2012..The Movie

West 36 said:
I don't much care how fantastic the special effects are, the movie will be ********.
This is my prophecy.
Click to expand...
I predict that your prophesy will be correct. In fact, if you write it in the form of a vague poem, you can sell it to stupid people, and make more money than this film.
 
complete rubbish ... nevertheless epic of course.... like independence day ... I would love to see the white house being blown-up again
 
Ansar said:
Well, considering most people in Mexico don't understand English, it's kind of hard buying one without Spanish subtitles. The Spanish subtitles are pretty funny, though (example. in some movie, the character said "F*ck!" and the translation was "Caracoles!", which means snails :lol:)

Eh, I never buy DVDs (pirated or not)...like Zelig, they're on the interwebs, so why pay? :D
Click to expand...

Yah, subtitles when swearing in English are very bad. 95% of swear words translate to Idiota for some reason.
 
2037: The Sequel - Death of the Unix ushers in end of the world.

EDIT: Looking into this to ensure I was using the correct date, it seems that would be the THIRD sequal, following...

2020: Mac implosion
2030: Windows da suck
 
pau17 said:
Not after I saw the part of "the government is making boats, we'll be safe!"

Typical Hollywood...
Click to expand...

I stopped when I saw a trailer that began by saying the Mayan civilisation, one of the earliest in the world, had predicted it.

West 36 said:
I don't much care how fantastic the special effects are, the movie will be ********.
This is my prophecy.
Click to expand...

Dude, the ancient Mayans had predicted that.

pau17 said:
No, I meant how they had to go and screw up another end-of-the-world movie with some happy ending in which humanity survives.

I'm sick of this "go humans" stuff. All the movies are the same...hardship, disaster, but TRIUMPH OF THE HUMAN WILL, GO US!
Click to expand...

Nietzsche isn't sure whether to laugh or to cry.
 
yeah.. it does seem pretty stupid. If you want to analyze it, you can speculate whether 2012 love remained as strong as it once did.

But -- this is Hollywood. If they manage to make a good movie for the masses, (which is the whole point of movies), good for them.
 
Just saw it, and holy crap is it crazy. I don't really know how to describe it, but Roger Ebert hit it spot on with his review.

Spoiler :
It's not so much that the Earth is destroyed, but that it's done so thoroughly. "2012," the mother of all disaster movies (and the father, and the extended family) spends half an hour on ominous set-up scenes (scientists warn, strange events occur, prophets rant and of course a family is introduced) and then unleashes two hours of cataclysmic special events hammering the Earth relentlessly.

This is fun. "2012" delivers what it promises, and since no sentient being will buy a ticket expecting anything else, it will be, for its audiences, one of the most satisfactory films of the year. It even has real actors in it. Like all the best disaster movies, it's funniest at its most hysterical. You think you've seen end-of-the-world movies? This one ends the world, stomps on it, grinds it up and spits it out.

It also continues a recent trend toward the wholesale destruction of famous monuments. Roland Emmerich, the director and co-writer, has been vandalizing monuments for years, as in "Independence Day," "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Godzilla." I still hold a grudge against him for that one because he provided New York with a Mayor Ebert and didn't have Godzilla step on me and then squish me.

In all disaster movies, landmarks fall like dominos. The Empire State Building is made of rubber. The Golden Gate Bridge collapses like clockwork. Big Ben ticks his last. The Eiffel Tower? Quel dommage!

Memo to anyone on the National Mall: When the Earth's crust is shifting, don't stand within range of the Washington Monument. Chicago is often spared; we aren't as iconic as Manhattan. There's little in Los Angeles distinctive enough to be destroyed, but it all goes, anyway.

Emmerich thinks on a big scale. Yes, he destroys regular stuff. It will come as little surprise (because at this writing the film's trailer on YouTube alone had more than 7,591,413 views) that the aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy rides a tsunami onto the White House. When St. Peter's Basilica is destroyed, Leonardo's God and Adam are split apart just where their fingers touch (the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel having been moved into St. Peter's for the occasion). Then when Emmerich gets warmed up, the globe's tectonic plates shift thousands of miles, water covers the planet, and a giraffe walks aboard an ark.

Many gigantic arks have been secretly constructed inside the Himalayas by the Chinese, funded by a global consortium, and they're the only chance of the human race surviving. Along with the animals on board, there's the maybe well-named Noah (Liam James). In theory, ark ticketholders represent a cross-section of the globe, chosen democratically. In practice, Carl Anheuser pulls strings to benefit the rich and connected, and wants to strand desperate poor people on the dock. I'm thinking, Emmerich often has a twist when he names villains, like Mayor Ebert from "Godzilla." So how did this villain get his name? What does "Anheuser" make you think of?

Such questions pale by comparison with more alarming events. The tectonic plates shift so violently scientists can almost see them on Google Earth. This havoc requires stupendous special effects. Emmerich's budget was $250 million, and "2012" may contain more f/x in total running time than any other film. They're impressive. Not always convincing, because how can the flooding of the Himalayas be made convincing? And Emmerich gives us time to regard the effects and appreciate them, even savor them, unlike the ADD generation and its quick-cutting Bay-cams.

Emmmerich also constructs dramatic real-scale illusions, as when an earthquake fissure splits a grocery store in half. Cusack is the hero in an elaborate sequence involving his desperate attempts to unblock a jammed hydraulic lift that threatens to sink the ark. He does a lot of heroic stuff in this film, especially for a novelist, like leaping a van over a yawning chasm and riding a small plane through roiling clouds of earthquake dust.

The bottom line is: The movie gives you your money's worth. Is it a masterpiece? No. Is it one of the year's best? No. Does Emmerich hammer it together with his elbows from parts obtained from the Used Disaster Movie Store? Yes. But is it about as good as a movie in this genre can be? Yes. No doubt it will inflame fears about our demise on Dec. 21, 2012. I'm worried, too. I expect that to be even worse than Y2K.
Click to expand...
 
Saw it last night and was really impressed, 2012 really was a lot better than I thought it would be. For the first mass destruction of LA, my friend and I grinned gleefully and munched away on the popcorn (although we ran out of popcorn before the cruise ship was sunk). After LA was (thankfully) gone, it did get more horrific and less humorous (it didn't try to be humorous in the destruction, it was just entertaining for me personally). Good movie.

Also highly ironic that today one of the bridges in town is closed and the other reduced to one lane (may even be closed by now), no idea about the other smaller bridges further upriver, also (although this does happen every year or so anyways from major amounts of rain if not the river flooding it a bit) the main park by the river, and some roads are flooded too.
 
I'd have to agree with PrinceScamp. I saw it on Sunday and thought it was one of the best movies I've ever seen! My favroite part was when Jackson and his family (with Gordon) were in the limmo and driving out of LA, and then the plane secne that soon followed. Over all, the movie was really good, and looks to be a boxoffice hit!
 
The movie sucked on every level except CGI. The CGI wasn't actually that good quality wise, but they were working with extremely busy scenes and thus quality wasn't that necessary, your eyes go from one crazy sight to another with no chance of you picking that up.

Is there any particular reason that black dude was intent on causing human extinction. Every "moral" arguement that guy made was complete and utter BS that made no sense at all.

Oh, and Danny Glover continues to be the worst actor on the face of the earth. Seriously, the guy has no skill whatsoever. Whenever I could undstand his mumbling he carries about as much gravitas as a comma patient.
 
bestrfcplayer said:
I'd have to agree with PrinceScamp. I saw it on Sunday and thought it was one of the best movies I've ever seen! My favroite part was when Jackson and his family (with Gordon) were in the limmo and driving out of LA, and then the plane secne that soon followed. Over all, the movie was really good, and looks to be a boxoffice hit!
Click to expand...

If "fun" is the emotion one should feel when watching a film in which 99.996% of humans suffer a horrible death and practically everything is destroyed, this race really deserves to suffer.

If I made a disaster film, people would leave the cinemas crying, trembling and in a state of deep shock. Because that's a natural reaction to bad things happing for real.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kyriakos
Which films have you seen lately? ΚΓ' - The thread is your movie hegemon.
16 17 18
Replies
349
Views
11K
Sommerswerd
Sommerswerd
W
Casual talk
Replies
2
Views
215
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
Estebonrober
Techno feudalism
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
Lexicus
Lexicus
Estebonrober
Natural Disasters: Oh, does my native land love to kill...
2
Replies
25
Views
928
Snowygerry
S
Broken_Erika
  • Locked
Which films have you seen lately Vol.22 Now with Smell-O-Vision.
48 49 50
Replies
998
Views
43K
Kyriakos
Kyriakos
Back
Top Bottom