2012 (review)
End of the World: The E-Ticket
(for the multiorgasmic destructo porn)
(for the cheesy melodrama)
(unless you need a good laugh)
You know that bit in Independence Day, where Air Force One barely gets off the ground and away from Washington DC just as the fireball of the alien’s city-destroying megablast overtakes the plane? Roland Emmerich loves that bit with the last-second escape of the plane so much he uses it three times in 2012.
It’s kind of awesome, the film’s self-involvement. This isn’t really a movie: it’s more director/FX-mad wannabe supervillain Roland Emmerich calling out every other disaster film that has ever come before... including his own. Aliens blowing up the Empire State Builder? What piker came up with that? Big-ass cruise ship hitting an iceberg and sinking in the North Atlantic? Bah! Try topping this: The whole damn planet has struck the metaphoric iceberg and is going down by the head. And there is no Jack Dawson to save you.
Well, there is John Cusack, and he’s so cute he must be able to make everything all right. Right?
Disaster is the new black in 2012: everyone’s doing it! It’s all got something to do with solar flares and neutrinos: those little subatomic bastards usually leave us alone, but now they’ve mutated and they’re microwaving the Earth’s core. It’s the new global warming for 2012. Everybody’s into it! You won’t be able to escape it!
Emmerich wasn’t content to merely make the biggest disaster movie ever: he had to make every disaster movie ever. 2012 is like a late-night infomercial: “Sure, everyone loves a good plane crash! Everyone loves yer basic earthquake flick! But order now, and you’ll also get Destruction by Supervolcano, Tsunami Catastrophe, and California Sliding into the Pacific Just Like They Told Us Would Happen Someday!”
It’s called global crustal displacement, and it will ruin your whole afternoon.
I gotta tell it: It’s exhausting, this multiorgasmic destructo porn, but it is high-larious. I didn’t think the end of the world would be this funny. Billions are dead, civilization is over... call it Tectonic. But -- and here’s where the funny comes in -- preposterous coincidence will go on. Ridiculous dialogue will go on. Schmaltz will go on. Hyperbole will go on. And John Cusack will go on. Won’t he? *sniff*
Cuz look: the Earth’s crust may be disintegrating, but Cusack’s (Igor, War, Inc.) family is disintegrating, too, okay? His Amanda Peet (The X-Files: I Want to Believe, Martian Child) ex-wife is still ragging on him as Hawaii boils away beneath them! His moppet kids prefer Mom’s new boyfriend even as Las Vegas is getting snuffed out by a cloud of volcanic dust the size of Yellowstone Park. But it’ll all be worth it in the end if his seven-year-old daughter feels confident enough after the end of the world to stop wetting the bed.
For all this we can thank Emmerich, who didn’t just direct but cowrote the script with composer Harald Kloser -- yes, a composer of music; they also cowrote Emmerich’s breathtakingly dumb 10,000 B.C.. And they have invented a story that is sort of beautiful in its absurdity: it’s like something Ed Wood would have made if he had a budget. (In fact, SF writer Greg Bear should sue Emmerich and Sony. For this is basically his brilliant and chilling 1987 novel The Forge of God [Amazon U.S.] [Amazon U.K.] , with layers of cheese added and a too-funny nonsense explanation for the end of the world replacing his coolly terrifying, actually-science-fictional one.) They can take a wonderful actor such as Chiwetel Ejiofor (Redbelt, American Gangster) and force him, as a White House science advisor and the film’s nominal conscience, to say things like, “The director of the Louvre is not an enemy of humanity!” and “Our culture is our soul and that’s not dying tonight” with a straight face. (Which, to his credit, he does manage.) They can take a break for a moment of Buddhist wisdom, cuz that’s what an exploding Earth needs: fortune cookies. Adorable little girls with bunny slippers are dying -- dying! I tell you -- and the aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy is crashing into the White House, but as long as John Cusack gets some resolution on his relationship with his ex, it’s all good.
If Emmerich was, perhaps, trying to convince us that humanity is not worth saving, he’s making a pretty good job of it.
If he thinks his movie is getting rescued on the big space ark when we flee the dying planet, though, and transport human civilization to Mars or wherever, he’s got another thing coming.
viewed at a semipublic screening with an audience of critics and ordinary moviegoersrated PG-13 for intense disaster sequences and some language
official site | IMDB | trailer | more reviews at MRQE
)
)
comments
posted by MaSch (Thu Nov 12 09, 11:42AM)
If your talk about mutated neutrinos is not simply metaphoric, I *must* see that movie. The thought of sub-sub-atomic DNA which got changed by something sub-sub-SUB-atomic just puts a smile upon my face :-)
posted by MaSch (Thu Nov 12 09, 11:46AM)
Ooooh, our multiplex really knows how to present such a movie: It's showing at twelve minutes after 8 pm ... (Is this anywhere/everywhere else the case, too?)
posted by JT (Thu Nov 12 09, 11:51AM)
Do you mean "if you need a good laugh"?
posted by CB (Thu Nov 12 09, 11:58AM)
It's a continuation of the preceding line. Think of it like this: "Skip it... for the cheesy melodrama. Unless you need a good laugh (at cheesy melodrama), in which case... See it."
It lacks parallel structure, but emphasizes that it's talking about the melodrama cheese.
posted by Jason (Thu Nov 12 09, 12:16PM)
I just can't watch this. I get angry just thinking about it. Why can't my disaster porn be scientifically accurate?
posted by bzero (Thu Nov 12 09, 12:21PM)
*chuckle* This does seem like the disaster movie to end all disaster movies. I mean, really -- what are they going to do next time to top this? (Besides maybe a movie with character and plot...)
posted by MaSch (Thu Nov 12 09, 12:27PM)
How Terra-centric is was *that* comment, bzero?
Next disaster movie, our solar system will bite the stardust.
Then, our galaxy.
And, then the whole universe will crumble and be sucked into one giant big black hole ...
And probably come out in another parallel universe, as will be shown in the first minutes of the movie where the multiversum and all parallel universes and all other dimensions will explode. With a huge *bang* sound.
posted by MaryAnn (Thu Nov 12 09, 12:28PM)
Heh. No, it's not metaphoric.
And what CB said about if/unless...
posted by CB (Thu Nov 12 09, 1:59PM)
BTW I have to ask: Was the Large Hadron Collider mentioned/implicated?
posted by Ken (Thu Nov 12 09, 2:27PM)
*spoiler* (as if it matters)
Big-ass cruise ship hitting an iceberg and sinking in the North Atlantic? Bah! Try topping this: The whole damn planet has struck the metaphoric iceberg and is going down by the head. And there is no Jack Dawson to save you.
Of course, they don't bother to leave it as subtle as a metaphor, and send their big-ass ship towards something bigger than an iceberg.
posted by ceti_alpha (Thu Nov 12 09, 2:38PM)
Ack, don't give Roland any ideas! I have a feeling this will be the case, with a Alpha Centaurian everyman and his annoying family in two to escape the multiverse.
But, I do feel like watching this now...
posted by MaryAnn (Thu Nov 12 09, 4:07PM)
Nope, just some bad luck with solar flares, we're told.
posted by Drave (Thu Nov 12 09, 5:19PM)
I'm disappointed to learn that this movie has things like character and plot. For a little while, it was looking like Roland had finally gone for what he has been building to for his whole career, and just made a movie that is nothing but things being smashed for 150 minutes. Someday, he will make that movie. After that, he will be completely spent, and the rest of his career will be quiet, introspective, character-driven pieces with a cast of three and one shooting location.
posted by Bluejay (Thu Nov 12 09, 6:45PM)
Funny you should say that, Drave. Maybe "the rest of his career" starts now. Here's what he said to the Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/movies/08gray.html
As opposed to this movie not being a joke, I suppose...
posted by Bluejay (Thu Nov 12 09, 8:11PM)
Then again, maybe he's not done yet.
http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2009/11/12/exclusive-independence-day-sequel-to-be-two-movies-possibly-called-id4-ever/
posted by MaryAnn (Thu Nov 12 09, 10:03PM)
Well, but not *good* plot or character. Don't fret that it will ruin your enjoyment of the beautiful awfulness of this movie.
posted by zids (Thu Nov 12 09, 11:12PM)
Saw it. And I got what I expected.The movie isn't world-changing ;)- after all, we can't go to Emmerich disaster movies without expecting A LOT of cheese, can we? -, but I can't say it wasn't entertaining.
I have a problem with the phrase "multiorgasmic destructo porn" - though I thought I did have a few climaxes.
MaryAnn,
"If he thinks his movie is getting rescued on the big space ark when we flee the dying planet, though, and transport human civilization to Mars or wherever, he’s got another thing coming."
Sorry to be picky, but shouldn't the last words should be "another THINK coming"?
posted by D (Fri Nov 13 09, 12:06AM)
MaSch : "Next disaster movie, our solar system will bite the stardust.
Then, our galaxy.
And, then the whole universe will crumble and be sucked into one giant big black hole ...
And probably come out in another parallel universe, as will be shown in the first minutes of the movie where the multiversum and all parallel universes and all other dimensions will explode. With a huge *bang* sound."
Russel T. Davies, is that you?
posted by Paul (Fri Nov 13 09, 8:18AM)
I'd consider ending a lot of the world for "resolution" with Amanda Peet. I wouldn't, but I'd consider it. (ducks)
posted by Lawschool_Douchebag (Fri Nov 13 09, 9:07AM)
I'll go see this movie if all the NY and LA elitists, intellectuals, and poets die.
posted by MaryAnn (Fri Nov 13 09, 10:01AM)
That's gettin' real close to the kind of trolling that gets deleted, Lawschool. Try less hard to live up to the second part of your handle.
posted by Brian (Fri Nov 13 09, 10:21AM)
@Lawschool: If all the elitists, intellectuals, and poets really did die, this would be the only kind of movie anyone will be able to watch.
posted by Lawschool_Douchebag (Fri Nov 13 09, 3:05PM)
Relax peeps, I am an elitist too! It was a joke!
2012 is trash. Don't waste your money on it.
posted by Left_Wing_Fox (Fri Nov 13 09, 8:45PM)
Six Flags over Ed Wood.
I _am_ going to have to see this movie now.
posted by tinman (Fri Nov 13 09, 9:25PM)
hope this gets you'all in the mood:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW2qxFkcLM0&feature=player_embedded
posted by Tonio Kruger (Fri Nov 13 09, 9:57PM)
Wow! Deja vu. I've never seen that video before, tinman. ;-)
Wow! Deja vu. I've never seen that video before, tinman. ;-)
Wow! Deja vu. I've never seen that video before, tinman. ;-)
Wow! Deja vu. I've never seen that video before, tinman. ;-)
Wow! Deja vu. I've never seen that video before, tinman. ;-)
Wow! Deja vu. I've never seen that video before, tinman...
You obviously don't spend much time on this site, right?
posted by Falconer (Mon Nov 16 09, 6:17PM)
You can actually enjoy this grossly overdone spectacle ("destructo porn"--I love that)if you look at it simply as unintentional satire of disaster movies. I mean, come on, Emmerich throws in all the possibles for future global cataclysms (as well as godawfully BAD astrophysics--just how the HELL does a subatomic particle "mutate" Does he even know the meaning of that word?) for our entertainment. Not to mention idiotic coincidences, boring cliches, predictable demises, and inane moralizing. Oh, and let's not forget plot holes you could fly the Death Star through. How did they manage to fly non-stop from Vegas to Tibet when they found out they couldn't refuel in Hawaii after all? And wasn't it great how the builders of the arks KNEW tsunamis would reach that high in the Himalayas in order to float off their arks? I think I will go re-read The Forge of God and its sequel now to help wash the crud out of my mind this stupid, STUPID movie left behind.
posted by CB (Tue Nov 17 09, 12:18PM)
Bad astrophysics? Try just bad physics! Like skyscrapers rolling down the street on their sides... Cus you know they're totally built with that kind of sheer stress in mind, and wouldn't just crumble to dust under their own weight immediately. No no. Next time you build a skyscraper, don't be surprised at the $50 million line item for roll bars.
But I knew as soon as I saw this movie was by the same guy as Day After Tomorrow that there was no chance of it making any sort of physical sense. I think that movie is best summed up by the scene which features a reversal of the classic "run from the fireball!", and instead has the heroes running from the freeze.
posted by Christine (Tue Nov 17 09, 2:28PM)
Just to answer zids' tangential question above, no, it is not "another think coming." Haven't you ever listened to Judas Priest?
posted by zids (Fri Nov 20 09, 5:21AM)
"Sorry to be picky, but shouldn't the last words should be "another THINK coming"?"
So says the person who used "should" twice in a sentence. Grammarian, heal thyself, he says to himself.
Christine: No, I haven't heard of anything by them.
On a more related note, I'm actually going to see this again. Looking forward to multiple orgasms..
posted by Bluejay (Fri Nov 20 09, 1:45PM)
@zids: Actually (and to my surprise), it IS "another think coming." At least that's the earlier expression, if you Google around; "thing" seems to be a variant.
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=120
Yay grammar tangents!