Message from discussion The Day After Tomorrow
Subject: Re: The Day After Tomorrow
Date: 31 May 2004 12:40:51 -0400
Organization: Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
References: <HyIEs6.1Ls@kithrup.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: gargoyle.oit.duke.edu 1086021649 16516 220.127.116.11 (31 May 2004 16:40:49 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 16:40:49 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Military Intelligence)
Keith Morrison <kei...@polarnet.ca> writes:
> David Silberstein <davids_aat_kithrup.co...@foilspam.invalid> wrote:
> >(yeah, yeah, off-topic for rasf.written, but nevertheless...)
> >WARNING: The Surgeon General has determined that this film
> >is enormously likely to cause severely strained suspension
> >of disbelief in anyone who has a greater-than-room-temperature
> >intelligence or a nonzero amount of general knowledge of reality.
> >For those who are actually educated in the laws of physics,
> >and more specifically, geology, meteorology and/or climatology,
> >said strain may cause headaches, and in the worst case, cranial
> >detonations may occur.
> Buwahahahaha! I've had to suffer bad geology, bad military and bad
> firefighting movies. Others have suffered bad computer science, bad
> physics, bad medical, even bad writing movies.
Bad chess (though sometimes surprisingly good).
> Now you climatologists can feel our pain. Welcome to our world.
Why not? We've been getting it in written SF for decades.
And worse, this too often happens in otherwise good books.
Of course as a *paleo*climatologist I have arguably been
suffering this since the days of silent films
I won't be seeing the film unless someone offers me say,
$100. So no review here.