SCI FI MEMBERSHIP

Login Register
SCI FI - THE SCI FI AUSTRALIA BLOG

SCI FI PI

2012: Apocalpyse - The Ride!



Starring John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Thandie Newton, Oliver Platt, Woody Harrelson, Danny Glover

Director Roland Emmerich
Released November 12
Rated M





The history of end of the world movies (EOW) is not littered with human drama - it's littered with human corpses. It seems that anyone expecting to get some kind of performance out of one of these things is looking only for disappointment. There are many reasons, to be sure, but for the most part (at the moment) it's because not that many people make 'end of the world' movies on a scale that warrants mass attention. Name anyone, off the top of your head, that you think of for these deluxo destructo movies outside of Roland Emmerich and Michael Bay.

Long list, huh? We've seen what these guys do. Do you really go into a Michael Bay movie NOT expecting giant Decepticon balls?





So, first up for the 'hate 2012 club'. Quit whinin'. To complain about the lack of scientific accuracy or deep interpersonal drama in an EOW is like complaining about the lack of fibre in ice cream. The lack of maturity in children. The lack of story progression in a roller coaster ride. These movies, when given the five star review, should effectively be judged only out of three stars, as we all know, this is as good as they're ever going to get.

So, is 2012 a three star movie? Yes it is. It's ridiculousness works as part of its charms, not against it, and if you just laid back, accepted it rather than fighting it, it would all be over much quicker and wouldn't hurt half so bad.





Stop being mean to Roland and Michael. They have feelings too. They want to make a good movie that everyone will enjoy. Just because you think you know how humans 'behave' or how gravity 'works' doesn't make you some expert on movie making. If only you could somehow replace your brain with that of a ten year old who is seeing something like this for the very first time, then you'd be happy.

But, failing that, you'll just have to accept that there is a balancing act in all these movies. To whit: do the giant explosions/destruction/mass death in all their glory beat out the poorly sketched characters/howling coincidences/unlikely scenarios that drive the story along.

Usually it's a see saw battle that's awarded on points after the dust has settled.





On this one, points have been given to explosions and co. Aeroplanes flying under the crust of the earth as buildings collapse on top and around it are worth any amount of John Cusack's eyeliner. An entire character's preposterous existence (Woody Harrelson) based seemingly only on a marketing idea can be made up for the delightful magnitude of his demise as the Grand Canyon changes from an innie to an outie in the most emphatic way. The list goes on, but rather than create a list of spoilers where cool stuff happens and literally billions of people die, we can say only this. See it on the big screen. Share the laughter with your fellow humans. Share the awe as aircraft carriers get dumped on top of Washington, DC. See how humans might even attempt to save themselves given a true end of the earth scenario. Don't let the fiddling mix ups and slips in logic destroy the experience for you. This film isn't a delicate gossamer balloon that can be deflated by a single pin prick. It's a World War II bomber, safely making it home after flying for miles on one and a half engines and no tailplane to speak of.






The director of Deep Impact? Mimi Leder. The Core? Jon Amiel. Knowing? Alex Proyas. Even those Irwin Allen 'classics' like Towering Inferno and Earthquake were considered clunkers in their day. Of course, one day, cinema goers will sit back and enjoy a ginormous 3D IMAX final cataclysm movie that will satisfy all and scoop the Oscars. One day. Perhaps the Day After Tomorrow. It may possibly be released on Independence Day.

But not today.













HAVE YOUR SAY.


  • madcatjo
    madcatjo 10 months ago

    "The history of end of the world movies (EOW) is not littered with human drama - it's littered with human corpses." If only the same could be said about Stargate Universe...

  • madcatjo
    madcatjo 10 months ago

    Sorry.....but I'm "still not likin' it"...

  • Orez Fokram
    Orez Fokram 10 months ago

    I think the EOW movies have fallen into the same trap that George Lucas did with the new Star Wars Prequels'..... He wanted to to get the next young generation of youth tied into the Star Wars universe, but forgotten that his strongest fan base were from the generation that watched Star Wars: A New Hope back in 1977, & the decade that followed... Same with the latest series of EOW movies. They assume you have to be 10 years old to enjoy these Disaster movies.

    But their is a difference with the young generation of today: they are more savvy now then, say, in the 60's, 70's or even the 80's... Yes, you can enjoy the special effects of cities sinking, or Super Volcanos' going off, but trying to be too incredulous in the story line (or the situations of the main characters surviving every situation by the skin of their teeth), will put off even the most gullible 10 year old from the movies today.

    Sadly, it will slowly drive people away from expecting anything good in future disaster movies, & eventually from going to see the next one.....

  • karl
    karl 9 months ago

    its good ;)

  • Brett
    Brett 9 months ago

    Anyone who goes into one of these movies expecting any major story will always be sadly disappointed. They are always special affects driven and have a minimal plot line. I personally like the fact that you can escape for 2 hours and leave thinking "well at least my life isn't as bad as that movie", 2012 isn't a bad movie and the special effects are some of the best I have seen in a long time, apart from Terminator: Salvation.

  • Avatar
    SHARE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW