Sticking to science slows the movie down, but...

Rating: 8/10 (29 May 2004)

Yesterday NPR (National Public Radio) interviewed two climatologists from NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) regarding the science in The Day After Tomorrow. The main question was "Is the science in the movie at all realistic?".
The short answer was yes, but sped up. The movie takes place over a few months. The NOAA scientists took the long route to state that while everything in the movie was basically correct, it would take months, not weeks, for things to develop. They said that, unlike "Armageddon" and the recent TV movie "10.5", this movie was Science Fiction, with the emphasis on science more than fiction. They were actually quite impressed with the scientific accuracy the movie makers presented. It will never be used to teach climatology, but the science wasn't rendered unrecognizable by the moviemakers.
So I looked in the paper for reviews, the movie received three of four stars. Usually blockbusters like this only get two stars. So last night I grabbed the boys and my hubby and we went out to see the movie.
Well, the theater was packed for the 7pm showing, people were laughing and talking about suspending their disbelief for an evening. They were clearly expecting something along the lines of Armageddon and the recent "Core", a fun adventure with laughable science.
By the end of the movie I was a little disgusted by the overt political/environmental message, they could have gotten the point across without the heavy handed preaching at the end. I was unimpressed with the CG (a pack of wolves is done very badly, the tornado's in LA overdone, the rest is standard for modern special effects but nothing special), with occasional editing problems. There were clearly several scenes cut, probably at the last minute because you could tell that something was missing.
The acting was so-so. I wish they hadn't used Dennis Quaid, he was OK, but I got the feeling that this movie would have been better with all unknowns. Quaid was only one of two actors I recognized, but I bet some of the teenage leads were probably known to some folks. I didn't much appreciate the lead teen male, but probably because I simply thought he was ugly.
The time-line of the movie is a little confused. It feels like only a few days from start to end, the whole thing feels like it happens in less than a week. But if you pay attention to clues, it actually takes place over a few months. Dennis Quaid doesn't walk 40 miles in snowshoes in a day or two, as it appears, it's closer to a week.
I was satisfied with the basic science of the movie, and impressed with the storytelling. They didn't make the teenagers "scream machines", only there to be rescued, for once, the lead teen was actually very level headed and simply did what needed to be done. And rather realistically, he was motivated by hormones.
There were only two scenes that I felt were unnecessary, both were in the previews, the scene where the climatologists' camp was right on top of the crack when the ice shelf breaks off (I felt it would have worked just as well if they had been back further and just felt the rumbles and cracking and watched the ice shelf break off from a distance, and the wolf chase scene. They didn't really need the wolves, the scene could have been played a little more realistically, but at lest the people were smart and used their brains to solve the wolf problem,not relying on someone's last second heroics. The bad wolf CG really didn't help the scene along.
I was rather impressed that they didn't feel the need to turn it into a "violent orgy of death and destruction" every minute of the movie. They actually spend some "quality time", which less mature viewers would view as boring parts, dealing with the science of the disaster, people and something resembling reality. They actually acknowledged that if you drop an unconscious person off a roof, he's going to get injured.
There were a few good digs on President Bush and Vice President Cheney in the characterizations of them (they weren't specifically Bush and Cheney but it was clear they were meant to be) , and there were some really ironic-funny scenes of the US/Mexico border being closed, by the Mexicans, and illegal crossing of the border... of Americans headed south!
On a scale of 10, I would give this movie a 7.5, and I do recommend it.