| |
 I
feel sorry for actors who star in big disaster epics...
Sure, the pay isn't
too shabby, but otherwise, it's a thankless job. I mean, how do
they expect to stand out against all the cool special effects
that popcorn-minded moviegoers are really there to see? Can you
imagine being George Clooney and Mark Wahlberg, who were stuck
playing second fiddle to a giant wave in "The Perfect Storm?"
Or what about Pierce Brosnan, whose cool charm was no match for
his volcanic co-star in "Dante's Peak?" Helen Hunt had
the wind knocked out of her by the powerful tornadoes in "Twister,"
and let's be honest here -- did anyone really care what happened
to Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck in "Armageddon?"
Now Dennis Quaid and
Jake Gyllenhaal face the unenviable task of taking on a slew of
computer-generated disasters in "The Day After Tomorrow,"
but in this case, the stakes are much higher. For one thing, we
live in a post 9/11 world, and the prospect of seeing New York
City -- not to mention the rest of the planet -- get destroyed
isn't nearly as fun as it used to be. Also, with the effects of
global warming becoming a bigger threat with each passing day,
how will moviegoers respond to a film that more or less trivializes
the dangerous reality of the situation?
Let's not
kid ourselves here. We are talking about a big Hollywood movie
-- one that cost more than $125 million to make, and one that
officially kicks off the lucrative summer season by opening on
Memorial Day Weekend. Despite all the recent (and free) publicity
that the film has received from the likes of NASA and former Vice-President
Al Gore, the main motive here is to fill seats, show moviegoers
a good time and keep 'em coming back for more. The film certainly
seem poised to do just that, since it was directed by Roland Emmerich,
whose "Independence Day" ranks as one of the greatest
summer blockbusters of all time.
Too bad it
isn't very good -- not even by the bottom-feeder standards usually
set by summer movies. Even if you leave your brain at the door,
you still can't help but get thrown off by the absurdity of the
whole scenario (I mean, a devastating Ice Age in just a few hours?
Hey, at least the phones still work!). Sure, the special effects
are cool, but if you've already seen all the big "money shots"
in the trailers, then there's not much left to the actual movie
-- that is, except for a load of corny dialogue, clichéd
characters and even (gasp!) long stretches of boredom. And despite
the film's efforts to address the effects of global warming, it
only ends up insulting those who fight the real cause.
All is not well with
the world. Hail the size of grapefruit pounds Tokyo. Record-breaking
hurricanes sweep through Hawaii. Snow falls on New Delhi. Devastating
tornadoes rip apart Los Angeles. Huge tidal waves flood the streets
of New York. It's beginning to look a lot like Doomsday, and climatologist
Jack Hall (Dennis Quaid) reasons that mankind is to blame. In
a matter of hours, global warming will plunge the entire planet
into a new Ice Age, but that won't stop Jack from braving the
harsh elements in New York to save his trapped son Sam (Jake Gyllenhaal).
Will he succeed? And even if he does, how will mankind survive?
Ever since the early
70's, moviegoers have approached watching disaster epics -- like
"Earthquake," "The Poseidon Adventure" and
"The Towering Inferno" -- with a guilty pleasure, train
wreck-style sensibility. Director Roland Emmerich is obviously
one of those people, and after destroying the Empire State Building
and the White House in "Independence Day," Emmerich
takes on the Statue of Liberty and the Hollywood Sign in "The
Day After Tomorrow." Despite the tragic events that have
taken place in the world since the last disaster flick, it's still
a marvel of movie magic to see it unfold on the big screen, and
the special effects are incredible.
But the film
tries to have it both ways -- by being entertaining and
informative -- and it fails on both counts. The character development
is about as contrived as it can be, and all the relationships
feel forced and fabricated beyond belief. And while there's nothing
wrong with taking a preachy approach to depict the dangers of
global warming, there's something to be said about being talked
down to. It almost does more harm than good, since people may
end up trivializing the threat the way the movie does. Then again,
we are talking about a screenplay that was written by Emmerich
-- who also wrote and directed 1998's disappointing update of
"Godzilla" -- so what did you expect?
The cast
members try in earnest to stand out from the special effects to
bring humanity to their clichéd roles, but as with other
disaster movies, it ends up being a lost cause. Dennis Quaid goes
through the motions, but at least he seems like he's having a
good time by doing something so "big." The same can
be said for Jake Gyllenhaal, who can usually be found in edgier,
artier fare like "The Good Girl"
and "Donnie Darko." Sela Ward has the most worthless
role of all as Quaid's wife (a doctor who misses all the action
by staying inside a hospital), while Emmy Watson shows some charm
as Gyllenhaal's would-be love interest.
Okay, so
it may never end up as a teaching tool on the Discovery Channel,
but "The Day After Tomorrow" does have one saving grace:
it's better than "Godzilla." Then again, that's not
saying much; and it's nowhere near as entertaining as "Independence
Day." Maybe that's because that film had a clear-cut "baddie"
-- the invading aliens who were out to destroy the earth. The
baddie here is ultimately mankind itself, so in that sense, the
characters -- and the filmmakers -- have only themselves to blame.
And the more I think
about it, now I really feel sorry for them!
|
|
