Yet another in the long line of disaster movies in the vein of
Deep Impact and
The Day After Tomorrow. 2012 centers around the idea that the world as we know it will end in 2012, as predicted by the ancient Mayans.
The first thing I'm going to nitpick is the fact that the movie's reference to the infamous Mesoamerican Long Count Calendar date is so slight, that they may as well have named the movie
Solar Flare Survival or
The Day the Poles Shifted or
Microwave: Earth! (okay fine, those titles aren't as catchy but you know what I'm getting at). The second thing (and this is for disaster movies in general, really) is that this movie depicts the Vatican, the Christ the Redeemer Statue in Brazil, and a Buddhist temple being destroyed. In the spirit of equality, I would like to see a disaster movie where other major religious sites are wrecked, like the Meenakshi Temple or something.
The visual and sound effects are great. The CG is so good in fact, that it feels like the writers just sat down and said "You know what, that wave effect looks awesome. Let's not think of a coherent storyline anymore - let's just build one around the effects!". However, my husband thinks that it failed to reach the "epic" effect found in the best disaster movies, because it felt too digital, and had a 'made for TV movie' effect. "Parang video cam yun ginamit," he commented. Turns out they
did use a video camera instead of a film camera (The Panasonic Genesis HD Camera or something). I didn't notice until he pointed it out, so normal moviegoers probably won't notice either (production and post-prod people might though).
Oh yes, the story. Well... hm. I wasn't expecting a complex or thought-provoking story, and like I said, it's a movie that basically showcases the wonders of CG. The most meaningful thing I can say is that the story lacked heart. As the world was falling apart, I wanted to feel something for the characters - empathy, affection, anger, pity, anything. But I couldn't because the characters:
1. Were two-dimensional/stereotypical
2. Didn't get enough screen time for me to form a bond with them, or
3. Felt too deus ex machina-ish (like Woody Harrelson's character).
It's a shame about #2, because the movie was pretty long. I could talk more about the movie's flaws, but ultimately, I admit that 2012 was an entertaining movie. I didn't have to think much, and I like seeing roads getting ripped apart and buildings crashing.
Michellan Rating for 2012:
Watch it in the cinema once, with friends. Don't bother with the DVD unless you have a kickass home theater where you can relive the end of the world on Blu-Ray.
- Michelle
