Wednesday, June 30, 2004

when good science goes bad

Okay, I'm just going to admit it upfront - I'm a huge nerd, so if you don't want to read something nerdy, stop reading right now.

I went to see Day After Tomorrow over the weekend and at the beginning was all excited because the guy at the beginning was presenting a scientific scenario that is actually based in current research. I was even more excited because I had actually read the paper when it came out, so I actually knew what he was talking about. (see? nerd.) I was sitting in my seat thinking, "I'm so impressed that someone in Hollywood actually took the time to research climate change theory!" HOWEVER, as the movie continued, I became increasingly disappointed as the scientific plausibility pretty much ended right there. I could launch into a lengthy tirade about how and why most of that stuff couldn't happen the way they presented it, but, really, no one wants to hear it. Suffice to say, the rest of the movie laid out a scenario which was based solely fantasy and sensationalism, and I fear that because of this, the fact that the original premise is based in "real science" will be lost on most people. Stupid Hollywood.

No comments: