Why 'After Earth' father-son movie doesn't impress critics

With Will and Jaden Smith, 'After Earth' should be a blockbuster summer film. Why it may not live up to it's star power.

Claudette Barius/Sony – Columbia Pictures/AP
'After Earth' stars Jaden Smith.

Will Smith may be one of Hollywood's most bankable action stars, but his new film, "After Earth," in which he stars with his 14-year-old son Jaden, has opened to cold reviews from critics and faces stiff competition in a busy box office weekend.

"After Earth" is a futuristic post-apocalyptic tale of a father and his teenage son in which the young boy must embark on a life-saving mission.

Sony Pictures Entertainment, a division of Sony Corp. , spent about $130 million to produce the movie, making it one of the studio's biggest summer releases.

The story is centered on the father-son relationship and the dynamic of a father passing the mantle to his son is mirrored both on screen and off, as the younger Smith leads the action.
Will Smith, 44, who wrote the initial story and was the executive producer of the film, said the project gave him valuable time to spend with his son, with whom he first starred in the 2006 family drama, "The Pursuit of Happyness."

"Filmmaking and entertainment is our family business," Smith said at a recent news conference. "So, it really gave us an opportunity for the last year to spend ten or twelve hours a day together, every day. And for me it's just the best way, for me at least, to parent."

Jaden Smith bears a strong resemblance to his famous father and won over most critics as the lead in 2010's reboot of "The Karate Kid." However, he has not been received as warmly for his performance as ranger Kitai Raige in "After Earth."


Variety's Scott Foundas said both father and son failed to meet expectations. "Senior Smith gives one of the least substantive performances of his career, while the undeniably charismatic Jaden toggles between ... paralyzing fear and simmering rage."

The Christian Science Monitor's Peter Rainer said Smith's '  fiercest adversary is the screenplay. Replete with howlers, it had the audience I saw the film with in titters from very early on."
Manohla Dargis wrote in the New York Times that the younger Smith was "a pretty teenager with jumpy eyebrows whose character remains an insufferable brat."
Rolling Stone's Peter Travers slammed the script as "an unholy mess of platitudes and posturing." He gave the film one out of five stars, saying "It's not a good sign when you sit there thinking one thing - Make. It. Stop."
"After Earth" scored just 32 out of 100 on Metacritic.com, which compiles ratings based on critics' reviews. Only 13 percent of critics recommended the movie in reviews collected on the Rotten Tomatoes website.
This is despite the fact that the film was directed by M. Night Shayamalan, who scored a huge hit with the 1999 suspense drama "The Sixth Sense," which grossed more than $672 million at the worldwide box office. Shayamalan was less successful though with 2006's "Lady in the Water" and 2010's "The Last Airbender."
Box office forecasters predict "After Earth" will make $35- $40 million in U.S. and Canadian ticket sales from Friday through Sunday.
The film opened on Thursday and took in $1 million at U.S. and Canadian theaters, behind Lions Gate Entertainment's comedy heist caper "Now You See Me," which earned $1.5 million.
"After Earth" faces tough competition this weekend from recent releases still drawing big business, such as car-chase sequel "Fast & Furious 6," superhero tale "Iron Man 3," and sci-fi film "Star Trek Into Darkness."
"It's not an enviable task opening up this weekend," said Phil Contrino, chief analyst with Boxoffice.com. International sales will be critical, he said, since Will Smith remains a big draw for overseas audiences.
Sony Pictures spokesman Steve Elzer said a weekend take of about $30 million in the United States and Canada would be a solid number for a movie that is not a branded sequel.
Sony's other upcoming summer films include action thriller "White House Down," sci-fi adventure "Elysium," and book adaptation "The Moral Instruments: City of Bones."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.