Film Review
2012
Matthew Hadley
Issue date: 11/17/09 Section: Arts & Entertainment
Director Roland Emmerich loves chase scenes. His protagonists are always forced to outrun something.
Think about it: in Independence Day, it was aliens and outrunning the explosions they were creating; in Godzilla, it was outrunning a giant lizard; in The Day After Tomorrow, it was the cold (remember that scene? Yeah, it was bullshit); with 2012, it's … well, everything - the ground collapsing, buildings falling, lava spraying, oceans intruding.
Come to think of it, Emmerich loves the apocalypse.
2012 gives you exactly what you expect from the director, the end of the world, compacted (or drawn out, if you're watching it) to nearly three hours.
The film begins in the present year, 2009, where there is reason to believe the Earth's crust is expanding and will eventually cause the end of the world in … wait for it … 2012.
The problem with this film, like most films of such grandeur, is its narrow focus. The years leading up to 2012 take up about 10 minutes of the film. The first visual signs of the apocalypse begin about the same length in, and 20 minutes later, all hell has broken loose.
Writer Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) attempts to take his kids on a camping trip, where they stumble into an area guarded by the American government. Here, Cusack learns of the impending apocalypse from a crazy guy in the forest, Charlie Frost (Woody Harrelson). Shortly after, he is forced to save his children, his ex-wife and her new husband in a race against the collapse of California. Then they have to fly and outrun an ash explosion in Yellowstone National Park. Then they have to outrun … well, you get the point.
En route to where "ships" were designed to save government officials and those rich enough to afford tickets, Curtis and family pick up some wealthy Russian accomplices, and head to China - where the ships are located. It's all frustratingly overdramatic from this point on, provided you didn't find this in the first 15 minutes.
As with any film of this capacity, whatever can go wrong does just that, if only to create more "suspense" (or frustration, cliché, predictability, annoyance - any of these words could fit that spot). By this point in the film though, viewers have been watching for two hours and it's just redundant.
Think about it: in Independence Day, it was aliens and outrunning the explosions they were creating; in Godzilla, it was outrunning a giant lizard; in The Day After Tomorrow, it was the cold (remember that scene? Yeah, it was bullshit); with 2012, it's … well, everything - the ground collapsing, buildings falling, lava spraying, oceans intruding.
Come to think of it, Emmerich loves the apocalypse.
2012 gives you exactly what you expect from the director, the end of the world, compacted (or drawn out, if you're watching it) to nearly three hours.
The film begins in the present year, 2009, where there is reason to believe the Earth's crust is expanding and will eventually cause the end of the world in … wait for it … 2012.
The problem with this film, like most films of such grandeur, is its narrow focus. The years leading up to 2012 take up about 10 minutes of the film. The first visual signs of the apocalypse begin about the same length in, and 20 minutes later, all hell has broken loose.
Writer Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) attempts to take his kids on a camping trip, where they stumble into an area guarded by the American government. Here, Cusack learns of the impending apocalypse from a crazy guy in the forest, Charlie Frost (Woody Harrelson). Shortly after, he is forced to save his children, his ex-wife and her new husband in a race against the collapse of California. Then they have to fly and outrun an ash explosion in Yellowstone National Park. Then they have to outrun … well, you get the point.
En route to where "ships" were designed to save government officials and those rich enough to afford tickets, Curtis and family pick up some wealthy Russian accomplices, and head to China - where the ships are located. It's all frustratingly overdramatic from this point on, provided you didn't find this in the first 15 minutes.
As with any film of this capacity, whatever can go wrong does just that, if only to create more "suspense" (or frustration, cliché, predictability, annoyance - any of these words could fit that spot). By this point in the film though, viewers have been watching for two hours and it's just redundant.
Be the first to comment on this story