Movie and Television Reviews

"Some people want to fill the world with [manipulative, melodramatic, derivative, exploitive, lowest-common-denominator hackery]. And, what’s wrong with that? I’d like to know."

-Paul McCartney

Before I start, I’d like to say that, if possible, you should see this movie in a predominantly Hispanic theater. The premieres of 2012 in Huntington Park (with subtitles) and Pico Rivera were a combination of Mardi Gras, the Academy Awards, and an Olympics opening ceremony: Long lines, unlicensed street vendors, and people milling about who may not have had tickets, but still wanted to be where the action is. Inside the theater itself: newborns (PG-13 my pompis), great grandparents- everybody.

"Hard to imagine? It's easy if you try."

-John Lennon

If you’re a middle-aged White guy, imagine your reaction upon the announcement of a new rooftop Beatles concert where the two surviving members will join a resurrected John and George. OK? Well, double that. That’s what 2012 means to us (interestingly, a person who denies the end of world in HP thinks himself a Christopher Hitchens-like skeptic/intellectual). My wife said she hadn’t felt that way about a movie since Titanic.

Plot, in one sentence:

Scientists discover that the earth’s core will cause a world-wide cataclysm and inform the authorities, who then prepare a way for some humanity to survive and sell tickets to participate in the plan, which one family can’t afford, leading the family to find an alternative. Do they? No spoilers here.

Derivative:

2012 is a pastiche of numerous pseudo-scientific/mystical disaster movies, most of which also happen to have been directed by Roland Emmerich: There are ignored warnings, plans (Deep Impact), races against time, and a stapled-on love story.

Caharacter-wise, we have the divorced father-loser who still loves his kids’ mother from War of the Worlds; the scientist with the correct theory who’s not taken seriously by his colleagues from Independence Day, Stargate as well as the crazy, but correct conspiracy theorist from ID; the cute kid with a soon-to-be-resolved life-impediment; the corrupt politician; the president’s daughter; the good president from Independence Day; various personages from Armageddon, Jurassic Park, Poseidon Adventure; Day After Tomorrow, and Knowing. Truly, the gang’s all here.

Hackery:

About fourteen times in the movie, the characters barely escape ahead of some shock wave, debris shower, or ground collapse. They almost hit a bunch of stuff. After a while, you feel like you're on one of those Back to the Future/Star Tours rides where you're strapped to a seat inside a shaking box and watch a video of meteors or dinosaurs coming at and missing you.

Absurdities abound: Why does the head scientist of a secret location have to meet the trespassers? Isn't that what security's for?

For some, a youtube highlighting the impressive, I guess, destruction scenes will do.

Melodramatic/ manipulative:

The family scenes barely register above "trite" on the authenticity meter. We're led to care about a puppy. The world's ending and Emmerich expects the audience to shed a tear for a useless dog (sorry, owners of yapping rat-dogs [not that you ever care about your neighbors' sleep]).

Exploitative:

I think Emmerich should next do a movie about a deadly swine flu epidemic.

Yet:

My attention never wavered and I found myself cheering the protagonists' escapes and break-ins. Something subtle was going on here: My mind said “stop,” but my bootie squirmed as every type of land, sea, and air vehicle narrowly escaped doom.

2012 is a cheesy movie that thrills. Roland Emmerich is the opposite of M. Night Shyamalan: Emmerich is a low to middlebrow genius while Shymalan is a hoity bore.

Lastly:

I like that humanity will restart where it began. Like a homo sapien reboot. Guys, this time keep the apples away from the women.

I'd love to see is a television series that extends the ending.

Politics/message:

Hmmm. The movie's as deep as the earth's post-shift crust, but such a scenario can't help but deal with some big issues.

We know that people will turn to God at the end of the world. He doesn't show up in the movie, however, and nobody has a faith crisis. Religion's mostly just a way to deal with horrible events: "Smoke 'em if you got 'em"

(Maybe it's for the best: Remember Contact?)

"If we are only for ourselves, what are we?"

The moral crisis that Emmerich does deal with is a fairness lesson appropriate for a 4th-grade journal topic (a leading one at that): "Should only rich people survive the end of the world?" Proving that Star Trek changed the world, it's claimed that any non-inclusive decision will sacrifice the group's "humanity."

I did find it semi-clever when they asked whether their first action should be a loving or practical one.

Thankfully, no eco-preaching.

Cast and crew below:

Read more »

Tags: mexican, mexican-american