=====
From brendthess@attbi.com:
Liked the overall effect, although the "destruction" of the city by disassembly
(rather than some sort of collapsing effect) seemed "... wrong.  Terribly,
terribly wrong." :-)  It just detracted from the overall effect of the video. 
IMO, one centered on the death and rebirth of the tree alone would have been
better.  (But what do I know -- IANAC  I Am Not A Critic )

=====
From tek@evilsuperbrain.com:
Great concept, and well realised. A lot of thought has gone into the details and
that really comes through. My only criticism would be that the textures and
models look a bit too artificial. I do like this though, I considered doing an
animation like this one but chose not to 'cause I thought it would be way too
difficult! :)



=====
From evilsnack@hotmail.com:
This was not challenging from either the artistic or technical aspect.

=====
From maarten_hofman@hotmail.com:
Excellent new concept, well choreographed, but some parts of the animation seem
rather artificial (like the city). Maybe instead of working with all the
compression, it would've been better to use the standard animation size and
implement more details?



=====
From Martin.Magnusson.7121@student.uu.se:
Good concept. The sky looks good - both day and night time. The way the city
just sinks into the ground looks a bit odd.

=====
From martin@simaltech.com:
Wow.  I would never have believed that this could be created in POV or that
someone would have the vision to put it all together.  You somehow managed to
accomplish a seemingly impossible artistic and technical endeavour. 
Fantastic!
=====
From chris_darcy_irtc@yahoo.com.au:
Good subject.
Nicely rendered.


=====
From bill@apocalypse.org:
Pretty, tough short and not especially compelling (no real "story" to raise my
interest).  I might have move the camera around a bit for more variety and
perhaps had some re-occurring object to tie the scene together.  Still, good,
effective work.

=====
From jonathan@scudder.no:
Nice idea. Would have morphed height fields rather than using iso surfaces, but
that's easy for me to say without having to actually do it :P Like the sinking
city especially.

=====
From jouni@mikrobitti.fi:
Interesting - it's the last animation for me this round, and it definitely
contained the best interpretation of force of nature. Technically it could be
better - the amount of detail could be increased quite a lot, but looking at
your render times, I understand the compromise.

Looking forward to your next one.

=====
From angelsdie2@aol.com:
Great work combining the macros together and using them effectively in a scene
-- some people frown upon using these 'plugins' but using them _well_ doesn't
bother me at all....  I also appreciate the fact that you did the intro and
outro scenes in POV.  It would have been fine to do it in some other program
but I am always impressed with that little extra effort.  The textures could
have been altered a little so that the anim doesn't look so grainy... in fact
it looks almost like you're animated crand...  it sort of adds to the image in
some respects though...  I just had eye surgery so I may not be the best judge,
but this your anim gets my highest scores this round.  Great work!

=====
From p_chan@shaw.ca:
Excellent work!  The terrain looks quite realistic.  The transitions between
sequences were smooth, with the exception of the glacier coming to a stop.  One
suggestion for improvement would be to have the river start smaller, and
gradually grow.  It almost looks as if the river bed is there to begin with as
the mountain near the camera drops.
=====
From batronyx@alliancecable.net:
Cool.

=====
From glenn@mccarters.net:
I had high expectations, but I became confused right from the very start.  "A
day is as a thousand years"?  So the one day-night cycle shown means the
mountains moved in only a millennia or two?  Then came something that looked
like a city, but was only a bit larger than the surrounding pine trees.  I
really like the way you transitioned between two different terrains, but the
moving glacier looks like a cheap B-movie effect.  Good concept.
=====
From irtc_mail@yahoo.co.uk:

The timescale ought to be millions of years rather than one thousand.
The city looks like a city-on-toast. The base of the city could have
been hidden behind some strategically placed hills. There is no
atmosphere and distant objects look not much further away than the
tree in the forground. I think a height field which is scaled up and
down for the land movements will speed up the slow rendering times.

Generating the electricity for 1400 hours rendering must have burned up
more fossil fuels and created more pollution than all the entries
in all previous rounds combined.



=====
From file:
Interesting...


=====
From r@adsl-65-64-194-217.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net:
Notable for textures, modelling, originality, lighting, composition


=====
From r@dsl-200-67-236-202.prodigy.net.mx:
Notable for originality