Critiques
of The Day After Tomorrow point to its exaggerated claims regarding
global warming not as a way to highlight the film’s environmental ideologies
but to highlight one of its biggest weaknesses. The environmental message seems
lost because it rests on such a poor interpretation of climatology. Instead,
critics valorize the film’s spectacular effects and faithful execution of the
eco-disaster formula. A surface reading of the environmental politics on
display in the film, then, deconstructs the film’s environmental leanings.
But
director Roland Emmerich’s assertion that the film’s climate-change
exaggerations were intended as a way to add to its dramatic appeal points to
another consequence of the “sublimely ridiculous” ecological disasters: large
box office sales. All of the 258 reviews on the Internet Movie Database admit
that the environmental catastrophes on display in the film are spectacularly
powerful, drawing audiences who crave the entertainment value that a highly
special effects-driven disaster movie provides. The special effects paid off: The Day After Tomorrow grossed $528 million worldwide and earned a
stunning $85.8 million during its opening weekend.
For
us, more appealing are ecological themes beyond the surface meaning, themes
that help us answer questions like, how is this cli-fi-disaster? How is
this cli-fi-disaster film different from those that have come before it? And (as
Dan Bloom suggests) can cli-fi movies serve to wake up readers and viewers to
the reality of the Climapocalypse? Our readings of early and contemporary
cli-fi films suggest they can, at least potentially, reveal the eco-horror
behind the spectacle on display.
For
us, cli-fi films continue some of the same trends we note occurring in
monstrous nature cinema, including drawing on anthropomorphism to both humanize
and vilify nonhuman nature. Dan Bloom asserts, “In order to be a cli-fi short
story or novel, the book will have a climate theme, of course. It can be set in
the past, the present or the future, and it can be dystopian or utopian.” The
same definition applies to filmic cli-fi, which, like short stories and novels,
explores climate change and global warming explicitly. Bloom also
differentiates cli-fi from environmental literature and film, declaring, “But
if the book is just about the environment, such as protecting rivers or
stopping air pollution, then it wouldn’t really be a cli-fi novel [or film].
There are other categories such as eco-fiction or calling a book an
eco-thriller if it is about the environment.” Earlier cli-fi films that
anthropomorphize monstrous nature explicitly fit Bloom’s criteria, a point we’ll
consider in next week’s blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment