This movie does not get the credit it deserves, in my opinion. Cooney wrote something beautiful in this script. He brought upon questions and ideas subject to us, and approached it in a manner that keeps us guessing – keeps us curious. Cooney is not a philosopher, he is a film writer: he is simply doing what he does best in life, and in my opinion with great merit. We have seen this theme before, and even after this film (The Butterfly Effect), but that does not give any reason why Cooney should not take his stab at it. Pure originality is few and far between these days, maybe even non-existent. As for the directing: nothing bad to say. There is some great camera work, cinematography and use of effects. There were some beautifully placed dark and gloomy scenes, and a wonderful recreation of the act of dying and being brought back to life (exactly the way my grandfather described it to me when it happened to him... not to say that each resuscitation isn't unique and individual, but we do hear of a common trend: see the white light; see your body below you).

My only real problem with the film is that I think Piper Perabo was slightly overacting. Not that the acting did not fit in some way, but it seemed a tad dry and much, but this is a subjective outlook. Others may find her fitting.

******** SPOILER ******** DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE WATCHED THE FILM

Consider what the orderly said (and I'm paraphrasing): how and why people die is the question. It may be the only question.

I am writing this comment not to be audacious or to act superior, but I feel I have read a few other unintelligent comments that brought me to be motivated to say my piece. What some people do not realize, or have yet to realize, is that the story is about a man who is at the edge of death. Some people in this world die, but have a chance to be resuscitated – some people come back to us, some don't.

Consider those who do survive. Why is it they live and other before them did not? The same tools and similar (maybe even the same) circumstances are at their temptation. Maybe those who died gave up, and those who lived still had something important to live for. This is Simon Cable.

Now, of course, there are holes in this hypothesis: is this important calling of God (Peter seems to think otherwise at the end: we decide), there are those who come back to us without amnesia (but at the end, does Simon not go back to where he once was, unaware and unknowing once again), and does this make him insane (the old cliché that the insane are truly those best in touch with the world). The last idea I don't personally believe, but this movie is about the questions. It doesn't end in obscurity or lose its' intelligence, it simply explores an idea and leaves us wondering: how and why do people die? And is this phenomenon even more than we, as believers of our own trend, realize.

Though the rating of a movie to simply overall 1 to 10 can be difficult, and I am still on the fence of how much I like it (having just seen it, and would like to come back to it a few weeks from now). I gave it an 8, though I think a 7.5 would be more accurate to my opinion at this moment.