The Day After Tomorrow WOW!!!!!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am a HUGE fan of Roland Emmerich movies. As over the top as they are, they never fail to entertain me. Since I love disaster movies, I was very anxious to see this one since I missed it in the theater. I am sure many of you are familar with the story line.

Jack Hall (Dennis Quaid) is a meteorological scientist who makes a disturbing discovery. The climates around the globe are changing and he can see the shift toward a new ice age. He tries to warn the US government of the problems which, according to his calculations, would take effect over the course of the next one or two generations when suddenly things seem to accelerate. Within days, strange weather patterns appear and gigantic storms begin wiping out parts of the northern hemisphere. It soon becomes evident that nature has taken matters in her own hands and that within days mankind will be faced with a new ice age.

Video wise this movie has no faults. The picture in clean, razor sharp, with vibrant colors. There is no bleeding of colors, and dynamic contrast between the sheet white snow, and deep blacks is nothing short of amazing. Skin tones are on the money, and the visual depth is terrific. I saw no compression errors, or edge enhancement problems. I was able to notice some things were CGI(the wolves, water, wave) but for the most part everything looked very natural. I think Fox did an excellent job on this transfer.

Sound wise this is a hometheater nuts dream. There is both a 754kbps Dts soundtrack along with a 448kbps Dolby digital soundtrack. Each sounds extremely good, yielding an extremely wide dynamic range and frequency response. It is emmersive with sound effects exploding from every channel(and the same time in some cases). The score is well recorded, with great lateral and depth imaging, and is spread nicely into the surrounds. The sound effects are at times VERY intense and system challenging. There is a great deal of sub 25hz information in the LFE, and front three channels. There is also quite a bit of sub 20hz information if your sub is up to the task. There were times I heard nothing directly from the speakers(in terms of bass) but the floor, air, windows, and walls were shaking as if a 7.0 earthquake was rolling through my room(excellent example of my speakers performance under 20hz)

Comparing the Dts soundtrack to the Dolby Digital one I found some subtle but noticeable differences. The LFE of the Dts soundtrack has more detail and tightness to it. It goes deeper and sounds cleaner. The DD soundtracks bass is somewhat boomy and indistinct at times in comparison. Also the Dts sound images slightly wider, but has a very noticeable deeper and better delinated depth to it. The Dolby soundtrack sounds flat and every so slightly constricted in comparison. Dts soundtrack throws up a huge soundfield that seems to put your right in the center of the action. Effects seems to be nestled nicely within that soundfield, and popped out only when punctuated. The Dolby soundtrack seems to pool around the speakers. I had to listen closely to notice these subtle differences, but clearly Dts is the winning soundtrack here. Both soundtracks deliver a nice solid punch, and are sure to please any avid listener.

I really liked this movie, so Roland when is the next one coming out?

[Woochifer]

Sheesh T, thanks a lot!

Thought it would be safe to just duck into the store, pick up a copy of "Ren & Stimpy: First and Second Season Uncut" and just go home! Now I'll have to sweat it out tonight when I see those DVDs with the bargain first week price tag. Good write up, you definitely got me curious now!

I'd originally planned to bypass this release because I read that the R2 version that got released overseas is a loaded two-disc edition that should make its way stateside in a few months. I got a lot of other viewing to catch up on, so I haven't been clamoring to get Day After Tomorrow just yet. Hmmm, maybe I can just "borrow" it from a fellow East Bay'er!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sheesh T, thanks a lot!

Thought it would be safe to just duck into the store, pick up a copy of "Ren & Stimpy: First and Second Season Uncut" and just go home! Now I'll have to sweat it out tonight when I see those DVDs with the bargain first week price tag. Good write up, you definitely got me curious now!

I'd originally planned to bypass this release because I read that the R2 version that got released overseas is a loaded two-disc edition that should make its way stateside in a few months. I got a lot of other viewing to catch up on, so I haven't been clamoring to get Day After Tomorrow just yet. Hmmm, maybe I can just "borrow" it from a fellow East Bay'er!

Wooch,

This is a two disc release also. Though the other disc is not packaged like other two disc sets.

[This Guy]

Yeah I saw this in the theatre. I'm with you, I love these disaster movies and when I saw it in the theatre i couldn't wait for the DVD so i could hear it on my system. My sub ain't up to all that 20 hz info, but it will do 35 hz really loud!

[Dusty Chalk]

I dug.

[eisforelectronic]

Just watched it in stereo using the tv speakers...soo cool.

[Kam]

but i liked this movie in spite of itself, thought of it more as an action-comedy than anything else. the dialogue was so ridiculously bad, people in the theater were laughing through most of the 'emotional' scenes. i did enjoy it, don't get me wrong, but maybe for different reasons.

and i hate to disagree with ya, Sir TT, but... i think emerich is big time hit or miss. i enjoyed stargate and ID4, but have to say godzilla is on my all time worst movies list and did not like the patriot at all either. and TDAT is pretty much on the border, don't really care to see it again cuz it might just ruin it. especially the wolves scene? what the heck was up with that? the entire zoo sequence seemed pretty much only to have that wolf sequence take place and if they can train lions and tigers and bears... why the hell not wolves? the cgi wolves looked horrible! and in a spfx movie with a bone thin plot and characters... i really can't forgive any lapses in spfx. alright, i better stop before i think i dont like this movie anymore.
all that said, i am curious how his King Tut is gonna be.

[Worf101]

Whole Famn Damily loved it. I wasn't looking for Citizen Kane (and I didn't get it either) just looking for entertainment and I got it. Great effects, but I will side with Kam and say the wolves looked especially weak. And the science!!!???? I'm sure many a dead one was spinning in his/her grave during the filming of this one. Only film stupider than this one was "The Core" which was without a doubt the silliest premise for a film since man discovered fire.

Da Worfster

[Dusty Chalk]

You know, we made the mistake of stopping this film halfway through for pee breaks for all. The first half is much more powerful than the second. We ended up wishing for more destruction during the second half. Especially since they kept promising that it was only going to get worse. It sort of calmed down with all those eye of the storms things.

My favourite scenes were the twisters tearing up Los Angeles.

Yeah that thing about being able to outrun air was kind of bad. I mean, the air was just falling -- you shouldn't be able to outrun it. Plus, fireplaces have flus, so the cold air would have dropped through there (and if not, it would have pulled the cold air in from everywhere else.

[Lexmark3200]

I was going to reply individually to this post with some thoughts regarding what everyone thought of this film, because I saw it in theaters and bought the DVD on release day, instead to save time I will post a pre-made review I did on another professionally oriented site; the review got like-minded replies from other members and positive remarks in general. Here's my thoughts on Emmerich's recent work:

You know it just couldnt be a summer without Roland Emmerich (or Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer for that matter) blowing something up or making our nation's largest cities into disaster zones and demolition sites; he did this successfully (or not so successfully) in "Independence Day" and "Godzilla," all while making, in my opinion, his best film about the Revolutionary War, "The Patriot," which was a departure from his usual man-against-nature-or-aliens fare.

And so this past summer we got "The Day After Tomorrow," which was hyped all over the media as the awesome summer blockbuster from the director of Independence Day....while I am a sucker for these disaster films, I went into this knowing the plot was going to be a little contrived, but also thinking hey, this is a Roland Emmerich film about the end of the world once again, so its gotta be good.....the plot pretty much fell on its face because according to scientists who know about this stuff, its pretty much impossible to believe what Emmerich is suggesting. Still, I went into the theater when this came out, with an open mind.

Lets get the acting and plot out of the way first; Dennis Quaid was absolutely horrible in this, as the scientist who discovers that global warming of the Earth is going to cause another ice age. The film opens with a bang, with Quaid and his team in the polar ice cap, holding on to dear life when one of the ice shelves breaks and rips a seam in the Earth as far as the eye can see. Quaid's acting was just horrendous here, sleepwalking through his role, trying to convince the vice president and the world that this disaster was coming, but frankly, I dont think its his fault so much as the screenwriting team, who gave him nothing to work with here. His son, played by a look-alike of Tobey Maguire, is on his way with a nerdy scholastic team to New York City for a conference when this storm of the century hits, freezing New York and everything in the Northern Hemisphere of the U.S.; in some of the film's better action sequences, Los Angeles is ravaged by tornadoes, and Manhattan is overrun by 30 or some feet of tidal waves; again, Emmerich is at his best destroying New York as he did in Independence Day. The effects are pretty wild.

The makers want us to believe that temperature shifts in the Earth's core changes the ocean temperatures so greatly that these massive atmospheric occurances are going to bring about the onslaught of another ice age, but I dont know....something about The Day After Tomorrow, aside from its ridiculous title, just didnt feel authentic or "accurate".....things just seemed all over the place to me; why was LA experiencing tornadoes when New York was first being hit with rainstorms, then snowstorms, then ice storms and then freezing? Isnt the notion of another ice age supposed to suggest that the ice caps are just going to melt and then cover our land bodies? Much of what happens in this film just doesnt seem possible. I tried to put my brain on pause during this, even in the theater, and think to myself "this is a Roland Emmerich summer blockbuster...just enjoy!" but I found myself, when watching the DVD this evening, enjoying the film even less than I did in the theater.

Released today by 20th Century Fox in either widescreen or fullscreen editions in an absolutely beautiful package which includes a holographic image of the statue of liberty buried under ice on the cover, The Day After Tomorrow seems a bit overpriced for what the Fox is giving us in this package; their recent release of "Man On Fire" did the same thing, with no extra features because Fox is planning on releasing special editions of these down the road....what a ripoff of the public. Really. I paid over 20 bucks with tax for this because I am a fan of disaster action films in general, and enjoyed Emmerich's The Patriot and Independence Day, and so I figured I would have this for my collection, as well; but 20 bucks seems like a stretch here. There is no trailer, no making of feature.....only commentary tracks and some deleted scenes and an audio demo menu of some kind which I didnt really understand how to navigate.

I bought the fullscreen version for my standard 4:3 set, and it looked wonderful in places.....there was some minimal distraction, such as light grain that popped up during certain difficult shots of the film, but there were moments where the fullscreen transfer of this DVD in 1:33:1 were eye poppingly fantastic. No complaints about the visuals here, to be honest (and you all know Im a critic).

Fox is a studio HEAVILY jumping on the DTS audio bangwagon; seems almost all of their releases have a track now. Man On Fire did. And so we get one with The Day After Tomorrow. To be honest, when the film started, I wasnt that impressed with the 5.1 DTS mix.....sure, it wrapped around me when the ice shelf was breaking in the beginning, but it didnt sound all that mind-numbing as I expected a recent film about the weather to be; it sounded like an average surround soundtrack. NOTHING along the lines of a Saving Private Ryan DTS, lets put it that way.

But as the film went on, the audio got really aggressive, with the wind whipping and things breaking, making their way into the surrounds. The score was mixed aggressively as well, and once the film picks up, the audio really opens up as well, and gets loud in the soundstage. Another good DTS mix from Fox. Dialogue seemed okay, which you all know Im a critic of big time, and the whole soundscape had a rich feel to it, much like Man On Fire did. But bass is there in spades, too, with the subwoofer LFE channel rumbling whenever something related to an ice shelf breaking or weather disturbance took place onscreen.

In the end, though, I couldnt help but not like The Day After Tommorow, and felt that it wasnt one of my wisest DVD purchases. I gave it a chance in the theaters, and now again on home media, but the film just falls flat on its face....there are parts when it gets just downright boring; as I said, Dennis Quaid was wasted here in my opinion. Well, I havent really seen anything I liked him in, believe it or not, since Jaws III or Dreamscape. But anyway, I just dont think this was as good of an effort as Emmerich's The Patriot or Independence Day was.

And forget Godzilla.

[agidol]

Yeah I know I know,,, that this is meant to be just a silly summer eye pleaser movie but the story still has to be somewhat reasonable but some stuff in this movie are just outright stupid. Here's a list of some of many totally outrageously dumb scenes I observed from the movie.

1. There are some silly reporters are standing/or flying right next to Killer Tornados attacking LA. Who in the right mind will stand right next to approaching tornado anyway?

2. The whole "I gotta rescue my son" plot. What the hell... the director should have just stick to major scale special effects and not attempt to build a human drama if he doesn't have any clue on how to do it. Here's a know-it-all scientist who should be vital to saving millions of lives leaving his post to rescue his son trapped in NY. Duh... his chance of survival is much more slimmer than his son staying in the library -- who's rescuing who here? And even if he gets there.... how was he going to rescue his son? He will just be another person trapped in the library. Lastly, why on earth these other two clowns volunteer to help the scientist rescue his son? Again, don't they have family of their own and what "rescue" plan is there and doesn't the scientist know better not to have them tag along to the march of death (doesn't he have moral responsibility of some sort)?

3. People can outrun ocean waves rushing through Manhattan and even freezing air approaching them. I know this is science fantasy but heck can you simply the shut the door on the incredibly freezing air and that will keep you warm?

Please.... this is too much even for a science fantasy... I must admit bass extension was good though

[Lexmark3200]

Thats exactly why scientists worldwide immediately responded to this piece of cinema and claimed the concepts Emmerich was suggesting were simply implausable.

[Kam]

it's a sad state of global intelligence, or the lack thereof, that scientists thought it neccessary to disclaim the "facts" in this movie thinking people might actually believe them... which, even more unfortunately, I am sure they did.

[kexodusc]

Wholly critics, Batman.

I've never seen a movie attacked on its scientific merit like this one was...you want science, watch the Discovery channel...you want to see $hit blow up...watch a movie.

As for the science, well, alot of it seemed far fetched, but then again I've never heard of any scientists being able to predict weather better than my Magic 8 Ball...how often is your local station wrong? These guys don't know nearly as much as they'd have you believe.

This movie was fun, the DVD is excellent, but this isn't going to win any oscars. I'd recommend it as a rental to all, sci-fi/FX fans will probably consider buying it.

Great DVD to show off an HT system though.

[Lexmark3200]

Well, when you have a Roland Emmerich mega-summer blockbuster media hyped the way this title was, there are no doubts as to the fact that all reigns of geo-political tiradists are going to sit up, take notice and respond.....I agree that this damn world has become a big brother is watching you version of itself and the government becomes too involved in what we do (when it doesnt harm others) but there is no doubt that the average public believed what Emmerich was suggesting could ACTUALLY happen as they filed out of the theaters last summer. Even the most un-elightened of the students I used to teach at a local community college happened to know a thing or two more about the ramifications of another ice age coming upon us, and Emmerich's vision wasnt it.

[kexodusc]

I'll be the first to admit, I called foul at a bunch of things in this movie too, but then a 55 year old lady who went with us told us to shut up and enjoy the SCI-FI movie...
Guess I couldn't argue with that...I can accept "The Force", warp speed, time travel, the matrix, etc, but a good ol' fashioned unpredicted storm is just too unrealistic. Somehow that doesn't seem fair.

Anyhoo, somehow I don't think that if this thing was more scientifically correct, the movie would have been any better or worse to anyone. In the end the plot, characters, and dialogue were just filler in between cool special effects.

As has been mentioned, at least it wasn't Godzilla 2.

[Lexmark3200]

Thank the heavens for no Godzilla 2........

[Woochifer]

Wholly critics, Batman.

I've never seen a movie attacked on its scientific merit like this one was...you want science, watch the Discovery channel...you want to see $hit blow up...watch a movie.

Well, if we want scientifically accurate movies, then all of the space battles in movies like Star Wars would have to be silent since you can't hear sub-20 Hz explosion sounds in a vacuum! The only movie I've seen that even made an effort to be somewhat realistic about space travel was 2001: A Space Odyssey. (e.g. the scene where Dr. Bowman has to blow the door off his pod and get back into the ship through the airlock -- the explosion was silent there)

[jack70]

it's a sad state of global intelligence, or the lack thereof, that scientists thought it neccessary to disclaim the "facts" in this movie thinking people might actually believe them... which, even more unfortunately, I am sure they did.

Only History is less understood than Science in schools. It truly IS scary the kind on nonsense most people will believe. I've heard it firsthand myself all the time... and the scary part is, you can't reason with such dolts. They're no different than the uneducated peasants in the middle ages who believed whatever the priests said.

But I agree, I don't know what good it might do. I guess a few might be relieved, but you're hardly gonna change a dolt into a person of reason... with facts.

Saw this the other day on science & the movies...

...Many teachers use films to illustrate scientific concepts within their classrooms. "The bad stuff is usually spectacular," says Tom Rogers, a former mechanical engineer who now teaches at Southside High School in Greenville, S.C. If the science in a movie is really bad, Rogers says, he writes a review for Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics (http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/), which is a feature of an educational Web site that he founded.

The rest of the article is HERE

[Bryan]

If you check your brain at the door and take this movie for the blow 'em up-let's-see-how-much-unrealistic-destruction-we-can-cause flick that it is it succeeds. Especially loved seeing LA blown to smitherines by the tornadoes and the Hollywood sign being mutilated. It wasn't about the science nor the acting. Lawrence of Arabia this is not.

"For Manchester United." ;^)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Dang you guys. You are ruining a perfectly brainless movie by simple over analysis, and bringing credidible science into the picture. Emmerich movies are never based on true science(ID4,Godzilla), they are based the suspension of belief, and just plain obsured brainless fun. I enjoyed it fully because it succeded in doing exactly what it was supposed to. It provided 2+ hours of popcorn eatin brainless entertainment. Not to mention it had a state of the art soundtrack, nobody could argue with that!!!

[eisforelectronic]

Most movies would really suck if they were scientifically accurate! If you make a movie and people believe it, maybe it should be taken as a compliment.

[Slosh]

It soon becomes evident that nature has taken matters in her own hands and that within days mankind will be faced with a new ice age.

I know this is just a silly-ass disaster film (and I haven't seen it) but I'd like to point out that we're currently in an ice age (albeit a relatively mild one that is seasonal).

[madmax1]

I loved this movie. Cause i love all these blow'em up movies thats why i bought my speakers and sub for!! Anyway you guys are just like my wife saying (that couldnt really happen) AND THAT RUINS THE WHOLE MOVIE FOR ME! I know this stuff couldnt happen thats why its a movie!!! Oh well had to throw in my two cents!

[Kam]

T, T2, Abyss, Aliens, Total Recall, Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Innerspace, Planet of the Apes, Empire Strikes back, Donnie Darko... all of them couldn't really happen yet are great movies, imo. There's a difference between saying something couldn't really happen in a movie, vs. a movie that is just plain bad because they don't take a few moments to research WHY it could/couldn't really happen, and then give an explanation as to why it does. hell, loony tunes has more inspiration behind it than most "blow 'em up movies." just cuz stuff has to blow up, doesn't mean there has to be 0 story. the two weren't mutually exclusive before, quite the opposite. epic stories and huge action were hand in hand at one time, its just been recently that a disconnect has happenned.
just my 2 cents
peace
k2