenes and brief moments away from the key plot(s) when this film totally sucks, also in terms of attention to detail (or lack thereof). But I will just use one: namely the one at the end when Thomalla's character makes a little speech, of course not without letting us know at the start that speeches are usually not her thing. But now, it simply needs to happen. Oh yes right, humble girl does not like to be in the limelight. Very realistic. Absolutely abysmal movie, also with the really pretentious pseudo-important title. Massive thumbs-down. Skip at all cost.
Frequently with these films, you see from the child actors how bad/good they are. And here "bad" is still an understatement. There is not too much I want to say about the two girls. The older one literally vanishes, the younger one is a running gag with how she finds boys and romance gross. However, the son. He is in the center of a story that is linked to his father, namely he thought daddy was dead, but he is really live. So Thomalla's character did not only lie to the boy, but even to the boy's father. For 15 years(!) or so. How charming. How likable. But with a brief mumbled statement from her on one occasion that maybe she did not make the right choice, everything is alright again. Guess, what? I disagree. I think this massive lie alone turns her into an extremely unlikable character. But the female lead in these kind of films shall never be criticized, right? She has many bad moments. The actress, the character with how he was written and sometimes both. Don't even get me started on when he climbs through the window on one occasion and is called a burglar or so by another character. And what is Thomalla's character reaction. She slaps him. Pretty roughly. How emancipated. Always fun to hit males in these films. Also he is the son of an elderly woman and while raising three kids, while managing to be successful with her work (get to that in a minute), she also took care of a non-related old woman. Oh my God. What a saint this woman. Now, let's lose a few words on her job. She is a writer. Writing trashy cheesy romance novels apparently, but she is struggling because she is suffering from writer's block. This is also a key element of the story here. And it feels so ridiculous how we see Thomalla's character swear at the screen of her computer on several occasions. So fake. So written. So unauthentic. The consequence is that this feels acctually really offensive to people who really suffer from writer's block. Those in real life. Who completely lose their source of income and maybe their existential basis. Who could lose their apartment. These are the ones basically mocked by Thomalla's character. And even more so by the screenplay. Of course, there is additional pressure with her boss threatening to fire her. That poor amazing woman. But hey, the solution is right around the corner because once Martinek's character takes all three kids out of the house for once is the moment where she all of a sudden has a breakthrough and comes up with quality material again. Well, "quality material", but I guess that one is self-explanatory. And don't even get me started on the oh so funny sequences when we have Thomalla depicted as a a woman working in the field of medicine and of course she is also there constantly approached by love-hungry men. Must be her amazing curves. I don't even know what to say. Also where are the Klitschko brothers' lawyers when you need them. Could they not have prevented this mess from happening with some copyright claim or so? Oh well, I guess in that case they simply would have used voiceover for a different name foor the canine. And probably in a way where you could realize it's voiceover. Okay I think I made myself clear why this is such a terrible film. I could list another dozen (probably two dozens) scenes and brief moments away from the key plot(s) when this film totally sucks, also in terms of attention to detail (or lack thereof). But I will just use one: namely the one at the end when Thomalla's character makes a little speech, of course not without letting us know at the start that speeches are usually not her thing. But now, it simply needs to happen. Oh yes right, humble girl does not like to be in the limelight. Very realistic. Absolutely abysmal movie, also with the really pretentious pseudo-important title. Massive thumbs-down. Skip at all cost.
