Supreme silliness doesn't stop The Day After Tomorrow from being lots of fun for connoisseurs of epic-scale disaster flicks. After the blockbuster profits of Independence Day and Godzilla, you can't blame director Roland Emmerich for using global warming as a politically correct excuse for destroying most of the northern hemisphere. Like most of Emmerich's films, this one emphasizes special effects over such lesser priorities as well-drawn characters and plausible plotting, and his dialogue (cowritten by Jeffrey Nachmanoff) is so laughably trite that it could be entirely eliminated without harming the movie. It's the spectacle that's important here, not the lame, recycled plot about father and son (Dennis Quaid, Jake Gyllenhaal) who endure an end-of-the-world scenario caused by the effects of global warming. So sit back, relax, and enjoy the awesome visions of tornado-ravaged Los Angeles, blizzards in New Delhi, Japan pummeled by grapefruit-sized hailstones, and Manhattan flooded by swelling oceans and then frozen by the onset of a modern ice age. It's all wildly impressive, and Emmerich obviously doesn't care if the science is flimsy, so why should you? --Jeff Shannon

20th Century Day After Tomorrow (Blu-ray) From the director of "Independence Day" comes a "spectacular" (ABC-TV) roller-coaster ride that boasts pulse-pounding action and "sensational, mind-blowing special effects" (New York Observer). When global warming triggers the onset of a new Ice Age, tornadoes flattenLos Angeles, a tidal wave engulfs New York City and the entire Northern Hemisphere begins to freezesolid. Now, climatologist Jack Hall (Dennis Quaid), his son Sam (Jake Gyllenhaal) and a small band of survivors must ride out the growing superstorm and stay alive in the face of an enemy more powerful and relentless than any they've ever encountered: Mother Nature!

The movie is a very entertaining Hollywood product, and the blu-ray version doesn't disappoint. Image quality is awesome, and the extras are worth the purchase. I'd recommend this product no problem...

I absolutely loved this movie! The plot was fantastic, and it was exciting to watch it unfold. The acting was the only thing that stopped me from giving it five stars, with a few of the actors giving subpar performances.

Overall, it was a very unique story and played out very well with the special effects and the political undertones. Definitely worth the money!

Have fun!

When the movie made its big-screen debut in 2004 - and continuing with the various DVD releases - debate oftentimes degenerated into questioning the actual validity of the global warming/cooling that is depicted, while seemingly forgetting that this is a Sci-Fi action adventure. It would be like giving opinions on The Da Vinci Code and One Million Years B.C. as if the films are based on historical facts.

Produced, directed and co-written by Roland Emmerich, the special effects are absolutely incredible, but the story stumbles due to the generic characters that can plague this genre; arrogant politicians, misunderstood scientists and practical voices continually lost in the wilderness of society.

Dennis Quaid is climatologist Jack Hall who valiantly tries to make the top political leaders in Washington, D.C., understand the harsh ramifications of the emerging storms worldwide. After tackling this tough task, he sets forth on a journey through massive ice and snow to rescue his son (played by Jake Gyllenhaal), who is trapped in New York City. Throughout the sojourn, both characters play off the themes of friendship, family and the will to survive.

There is a nice mix of special features - including scenes edited out of the film - that are interesting. But the storms steal the show and wash away a script that was built around the big bang of special effects and had cardboard cut-outs for characters.

Total eco-fraud terrorist propaganda. A prominent environmental expert says "This movie does for climate study what the movie Frankenstein did for heart transplant surgery. Totally unbelievable rubbish, a stupid plot (the part about where they rescue the kids from the library is just too stupid for words) with fairly poor and stilted acting gives it the true look and feel of propaganda. This is why stupid people think if you drive a new escalade you are going to kill the entire planet off, and you are an evil person who should be shot on sight, while they drive a 1969 school bus with a burned out 460 cubic inch V8 engine that spews thick blue smoke all down the road with "save the planet" painted on the side.

I like to feel that I am balanced in my scorn of cod-science. For some reason, some people have taken offence to my review of "State of Fear", the Michael Crichton stinker. Ok, TDAT takes some pretty sound scientific principles and drives a bus through them to get a plot out of it. Lets be fair, no one is going to say "oh My God, I`m going to be crushed by that rapidly advancing glacier if I stay routed to this spot for the next couple of thousand years", so I can allow them their scientific whimsies for dramatic purposes. But I was able to ignore the science (and as an environmental scientist who does this stuff every day, if I can do it, so can you) enough to enjoy the film for what it is, an Independence Day type of disaster movie, and to be fair, probably more plausible than being invaded by aliens (which is kind of disappointing as I recently enjoyed a screening of "V-The Mini-series" on Sci-Fi Channel recently).

On the science front, I would place it as equivalent to cloning dinosaurs from extinct DNA, sounds sorta pseudo science possible, but actually we are unlikely to be over-run by velociraptors on our way to do the Christmas shopping next year. And if you are, like TDAT's tidal waves, a simple revolving door should keep you safe.

One thing I hope isn't true is that the makers of the film were asked to speak to Congressional Hearings on Climate Change. I don't think the film sets out to be "An Inconvenient Truth" with special effects, just a popcorn enhancing flick. I like to think of it as more "a convenient half truth".

(PS - If someone else has used that, sorry, I didn't read all 700 reviews.)