"Day After Tomorrow" Next Politically Hot Film

Forums: Movies
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Hollywood flick generates political interest
Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Posted: 4:03 AM EDT (0803 GMT)

http://movies.go.com/images/photogallery/DayAfterTomorrow/dayafter_9.jpg

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When is a special-effects-laden disaster film not just a potential summer blockbuster?

The answer seems to be when the subject is global warming.

"The Day After Tomorrow" a big-budget Hollywood movie opening this weekend is already generating political debate and inviting scrutiny because of its plot.

As described by 20th Century Fox promotional material, the movie premise is based on "an abrupt climate change [that] has cataclysmic consequences for the entire planet." Along the way, a paleoclimatologist tries to rescue his child from a field trip to New York City as a sudden Ice Age develops.

Former Vice President Al Gore was to join environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to speak at a public forum about global warming. The Monday night event was sponsored by the liberal-minded political group MoveOn.org.

Balance of article:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/24/movie.politics/index.html

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,129 • Replies: 23

No top replies

Noticed that Putin changed his mind on Kyoto...or was it Putin?

0 Replies

USA Today:

'Day After Tomorrow': A lot of hot air
By Patrick J. Michaels
As a scientist, I bristle when lies dressed up as "science" are used to influence political discourse. The latest example is the global-warming disaster flick, The Day After Tomorrow.
This film is propaganda designed to shift the policy of this nation on climate change. At least that's what I take from producer Mark Gordon's comment that "part of the reason we made this movie" was to "raise consciousness about the environment."

Fox spokesman Jeffrey Godsick says, "The real power of the movie is to raise consciousness on the issue of (global warming)."

'Nuff said.

BALANCE OF USATODAY ARTICLE

0 Replies

Since when has Hollywood been faithful to the science in science fiction?

However, from what I've read the science in the film may be highly improbable but not impossible. Ditto "Jurrasic Park" which was also criticized for bending science.

Science is based on skepticism and that has to do with the idea that there are few absolutes and the premises that are perceived as absolute ending up getting tweaked by some future scientist.

0 Replies

There's a good, extensive piece on this in the NYTimes:

When Manhattan Freezes Over

0 Replies

Fascinating article, nihm, and thanks.

It reads that Emmerich doesn't expect anyone to swallow the whole thing down as undeniable fact. It's a movie. It's seems offered as an analogy for ignoring the problem of global warming. The important thing, do we even want smaller doses?
The detractors don't seem to want to address that.
It's a new movie, "The Attack of the Strawmen."

0 Replies

good film, but it is not so dramatic.

my opinion:
Roland Emmerich, ist the best director after Steven Spielberg ------

0 Replies

I just get a bang out of those who come up with, "I don't believe the American public is that dumb," and then lament about a film like this. It's the paranoia that the film will change any minds that is telling. Calling attention to the problem is not a bad thing in itself. Industry (which is also big business) doesn't like any attention called to their pollution and they have an army of political pimps to back them up.

0 Replies

Calling attention to the problem with bad science or no science at all simply compounds the problem. Most natural process work slowly (on a human time scale). Thus the idea that things can get rapidly bad can also send the revers message, thing can be made right with a quick fix. science fiction is a lot of fun and useful, but I think there is an obligation on the part of film makers to at least make the basis for their science fiction plausible.

0 Replies

I agree but I think the hue and cry from the right could make many people take the film more seriously than they would if it were just left alone. Many things are exagerrated in movies and not just the science. It's science fiction with the accent on fiction. I would prefer a well made docudrama spanning a more realistic time frame and I would only go to a film like this to be entertained by the special effects. Not sure that the preview shots haven't just about given up the entire film.

0 Replies

The Guardian review:

http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,4120,1215824,00.html

0 Replies

And Roger Ebert:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-day28f.html

On the big screen some of you might like this one. Looks to me like it has topped the disaster film and where's a good comedy satire of the genre when you need it?

0 Replies

There's a rather good parody site from Greenpeace HERE (you can choose your language/change to your language on the site).

First critics after the pre-start and start were here similar than elsewhere ("Fiction vs. Science"), but the film got unusual good critics, especially by those, who saw it the last few days (couldn't find any in English yet).

0 Replies

At least in the film the tornadoes go directly after Hollywood. I know it was out of convenience, but I like the effect.

0 Replies

I used to live right below that sign (I used to hike up there in the morning on the same stairs that appeared in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." Good thing I moved away. Hollywood is an exciting city to live in but a bit too exciting for me now. I loved "Laurel Canyon" as that's my old stompin' grounds.

This looks like the typical storyline of a disaster flick and is getting divided reviews (right down the middle actually). I do see blockbuster in its future.

0 Replies

I thought the film opened today, so why isn't it" the day after today ? if it was the day after tomorrow that would be saturday and then it would have to be called the day after saturday and that is not as good so what is it called today. SO,The day after yesterday, which will be tomorrow..... can i call it" the day after today" Unless i see it tomorrow then it would have been seen the day after the day that was today to see the day before yesterday.Golly geee, I think i'm confused....can anyone HeLp ???

0 Replies

wait a minute, the cops gave me a black-eye for no identifiable reason while visiting....but that was just a few .........

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

There's a rather good parody site from Greenpeace HERE

from the article I linked above I got the feeling that the Greenpeace site may not be so much a parody, as rather something thats pretty much co-ordinated with (or got the unspoken consent of) the film's makers ...

0 Replies

that was a cool seatrocking Hollywood actionbuster ... man, those special effects!

<just went to see it>

0 Replies

sorry wiz. I was out of town most of this week so I didnt check the "new" posts, otherwise Id never have started a new thread.
Im with wiz, I dont think there was much of an outcry from the geologists on the Volcano movies or jurassic Park.
I suppose the polarity that this issue has driven is the culprit. Still , its entertainment, Id look at it as such and, even though im sure the producers had some technical input, it wasnt the driver of the story,

We never seem to indict the authors of the books that are the bases of many of these movies. At least Spiderman keeps true to science no?

0 Replies

"Day After Tomorrow" Next Politically Hot Film

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know