I watched the movie "Day After Tomorrow" has strong feelings. I think this is the advent of catastrophe is not only natural disasters, more importantly, the destruction of human beings to the earth. Warming of the Earth continuously, because of human emissions from non-stop, cut down trees. This is wrong. We must properly protect the earth, a variety of trees, love nature, love animals, do not let the earth be polluted! 行不？
⑵ 一篇英文電影評論 <<後天>>
1. This movie takes a big-budget, special-effects-filled look at what the world would look like if the greenhouse effect and global warming continued at such levels that they resulted in worldwide catastrophe and disaster, including multiple hurricanes, tornadoes, tidal waves, floods and the beginning of the next Ice Age. At the center of the story is a paleoclimatologist (a scientist who studies the ways weather patterns changed in the past), Professor Jack Hall (Quaid), who tries to save the world from the effects of global warming while also trying to get to his son, Sam (Gyllenhaal), who was in New York City as part of a scholastic competition, when the city was overwhelmed by the chilling beginnings of the new Ice Age. In addition to all of the other challenges Dr. Hall faces, he's also going against the flow as humanity races south to warmer climes, and he's nearly the only one going north...
2. When global warming causes world wide disasters and leads to an ice age, a climatologist named Jack Hall tries to rescue his son Sam who is trapped in New York. Jack must go from Washington D.C. to New York, but on the way some things happen. Can Jack rescue his son?
3. We humans are such sinners. We pillage and plunder our planet's natural resources, carelessly and indignantly burn our fossil fuels, and throw caution to the wind for our wanton irresponsiblity.
Well, to coin a classic phrase, "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature." And she's one broad you don't dare want to mess with, as the disaster-laden THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW attests. In a movie that must have environmentalists and tree huggers worldwide grinning from pierced ear to pierced ear, we humans are forced at last to atone for the sin of global warming--a sin that melts the polar caps and brings on another Ice Age (in about the time it takes to play a baseball game).
Forget the plot. It's worse than bad--it's trite, banal, hackneyed, threadbare, and worn-out all rolled into one. Dennis Quaid is the climatologist who predicts doom but is subsequently ignored by his greedy government; he also has a son who ends up trapped in New York. The beautiful Sela Ward plays the standard this-disaster-epic-must-have-a-female-lead-who-spends-her-time-wringing-her-hands-and-looking-worried-and-then-cries part. Ian Holm, for goodness sake, is Bilbo Baggins, not some Scottish scientist about to go into the deep freeze, and Jake Gyllenhaal, who plays Quaid's and Ward's son, has a constant smirk on his face that I could never figure out.
As I said, forget the plot. This movie's strength is its visual onslaught of destruction and disaster on a global scale--from tornadoes ravaging Los Angeles (Why do LA TV reporters feel compelled to cover a twister a stone's throw away on live TV?) to three cataclysmic "blizzard hurricanes" that devour the Northern Hemisphere. The special effects are well-done, and jarring; seeing a huge tidal wave overtake the Statue of Liberty and then sweep relentlessly into Manhattan (Why didn't Brooklyn and Queens get equal time?) is bone-chilling. Throw in a pack of hungry wolves escaped from the zoo and an eye of each storm that plunges the temperature minus 150 degrees in a matter of seconds, and you've got a virtual kitchen sink of gloom and doom. Our fearless government reluctantly acts; in a huge twist of irony, the U.S. is evacuated, with its citizens streaming into Mexico, and the northern states take on a popsicle effect. It's all great fun to watch.
THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW succeeds on the visual, and fails dismally on everything else. Now I've got to go get my twelve-pack out of the freezer. I want to see what frozen beer tastes like.
4. There's no two ways about it...filmmaker Roland Emmerich really despises New York...three of his last four films depict some level of destruction within the Big Apple. Why does he hate it so? I have no idea, but he also doesn't seem all that found of Los Angeles, either...
The Day After Tomorrow (2004), written, proced and directed by Roland Emmerich stars Dennis Quaid (who'd been having a really decent run of good films, up until now, that is...), and Jake Gyllenhaal, who seems to bounce between really good movies (Donnie Darko) to really lousy ones (Bubble Boy, Highway). Also appearing is Emmy Rossum (who bares a remarkable resemblance, at times, to American Pie's Elizabeth Shannon), Jay O. Sanders (Daylight), Perry King (The Lords of Flatbush), Kenneth Walsh (Miracle), Sela `yowsa, yowsa' Ward, and Ian `Bilbo Baggins' Holm.
Okay...Jack Hall (Quaid) is a paleoclimatologist...what's that, you say? Well, apparently it's someone who studies the weather of the past, using ice core samples from the artic and sophisticated computer programs...more or less a glorified weatherman. During his research, he's found evidence to support the world is soon (soon meaning anywhere from 100 to 1,000 years) heading for another ice age, but no one is taking him too seriously, especially not the haughty Vice President (Walsh), probably e to the fact the weather reports we get on the TV are usually only right about half the time, so why should we jump through hoops for this clown? Surprise, surprise, it turns out Walsh is right (but his timing is way off...typical weatherman) as the poopie hits the fan...big time. Hail the size of footballs in Japan, tornadoes in LA, tide waves and crazy snow in New York (haven't they suffered enough?), all resulting in a global climate change, which doesn't sound all that bad, but basically the entire northern hemisphere is buried under ice and snow...a lot of ice and snow...and temperatures are dropping. Oh why didn't they listen to Hall? The fools...the frozen fools...
I will say this...The Day After Tomorrow sported some of the best special effects I've seen in awhile. The wide scale destruction of major cities was very intense (Irwin Allen, the master of disaster, the man who brought us all those wonderful 70's disaster movie, would have been proud)...also, I thought the acting was passable, which is sad, given the experienced cast involved, but they were just doing what they were told. If I were to rate this film on the special effects alone, it would be five stars, but I have to also consider the other aspects, the story, the dialog and such. It's these elements (or lack of) that ultimately derailed the film, for me at least. Emmerich seems to try and dazzle the audience with glossy special effects in hope we won't put too much thought into all the holes, large and small, that riddle the plot. I remember when I saw Emmerich's Independence Day (1996) for the first time, I was really taken with the film, but subsequent viewings revealed the paper thin construction, allowing the story to collapse in on itself...here, I need not watch the film again as the flimsy nature came through like a sledgehammer to the head...and Emmerich lays on the schmaltzy, maudlin sentimentality, disguised in the form of altruistic self sacrifice and heroism, about as thick as he lays the snows on New York...I would have thought it difficult to top the gushy, slushy, saccharine sweet goo presented in Independence Day, but I was wrong, as here, he turns it into an art form. The dialog was just awful...I was surprised some of the actors managed to get their lines out while keeping a straight face. Also, the dialog was entirely predictable, especially between the pregnant pauses meant to heighten the emotional level for the drivel soon to follow...I actually found myself speaking lines before they were spoken in the film, as it was that obvious as to what was coming. And the film seems inundated with a preachy smugness...yes, we consume fossil fuels and use resources from the Earth, but does that necessarily make us evil and deserving of the scenario played out in this film? I love it when Hollywood, in all of its shallow gloriousness, tries to teach the rest of the world what's wrong with us. This is a big difference between Emmerich and Irwin Allen...Allen made disaster films to engage and entertain, while Emmerich seems to use the medium as a means to tell us the error of our so called destructive ways, and showing the ruinous consequences that result. Ahh, I've stood on my soapbox long enough...here's some scenes to watch for...the one, after New York is frozen, with the homeless man teaching the rich kid, who normally wouldn't have given the filthy man the time of day, how to use newspapers and such to insulate himself by stuffing them in his clothes...can you see the irony here? The homeless, once a burden on our society, have now, after the disaster, found purpose in advising the uninitiated on how to survive, as they've had to do living on the mean streets. Everyone go out and befriend a homeless person now, before it's too late...okay, how about this scene...the kids, now stuck in the Manhattan library after the storm, are scrounging for food, and break into some vending machines. The homeless guy suggests looking in the trash cans, as there's always something to eat in trash cans (yeah, okay...I'll tell you what my stinky friend, I'll eat the potato chips and M&M's and you can have whatever edible, maggot infested morsels you find rummaging in the garbage)...again, infinitely invaluable advice from the homeless...
⑶ 誰知道 電影後天 的影評
本片子片頭首先是一個較長的移動鏡頭，是航拍的，交代大的環境是在南極，然後緊接著就是冰川大裂縫的驚險情節，這一組快節奏的驚險鏡頭最後由一個大遠景來結尾，展現了冰川大裂縫之大。這部電影的攝影善於運用前景來營造氣氛，並且幾乎每個鏡頭都是運動的，拍攝的外景喜歡用天空的夕陽作為後景，善於運用大自然賦予的美來增加構圖的美。
在東京天空下冰雹的那組鏡頭，雖然我覺得冰雹有些大的誇張，但我感覺出一種美，像大塊的水晶，給人們一種提問，明天我們的生活環境會不會出現這樣的景象。如果出現該怎麼樣辦。
「明天之後，你會在哪？」也許我們每個人都不知道答案。
當你看到《後天》電影DVD封面上的這醒目的提問時，會自問？如果我們真地在如此的揮霍自然，明天之後，我們會在哪裡呢？
也許每個人都會說這是一部災難片，我卻不這樣認為，只是災難片會給人們這樣的悸動嗎？只是災難片會這樣引人深思嗎？只是災難片會讓我們看到那麼美好的「明天」嗎？《後天》在我眼裡是一部結合了親情、愛情、友情、社會責任、人類文明的綜合性電影。
《後天》中的主人公——古氣候學家傑克·霍爾為了去營救被困於紐約的兒子，不惜冒著失去生命的危險在冰天雪地里前往紐約。這里體現的父子之情，是多麼純正——不論他們平時的相處時間是多麼的少，無論傑克為了研究多麼忽略他的家人，但在關鍵時刻，他做了保證，他前往，前往他兒子的身邊。他的兒子森同樣的愛他的父親，當被問之最快樂的假期時，他的回答竟是和父親一起遇難十多天。遇難可不是什麼好事，可是能和爸爸在一起，那就是最美好的。當颶風眼襲擊過後，通往「希望」的門被打開時，傑克和森面對面的那一刻，那種激動時不能言語的，不用說「我愛你」，只有一句「you make it」就能表達出全部的情感——欣慰，激動，無限的親情，溫暖的愛。
你會為了你喜歡的女孩沖向危險么？你會為了陪在她身邊保護她么？至少森會。為了她，他可以參加他毫不感興趣的學術會，只是為了能在她身邊；在面臨被洪水淹沒的那一刻，是森跑回去救她；在她因感染面臨生死難關時，是森憑借著智慧，在面對冰天雪地和餓極的狼匹的威脅下，在船中找到了治療的葯品。影片的最後，當他們得救了，她輕輕靠在了他的肩膀上，找到了一生的依靠。
《後天》之中友情、社會責任也隨處可見，傑克研究所的朋友們，陪伴著他踏上了凶險而未知的旅途；森的朋友們，陪著他去尋找救命的葯物；傑克的妻子——一名醫生，在最後一刻都陪在她的病人身邊；大量的研究人員在不懈的努力改善環境問題。
這一點一滴，都會讓我體會到這部「災難片」的深意，就像那個博士說的話一樣：「重要的不是看著自己的孩子長大，而是他會長大」，是的，重要的不是明天會怎樣，而是會有明天——有一個明天讓我們創造。
回過頭來，談談作為災難片《後天》製作問題，東京街頭的巨大冰雹、紐約市的滔天洪水、阻擋不了的超級龍卷風，這些在製作上可謂是做工精良，真實驚險。
本片的另一個特別的看點就是它不是發生在荒無人煙的沙漠而是在人員密集的城市——人們每天的生活場所，試想一下如果《後天》變成現實，恐慌、驚險、求生，流動的人潮，為了生存不顧一切的人們……一種人類共命運的真實感受會給人們帶來某種歡喜，不僅僅是災難，這里更有著與生存緊密關聯的東西在裡面。
《後天》是一部值得人們深思的影片，它教育我們要注重環保，真正做到人與自然的和諧關系。這確實也是現代社會的一個重大問題，無止境的索取、無止境的浪費，我們是為該真正的反思一下了。這部影片在敘事之間不時的會用抒情來平衡，特別是影片的後半部分被圍困在圖書館的那段，表現的特別人性化，人的感情主宰著事態的發展也表現出了人在面對大自然時的弱小無助。抬起頭，看著天空，希望我們天天頭可以擁有藍天，而不要等災難發生後，像那個宇航員那樣詢問他的同伴：「你見過這么藍的天嗎？」
《後天》還有一個值得看的就是視覺效果，演員的表演幾乎沒有任何可圈可點之處。編劇導演將所有角色放在商業流水線上，打磨成統一尺寸的螺釘螺母，幾乎放過了對任何可能出彩的劇情、對白、或對角色的琢磨。因此你不會看到那些面對浩劫災難時本應變得復雜、叵測、意味深長的人性和人物關系，取而代之的是被處理得潦草蒼白的愛情、親情或者友情。它們在電腦特技造出的末世景象面前，虛假得如同一束塑料花兒。因此，當片中那兩大團狀如冰激凌的「風暴眼」在大氣層上空緩慢移動，地球像一枚誤放入冷凍室的柿子那樣從外到里逐漸結滿了冰碴兒的時候，我心想，這世界總算清凈了……
還有一個另我難忘的鏡頭是在龍卷風剛剛過去之後，躲在辦公樓里的那位男的懷著好奇心顫顫慄慄的走向那扇門，當他打開那扇門時，一剎那不止是他傻了，連我也愣了一下，天啊，他打開的是一扇天窗啊，是一片被掃盪過的狼狽的世界，後面還有正在示威的龍卷風，這時鏡頭給了一個拉遠的大遠景，有點世界末日的感覺。
分析了這么多，我覺得這部影片的成功之處是給我們敲了一次警鍾，保護環境不是一個人的責任，也不是一個國家的職責，而是全世界人共有的責任，如果我們還繼續破壞和污染生活環境的話，那麼人類的後果就像在本片上演在屏幕上的一樣，相信每個人都不希望電影中的災難再在現實地球上上演一遍.
⑷ 急求電影《後天》英文觀後感，翻譯即可
I watched the movie "Day After Tomorrow" has strong feelings. I think this is the advent of catastrophe is not only natural disasters, more importantly, the destruction of human beings to the earth. Warming of the Earth continuously, because of human emissions from non-stop, cut down trees. This is wrong. We must properly protect the earth, a variety of trees, love nature, love animals, do not let the earth be polluted!
行不？
⑸ 一篇英文電影評論<<後天>>謝謝了，大神幫忙啊
1.Thismovietakesabig-budget,special-effects-ster,includingmultiplehurricanes,tornadoes,tidalwaves,.(),ProfessorJackHall(Quaid),ttohisson,Sam(Gyllenhaal),,..Hallfaces,he',andhe'snearlytheonlyonegoingnorth... 2.,.JackmustgofromWashingtonD.C.toNewYork,butonthewaysomethingshappen.CanJackrescuehisson? 3.Wehumansaresuchsinners.Wepillageandplunderourplanet'snaturalresources,,. Well,tocoinaclassicphrase,"It'snotnicetofoolMotherNature."Andshe'sonebroadyoudon'tdarewanttomesswith,asthedisaster-.ompiercedeartopiercedear,--(). Forgettheplot.It'sworsethanbad--it'strite,banal,hackneyed,threadbare,andworn-outallrolledintoone.hisgreedygovernment;.-disaster-epic-must-have-a-female-lead-who-spends-her-time-wringing-her-hands-and-looking-worried-and-then-criespart.IanHolm,forgoodnesssake,isBilboBaggins,,andJakeGyllenhaal,whoplaysQuaid'sandWard'sson,. AsIsaid,forgettheplot.Thismovie'--('sthrowawayonliveTV?)tothreecataclysmic"blizzardhurricanes".Thespecialeffectsarewell-done,andjarring;intoManhattan(Whydidn'?)isbone-chilling.,andyou'.;inahugetwistofirony,theU.S.isevacuated,,.It'sallgreatfuntowatch. ,.NowI'vegottogogetmytwelve-packoutofthefreezer.. 4.There'snotwowaysaboutit.......Whydoeshehateitso?Ihavenoidea,buthealsodoesn'tseemallthatfoundofLosAngeles,either... TheDayAfterTomorrow(2004),written,(who',upuntilnow,thatis...),andJakeGyllenhaal,(DonnieDarko)toreallylousyones(BubbleBoy,Highway).AlsoappearingisEmmyRossum(,attimes,toAmericanPie'sElizabethShannon),JayO.Sanders(Daylight),PerryKing(TheLordsofFlatbush),KennethWalsh(Miracle),Sela`yowsa,yowsa'Ward,andIan`BilboBaggins'Holm. Okay...JackHall(Quaid)isapaleoclimatologist...what'sthat,yousay?Well,apparentlyit',....Duringhisresearch,he'(soonmeaninganywherefrom100to1,000years)headingforanothericeage,,(Walsh),thalfthetime,?Surprise,surprise,itturnsoutWalshisright(buthistimingiswayoff...typicalweatherman)asthepoopiehitsthefan...bigtime.HailthesizeoffootballsinJapan,tornadoesinLA,(haven'ttheysufferedenough?),,whichdoesn'tsoundallthatbad,...alotoficeandsnow...andtemperaturesaredropping.Ohwhydidn'ttheylistentoHall?Thefools...thefrozenfools... Iwillsaythis...'veseeninawhile.(IrwinAllen,themasterofdisaster,'sdisastermovie,wouldhavebeenproud)...also,Ithoughttheactingwaspassable,whichissad,,.,itwouldbefivestars,,thestory,thedialogandsuch.It'stheseelements(orlackof)thatultimatelyderailedthefilm,formeatleast.won',largeandsmall,thatriddletheplot.IrememberwhenIsawEmmerich'sIndependenceDay(1996)forthefirsttime,Iwasreallytakenwiththefilm,,...here,tothehead...andEmmerichlaysontheschmaltzy,maudlinsentimentality,,...,slushy,,butIwaswrong,ashere,heturnsitintoanartform.Thedialogwasjustawful...ightface.Also,,hedrivelsoontofollow...,....yes,,isfilm?IloveitwhenHollywood,inallofitsshallowgloriousness,'swrongwithus....,estructiveways,.Ahh,I'vestoodonmysoapboxlongenough...here'ssomescenestowatchfor...theone,afterNewYorkisfrozen,,whonormallywouldn',...canyouseetheironyhere?Thehomeless,onceaburdenonoursociety,havenow,afterthedisaster,,asthey'.,beforeit'stoolate...okay,howaboutthisscene...thekids,,arescroungingforfood,.,asthere'(yeah,okay...I'lltellyouwhatmystinkyfriend,I'lleatthepotatochipsandM&M'sandyoucanhavewhateveredible,)...again,...
⑹ 電影後天影評
《後天》是羅蘭·艾莫里奇2004年的作品，作為04年一部耗資巨大的商業片，影片繼承了羅蘭一貫的風格（甚至到抄襲），災難、人類文明、拯救、希望...
隨著人類環保意識的增強,溫室效應作為20世紀危險的產物,依然不斷刺激著人們的神經.本片被定義為"環境災難驚悚"而非"科幻片",也就是說,本片所展現的情景,是與現實有著密切聯系,而非憑空編造的.
盡管如此,影片中的大量情節仍被批作是"扯淡的".比如冰河期來去的速度、波及的范圍，從科學意義上講都是不可能的，可我覺得，科幻（我還是習慣稱其如此）不是科普，盡管它很不嚴謹，但我們仍能體會出導演用誇張警示人們的用意。
少談幾點感情主線
《後天》摒棄了好萊塢以往一貫「明目張膽」的個人英雄主義，如果冰河期的到來與結束是影片的大背景的話，那父子情便是貫穿全片重要的情感主線之一。而這種感情，體現在父親營救兒子的過程中。
從開頭看，Sam與父親的關系明顯存在分歧與矛盾，這是許多美國家庭在此時期的普遍現象。當兒子面臨危險時，父親毅然北上，這不僅是勇氣與毅力。更是一種可以戰勝理智的情感——愛！
當冰河來臨，困在圖書館的幾人成為一個整體，他們在最絕望、最危險的時候相互依靠、相互鼓勵，這是相當重要的一條線索，也有著以點帶面的妙處。
當他們在選擇用來燃燒取暖的書時，所發生的分歧可以顯示出不同的人在危難時，對人類文明的態度。
一類贊成以生存為主，因為只有生存下去，也許才有可能重建人類文明；另一類寧死也要保存人類文明的痕跡，因為這是老祖宗千百年來留下的瑰寶，是人類智慧的結晶，他們期望有一天，也許在危難之後的某時，子孫能重拾那曾經險些毀滅的文明。一類對自己存有希望，充滿生的渴望；另一類則對未來充滿了末世關懷的宿命期望。
這一橋段，是導演提示著人們，展開了非常深刻的思考。
但最終，雙方均作出讓步，同時，彼此信任著、鼓勵著，此刻，不會再有任何對權錢的貪欲，不再有個人的私利與爭奪，因為此刻，人類文明基本被冰封的時刻，一切都顯得無關緊要。他們清楚地認識到，此刻只有互相幫助，才能抓住生的希望，或許才有生的可能！於是，人類的情感在社會滅亡的邊緣蛻化的單純而真摯！而此刻，觀眾也會不禁思考，難道一定要等到災難滅絕每人類才懂得蛻化？！
這一點，與之前一點，展現在同一時空環境下，構成了影片最深刻的兩點人文主題。
故事的警示
影片的故事並沒有顯示出多少新奇的地方，總的來說，通俗易懂。我們暫且不論劇情的疏漏或場景的似曾相識，單看故事本身所要傳達的思想，是發人深思的。
在氣象學家發現洋面溫度異常後，立即向總統申請全國向南轉移。而總統說「請不要忘了我們的經濟同我們的環境一樣脆弱！」。此時，總統的形象代表了典型的大資產階級，他們惟利是圖，不願浪費任何一點時間和精力在非賺錢的事物上，他甚至依然覺得，經濟才是解決一切的萬能鑰匙，直到最後。
為了緩解溫室效應，國際上有著《京都議定書》，而恰恰是美國，拒絕在和約上簽字！本片無疑是對美國莫大的諷刺。那些自信的美國人向來喜歡指責別人，而他們自己做的，已經很差了！
當潮水來襲，林立的高樓瞬時倒下，龍卷風中的房屋、大橋、汽車...一一被毫不留情地卷上天,被摧毀、被撕碎、被吞噬！人們甚至還來不及作出反應，那些耗費人類大量金錢、智慧、勞動力的所謂「人類文明的傑作」，在自然的力量面前顯得如此脆弱、渺小而不堪一擊！那些有著「良好建築技術」、「優秀建築材料」的人類避難所，頃刻間化為烏有！被冰封的自由女神像，只殘剩出奄奄一息的頭。此刻，她高舉向天的手不再示意著自由，那是在質問！在指責！在控訴！！
數十分鍾災難場景的連續體現，使人們坐在銀幕前感受到了巨大而不可名狀的恐懼與深思。
我們生於自然，長於自然，我們為了自己的文明不惜破換自然的平衡，最終，自然反過來向人類做了宣判，我們的一切文明，物質上的、精神上的，完全可以被她輕而易舉地全部摧毀！在自然面前，無知的我們憑什麼自豪於自己的「傑作」？！我們有徵服、取代自然的資格嗎？
影片中，由於溫室效應導致全球洋面升高，整個北半球被全部冰封。這種假設是撼人的！恰巧那段日子全球氣候極為異常，如歐洲六月降雪，阿爾卑斯山大量冰川融化、雪線上升...人們不禁警惕地問"後天不會明天到來,那明天的明天呢?"
但這畢竟是商業片,不會是絕望到底的.人類的最大優勢就在於即使是在最為難的時刻也保留著"潘多拉魔盒"最後所剩--希望!正是如此,導演才在結尾讓地球自行結束冰河期.
沒錯!自然永遠都是一位母親,在孩子犯錯的時候,她只會或重或輕地懲罰,而不會毀滅我們!(其實我倒希望地球徹底發一次怒,讓人類社會就此毀滅!!!)
⑺ 求電影《後天》的觀後感，英文的，謝謝啦！
The Day After Tomorrow, while drenched with some of the richest special
effects seen since The Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, and Star Wars, is
rich in both character depth and plot quality. It is easy to be awed by
the movie magic but one must be careful not to overlook the important
message imbued within the movie. The political importance of the
concern with global warning is an undertone throughout the entire film
(in some scenes it is more prevalent) but it does not take away from
the grand scope of The Day After Tomorrow. Not since Stephen King's,
"The Stand" has a movie of global disaster done the genre justice.
Movies such as "Deep Impact" and "Armageddon" fall far short in their
attempts to lure the audience in with the promise of a cataclysmic
event, only to find that the heroes come through in the eleventh hour
to save the world from dire calamity! In The Day After Tomorrow, the
heroes do not save the day for everyone in the world, or, more
specifically, in the Northern Hemisphere. While there is a bit of stark
heroism intertwined with the plot, it is not so trite as to be tacky.
The Day After Tomorrow is well worth the wait and should serve as a
benchmark for future disaster movies to come.
⑻ 求電影後天的英語影評
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 ll 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 – ring 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.
一些難的句子可以跳過>M<
⑼ 電影《後天》英文觀後感，要有闡述自己的觀點，翻譯的可以，語法要正確，不用太長。
請求幫忙翻譯：我看了電影《後天》感觸很深。我覺得這個巨大災難的來臨不僅是I watched the movie "Day After Tomorrow" has strong feelings. I think