RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Movie Review

Movie Review: 2012 (2009)

Movie Review:  2012 (2009)

Directed By:  Roland Emmerich

MPAA Rating:  PG-13

Starring:  John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Thandie Newton, Chiwetel Ejiofor

IMDB Link:  2012

Movie Trailer:  Trailer

If you’re wondering (and you know you are) what a movie strictly built around the use of special effects looks like, look no further than 2012. It’s got a backstory that was clearly etched on a wet napkin during a drinking binge at the local Applebee’s after director Roland Emmerich discussed the idea of making some super-awesome computer effects depicting the destruction of civilization with his drinking buddies. (Run-on sentence much?)

Still reading?

Okay then, let’s get right to the crux of the story — the world is going to implode in upon itself in the year 2012. In a very incredible fashion too. That is, of course, if you believe those zany theorists who say the lining up of the planets and the lack of a Mayan calendar after December 2012 spells our doom. Assuming you do, the devastation is bad-ass.

Whatever that supercomputer that beat Kasperov in chess was made up of, it is one thousand-fold weaker than what was used to develop the action sequences in 2012. The CGI in this film is simply head scratchingly bewildering.

  • Hawaii is reduced to fiery embers due to lava spitting mega-volcanoes.
  • Los Angeles is reduced to rubble in thanks to magnificent earthquakes ripping massive rifts throughout the city.
  • The Eastern seaboard of the United States and a big chunk of Asia are swallowed up under the waves of enormous tsunamis.

The attention to detail of all this chaos is quite impressive. I took notice that the animators went through the trouble of showing expressions on peoples faces on a falling bridge fragment that was away from the camera’s focus.

Too bad the story couldn’t keep in stride with the computer graphics.

2012 is littered with characters with no redeeming qualities and a story that, at it’s heart, is a preposterously boring “love at all costs” tale. Anchoring it is John Cusack as Jackson Curtis one of those doom and gloom theorists that lost his family because of his beliefs. He gets the last laugh though when he comes to learn of an “ark project” slated to save the ultra powerful and rich. He races in a nick of time to save his ex-wife Kate (Amanda Peet) her new beau Gordon Silberman (Thomas McCarthy) and kids Noah (Liam James) and Lily (Morgan Lily).

And that’s basically it. Kate and Jackson predictably reconcile while the brood journeys from L.A. to some remote location in China that the world powers have decided was ground zero for the survival of all living land creatures on Earth. If I went further into the glaring holes of the story, told in part through characters Adrian Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a science advisor to the White House and Charlie Frost (Woody Harrelson), a bizarre conspiracy theorist, you’d lose further faith in the film.

As it stands 2012 is a movie with probably one of the strongest showings of computer graphics ever attempted. You’re probably better off checking for these scenes on YouTube, however, than attempting to sit through the pain associated with actually sitting through 158 minutes of tedium.


I rate this movie:
Movie Review: Four Shit Piles - Not Worth It!Movie Review: Four Shit Piles - Not Worth It!Movie Review: Four Shit Piles - Not Worth It!Movie Review: Four Shit Piles - Not Worth It!


About: General Disdain
I love long walks on the beach, candlelit dinners and I'm a sucker for women named Helga. What can I say -- I live for the finer things in life!

Thanks for visiting! If you'd like, why not use one of the buttons below to subscribe or bookmark us for future updates?
Subscribe Via RSS Feed Subscribe Via Email Twitter Bookmark
At the very least, cast your vote on our poll over there on the top right!

Trackback URL     Share This

Order DIRECTV Today for $29.99 a month

RSS Feed for This Post7 Comment(s)

  1. Braken posted a response on: November 30, 2009 | Reply

    2012 is so farfetched and stupid it can’t be anything other than a joke.

  2. Jack Courtney posted a response on: November 30, 2009 | Reply

    For some, this could be a very boring movie while others may find it very interesting since it will relate the end of the world. In addition, the movie will show how to value your own family.

  3. vitamine d posted a response on: December 1, 2009 | Reply

    Hello
    I have recently seen 2012 movie and I like it very much and it was interesting for me to watch it..Its full of special effects.You have given good review about a movie.

  4. Forbrugs lån posted a response on: December 4, 2009 | Reply

    2012 has a splendid computer graphic effects that has never seen ever before. The story line was not different from the previous end of the world movies like, The Day after Tomorrow and so on. Even though the movie portray the Noah Arc in terms of Modern and high technology available today.

  5. nintendo dsi r4 posted a response on: December 11, 2009 | Reply

    Hi,
    Do we really believe in some sort of “change” is going to take place in 2012 based on an ancient culture? In my opinion religion was formed to explain things that were unexplainable to ancient people. Why’d it rain? The rain god made it so. Why is the person acting crazy? He has a demon.

    What is my ponit?

    That if there is some “shift” in thinking it will go unnoticed by the masses. Most of us won’t realize it’s happening until we can look back and see the paradigm shift in retrospect. I believe nothing magical or alien will happen on that day. The same way nothing happened in the year 2000 when all computers were going to fail and the second coming of Christ was supposed to happen. Movie looks interesting though.

  6. Julie Simpson posted a response on: January 14, 2010 | Reply

    I’ve got to agree with the bad rating given but disagree with the 2012 being the “strongest showings of computer graphics ever attempted”.

    The CGI made me feel like I was watching a computer game; in particular the earthquake scenes with the limo and the one where Cusack tries to get onto the plane at the airstrip after finding the map. One word: TERRIBLE. Towards the end of the movie, CGI was actually pretty decent IMO…had a very Star Trek feel to it.

    The kill factor of the whole movie is that it didn’t touch the audience on an emotional level unlike Armageddon for example where even I shed a few tears. You could watch this if you have nothing else particularly better to do for 3 hours …or better yet you could re-watch the far better Armageddon, and save yourself an hour.

  7. parfums posted a response on: January 16, 2010 | Reply

    I did not like the movie anyways. I had seen the trailer on you tube and they looked wonderful. I had been waiting for this movie like many others since the last year(2008 Nov when I had first saw the trailer via Digg). But it is sad that Emmerich could not maintain that part… He ended up messing the whole thing - there were too many frontiers to be shown and he could do justice to none! Sad but the movie failed to live up to my expectations.

1 Trackback(s)

  1. From Xlibris Launches Podcast Marketing Service for Self Published … | Promotional Media Marketing Wisdom | Dec 6, 2009
 

Get Involved -- Post Your Opinion!

Please make comments relevant and meaningful to the review. Don't waste your time if you're only posting a one or two word comment looking for PR juice.

Deep Discount DVD

  • Subscribe & Bookmark

    Subscribe Via RSS Feed   Subscribe Via Email   Twitter Bookmark


    14 Users Are Currently Online
  • Sponsored Links

  • Grading Scale

    Movie is a massive heap of shit
    Stay Away

    Movie is a pile of shit
    Don't Bother

    Movie is shitty
    Seen Better

    Movie is getting shitty
    Not Bad

    Movie is not so shitty
    See It

[The Critical Critics   ©2005-2010]
Unauthorized reproduction can lead to excrutiatingly painful irritable bowel syndrome

Close
E-mail It