Life After People
January. 21,2008In this special documentary that inspired a two-season television series, scientists and other experts speculate about what the Earth, animal life, and plant life might be like if, suddenly, humanity no longer existed, as well as the effect humanity's disappearance might have on the artificial aspects of civilization.
Similar titles
Reviews
Just perfect...
How sad is this?
Good , But It Is Overrated By Some
A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.
Life after people is a ripoff of Alan Weisman "World without us" (first of all by using a title structure in three words, but whatever).The basic thought experiment of Alan Weisman is aimed not so much at looking at how nature would recover after we have left, and how buildings etc deteriorate but in fact analysing to what extent our actions on the environment are permanent.Life after people (the main program) hardly mentions our use of plastics, our pollution of the planet with PCBs, how permanent nuclear waste will be and focuses on the mild, innocent traces of us that will be erased easily: wood, paper, iron, cement. Overall both the program and the series remain a list of crumbling buildings, repeated over and over again, with the same engineering viewpoint.The series (which I lazily address with this comment too) do mention this a bit more, along with our impact on fauna (eg bison population), or the recovery of fish population due to our current overfishing. Too little still.The documentary is reasonably good, padded with special effects that are shown over and over again, and with a shift of focus to American landmarks, which is understandable as it was made for US TV.The content presents a somewhat idealistic and benign-ized vision of our impact on the planet, which really misses the point of actually addressing what are the harmful things we are doing right now and which our descendants will curse us for.
As it's based on scientific conjecture anyway. Where's history where's there no people to live it? And no I don't believe the monkeys will evolve. Yep, swap this with Sci-Fi Channel's Ghost Hunters which deals with histories of sites and lives. History's movers and shakers must be they so desperate to get it's emphasis off WWII they'll leap on anything—and such a stupid pointless anything. I've tried watching and I just can't. It goes over the same progression—One day , month, year....Blah. And it's mostly CGI—make a video game out it please. I'm giving it a 3 for the animal shots that said it could be transplanted to Animal Planet. Please History drop this; make more episodes of "Gangland", much needed new episodes of "Civil War Journal" hey even "Modern Marvels" which though I don't like all that much it provides the background of inventions. If it has to stay on History it should be a series shown on random occasions—weekly doesn't work to for me.
Impressive visuals, but this is as much science fiction as science fact - the level of speculation that goes on mars it. It routinely ignores non-degradable garbage and nuclear waste in its prognostication, there are huge leaps in logic - for instance, involving zoo animals. They present the only issue as whether they can get out of the zoos, not if they can actually survive the wild, they will actually mate, if there is enough diversity to even create a gene pool for the species to survive. In essence, this show takes incredibly complicated issues with multiple factors and boils them all down to more simple ones. Plus, they misrepresented an area of Chernobyl in order to make their point! There was something vaguely Republican about the whole thing, the idea that no matter what we do to the Earth, it's okay, because it's going to turn back into a pristine Garden of Eden anyhow! Enjoy this for what it is - a science fiction documentary.
This would have been very interesting if it wasn't for the flashing images, CLOSE closeups on old dolls amongst other things, the over dramatic narrator and music. I want facts, images which i can see something, and not 80% about USA, this is not a documentary it's infotainment. The problem with that is that there is more entertainment than information, though what is so entertaining about blurry images every two seconds? Why are these so called documentaries made? It is not for giving people interesting facts that's for sure. I'm disappointed. More and more of these crappy infotainments are made and it keeps out the interesting parts all it shows me is closeups of trees, windows, roads, birds, office buildings, flowers etc.