6
votes

Movie Review: 2012

posted November 14, 2009 - 6:01am
| More
Movie Review: 2012

2012_01.jpg

Image copyright © Sony Pictures 2009

Hey, what do you say, let's take a look at the career of Roland Emmerich! And when I take this look at this German director's filmography, I realize I've followed him almost from the beginning. Okay, "followed quot; is an exaggeration - Emmerich isn't a director you follow, but one who's movies you see whether you want it or not.
    I remember when I rented the direct-to-video flick MOON 44, starring Michael Paré. The year was 1990 and I remember it had a few impressive scenes and visuals for being a little B-movie. Before that one, Emmerich had made a couple of even smaller movies, of which GHOST CHASE was one.
    In 1992, Emmerich had Mighty Dolph Lundgren and Jean-Claude Van Damme slugging it out in UNIVERSAL SOLDIER; one of the best movies ever made.* STARGATE got a lot of attention because its state of the art CGI effects, but the movie was stupid - and so are the TV shows I've tried watching without getting hooked.
    INDEPENDENCE DAY is also stupid, but I like it anyway; all the flag waving is pretty fun and makes me envy proud Americans. I hardly remember anything of GODZILLA, since I thought it was rotten and insulted the original Japanese monster, THE PATRIOT wasn't very good (but contained a soldier getting his head blown off with a cannon ball), THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW featured a few mighty scenes, but was otherwise stupid and boring, and the latest epic from Herr Emmerich was 10,000 BC, a totally worthless turd of a movie.
    Here we have 2012, which is marketed as the Disaster Movie of Disaster Movies. And in a way, that's what it is.
    EARTHQUAKE, THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE, THE THE TOWERING INFERNO; gigantic movies sporting lots of super star celebrities from all over the entertainment industry, getting burned, crushed, drowned, you name it. In 2012 there aren't any superstars, but a bunch of more or less decent actors.
    A scientist discovers the world is coming to its end in 2012 according to an old Maya calendar. The leaders of the world come up with a plan to save parts of Earth's population (the rich ones), animal life and Mona Lisa. John Cusack, an actor I like, is a divorced and failed author who's driving his kids in a limousine when catastrophe strikes. Woody Harrelson is a nutcase in the woods who's discovered all of the conspirations. Danny Glover, who's a pretty crappy actor (when he's not Roger Murtaugh), is the high-flown president of the U.S.A. who likes to pray and talk about religion. Oliver Platt is a slimy bigwig. And they all want to be aboard one of the arks that are secretly being built.
    Let's begin with the negative aspects: 2012 is way too long, 158 minutes. It gets draggy and a little boring when things aren't blowing up or falling apart. And the characters aren't very fun and engaging, I can't say I cared about them.
    But then we have the catastrophes, and what can I say, people, but Holy Shit! I was just staring with my mouth wide open. Whoa! This sure is powerful. Skyscrapers fall over around the little plane our heroes are flying, giant waves swallow cities, building slide into the underground - and it got even better seeing all this i a giant theatre with a giant screen, which I did.
    I was especially impressed by the scenes with the arks i the final part, they give the movie an air of old science fiction. I loved stuff like this as a little kid: secret installations in mountains, incredibly big ships, thousands of people in crowds and who sometimes fall down chasms. And: helicopters carrying African animals hanging from harnesses.
    What's also positive are the female leads Amanda Peet and Thandy Newton, they aren't exactly ugly. Come on, I'm a guy, what did you expect me to write? But the biggest surprise of the movie is that Zlatko Buric participates. Zlatko who? The Danish-Croatian from Nicolas Winding Refn's PUSHER! 

According to the IMDb, 2012 was shot on 35mm and some other formats, but I find several scenes, especially near the end, a little irritating, since they get too cold and digital, and therefore cheap looking.

*No, it's not one of the best movies ever made, but I love this great actioner! One of the best of its kind.
 

2012_14.jpg


Image copyright © Sony Pictures 2009



Comments

Well,

this one was beaten by the mockbuster company The Asylum, who put out 2012: SUPERNOVA a while ago...

OOKABALLAKONGA!

Interesting...

I wonder how many '2012' type movies are going to be made before that actual date? Great review once again!  Thank you.

A Selection of Wdzzz's Recent Articles

The other year...

...some colleagues and I discussed writing a book about the future that's already been, ie. futuristic movies taking place in a distant future that was years ago. There are lots of them, from the obvious ones like 1984 and SPACE:1999, to ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and DEMOLITION MAN. Not to mention THINGS TO COME.

OOKABALLAKONGA!

3 years before

I find it interesting that they would release a movie 3 years before the actual date. I guess it is like the new millinium. When the date passes and nothing happens, you can't make a movie about it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You can use BBCode tags in the text. URLs will automatically be converted to links.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <br> <b> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <span> <object> <param> <embed> <table> <tr> <td> <div>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

Join Xomba Today

Do you like to write? Would you like to make a little extra money on the side? These people do. Join the Xomba community today.
Become a Member