The Day After Tomorrow (2004) User Reviews

Spectacular special effects, uneven film

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 29 November 2009]

The Day After Tomorrow is not a bad movie by all means. In fact, it's an uneven but decent film. The film does start off absolutely brilliantly, with a wonderful idea for a story and truly spectacular special effects. As a matter of fact, the whole film is well worth watching for the special effects alone. The acting is not too bad; Jake Gyllanhaal is rather bland, but Dennis Quaid is a superb lead. Plus Emmy Rosum looks positively radiant and Ian Holm is as reliable as ever. The direction from Roland Emmerich was surprisingly good, there have been times when I have found his direction too murky and unfocused, but no it was above decent here.

However, the second half isn't as impressive. Whereas the first half is very like a typical disaster movie, the second half for me as it focused on the rescue mission felt more of a thriller. The screenplay in general could have done with more precision and focus too, there is good interplay sometimes but on the whole I found the screenplay and some of the characters underdeveloped. My main problem though with The Day After Tomorrow was the pace, for my liking it was too leisurely and too stodgy.

All in all, uneven it is but it is a decent disaster movie. The first half I can watch again and again, but the second half for me was a bit of a letdown. 7/10 Bethany Cox

One of the last great disaster flicks

[NateWatchesCoolMovies · 7/10 · 29 December 2017]

Roland Emmerich's The Day After Tomorrow is one of those textbook disaster flicks where every recognizable element is in full swing: determined scientist, sure of his curveball theories that no one else buys, saddled with a dysfunctional family and a clock that's quickly ticking down towards some looming cataclysm, in this case severely bat tempered weather. It's cliche after cliche, but this is one of the ones that works, and I have a theory why. These days it seems like the formula for the disaster film is pretty dead, or at least doesn't carry the same magic it did throughout the 90's and early 00's.

Stuff like San Andreas, 2012, Geostorm (shudder) just feel dead on arrival, and instead we go back and revisit things like Armageddon, Independence Day, and for me, ones like this. There's a quality, a feel for time and place that got lost somewhere along the way as time passed in Hollywood, and this is one of the last few that serve as a milestone as to where that happened. The first half or so is cracking stuff, followed by a slightly underwhelming final act. Dennis Quaid is the scientist who gets all in a huff about an extreme weather front that's apparently barrelling towards the east coast, threatening to give the whole region one wet day in the park. There's an exaggerated halfwit Vice President (Kenneth Welsh) who scoffs at him, an excitable veteran professor (Bilbo Baggins) who eagerly supports him, and an estranged family right in the storm's crosshairs who he must rescue. The special effects are neat when the maelstrom slams into New York like a battering ram, pushing over buildings with walls of water and chucking hurricanes all about the place. Quaid's wife (Sela Ward) and wayward son (Jake Gyllenhaal) are of course stuck in this mess, as he races to find out what's causing it, and how to escape. The initial scenes where it arrives are big screen magic, especially when Gyllenhaal's girlfriend (Emmy Rossum) is chased down main street by a raging typhoon and barely scapes into a building, a breathless showcase moment for the film. The second half where the storm levels off isn't as engaging, despite attempts to throw in extra excitement, such as wolves, which I still can't quite figure out the origin of, despite watching the film a few times now. Holed up inside a library, it's a long waiting game in the cold dark where the writing and character development is spread a bit thin for the time they have to kill, but what can you expect here. Should have thrown in a T Tex or some ice dragons to distract us from sparse scripting. Still, the film gets that initial buildup deliciously right, the nervous windup to all out chaos, the editing between different characters and where they are when the monsoon shows up, and enough panicky surviving to make us thankful for that cozy couch and home theatre system all the more. One of the last of the finest, in terms the genre.

Excellent catastrophe movie by the great director Roland Emmerich

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 16 June 2004]

The film deals about ice melting of the Arctic created by global weather change of the hole ozone. The movie is impressive , New York's flood is overwhelming .

The plot summary centers in Dennis Quaid a climatologist who predicts disaster and he goes to looking for his son Jake Gyllenheal to New York staying all the way freezing cool fighting against amount dangers because middle United States are frozen. The F.X. of computer generator are first rate , better than the classics 7o and 80 :"earthquake", "Inferno towering" and likeness to "Volcano" or "Armaguedon". Thrilling screenplay dispenses absurd excitement as well as spectacular scenes and lots of action . This is a fast-paced, stylized disaster-spectacle film . Cinematography and musical score by Harald Kloser are breathtaking .

Direction by Roland Emmerich is fitting as in all spectacle film that he makes . Roland Emmerich estimated that at least 1000 digital artists worked on the film . The motion picture was well realized by Roland Emmerich . Roland made his feature length film in 1984 : ¨The Noah's ark principle¨ , he subsequently made ¨Joey¨ . In 1997 wrote, directed, and produced the critically acclaimed "Moon 44" . Filmmaker Roland Emmerich quickly understood the freedom and malleability that direct in USA presents and has gone about creating some incredibly interesting genre fare in ¨Universal Soldier¨, his first American movie in which displayed an acute understanding of the action genre . Roland ulteriorly directed 1994 Stargate , 1996 Independence Day , 1998 Godzilla , 2000 The Patriot , 2004 The day after tomorrow , 2008 : 10.000 , 2011 Anonymous and his last movie 2013 White House Down .

Rating : 7/10 , above average. The picture will appeal to disaster genre fans . Well worth seeing .

Clichéd, illogical, unscientific but the first hour really delivers even if the second hour is like the 1970's never happened

[bob the moo · 31 May 2004]

After years of warning about global warning, Jack Hall is horrified to find all his predictions coming true much faster than he could have imagined. Hail stones the size of footballs decimate cities, typhoons destroy Los Angeles and New York becomes flooded. As the big freeze crosses the northern hemisphere, a small group of survivors try to fend off the cold as the world prepares for a dramatic change in the world order.

This film may be a modern blockbuster but in almost everyway it is a 1970's disaster movie where an event happens after some build up and we then spend the rest of the film watching the survivors trying to, well, survive. In that regard the film carries all the usual problems that the genre carries but happily benefits from the fact that the effects are much better than 1970's movies could manage. For this reason the first hour is great – it has dramatic pace, is involving and looks fantastic even if we have seen it before in different variations (how many times has New York been destroyed now?). However after the sheer global terror is pretty much finished we suddenly become much more small scale and the film looses much of it's impact and it's pace. After the initial danger has passed the film uses illogical and silly plot devices to put the survivors at risk – a cold eye of a storm, blood infections, creeping ice and wolves are among the problems. While this is OK on a genre level it doesn't compare to the first hour and it gets a little dull and plodding at times.

The clichés are all present and correct: the politicians, the upright scientists, the sacrifice, the daring rescues and so on. It's fair to say that if you are looking for more than a basic script then you will be looking in the wrong place here. All this film does is to provide spectacle and moments of dramatic action – if you want to think about it then you will only hurt your enjoyment of the action. The film tries to deliver an environmental message but in a way this film will not help the environmental movement because it is too exaggerated to be taken seriously (like the idea of Celtic and Man Utd reaching the Champions League final – during this season? Please!), however it does include several surprisingly barbed attacks on the US administration (could the VP look any more like Cheney?). Just a shame that the film message is delivered with all the subtlety that Segal showed when he did something similar in his environmental action film On Deadly Ground.

The script doesn't really create characters either and it means we don't care that much about what happens to them in the final hour (countless millions are dead for goodness sake!). The dialogue in the first hour is nicely gruff and scientific and very genre but the second hour is more human and the lines aren't suited for that – not even in the hands of an impressive number of good actors. I like Quaid and he is a good lead here, he gets the good scientific stuff and only is lumbered with the rather silly notion of walking to New York from Washington. Gyllenhaal must have upset legions of cult fan boys by appearing in a big budget movie but he does OK with the role (despite looking too old to be in school). The rest of the cast are fairly mixed but, as with the genre, they are just filled even if some are good. Welsh is good even if he was cast for his similarity to Dick Cheney, Holm adds a small bit of dignity in his role as well as being supported by the very fine actor Lester in a minor role. Faces like Sanders, Mihok and a few others don't really matter as they are merely victims waiting for their turn to be used for dramatic effect.

Overall the first hour of this film is good on a blockbuster level, but it blows it's wad too early (don't ya hate it when that happens?!) and is left with a second hour that is right out of the 1970's with all the weaknesses that that entails. Generally I enjoyed the film because I was just expecting a big noisy movie to pass a few hours – bad script, no characters and lots of clichés? Why would I be surprised by that? It's par for the course and you should not watch this if you know these aspects will annoy you. As it is, it's an average film but one that is noisy and spectacular enough to pass muster in the summer blockbuster stakes.

A lot of fun!

[mihvel · 7/10 · 26 January 2005]

OK, definitely this is not very smart movie and it has many holes in the storyline, but if you like this kind of movies you will got a lot of fun! I mean, you should know what you can expect of this kind of movies. If you like movie "Independence Day" you will know what I mean (BTW good recommendation from IMDb team!). If you want art or some wisdom message or you are searching for holes and sanity in the storyline, forget it. Go and watch some European authors. But if you are looking for fun, want to relax yourself, to see some amazing and very realistic computer effects go and watch it! You will not regret. For true impression big theater screen is mandatory!

A Plea For Kyoto

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 5 June 2007]

I'm certainly in no position to comment on the science put forth in this film. When I was going to school, I remember being taught in science class that the Ice Age was a gradual process that took place over thousands of years and then it took thousands again to reverse it. Of course we didn't have man around using all the planet's resources for industry.

But scientist Dennis Quaid says that the Ice Age will dawn upon man again and soon. But it happens a whole lot sooner than even he predicts and the nations of the world pay for it.

The first half of the film is Quaid's struggle in vain to persuade our government, particularly a Vice President played by Kenneth Welsh who bears no accidental resemblance to Dick Chaney of the folly of its environmental policy.

When doomsday strikes, the action shifts to Quaid trekking to New York to rescue his son Jake Gyllenhaal who is trapped in the New York Public Library with other kids from an Academic Bowl they were participating in.

IF the science is open to speculation, the special effects are spectacular. Personally the sight of that freighter sailing up a flooded 42nd Street is something to behold. And the whiz kids who survive prove to be pretty resourceful.

The Day After Tomorrow is Hollywood's appeal for the USA to sign and obey the Kyoto Accords. Hollywood has taken up worse causes.

An enjoyable 'Disaster' Film with some nice set pieces

[maue-19674 · 7/10 · 30 April 2020]

This Film harkens back to the old 70's Disaster flicks - taking situations and just magnifying them 1000 fold for entertainment sake. Yes, the Science here is questionable (apart from the effects of the currents being disrupted!) - it is all in the service of a storyline. The weather systems across the entire Planet are thrown into chaos by 'climate change' and it is up to Paleo-climatologist Dennis Quaid to convince all that the unthinkable is going to happen - while at the same time trying to re-bond with his estranged son - Jake Gyllenhal. All of this is hardly new but this Film does it with great dash and with a few great set pieces - the inundation of New York is superbly done and the characters are allowed to develop in quite a natural way. Unlike many of Emmerich's film (which I find overblown) this one he approaches in a more serious manner - the opening shots of Antarctica set the scene extremely well and the accompanying score by Harold Kloser is actually very haunting. All in all, an enjoyable film with some very nice performances.

ALL TIME FAVE DISASTER MOVIE.

[andrewchristianjr · 9/10 · 30 March 2019]

I don't get it why this film just got 6.4, maann the visual effect alone was amazing. The tension is so high especially the new york scene. Maybe the science isnt accurate but I found this film is very entertaining. I watched this when I was 9 or 10 yo, now I'm 24 and this film still my fave disaster movie. The tsunami, tornado etc was perfect. Good job for the writers, director, producer especially the cast.

Very fun if you like disaster movies :D

[CatfishOpinions · 7/10 · 1 May 2020]

I saw this once and my sister was hiding under a blanket the whole movie. that's not really relevant, but it is funny. hehe.

This movie is pretty fun. It has surprisingly good romantic chemistry for its genre, and you really feel the weight of everything that's happening. Super dramatic, not scientifically accurate at all (but who cares really), decently romantic, and attention-grabbing. Like ya want to know what happens next.

Not much else to say. Watch it if you like disaster/action stuff. I thought it was a lotta fun. My favorite part is when the boat goes through the thing. haha.

Lower Manhattan is INACCESSIBLE

[Calicodreamin · 8/10 · 20 February 2021]

One of my all favorite time disaster movies! It's got the right mix of over the top weather moments, dramatic storylines, and Dennis Quaid. Endlessly rewatchable and surprisingly heartfelt.

It's better than most disaster movies

[MayuMG · 7/10 · 30 April 2020]

-Like how it brings global warming the attention it deserves. -The survival tactics were commendable.

-I didn't get too attached to the characters, thus there wasn't much suspense.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel okay.

[Victor Field · 6 June 2004]

"The Day After Tomorrow" is a disaster movie, but it isn't a disastrous one. But if Roland Emmerich really thought he was making a movie with a message, he didn't quite succeed - to be honest, Emmerich is to serious film-making as Naomi Wolf is to recommending "Voluptuous" magazine. The fact that the movie begins with the Twentieth Century Fox logo under stormy skies doesn't make it any more significant.

Well-intentioned it may be, but the movie's plot takes second place to the imagery - the opening credits over an icy landscape, the massive weather systems over the planet, colossal hailstones pelting down on Tokyo, snowstorms over India, tidal waves - and the numerous effects houses make it an eye candy feast, especially for people with a grudge against the Big Apple (kudos to Industrial Light and Magic, Digital Domain and all the less renowned FX companies involved). So on that level, it works; the music by Harald Kloser and Thomas Wanker is also a bonus, being more restrained and serious in its support than is usually the way with Emmerich movies.

And then there's the script - it has a whole load of characters but doesn't do much with any of them. Example: Climatologist Dennis Quaid's relationship with son Jake Gyllenhaal doesn't seem to be as estranged as it's intended to be, and similarly the friendship Quaid has with a longtime colleague gets about as much emphasis as the crush his younger colleague has on fellow scientist Tamlyn Tomita (and the movie pays for it later on in a sequence shamelessly ripped off from "Vertical Limit," which has little of the emotional resonance it should). In fact, all the human elements - Gyllenhaal's repressed feelings for classmate Emmy Rossum, his doctor mother Sela Ward's problems with a young patient, etc - all of them are underdeveloped or just plain undeveloped, and some moments practically scream "Contrived Climax Ahoy!"

Those moments are there because "The Day After Tomorrow" doesn't have an enemy as a natural outgrowth of its story; the elements aren't really villainous as they have no concept of right or wrong, and the closest thing to a villain here is the current administration in the White House, so Emmerich and co-writer Jeffrey Nachmanoff have to impose a tangible enemy (why else are those wolves there?) on the proceedings. This does help things from getting totally boring in the second half, though it's still pretty watchable even then - but if some more thought had been put into the screenplay, like exploring the characters or developing the promising ideas therein (like Americans fleeing to Mexico, or further looks at the Government side), it would have carried more weight and made the movie into more than an improvement on "Godzilla."

As it is, it's a competently done if implausible attention-holder that wants to be more; that it actually had the potential to be more makes it a bit of a disappointment, but at least it's a watchable one.

Overcritizited

[angelika-64518 · 7/10 · 17 December 2023]

I am aware of some critizing opinions about this movie. I realize a lot of scientistic facts are disorted even I am not the climate specialist. Nevertheless I enjoyed watching this production. First of all, great cast. Specially, I think about Jack and Sam. Fun fact for me is that Jake Gyllenhall (I have no idea how to spell his surname haha) played 17 years old teeneger white he had 24 white shoooting. Even of this fact, cast was reliable for me and I kept my fingers crossed for the future face of the characters. I have no doubts special effects was really good. I know some green screen was too obvious for our eyes, but it did not disturb me from watching. In this movie we can see tipicak scheme of character who is always right and nobody listen to him until it is too late to prevent the danger. But also this did not make me tired. I rate for strong 7. ;)

It's important to protect the environment

[o-54079 · 7/10 · 23 March 2020]

The first time I saw this film was when I was a senior in high school. My English teacher at that time showed it to us. The film was so powerful and powerful that it left an indelible impression on my mind, so much so that I can still recall what I felt and saw then.

Nothing wrong with this

[rythestampede · 7/10 · 17 March 2021]

Not super gripping or suspenseful but just a good all round by the books disaster film, good acting, reasonably entertaining, never boring. I was expecting worse based on everything I've seen and heard about it, but it's a solid watch.

Come on people.

[acedj · 8/10 · 18 November 2019]

How many times do I need to read other's reviews on disaster films before I remember most people on here writing these think they are actual film critics? It is a disaster movie. Yes, the science is terrible. Yes the coincidences are fantastical. If you watch these for ground breaking stories with rich plots, or for an Oscar worthy performance by one of the actors, then you are watching these for the wrong damn reasons. This movie shows a future where due to the rise in global temperatures, a modern ice age is triggered. How it is ushered in is by these violent, giant hurricane-like storms that cause flash freezing, and bring in a myriad of disasters with them. These include tsunamis and blizzards that drop so many feet of snow that people are walking level with the signs on the interstate that you would normally drive under. It also tries to throw in a lot of relatable human elements, such as the struggle of a man that is an absentee parent because of his job, trying to connect with his son, a lonely boy dying of cancer, and just the human death that this kind of disaster would bring. Do not watch this for the science, though I do feel that they had the causation of another ice age correct. Do not watch this for deep plot. Watch this for the enjoyable ride on which it takes you.

Fun Ride

[jorgebaeza-44969 · 7/10 · 8 August 2021]

Maybe a few lulls in the action, not believable at all, but fun, funny, exciting, great special effects and Jake at the top of his game. Seen this many times, own the disc, this is the type of film you go out and buy. When Hollywood can take an outlandish story and make you believe it, they are doing good. What has happened to Hollywood since 2004 ? They ain't makin' em believable anymore !

I am the only person on earth that loves "The Day After Tomorrow"

[UniqueParticle · 10/10 · 4 November 2019]

I have seen this movie so many times in the last 15 years and still relish it for what it is! I really enjoy a lot of the scenes and story. I'm blown out of the water that a bunch of reviews were bashing the script and story, really unfortunate. I got silly thoughts like I'd like to see anyone of you make a movie script lol it's cool though I have fun! Very cool to see the storms and all the smart people gather to talk about everything, I love all of it!

I'm gonna head to the bathroom and take a Day After Tomorrow

[TheMovieMark · 28 May 2004]

Do you like a good old-fashioned action-packed Summer movie with a good story and scientific accuracy? Welp, you best keep on looking because you won't find those ingredients in "The Day After Tomorrow."

This is one of those movies where the entertainment value is in how much you can make fun of it. And believe me, Stephanie, Mr. Shade, and I poked fun at the movie for the entire two hours. What else can you do with a movie this ridiculous? I'll admit the special effects are really good. The problem is that they're used up in the first half of the movie. I was expecting a full 2 hours of action and chaos, but they got all that out of the way and the rest of the movie focuses on the characters and their attempts to survive.

How cheesy is this movie? Let me count the ways...

1) Gyllenhaal supposedly fails his math class because on his final exam he only wrote the answers. He did all the work in his head, you see. That's just how much of a genius he is. So he and Quaid determine the teacher just failed him because he's jealous. Um, when I was in school I had to show my work. Sorry to be the bad guy here, but it's easy to see why the teacher might be suspicious. But this is a final exam, so wouldn't this issue have been addressed earlier? Sigh. I thought for sure later in the movie Gyllenhaal was gonna save the world but he was gonna figure it out in his head so the movie wouldn't have to explain to us how he did it. Thankfully, the movie didn't get quite that extreme.

2) This movie leads us to believe that a tornado warning cannot be issued until turning on the news and checking the weather report.

3) You gotta love the overdramatic delivery of dialogue: "Looks like a hurricane." *dramatic pause* "Only hurricanes DON'T FORM OVER LAND!"

4) The temperature supposedly starts to drop 10 degrees per minute. Riiiiiiiight. So within an hour the temperature would be 600 degrees below zero? And as the temperature starts dropping, we see everything freezing. Particularly ridiculous is when Gyllenhaal and his buddies are in a library and we see the floor freezing and chasing after them. They manage to jump in a room and close the door JUST IN TIME! For some reason the door magically shields them from the cold. Whatever.

5) Quaid and his friends are able to survive walking in sub-zero temperatures with little more than parkas and gloves. And they have these tents that apparently have magical warming powers because once in the tents they're able to take off their gloves and hats and not be cold at all!I could go on, but I think you get it. Ohhh, and what was the point of Quaid walking all the way from D.C. to New York just to find his son? He knew his son was holed up in the library, and he didn't show up with a rescue squad or anything to take him home. Oh yeah, he made a promise. Mr. Shade leaned over to me and said, "If I ever promise you that I'll meet you at the movie theater and the whole world freezes over, then don't expect me to be there." Fair enough. It was obviously supposed to add an emotional element to the story, but it did nothing for me. Quaid should've just waited and taken a helicopter to New York after the storm died down. It would've been better than risking his and his partners' lives.

I could write a thesis on the absurdity of the science used in the movie, but I won't bore you. There are plenty of articles by climatologists you can read that state how the events in the movie are impossible, especially a glaciation of this magnitude occurring in three days and catching the ENTIRE WORLD by surprise. Folks, Memphis weathermen interrupt my regularly scheduled programming whenever a drop of rain is registered, so you better believe they'd be on top of this.

Let me just add that this movie is based on the book, "The Coming Global Superstorm" by Art Bell and Whitley Strieber. Strieber wrote another book called "Communion," in which he claims he was told of the Earth's upcoming apocalypse by aliens. If that's who you wanna get your science from then go ahead. I hope you'll excuse me while I point and laugh at you.

I feel sorry for fringe groups who are actually using this movie to tout their political agenda. Saying this is a movie people should watch to prepare for a possible global warming catastrophe is about as legitimate as saying people should watch "Dawn of the Dead" to prepare for what would happen if zombies attacked. I'd say they're on equal ground in regard to scientific accuracy. But I doubt too many moviegoers are gonna take this seriously.

There's so much more to make fun of, but I'm gonna stop myself. I was extremely disappointed in the movie, so there's a good chance you will be also. This is the type of movie that shows a weatherman get hit by a huge billboard during the middle of the storm, and the only emotion it prompts is laughter. You've been warned.

"The Day After Tomorrow" is the kind of movie that might have scared me when I was 6 years old and uneducated. Now I can't help but laugh at the absurdity of it all. But hey, if you like movies with overwrought dialogue, a lame attempt at a love story, a severe lack of tension, no emotional pull (other than laughter), less believability than "Independence Day," and one of the most anticlimactic endings I've ever seen in a Summer blockbuster, then this is the movie for you.

Now if y'all will excuse me, I'm gonna head to the bathroom and take a Day After Tomorrow.

Not Awful, But Badly Flawed

[mjw2305 · 6/10 · 30 December 2006]

The build up to this disaster film is somehow far better than the aftermath. We are introduced to the main characters, told about their quirks, special talents, etc. and the scene is setup nicely for a damn enjoyable film. By the time the disaster hits most people will be pretty pleased with story so far and the effects during the disaster certainly don't disappoint at all.

From here on in the movie falls apart. It quite simply becomes boring to watch and although the acting among the survivors is talented and believable it doesn't stop you thinking there should be more to enjoy. As usual for the genre, some of the science is flawed, and although this is often forgivable, the failure to keep the audience entertained, only makes them think about these flaws all the more.

Ultimately 'The Day After Tomorrow' peaks too soon, and rather then build to a climax, it's over way before we are satisfied.

6/10 should have been way better

Huge spectacle CGI movie warning about global warming

[imseeg · 6/10 · 29 September 2020]

They dont come any bigger than this. Typical nineties CGI action blockbuster, with (some) great special effects and about average acting performances by Dennis Quaid and Jake Gyllenhaal.

Not an excellent movie for sure, but good enough to be really enjoyable with a bag of popcorn and a coke.

The story is simple: global warming causes an catastrophic ice storm and America is in danger. Will they survive the icestorm?

The bad: there are many tedious talking scenes, half an hour could have easily been cut out of it. There are a few impressive special effects scenes, but there are many silly ones as well. Mixed bag.

It'll do for the fans of this genre, but please do lower your expectations...

One of the better apocalyptic features out there!

[SoumikBanerjee1996 · 7/10 · 25 March 2023]

The visual effects are stunning. For a film that will soon celebrate its twentieth anniversary they don't feel dated at all, which is surprising. Yet that was kind of obvious given that it was coming from none other than Mr. Emmerich.

In addition to the aforementioned technical mastery, the storytelling has been outstanding. The way this gloomy, apocalyptic theme has been treated and presented to us is gripping to say the very least.

Notwithstanding the fact that the script here outright refuses to expound or speak longer on the central issue of climate change, choosing instead to focus on this father-son dynamic, which in my frank opinion prevents the story from truly blossoming.

Other than that, it's a powerful illustration of all the conceivable risks and challenges associated with such apocalyptic tragedies, and that is truly alarming.

Definitely not scientifically accurate but I love it anyway

[thewhitehydrangea · 8/10 · 3 September 2020]

Honestly I love this movie. No matter what I'm doing if I see this on tv I go ahead and grab a drink and put my feet up. Don't watch this expecting realism. Just watch it for what it is - a disaster movie that suspends reality and science to reunite a father and his son during the storm of the ages.

The Day After Tomorrow

[jrtone-49357 · 7/10 · 20 May 2020]

This was one of my favourite films as a child so I expected the quality to have dated significantly - but it actually holds up pretty well. The VFX doesn't look dated and although the story can be cliche and has some flaws, it's still a thoroughly enjoyable film.

Fair As A Summer Blockbuster But Still Flawed

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 22 March 2008]

If I ever get a job as a screen writing guru I shall tell my students that under no circumstances should they write an environmental thriller . Films with a message that we're destroying the planet do not make good cinematic ventures . NO BLADE OF GRASS is annoyingly sententious but is still compelling due to John Christopher's source novel . SOYLENT GREEN is poignant but much of that's down to it being Edward G Robinson's last movie . Do I need to mention Steven Segall and his pathetic attempts to entertain while educating us and failing at both ? I don't think I do

The problem with THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW is that its trying to do two things at once . Both entertain the audience and get them to think about global environmental disaster . One can't help thinking that if there wasn't so much debate about climate change then the producers would have made a much simpler movie . Unfortunately by taking the film so seriously a critical audience are able to recognise the scientific implausibilities along with the stupidity of the characters . Of course there's little wrong with having stupid characters in films because many genres like horror rely on this to further plots , but even so you can't help noticing a lack of internal logic

Another problem is that the film does feel a bit too epic in its scope . We're shown events happening in The South Pole , India , North America and Scotland . Personally I would have preferred a much more intimate film with less locations and characters . This is the strength of the 1970s disaster movie where the characters are drawn up early in to the film so the audience can clearly cheer the hero whilst booing the villain

I rated THE DAY AFTER Tomorrow six out of ten which means I didn't think it was a bad film . But I'm sad to say this could have been a much better one if the producers had focused the story more while making things a little less serious