4/5 Interesting enough
  by Blueman (Bethesda, MD)
If you haven't seen "Life After People," as I have, then you'll surely appreciate this program more than I did. But I did not find it better than "Life After People." You get a slightly different perspective, of course, but there is plenty of general overlap. I felt this program was a bit repetitive in places and seemed to dwell on some favorite matters, like the Eiffel Tower. I got plenty tired of seeing the Eiffel Tower topple. Perhaps because I saw this on DVD, I was jarred by some of the transitions, which seemed more suited to TV. But the narrative and tone of "Life After People" seemed more effective to me than in this program.

4/5 Truth is scarier than fiction
  by D. Navrozidis
These days, with so many people on the planet, there have been many a day when I thought that there were simply too many of us, and how grand it would be if a good many simply disappeared into thin air. However, after viewing National Geographic's "Aftermath - Population Zero", I realized just how devastating, and deadly, matters would quickly turn out there should the on-going maintenance of key places on the planet cease even a short period of time.

Intentionally or not, humans have set-up shop here on this planet in such a way that should a large proportion of us suddenly disappear due to some unforeseen event the demise of the remaining survivors would be sudden and swift.

Once this dvd starts it will have your attention and you will learn a great deal about things that you had not even considered before. Unless you're one of those who believes that ignorance is bliss, the small price you pay for owning this dvd is worth the knowledge and insight it offers in return.

4/5 Thought-provoking
  by M (I wait behind the wall, gnawing away at your reality)
I saw this not long after watching Life After People. Which one is better? It's hard to say, since LOP concentrated a lot on buildings and such, while this one concentrated a lot more on animals.

Instead of saying one is better than the other, watching the two together makes for a good overall experience, why compare? Both documentaries had things in them that the other one was lacking in (which makes sense since the History Channel would be more knowledgeable about buildings and people's history while National Geographic would be more knowledgeable about nature and animals) The one thing that made me really sad was not the demise of buildings or historical artifacts, but the demise of animals, especially household pets and other kept animals who would be doomed to die if we were all to disappear (such as the ones in apartment buildings or cages)

This documentary was fascinating and several of its projections were different than LAP (this DVD for example, predicts that buildings and the Hoover Dam would be more short-lived than the projections in LAP) but its insights on animals and Nature are not to be missed.

5/5 What happens if we disappeared?
  by Michael Valdivielso (Alexandria, VA)
Well, after the atomic plants blow up and many of the pets die off and the cars stop running, things start to get wild. Really wild. Trees take over, cities become cooler, the oceans start to fill up with fish. National Geographic really hooked me, with great effects, real animals like tigers running about, and just a really cool ride. But it also shows us that, with a little more work on our part, we may be able to correct some of the damage we've done to our own planet.
The more we understand about how the Earth works the more we can do to help it. Maybe clean up the oceans, the atmosphere and the land without having to die off first. Give a hoot.


4/5 Surprising results of our demise
  by Lou Grantt (California Desert, USA)
My writing partner and I wrote a scifi novel about life in a climate-induced, post-apocalyptic city in the U.S. Reality Crash Despite our exhaustive research, there are still some things detailed in this documentary that we hadn't considered. Aftermath was definitely eye-opening. And with good production values. Naturally, some things had to be CGI, but there were so many shots with real animals, lending a stark reality to the whole thing. I thought it was quite good, and certainly thought-provoking.