This movie will do something to ya. It's a good balance of social/political commentary (among my favorite moments of the movie is when, ironically, Americans start hopping the border to Mexico), human emotions, and of course - destroyed cities. It even manages to work in the classic wolves roaming the city without missing a beat.

There is surreal imagery in abundance - a frozen-over Lady Liberty, a lone janitor staring out at the ruins of L.A., and of course a ghost ship coasting into the middle of ruined New York. In a weird way, this enhances rather than subtracts from the realism the film's makers were shooting for. There was also a lot of realism in the way people reacted to the crisis: even while it was going on all around them, a lot of people thought "it can't happen to us" - it took a giant wall of water heading straight at New Yorkers to get them moving.

So to sum it up: go watch it. It's amazingly bone-chilling and I swear, I would not have left that theater if it hadn't ended on a somewhat positive noteupo.

Gunslinger Moogle fucked around with this message on 06-02-2004 at 12:00 AM.

The part with the helicopters freezing in midflight made me sadf

quote:

---

Rodent King said this about your mom:
Any trace of starving people resorting to cannibalism?

---

The movie took place over a few days....

quote:

---

Pesco got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
The movie took place over a few days....

---

..while all the scientists say it would take a few decades (or more) for everything portrayed in the film to happen.. rather than in one big worldwide calamity..

My only gripe is the number of Greenpeace activists (and other environmental groups) who are using a FICTIONAL MOVIE to claim that all their warnings about global warming are true...

Reality checks ahoy...

quote:

---

Abbikat said this about your mom:
[QBReality checks ahoy...[/QB]

---

I think their reality checks just bounced.

When the policeman left with all those people, I was screaming at the screen for them to stay... my uncle nearly disowned me

quote:

---

Abbikat had this to say about Duck Tales:
..while all the scientists say it would take a few decades (or more) for everything portrayed in the film to happen.. rather than in one big worldwide calamity..

My only gripe is the number of Greenpeace activists (and other environmental groups) who are using a FICTIONAL MOVIE to claim that all their warnings about global warming are true...

Reality checks ahoy...

---

Would take around fifty years I believe...But that doesn't make for a good disaster movie.

quote:

---

Pvednes had this to say about Pirotess:
Would take around fifty years I believe...But that doesn't make for a good disaster movie.

---

Oh, I dunno. It would work for elves.

Conflict: Man vs. Nature

The air from the upper troposphere is being sucked down to the surface.
"But wouldn't it cool down!?"
No, it's going too fast!

I didn't really see the movie yet. But I intend to.

edit: god damnit hehe

Korvus fucked around with this message on 06-02-2004 at 02:31 AM.

quote:

---

The logic train ran off the tracks when Callalron said:
I think their reality checks just bounced.

---

You should be taken out and shot.

quote:

---

Snoota got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
It was one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. The only, ONLY, reason to go see it is for the neat special effects.

---

You expected something more than cool effects?

quote:

---

Arrenn Lightblade had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
You expected something more than cool effects?

---

No, that's what I went in looking for. But everyone here is having orgasms about the pitiful excuse for a story they threw together in ten minutes to explain what the cool effects meant.

By the way, I could not stand Lord of the Rings at all ;P

quote:

---

From the book of Led, chapter 3, verse 16:
By the way, I could not stand Lord of the Rings at all ;P

---

...what the hell does that have to do with anything?

quote:

---

Rodent King had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
Any trace of starving people resorting to cannibalism?

---

quote:

---

Pesco painfully thought these words up:
The movie took place over a few days....

---

quote:

---

Pvednes had this to say about Knight Rider:
Would take around fifty years I believe...But that doesn't make for a good disaster movie.

---

Thus good disaster movies REQUIRE cannibalism.

quote:

---

ACES! Another post by Snoota:
...what the hell does that have to do with anything?

---

You imbecile. She's getting at that Lord of the Rings would not have made it a better movie.

I disagree, however. What's scarier than a series of natural disasters hitting the world simultaneously? A series of disasters hitting the world simultaneously...with cave trolls.

quote:

---

Mr. Parcelan wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
I disagree, however. What's scarier than a series of natural disasters hitting the world simultaneously? A series of disasters hitting the world simultaneously...with cave trolls.

---

quote:

---

The logic train ran off the tracks when Led said:
...
The part with the helicopters freezing in midflight made me sadf

---

I had to bite my tounge in the theaters at that part..My first though was like why they didn't fall out of the sky out right, if it's sucking air down from that far up...their shouldn't be enough air for the rotors to maintian lift, or the engines to run.

Also, why did they just burn books, not any of the wood stuff since the wood heats better, and burns longer.

This was the movie that everyone looks for a conspiracy message in, because the administration doesn't want NASA folks officially discussing the movie, etc. After the flak they got after Armageddon, Deep Impact, and The Core, no one wants to get their wang slammed in the door again.

quote:

---

Peter wrote this stupid crap:
Also, why did they just burn books, not any of the wood stuff since the wood heats better, and burns longer.

---

The only good reason I can think of is because burning books gives them some symbolism, and some character conflict with those wacky librarians. Admittedly, it's not always realistic (especially when they literally slammed the door in the face of dropping temperatures - but if I can forgive 'The Mummy Returns' because they outran the rising sun, I guess that's OK).

Gunslinger Moogle fucked around with this message on 06-02-2004 at 10:59 AM.

Uh...huh. Bush doesn't want us to find out that global warming could cause great CG effects? Uh oh!

quote:

---

Moffles Puu had this to say about Cuba:
Moveon.org is ranting about the Day After Tomorrow, claiming it's the movie that Bush doesn't want you to see.

Uh...huh. Bush doesn't want us to find out that global warming could cause great CG effects? Uh oh!

---

More like because "He doesn't want you to think, or see, the president brushing off the fact that we fucked up the planet."

quote:

---

The logic train ran off the tracks when Trillee said:
More like because "He doesn't want you to think, or see, the president brushing off the fact that we fucked up the planet."

---

Or the president not making it.

lol!

quote:

---

BeauChan had this to say about Pirotess:
Or the president not making it.

lol!

---

Or he fears it'll give our Vice President ideas

For instance, Armageddon: The writers latched on to one fact (namely that NASA can only watch roughly 1% of the sky at any given time, which is a bit like looking at the night sky through a straw, never mind that we can move our straw-view perspective around almost constantly), and the media blew it out of proportion when they questioned NASA officials who said "yes but", insinuating that NASA and the government weren't doing their jobs. This was made worse a couple of years later when a "near miss" occurred.

The same thing happened AGAIN the same year Armageddon came out; it was in regards to Deep Impact. In this case, the government in the movie didn't have much in the way of plans to survive (dig a big bunker in the ground and hide in it, essentially). They contacted scientists working for the government again and the scientists said that yes bunkers would probably be used, but no they wouldn't really work in the long run. Aaaand that got sent out to the media.

And it happened a third time with The Core. Someone found some sort of cold war nonsense about finding a way to trigger earthquakes. It was one of fifty million fake plans we never really invested any money in, designed to freak out the Soviets and trick them into spending oodles of money. They asked government science guys, who said "Yeah we did write up a report, to scare the Soviets, but it wasn't ever anything serious" but what ended up getting mentioned (admittedly, not very loudly) was that yeah the government did in fact have a SECRET EARTHQUAKE PROJECT.

So the administration finally said "Hey we're going to stop feeding the media information with which they can kick us in the nuts over stupid stuff people essentially vote not to worry about" and thus NASA scientists were told not to speak to the media about "Day After Tomorrow" in any official capacity.

On the other hand, Popular Science loves to dissect big disaster films, and they rarely have to go to NASA to ask about it. They talk to geologists, physicists, whoever's pertinent, and they break down the possibilities. The big one in "The Core" was that they essentially had it backwards. The molten core of the Earth spins because we have the magnetosphere, etc. We don't have it because the core spins. They had it backwards in the movie. Likewise, the effects would be much more subtle (jump in cancer and especially melanoma rates, not the sudden melting of the Golden Gate Bridge).

With "Day After Tomorrow" you have the whole "Well yeah...things could cool down over fifty years, but keep in mind we're, geologically speaking, in an Ice Age."