Well, I'm still here after "The Day After Tomorrow"

Rating: 10/10 (29 May 2004)

First off, I'm going to make this short and simple: I'm not an environmentalist, don't know any, nor do I care to get swept up in their crusade to save our planet. BUT, I do respect what they try to do (not to mention the lengths), and that is in that they try to change the course of the grim direction that our world is headed, especially in today's times.
I try to not get caught up in politics, but "The Day After Tomorrow" has already stirred up so much heated debate in the weeks before its release, I might as well speak out on some of them. I didn't go to this film to judge it on its "science"; that would basically defeat the purpose of going to the theater and watching it. What I will say, even though I'm no climatologist, is that it isn't the science that's important, it's the effect.
Believe it or not, many will flock to this film just to see Lady Liberty (not to mention most of New York) get trashed by a massive tidal wave, but will be surprised by the human element of the film. Though much of the first half of the film is dedicated to special effects, the second half is made up mostly of characters; that's an achievement in film-making. A special effects bonanza that actually takes time to let us get to know and feel for the characters. I'm not saying that the performances were bad, but they were all in fact, pretty convincing.
Roland Emmerich, the director of "The Day After Tomorrow," has a long resume of special effects blockbusters listed as his achievements. This is the same man that brought us "Independence Day" and "Godzilla" and who can now add this movie to his list as his next great film.
Much of the debate surrounding "The Day After Tomorrow" has been centered on him, and that is wrong. He set out to make a movie about global warming and the onset of another ice age, not to convert the audience into environmentalists.
Now here I come. I had originally wanted to see this film just to try to make sense of the controversy, and I did, more or less. People will judge this movie, not just for its credibility, but because of who and what it's supposedly aimed at: our government, which is said by some to be quite lax on the environment, especially under President George W. Bush. Indeed, I believe he hasn't done much for the environment, but I'm not here to rip him to shreds.
I've read a number of articles judging this film's science and whilst they all say it's hogwash, the scenario that it depicts is not that far from the truth, and it's for that reason I gave "The Day After Tomorrow" a "10." I'm more likely to believe men and women who have written books on the possibility of a new ice age than the people who say that this movie is total bull****, and most likely haven't seen it yet.
Whether or not people will use "The Day After Tomorrow" as a model for environmental change and awareness, I say let them use it; it probably won't do them that much good anyway. If people want to bash it because they say, "That's not going to happen," let them say it. But for those, like me, who went to this movie with an open mind about its message, don't ruin it for us; since we're most likely in the minority, we could laugh at those who use this movie as some kind of tool or gimmick for their causes.
P.S.: This film's final closing shots of New York City with a frozen Statue of Liberty, and a half-frozen North America are both sure to start debate on those startling images alone.