Like a super-sized version of his earlier film The Day After Tomorrow, Roland Emmerich’s 2012th epic disaster movie to date (give or take) is spectacularly loud, laughably ludicrous and insanely entertaining for all the wrong reasons. The phrase ‘so bad it’s good’ just doesn’t quite cut it; 2012 is a full-blown disaster both on and off the screen, which is exactly what makes it so much fun.
This time round, Emmerich has kindly provided us with two years notice before the apocalypse. Apparently though, if we’d have listened to the Mayans, we’d have known about it centuries ago. Their calendar ends on December 21st 2012, which turns out to be the very date US scientist Adrian Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor) believes the Earth will expire. There’s some scientific mumbo jumbo to support his claim – something to do with solar eruptions destabilising the crust of the Earth – but don’t read into it too much. All you need to know is that when the dialogue goes something like this….
Scientist: Sir, I think you better look at this.
Chief of Staff: Oh….my…God….
Get me the President!
…shits about to hit the fan. Emmerich style.
Caught smack-bang in the middle of the impending apocalypse — along with six billion other people that don’t matter — is Jackson Curtis (John Cusack), a struggling writer who promised his ex-wife Kate (Amanda Peet) to take their two kids (Liam James & Lily Morgan) camping in Yellowstone National Park. The park, however, has been seized by the US military, who according to a crazed prophet Charlie (Woody Harrelson), are secretly setting in motion a contingency plan for the super-elite (and super-rich) to survive judgment day. It’s only after cracks the size of the Grand Canyon start devouring much of the world that Curtis begins to believe Charlie, and for the next two hours, attempts to outrun the apocalypse with his family and a bunch of hilariously caricaturised Russians (don’t ask).
|
|
Essentially, 2012 is one gigantic spoof of the entire disaster genre: Titanic, Deep Impact, Volcano, Armageddon, Dante’s Peak, Noah’s Ark, The Core, Poseidon… the gang’s all here. It succeeds because unlike the erratically self-serious Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, 2012 knows it’s stupid. It embraces stupid like it were a long lost son. As millions upon millions of people are engulfed by tidal waves, struck by debris or incinerated in pits of molten lava, I challenge you not to laugh at the sheer excess and absurdity of it all. Take, for example, one hilarious scene where a light aircraft is dodging falling skyscrapers as the plates of the Earth start to subside, and suddenly a subway train launches out the side of the Earth’s crust, almost hitting their plane. It’s comedy gold!
Of course, stupidity comes at a price; what little plot there is shamelessly held together by clichés and ludicrous ‘right-place right-time’ conveniences. Then there’s also the problem of character development, which understandably doesn’t get much of a chance to occur between running from earthquakes and volcanic fireballs. Cusack and Ejiofor are likeable enough as the joint protagonists, the former spending most of his time in front of a green screen pretending to be terrified, the later prancing about the White House trying to save humanity. Elsewhere, Danny Glover horribly hams it up as the US President, while Woody Harrelson gets away with exaggerating his conspiracy-nut character because he’s, well, completely bonkers.
Woody Harrelson in 2012 |
For what 2012 lacks in brains, it sure as hell makes up for in brawn. The visual effects are utterly jaw dropping, created by a whole range of companies including the renowned Digital Domain (Titanic, Benjamin Button) and Double Negative (The Dark Knight, Hellboy 2: The Golden Army). Rather than an enlisting an A-list cast, it’s clear that most of the film’s (rumoured) $200 million budget went into making some of the best destruction porn ever created. The stunning water animation alone is worth the price of admission.
But with the film’s bloated runtime of 158 minutes, it’s a destruction overload. To pass the time, Emmerich recycles the same sequences over and over again. First, there’s the old ‘airfield-is-collapsing-beneath-us-so-hurry-the-fu*k-up-and-take-off’ scene. We get that one no less than 3 times. Then there’s the ‘iconic-building-is-collapsing-on-hopeless-masses’ scene. That’s obligated to occur at least once per minute. Lastly, and most frustratingly, there’s the ‘I-just-called-to-say-I-love-you-before-we-all-die’ scene. It’s hard to repeatedly shed a tear when every single character in the film makes this same phone call, and it’s when Emmerich attempts poignancy (and fails miserably) that the film starts to bore.
More often than not, however, 2012 is a riotous action-extravaganza that knows how to have a good time. Whether it was intentional or not, this is hands down the best comedy of the year.
Follow the author Anders Wotzke on Twitter.








![Boy [2010] (Review)](http://cutprintreview.com/wp-content/uploads/boy-01-e1283155907645-150x150.jpg)








View Comments
Hahaha, that's great! Sounds almost as good as black sheep!
I would like to go see it for the visual effects though, they sound pretty awesome
Posted on November 12th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Well, I basically said EVERYTHING this reviewer said last night during the car ride home, except I was actually brought to rage by the pathetically cliche character/story development. Shouldn't we know when we are attending a comedic genre spoof?
In the end, I guess it was my fault; I didn't realize I was going to see the same director from “The Day After Tomorrow.” If I had, I either would have abstained all together, or I would have gone strapped with my “so bad it's funny” sensibilities. Conversely, I rolled in ($25 bag of popcorn and all) in hopes of seeing an epic STORY. I thought this concept had a lot of potential; a cryptic story about the Apocalypse written in the style of say Flash Forward or Lost would have been worth seeing. I mean, WHY ELSE would they make a 160+ minute movie? In my mind, over 2 1/2 hours is supposed to = epic. Again, just another assumption I made based on the “potential” I saw in this story.
Although, after the first “escape scene,” I guess I did get my humor about me. I mean, how can you not laugh when everyone in a city is killed except for the 40 year old writer/protagonist who is wheeling his family around in a limo amidst falling skyscrapers and highways? While there were PLENTY of obvious moments of ridiculousness, my favorite part was a little less apparent. What was it? The requisite explanation of the Mayan theory! Oh boy was that precious! Instead of breaking it down in a sophisticated, intellectual type of way, I'm sure the writers sat down and had the following conversation:
Writer 1: Ok, how do we get the generally stupid American public to understand this?
Writer 2: How about a cartoon?
Writer 1: YES! Let's have Woody Harrelson narrate a minute-long cartoon. Let's just make sure we have 3rd grade level illustrations so we don't confuse any of our idiot American patrons!
Fittingly, I did feel like a stupid American after shelling out my hard-earned money based on a trailer that promised nothing but special effects, yet somehow I convinced myself that a mainstream, widely advertised feature film would offer us SOMETHING in the way of substance.
Boy was I wrong…
Posted on November 23rd, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Thanks for the comment Matt!
The film will certainly divide those looking for a serious take on the end of the world and those looking for a bit of destruction porn. It is a mistake that the film is marketed so seriously, and I can see why you were disappointed by that. It's a similar scenario to Independence Day; it was only enjoyable if you were prepared for a bit of mindless fun, not some cerebral thriller. I went into 2012 knowing Emmerich's previous works, and thus was prepared for a wave of stupid.
I don't think it's just to say Americans are stupid, i think mindless popcorn entertainment has its place in society. It's a great form of escapism, so long as its enjoyable. And i think this was exactly that.
Posted on November 23rd, 2009 at 3:00 pm
I really enjoy this disaster movie. It's story looks interesting and give confusion whether the story in this movie could happen soon in the reality.
Posted on November 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
I really enjoy this disaster movie. It's story looks interesting and give confusion whether the story in this movie could happen soon in the reality.
Posted on November 26th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
I really enjoy this disaster movie. It's story looks interesting and give confusion whether the story in this movie could happen soon in the reality.
Posted on November 26th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
I really enjoy this disaster movie. It's story looks interesting and give confusion whether the story in this movie could happen soon in the reality.
Posted on November 26th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
2012 .. havent even seen it… the trailor made me sick .. it looks like typical shock value cgi yanky rubbish with 0 story line ..
Posted on March 23rd, 2010 at 4:21 pm
I have watched this movie and believe me it one of the best movie I have ever seen in my life. The special effects in this movie are really worth seeing.
http://www.riyawrinklefree.com/
Posted on August 14th, 2010 at 11:06 am
[...] August 16, 2010 Glynn Morgan commented on: Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (Review) – August 15, 2010 emeritaschlitz commented on: 2012 (Review) – August 14, 2010 Anders commented on: Scott Pilgrim vs. The World [...]
Posted on August 20th, 2010 at 12:33 pm
Add A Comment