2012 Review
CONTAINS SPOILERS
Cross-posted from Facebook
Roland Emmerich really did something wonderful with this film, and I bet you don't even know what it was. I didn't at first, until I really started thinking about it.
Disaster films have been around as long as movies have; with the human nature of morbid curiosity, it just makes sense that we'd base 'entertainment' off of watching mass destruction. Roland Emmerich is no stranger to this genre, and with The Day After Tomorrow we saw him step away from some of the conventional ideas on disaster movies. I remember him (either in an interview or commentary) talking about TDAT and how most disaster movies end with the main characters picking up the pieces from the sad little corner of their toppled life, and how he wanted to do something on a more global scale, where there would be no pieces to pick up.
Massive Global Disaster. We know from the outset that the movie will be going through a massive population decline and the world's not going to look quite like what we're used to seeing. There goes Main Street ... as well as the rest of the state; don't bother worrying about the stove. Don't worry about sending your neighbours a Christmas Card, they're probably dead. You would be, too, unless you're a main character (more on that, later).
Now, there's always scientific aspect to global disaster movies, and part of that is to showcase the imperfect art of scientific prediction. The timeline always gets cut; "Yes, sir, it's what we predicted would happen, but it's happening 10 times faster." [insert worried look here]
THIS is where 2012 gets interesting, but hold on a moment, I have to connect this with another thought;
Another staple of disaster movies is the Last-Minute Getaway. Dante's Peak: Pierce Brosnan trying to outrun a pyroclastic cloud in a tireless pickup truck, TDAT: everyone racing to a fire source before the Big Freeze. 2012 .... were you keeping count?
What makes 2012 a great movie is that it pokes fun at its own genre. For one, the scientists are getting their asses handed to them on the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates (not only does the timeline get cut, it goes completely to shit. TDAT: "That's in months?" "No, weeks." 2012; "OMFG WE HAVE TWO DAYS! O.O", while there are no less than THREE last minute, white knuckle escapes (each progressively bigger and more badass than the last). Over the top, you say?
Intentionally so, say I.
And that, I feel, is what makes this movie stand out to me. It was less about 'Mayans and the End of the World' and more about LOOK AT ALL THE SHIT WE GET TO BLOW UP AND DESTROY!!!!' It's like Godzilla meets Coruscant, and it works. If we don't take is as a 'warning to humanity/serious thinker movie', it works.
Roland Emmerich wants us to enjoy this movie for the implausibility that this genre has to offer. We don't go see disaster movies for an accurate rendition of a plausible scientific theory put to screen, we go for the explosions and the rumbles and the sight of A WHOLE FUCKING TECTONIC PLATE BREAKING UP INTO LITTLE CRUMBLY PIECES OMG SO AWESOME AOAMSEAHAGRHAG
When we forget the basis of an entire genre, we are really just admitting how pompous and prentious we can be. Thank you, Emmerich, for this absolutely wonderful example of what the genre's supposed to be.
I'll probably post again in the next couple days about character development and plot content, as I have some insights on that.
Tonight was all about the AWESOME. :)
Cross-posted from Facebook
Roland Emmerich really did something wonderful with this film, and I bet you don't even know what it was. I didn't at first, until I really started thinking about it.
Disaster films have been around as long as movies have; with the human nature of morbid curiosity, it just makes sense that we'd base 'entertainment' off of watching mass destruction. Roland Emmerich is no stranger to this genre, and with The Day After Tomorrow we saw him step away from some of the conventional ideas on disaster movies. I remember him (either in an interview or commentary) talking about TDAT and how most disaster movies end with the main characters picking up the pieces from the sad little corner of their toppled life, and how he wanted to do something on a more global scale, where there would be no pieces to pick up.
Massive Global Disaster. We know from the outset that the movie will be going through a massive population decline and the world's not going to look quite like what we're used to seeing. There goes Main Street ... as well as the rest of the state; don't bother worrying about the stove. Don't worry about sending your neighbours a Christmas Card, they're probably dead. You would be, too, unless you're a main character (more on that, later).
Now, there's always scientific aspect to global disaster movies, and part of that is to showcase the imperfect art of scientific prediction. The timeline always gets cut; "Yes, sir, it's what we predicted would happen, but it's happening 10 times faster." [insert worried look here]
THIS is where 2012 gets interesting, but hold on a moment, I have to connect this with another thought;
Another staple of disaster movies is the Last-Minute Getaway. Dante's Peak: Pierce Brosnan trying to outrun a pyroclastic cloud in a tireless pickup truck, TDAT: everyone racing to a fire source before the Big Freeze. 2012 .... were you keeping count?
What makes 2012 a great movie is that it pokes fun at its own genre. For one, the scientists are getting their asses handed to them on the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates (not only does the timeline get cut, it goes completely to shit. TDAT: "That's in months?" "No, weeks." 2012; "OMFG WE HAVE TWO DAYS! O.O", while there are no less than THREE last minute, white knuckle escapes (each progressively bigger and more badass than the last). Over the top, you say?
Intentionally so, say I.
And that, I feel, is what makes this movie stand out to me. It was less about 'Mayans and the End of the World' and more about LOOK AT ALL THE SHIT WE GET TO BLOW UP AND DESTROY!!!!' It's like Godzilla meets Coruscant, and it works. If we don't take is as a 'warning to humanity/serious thinker movie', it works.
Roland Emmerich wants us to enjoy this movie for the implausibility that this genre has to offer. We don't go see disaster movies for an accurate rendition of a plausible scientific theory put to screen, we go for the explosions and the rumbles and the sight of A WHOLE FUCKING TECTONIC PLATE BREAKING UP INTO LITTLE CRUMBLY PIECES OMG SO AWESOME AOAMSEAHAGRHAG
When we forget the basis of an entire genre, we are really just admitting how pompous and prentious we can be. Thank you, Emmerich, for this absolutely wonderful example of what the genre's supposed to be.
I'll probably post again in the next couple days about character development and plot content, as I have some insights on that.
Tonight was all about the AWESOME. :)