Introduction
The movie industry would probably be impossible without heart-breaking and sole-touching movies. However, not of less importance for the box-office are the scientifically based movies about disasters that are about to strike the world and change everything. One of such movies is Deep Impact directed by the peacemaker Mimi Leder. This is the work that preceded Armageddon and won less financial success, though was recognized to have a better and more thoughtful scientific approach. Nevertheless, this was exactly the reason why critics claimed Deep Impact could have had more love appeal and characters disclosure. So, the movie is great and very deep to understand that no one can insure from nature’s collapses.
Movie’s Focus
This is a space-impact film that differs from all alike by its profound approach towards the scientific explanation. This is a great piece of work that makes it possible for an average viewer to understand the rules of nature and science and at the same time indulge in science-fiction drama. The dramatic feature of the movie is that the human life is threatened by the comet that is approaching the planet and the prognosis is that the entire human race can face extinction in a year. The movie represents mutual human attempts to build sanctuaries under earth to have at least a slight possibility to survive. It is a magnificent unity of human race (throughout nations) that bares even more importance as per spiritual solidarity. It is interesting that this film represents mutual attempts of the US and Russia as two powerful states, rather than focusing on New York and the US government only. Following is the basic plot of the movie. A young astronomer called Leo Biederman is the one to discover the comet that is approaching the Earth and threatens everything alive on the planet. This gives the government an opportunity to take action before the Earth meets the comet. Hence, the team of astronauts will try to destroy the disastrous comet. However, their attempts failed and President of the United States decides to employ plan B: use the cavernous retreat that can host only 1 million of Americans. This entails further excitement among people because the mean to get to the retreat is a lottery. Leo will certainly get to the retreat, though his girlfriend Sarah and her parents obviously do not have such a chance. Ultimately, Spurgeon Tanner – the spaceship captain – thinks of a kamikaze-styled plan that gives hope for survival.
Critics’ Debates
A peculiar thing about all the reviews of the movie is that all of them collide on the point of Deep Impact either being deeply scientific or level it as science fiction and fantasy. One of the critical interpretations was released by David N. Butterworth the same year the world saw the movie. Of course, every American has his/her right to for freedom of voice, however, let me unbiased and disagree with some of the points he makes in his review. So, the overall perception of the author of an article is welcoming and he likes the movie. Nevertheless, he bases his grounds on the fact that there were plenty of movies about nature’s disaster in 1970s that ‘got rammed down our throats’ (Butterworth, n.p.). Of course, there were the earthquakes, water, and air disasters stories, though in consideration to the new century’s problems and vital debates, it is understandable that a viewer wants to learn more about contemporary problems – this is all about the creative legacy that humanity has been making up for centuries (Fiero, p. 158). Moreover, the overall cultural context of the movie, to my mind, is connected to the desire of the public to learn and understand more about the state and planet we live on, rather than being completely unaware and blocked from information by the government, like it was back in the previous century. However, here it is necessary to mention the movie’s politically respective background. Namely, please, pay your attention to the fact that the underlying meaning is the America’s democratic political order which entailed all citizens’ participation in the lottery; whereas it is likely that if it was for real, the government would probably be far from holding such a procedure. Instead only privileged persons would reach the caverns.
Another critical review is by Rob Gonsalves. He states that the movie s way far from what the audience expected it to be scientifically and emotionally: ‘the disappointment when the movie finally gets around to those big destruction scenes, which can’t possibly live up to all the build-up and anticipation’ (Gonsalves, n.p.) Of course, I can agree with the scientific approach being not played off efficiently, but after all this is a science fiction – not the documentary. What concerns they love leitmotif, yes, it is somewhat weak in some scenes, though this can be explained by the attempts of director to show the Earth’s collapse rather than stressing the feeling’s perspective. So, overall the film is great and in some facets it is unnecessary to compare it to other films about disasters, such as Armageddon.
Prediction or Coincidence?
Many critics and average people now notice that the movie bears somewhat predictive nature. It is impossible not to notice unexpected fact that director put a black man into the Presidents seat in 1998, whereas now is 2010 and the president is Afro-American. Moreover, the upcoming elections of the President before Barack Obama took his seat, were met fiercely by Kevin Henry in his article ‘Do We Really Want Another Black President After The Events Of Deep Impact?’. As for me, the article is way overreacting. And it is impossible to now asses if he was using the movie’s plot or simply is an inadequate man who takes fantasy for granted, because this phrase really strikes your imagination: ‘All we will get by electing an African-American is Texas-size space particles crashing into the Earth’s surface, mega-tsunamis that barrel into the Appalachian Mountains, and 6.6 billion dead people.’ (Henry, n.p.)
One more prediction we can understand only now is the crush of the Twin Towers, this really makes one’s blood run cold. However, if we regard this issue in another perspective, the movie shows massive destruction, so whatever happened in the next years after 1998 would have been considered a forecast, this is all about features of different genres of art. (Sporre, p. 25)
Conclusion
Deep Impact entailed many feedbacks. Among them were not very flattering ones, of course, because there is no accounting for taste and the contemporary viewer is a really sophisticated one being spoilt with the variety of movies and genres. However, the overall perception of the film is good for those times. There were political issues burningly discussed and possible predictions’ truth assumptions, as well as the debates over the contrast between Deep Impact and Armageddon, though the ultimate goal is pursued – the movie is still talked about just as it was back in 1998.
Works Cited
Butterworth, David, N. Deep Impact (1998). Web.
Fiero, Gloria. The Humanistic Tradition Volume II: The Early Modern World to the Present. Desoto: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.
Gonslaves, Rob. Deep Impact. 2007.
Henry, Kevin. Do We Really Want Another Black President After The Events Of Deep Impact? America’s Finest New Source.
Sporre, Denis, J. Perceiving the Arts: An Introduction to the Humanities. Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2011. Print.