Sunday, November 15, 2009

Film Review: TwentyTwelve, Thirteen, Fourteen...



So what's all the buzz about 2012? Well, it's the latest and greatest Roland Emmerich film to hit the talkies! I find it redundant to have to recount the overall plot of the film, but here goes. It's the end of the world, as we know it--and I feel fine. Ah, R.E.M., how I love you, you make my segues so smooth. But, no, really it's an apocalyptic film, like: Independence Day, Godzilla, The Day After Tomorrow, and 10,000 BC.

Wait a second! Those are all Roland Emmerich films! Surprise! If you haven't gotten the memo, Emmerich is a very, uhm, disaster-film-happy director/writer/producer/shaman/guru. Most people see this film as simply a continuation of a disaster-porn (thanks, Max) series with the only notable caveat being The Patriot. While I'll admit that maybe Emmerich is a bit limited in scope, I can't fault him for what he does. It's simple economics, make something the masses will blindly watch and you've got yourself a hit. And that it is. It's a Summer blockbuster deep in the heart of Fall. Max, my roommate, said it well--"Sometimes it's just good to shut off your brain." That's what you have to do to really enjoy this film...if you can sit through 3 hours like a good boy.

It's hard to really write a review for something that is so very polar. The first hour, maybe even hour and a half I could not stand. John Cusack continues to be one of my least favorite actors, I can't remember the last thing I saw that I liked him in. Wait, maybe it was Being John Malkovich. Yeah, I think so. That, and, oh yeah!, he was the voice of Dimitri in Anastasia. The CGI was horrendous at times. And by horrendous, I mean just plain bad. The scene where Los Angeles is literally collapsing in on itself and whatnot is choreographed brilliantly but it is negatively complemented with mediocre graphics. A film so graphics-reliant definitely needs a team behind it to make me truly believe that the world is coming to an end. It falls short on that a few times. That was counterbalanced with some astounding sequences as well. I won't give away too much because although this is the kind of movie whose plot you could unravel a mile away there is much to enjoy yet.

While Max was very much unhappy with the film overall, I feel that it was salvaged in the end through raw human emotion. The film got rid of its gimmicky "ZOMG the Mayans talked about it back way when!" or "The dwarf planet Nibiru is going to collide with the earth!" very quickly, and I was quite pleased with that. Rather, it combined mediocre CGI, an overloaded subplot arc, with what probably saved this movie from the 'Unbearable Films' pile--humanity. The act of survival and its pursuit makes the film somewhat attractive. Call me a sucker for it, but after I got past the 90-minute marker and the film took a very pleasant turn, I got hooked on the strong human saga of survival. The ability for a film to seamlessly hook you, despite all of the visual storytelling going on, is an ability that warrants it some level of appreciation.

Although most people will probably disagree, Emmerich finally is grasping the ability to tell a story with raw and very real human experiences. Although it was overly saturated with far too many subplots, the film doesn't develop them to the point of overload. The Indian scientist's grief, terror, and a glimmer of relief is all betrayed by his face when faced with imminent doom. The devil is in the details and this film captures them with stunning clarity. Every character, however small, or convoluted their subplot might have been, tells the same human story in Nepali, Hindi, Bihari, Chinese, English, or whatever.

It might very well be that I'm reading too deep into what was as esoteric as the gum beneath my shoe--I mean, they show the destruction of very powerful Christian and Buddhist icons--the Vatican, O Cristo Redentor, and the Panchen Lama. But it just could be that the story of humanity isn't limited to the sects of human spirituality--rather it is told in the most pragmatic way possible--through voiceless emotion. As non-religious as this film portrays itself to be there are many moments where religion plays a very strong unifying theme. Although quickly quashed by a giant building, or thousand-foot tidal wave--it serves its purpose well. I mean, I don't want to ruin it for anyone but anyone who has been to a school like mine (ahem) will know this story all too well. [Spoiler Warning! Do not mouse over or click the previous link if you do not want to be spoiled!]

I'll halt the philosophical and emotional banter there. To sum it up though, 2012 is probably a serendipitous film that draws you in through gimmicky means and through its latent power holds on to your primal urge to root for the little guy and hope that in the end, as cheesy at it sounds, that the human experience continues.

Luis' Rating: 6.5/10--Go See!

No comments:

Post a Comment