The New Gospel Of Death: What Hollywood’s Take On The Afterlife Looks Like
(ANALYSIS) Death is a part of life. Ben Franklin put it this way: “In this life, nothing is certain but death and taxes.”
It’s only natural that every society tells itself stories about death to help make sense of life — whether it’s the Egyptian or Greek underworlds, Hindu reincarnation or Christianity’s concept of heaven and hell.
Movies are our biggest storytelling medium, and up until recently, these stories — at least to some degree — reflected the nation’s Judeo-Christian tradition. As journalist and culture critic, Terry Mattingly wrote that movies like “Ghost” gave us versions of the afterlife that appealed to Christians, even when the writers didn’t believe it. Bruce Joel Rubin, for example, penned the classic romantic drama, which won him an Oscar for Best Screenplay.
READ: The Gospel According To Bryan Johnson
“Rubin is a convert to Buddhism.” Mattingly recalled. “When I asked him why, near the end of this film, demons arrive and yank the villain into hell — a tricky plot twist in a Buddhist worldview — he gave a simple answer. He said that he knew he was writing a movie for ticket-buyers in a predominantly Christian culture. Thus, he needed good vs. evil, heaven vs. hell. That’s that.”
But with the increasing secularization of America, there’s far more freedom for Hollywood writers to tell stories about the afterlife that are in conflict with Christian narratives. In fact, with our old stories losing power, there’s almost a necessity to. There’s less cultural pressure to conform to Christian norms, so filmmakers explore alternative or ambiguous views of the afterlife. Christian ideas are often critiqued or sidelined, replaced with vague spirituality, nihilism and even existential humanism.
Which is why it’s fitting that in 2025, Hollywood has put out so many movies about death. From “Presence” to “The Monkey” to “The Life of Chuck” to “Death of a Unicorn” to “Final Destination: Bloodlines” to “28 Years Later” to “Sinners” to “Bring Her Back.” All of these stories not only deal with death but explicitly attempt to answer how we have the best life possible under its shadow.
Christians believe death is not the end, but a transition to an afterlife. While the physical body dies, the soul continues on. Christians believe in either heaven or hell (based on their relationship with God and actions during life) and in the resurrection of the dead.
So what answers do these movies give? Interestingly, they largely give the same one. Whether that answer holds up is another matter.
You can’t beat death
The first big thing these movies say about death is it is inevitable.
"Everything dies, and that’s life,” says Lois Shelburn, mother of "The Monkey" protagonist Hal.
“Life of Chuck” is a story about a young boy named Chuck cursed with a vision of his own death, which he uses to inform the rest of his life. “Final Destination: Bloodlines” is about a family who get the chance, through premonitions, to try to circumvent death.
“28 Years Later” is a movie about the zombie post-apocalypse, where a child attempting to save his mother’s life finds that there’s nothing he can do to save her.
“Death of a Unicorn” features a single father who works with immoral scientists to harvest blood from unicorns that might cure death.
“Presence” features a ghost who tries to prevent a death — but in doing so leads to their own death. All of these movies, in their own way, deal with the inevitability of death.
In fact, these films make a very strong point that the very attempt to cheat death is not only in vain, but will cause you to create far more harm. “28 Years Later” shows a society of Britons who attempt to ward off death by building a culture around killing zombies and protecting themselves from them, ultimately causing pain (like keeping Spike’s mom from having a dignified death) and cutting themselves off from people (like the doctor Ian Kelson) who can help them.
“Final Destination: Bloodlines” reveals that, according to the rules of the universe, “when you f--- with death, things get messy.”
Such attempts to avoid death causes characters’ ultimate demise. “Bring Her Back” follows a grieving mother who tries to bring back her dead daughter and nephew by killing other children and using their bodies as vessels. The brothers’ attempts to control death in “The Monkey” only cause them to kill countless people they never intended it to kill. The attempt to use the blood of a unicorn to cure disease and gain immortality in “Death of a Unicorn” unleashes more violence. The vampires in “Sinners” offer eternal life — but only in the form of eternal death.
Religion is typically looked upon badly in these films, as a form of denial of death that makes you feel better but ultimately is a bad coping mechanism. “The Monkey” constantly mocks religious people who claim to have the answers or downplay the question. “Sinners” shows Christianity as impotent against vampires. Christianity and religion are typically portrayed unfavorably compared to more vague forms of spirituality, such as in “Sinners,” “Presence,” and “Death of a Unicorn.”
Lies to make people feel better — which are often associated with religion — are often noted in these films as part of something that harms relationships. The religious “28 Years Later” community constantly finds ways to lie about the reality of death, and these untruths eventually push Spike away from his father. In “Bring Her Back,” Andy tries to comfort his sister with ideas of an afterlife, but his willingness to bend the truth to spare her feelings eventually causes him to lose her trust.
Hope lies in the present — not in an afterlife
If death is inevitable, and attempts to fight off or deny death only cause further harm, where do these movies suggest we find our hope?
In enjoying the life we have now. “Final Destination: Bloodlines” makes this point at least twice in the film. The first comes during the memorial service for the family matriarch, Iris, in a speech given by her son: “Her death should be a reminder to enjoy life, and to spend the time we have together, because we’re not going to get any back.”
Second, with the final lines spoken by franchise regular William Bludworth (whose actor, the legendary Tony Todd, died shortly thereafter, making the lines so much more poignant), said: “I intend to enjoy the time I have left. You do the same. Life is precious. Enjoy every second of it. You never know when.”
Movies like “The Life of Chuck” and “The Monkey” also make this point: In the face of death, the only response is to enjoy life now and not worry so much about tomorrow. This is the advice Lois Shelburn gives her sons, which one of them eventually embraces. This is the determination Chuck gives to himself when he’s confronted with his own mortality.
Dancing is a strong motif in these films. “The Life of Chuck” and “The Monkey” both have their protagonists find connection with their mothers and follow the advice to live life now to the fullest in dancing. Dancing is also how they initially found family in “Bring Her Back” respond to a funeral, and the summa of all joy in “Sinners.” This makes sense because dancing is a beautiful and enjoyable thing that is gone as soon as it’s over. It’s not something like art that lasts. But the joy of the memory can last.
“28 Years Later” takes a slightly different angle. It suggests that you can’t control if you die, but you can control how you die.
“There are many kinds of death. Some are better than others. The best are peaceful, where we leave each other in love.” It’s this logic that leads Kelson to euthanize Spike’s mother with her consent, although not Spike’s.
A couple of these movies do hold out hope for a vague version of life after death. “Death of a Unicorn” has both father and daughter having visions through the unicorns of the afterlife, where their wife/mom is alive. “Sinners” has the hero see a vision of his lover and their dead child as he’s about to die. But both of them affirm that most attempts in this life are to preserve it and that doing so can only corrupt.
The afterlife and mental health
While it’s way beyond the scope of this piece to argue for or against life after death, there are some interesting problems with this modern, secular myth of death.
First, its contention that accepting death gives you better psychological well-being than those who believe in an afterlife is a dubious one at best. Studies show that religious people — particularly those who regularly go to church — often have better mental health than those who do not. In fact, they never seem to have worse mental health. It may be that it’s the community aspects of faith that are providing these mental health boosts. But it’s also true that religion is typically necessary to provide a basis for the tight-knit, robust community that we need psychologically, as Jonathan Haidt notes in his book “The Anxious Generation.”
But there may also be something necessary about believing in an afterlife for mental health. If so, it may explain why belief in an afterlife has gone up since the 1970s, even among the nonreligious. After ages, the secularist experiment of “accept death and you’ll be happier” hasn’t really gained much ground. This suggests to me that it might not be true.
Second, its viewpoint that all attempts of religion and science to stave off death are life-harming failures is — to put it bluntly — something everyone knows is false. As Tom Holland pointed out in his seminal book “Dominion,” one of the primary results of Christians’ belief in the resurrection of the dead was a greater respect for human life and dignity, such that they rescued babies from infanticide and got rid of gladiator games. As Nancy Pearcey points out, the spread of Christianity also elevated the status of women (and lowered the abuse of men) wherever it went around the world. And that’s not to even mention the building of hospitals, universities, modern science and the abolition movement that ended legal slavery in the West.
Human attempts to fight back against death have done wonders to extend and improve the quality of life for people around the world. The rise of capitalism reducing poverty levels and the dissemination of medical technologies have caused infant mortality rates to plummet around the world and life to be extended and improved for everyone.
There are also bad ways to try to extend one’s life. The “Frankenstein” myth exists for a reason. Peter Thiel’s recent conversation with Ross Douthot, where he suggests that humanity is something we should transcend rather than preserve, is a reminder of that. But the general pessimism about humanity’s ability to fight death, and the general moral repugnance against trying, is wildly out of step with the reality we see.
Finally, it’s worth noting that this philosophy is primarily a selfish and privileged one. It’s hard to deny that the response to death by characters in these films, to “enjoy life,” turns one’s gaze inward rather than toward others. Bludworth says he’s going to enjoy life as he walks away from people who need his help. It’s also privileged, as one’s capacity to enjoy life in the way someone like, say, Chuck does, is predicated on being an able-bodied man in a rich country with few barriers to his happiness. This may be why poorer countries have a tendency to be more religious.
When old death myths die, they are replaced by new ones. For good and ill, Hollywood is the modern myth maker for our ideas of death. Time will tell if these new ideas grow into a consensus — or if they ultimately die their own death upon the rocks of reality.
Joseph Holmes is an award-nominated filmmaker and culture critic living in New York. He is co-host of the podcast “The Overthinkers” and its companion website theoverthinkersjournal.world, where he discusses art, culture and faith with his fellow overthinkers. His other work and contact info can be found at josephholmesstudios.com.