Page 1 of 1

2012 (spoilers)

Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:55 am
by finn
Yesterday a girl in the office spoke about this movie when I said I was going to go see it and she described it (from the preview she'd seen) as the Day after, the Day after Tomorrow. That is pretty close in a number of ways with maybe a veneer of Deep Impact overlaying it. Nonetheless it was a good ride on the roller coaster despite an average plot with no real depth, some questionable science and the sub genre of survival-of-the-dumbest being given the usual cursory nod. Maybe that's a bit harsh as I did enjoy it especially the special effects which were immense and have to be seen on the big screen with the big sound.

I thought it would have more of a subtext of Mayan myth married with the various (supposed) beliefs of others who have predicted this date....more of mix of The Day After Tomorrow and Da Vinci Code. However that was downplayed and the action starts pretty close to the start of the movie and just keeps going.

The acting is average with Woody Harrelson playing the usual disturbed creature being the stand out for me; Danny Glover was his usual likeable self as president and I was waiting for the "too old for this shit" line from the White House Lawn. John Cusack went from good to awful too many times to be able to really give him the nod with the children left to cement the character relationships. Chitwetel Ejiofor and Oliver PLatt get a lot of screen time but both are two polarised as classic/romantic for me.
Spoiler
For me they should have been more ruthless with the survival of the species, that the Chinese do not double cross the Americans at the last minute is suspect as is the Platt characters allowing the president to stay behind alive to broadcast what was happening before everyone was locked down safely. Re-opening the arks was also a mistake which they get away with but what if they had not? In any real situation that was too great a risk and the survival of the species should have been more critical than the sugar sugar approach.
Emmerich has clearly remade TDAT in another way with another plot rationale, but I enjoyed TDAT so I guess I didn't mind. However I think when I see it again the list of similarities will keep growing with the fates of nearly all the character sets being the same and the outcomes and sequence of events just being turned up a couple of notches. Unlike TDAT there is no political subtext (that I can detect) but the lack of political scrutiny seems to have made it more possible to stretch the science from SF to Fantasy.

Overall I'd say go see it, its 2 1/2 hours of rush, big explosions (Yellowstone is the best explosion I've ever seen) catastrophic Old Testament events and the next generation of flooding CGI is well worth the money and time and outweights the frustrations of the plot.

Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:20 am
by Worm of Despite
Hmm...a stupid summer movie in November. <shrugs>

Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:14 am
by Cail
In the early '90s, Leonard Maltin called Alien3 the best-looking bad movie ever made. Roland Emmerich has made a career out of proving Leonard Maltin wrong. Independence Day, Godzilla, The Day After Tomorrow, and now 2012 are hands-down the worst big-budget films ever made. Michael Bay can breathe a sigh of relief, because 2012 makes Armageddon look like Hamlet.

If the film had simply been 3 hours of stuff getting destroyed, that would have been fantastic. Instead, we get a pastiche of every single disaster movie cliche.

Absolutely horrible, but the effects are worth seeing on a big screen.

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 4:37 am
by Rigel
Cail wrote:In the early '90s, Leonard Maltin called Alien3 the best-looking bad movie ever made.
This is the single most accurate statement one could make. I got talked into seeing this with some friends last night, and was surprised in two ways.

First, the movie is absolutely gorgeous. I'm severely tempted to buy it just to use as a screensaver ;)

Secondly, the plot is even worse than I was afraid of. In fact, it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen (though thankfully, they downplayed the 2012 stuff). If I ever do watch it again, it will be muted so the sound doesn't disturb my enjoyment of the visuals.

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:39 am
by Worm of Despite
Cail wrote:Michael Bay can breathe a sigh of relief, because 2012 makes Armageddon look like Hamlet.
That's like saying Hitler can breathe a sigh of relief because Stalin killed more people. :lol: :lol: