Rescate en la Antártida

Good movie--However, I have been to Antarctica for 2 1 year stretches and a lot was embellished in the movie...of course to make it plausible to the masses. You would never see the sun during the Antarctic winter. It is dark down there--the sun dips below the horizon in late March and does not come back until August. BUT I guess Hollywood would have had a hard time filming in the dark, right?? I've actually been to Bailey's in Cheech (Christchurch) and that looked authentic. SO did the outside of the hospital in McMurdo. I would recommend this movie to anyone who wants a better understanding of life in the field camps down there--some of it was true but the majority of it was well thought by the makers of this film!

Just getting back from seeing 8 below, i am completely blown away by several elements. Firstly, right away you get glimpes of STUNNING scenery that continue throughout the whole film. Beautiful artic landscapes frame the main story line and on the big screen, it really takes your breath away. The movie also is really able to give anyone an idea of what its like to be in the artic, and really gave a clear picture of what being an explorer was like. This added to the appeal of the movie, because its not something most of us get to experience. Although the acting has been in some cases been criticized, I believe the actors fulfilled their purpose within the movie. They were able to play their roles, without distracting from the dogs, which of course, is the most important part. Paul Walker clearly comes across as a strong animal lover, and displays this well. He becomes relatable to any animal lovers, who will utimatly love this movie. As for the others, the fulfilled their jobs, which is what matters. The character of "Cooper" gave great comic relief, and "Katie" acted out the predicable love story line well. But of course, the most important aspect of this movie was the dogs. I can hardly even begin to describe what a wonderful job they did. The tricks preformed (as a dog lover and trainer) were some with great difficulty. Ultimately, the way the dogs interact with each other and are so compassionate, you really connect with them. The only way to really experience this is to GO. the movie is AMAZING and a wonderful family film. Although a part or two may be slightly scary, its still an amazing picture for ALL to enjoy, it completely blew all of us a way.

I am a huge dog freak, so I was looking forward to this movie already to begin with. But I didn't expect it to be so touching. it's not just about sled dogs in Antartica, it's about survival, and the bond a person has with their dogs.

While the actors did well in the movie, the best performances in the movie came from the dogs, hands down. I know that makes me sound pretty crazy, but when you see this movie, you know it's true. This is an awesome movie for all ages. I went to go see it with my 20 and 30 year old friends, and this is now one of their favorite movies of all time (besides Dirty Dancing). I say this is a great movie for the whole family!

My wife and I went to go this flick in the theater and I would say we were the only folks there without children. We went because we are the proud owners of two huskies ourselves. I urge anyone that is interested in dogs, animals, huskies, Antarctica, whatever, to see this movie. I must say for a Disney movie, it's not as childish as one may think, and there are definitely a few tear-jerking parts for different reasons. I have already noticed the desire growing amongst folks to have huskies in the past year or so, and I bet this movie will only positively influence that. Huskies can be a handful, but they are one of the coolest/smartest breeds you'll ever encounter. I just hope folks will go to Husky Rescue groups, before shelling out hundreds of dollars for breeders. Minor adjustments I would have made are focusing a little more on the dogs survival and less on Paul Walker's mission to get funding. Also, the dogs definitely did not not "talk" as much as our two huskies do : )

Poetic license is some thing, but changing reality to make an absolutely impossible story seem plausible is another. The writers obviously need better advisers about Antarctic travel. Here are just a few of the errors. They show the dogs running when pulling the sled. They would kill them in short order. Real sleds dog simply walk at a very fast pace bordering on a trot. Real Antarctic travelers don't try to travel through storms. They just wait them out in a nice warm tend. Now lets get into science fiction. Bruce Greenwood falls through ice into water. Where exactly would you find water on Antarctica? The ice is several thousand feet thick. (While on the subject of water, where exactly did the dogs find any water to drink?) There are no birds in the interior of Antarctica in the winter and none even on the coast in winter. But lets get to the biggest absurdity bright sunny days in June and July. Huh? There is almost 24 darkness at that time of year. I hate it when they claim that a story is based on reality and the present something that is obvious complete and utter fiction. Am I missing the point but dewelling on these gross distortions of anything faintly resembing reality? Well, if you have a story that consists of nothing more than contrived emotional manipulation using a pack of dogs, you could at least get give the setting and circumstances some semblance of reality rather than turning the world upside down to confirm.