I have just read the reviews of this show by a number of alleged viewers & I am at a loss as to what they think they actually viewed. It was convenient, in hindsight, that the date of the supposed action was "5 years in the future". This makes the date irrelevant with regard to it referring to any particular year, 2012, 2013, 2025 or any other year as obviously if I watch it now (2011) it becomes 2016. In any case the film should have been released in 2007 to be "5 years" in the future of 2012. Some reviewers were unable to figure out how long the drought was. One, was unable to use the automatic spell checker & obviously did not read his review - how long has anyone lived in "Sidney, New Soth Wales". The same person also doesn't understand that the abbreviation PM means Prime Minister when the reference should have been State Premier (or just Premier), and since when have we "brung" anything.
Unfortunately, some reviewers also may have spoken in 'tongues'. I have lived in Australia for more than 60 years & I still don't know what the AIIMS... is, incidentally the ABC might mean American Broadcasting Corporation (or Company, or .....). Please, space out acronyms as full words at least once in your review as not everyone knows what they mean.
Thanks to those members of the Australian Rural Fire Service for their input on how it actually related to the Service Aussies are very proud of these people who volunteer their time (mostly FREE) to help others. It should be appreciated that real fire-fighters thought enough of the film to even make comments, it also shows how seriously Aussies take the danger of bush-fires & willingness of everyone to chip in. Of course the actual supposition that there is 'absolutely no water anywhere' to use to fight bush-fires does stretch the imagination, just a l i t t l e {LOL}. There are so many creeks & dams around Sydney, New South Wales, Australia (and all Australia) that the drought would have to have been a lot, lot (many lots) longer than 200 or so days of the film. Even when the film was made some localities in Australia were in areas declared drought for a lot longer than that.
Well, after all that my review of the film is that while it is definitely not in same league as 'Armageddon', 'The Day After' or other similar disaster movies, it was a film worth watching, especially for those who like the nitty-gritty of the interaction between persons who could be 'you' (or/and maybe 'me').
(NOTE: LOL = laughing out loud)
Unfortunately, some reviewers also may have spoken in 'tongues'. I have lived in Australia for more than 60 years & I still don't know what the AIIMS... is, incidentally the ABC might mean American Broadcasting Corporation (or Company, or .....). Please, space out acronyms as full words at least once in your review as not everyone knows what they mean.
Thanks to those members of the Australian Rural Fire Service for their input on how it actually related to the Service Aussies are very proud of these people who volunteer their time (mostly FREE) to help others. It should be appreciated that real fire-fighters thought enough of the film to even make comments, it also shows how seriously Aussies take the danger of bush-fires & willingness of everyone to chip in. Of course the actual supposition that there is 'absolutely no water anywhere' to use to fight bush-fires does stretch the imagination, just a l i t t l e {LOL}. There are so many creeks & dams around Sydney, New South Wales, Australia (and all Australia) that the drought would have to have been a lot, lot (many lots) longer than 200 or so days of the film. Even when the film was made some localities in Australia were in areas declared drought for a lot longer than that.
Well, after all that my review of the film is that while it is definitely not in same league as 'Armageddon', 'The Day After' or other similar disaster movies, it was a film worth watching, especially for those who like the nitty-gritty of the interaction between persons who could be 'you' (or/and maybe 'me').
(NOTE: LOL = laughing out loud)