Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

Neon


MOVIE REVIEW: '2012'

Apocalyptic '2012' offers little more than special effects






It's a disaster movie, all right -- in both senses of the term.

But what can you expect when the movie is "2012" -- and the guy calling the shots is Roland Emmerich.


Most Popular Stories
  • INTERVIEWS: Jon Stewart
  • RESTAURANT REVIEW: ESPN Zone
  • Betting on the Future
  • PLAYER'S EDGE: Jerry's Nugget offers promotions for 'Big Game,' senior players
  • SHOW REVIEW: 'Rockstar: The Tribute'
  • MIKE WEATHERFORD: Sahara combining showrooms
  • 'Boyz' Town
  • SOUNDS: Strait Talk
  • MOVIE REVIEW: 'Dear John'
  • RESTAURANT REVIEW: AquaKnox




  • A veritable master of disaster, Emmerich already has made lots of stuff blow up real good (invading aliens zapping the White House in "Independence Day") and lots of other stuff get water-logged real good (remember the Russian tanker sailing through midtown Manhattan in "The Day After Tomorrow"?) and even more stuff gets flash-frozen, blasted by tornadoes and otherwise assaulted by won't-get-fooled-again Mother Nature.

    If that's your idea of fun, fun, fun, then you'll absolutely adore "2012," which puts everyone on Earth on a countdown to oblivion.

    This being an Emmerich extravaganza, you know oblivion will hit -- in multiple spectacular ways.

    You also know that billions of faceless people will die, but a few plucky souls will prove the resilience of the human spirit by surviving (just barely) relentless multiple special-effects assaults.

    If you're not into those multiple special-effects assaults, however, "2012" offers few other diversions -- especially because there's nothing in this movie we haven't seen many times before.

    Oh, I don't mean the computer-generated effects aren't impressive, in their coldly efficient way.

    But now that we know computer effects can conjure pretty much anything and everything, that makes the spectacle of mass destruction just another ho-hum digital workout for all but the most enthusiastic mayhem junkies.

    Even Las Vegas' inevitable devastation (what, you thought Vegas wouldn't be invited to the end-of-the-world party?) seems anticlimactic in the face of so much over-the-top excess.

    Maybe that's because disaster movies live -- or die -- on the strength of the few characters who do manage to survive multiple cataclysms. And in "2012," they're not exactly the most compelling bunch.

    In our Everyman corner, we have failed writer Jackson Curtis (John Cusack, maverick-y as ever), who's been reduced to working as a chauffeur since his futuristic novel tanked and his neglected wife, Kate (a wan Amanda Peet), divorced him. She's since taken up with Gordon (Tom McCarthy, better known -- for good reason -- as the director of "The Visitor" and "The Station Agent"), a plastic surgeon who's been a much better parent than Jackson to his kids (Liam James, Morgan Lily).

    But Jackson's determined to make up for his failings -- by taking the kids on a camping trip to Yellowstone National Park, destined to become the world's doomsday hot spot.

    Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, "2012's" resident Noble Scientist, Dr. Adrian Helmsley (too-good-for-this-movie Chiwetel Ejiofor) and an equally worthy Indian colleague (Jimi Mistry) discover the awful truth: Massive solar flares are overheating the Earth's core and will inevitably trigger unprecedented disasters, from earthquakes to volcanoes to tsunamis so gigantic Mount Everest could become a beach resort.

    Naturally, global leaders -- led by the U.S. president (a dignified Danny Glover) -- prepare for the worst. But arrogant White House adviser Carl Anheuser (Oliver Platt, who could use a moustache to twirl) and his fellow greedheads aren't about to let altruism interfere with survival. Unless, of course, our heroic Everyman and Noble Scientist manage to thwart his nefarious schemes first.

    No one expects a movie such as "2012" to explore the anguish of the human condition in the face of global disaster. (If you're looking for that, try the movie version of Cormac McCarthy's Pulitzer Prize-winning "The Road," which opens Thanksgiving Eve.)

    But is there some international edict requiring "2012" to be so ridiculously overwrought?

    Emmerich scrupulously follows the Disaster Movie playbook that's been in force since the genre's '70s heyday, when such bloated all-star entertainments as "The Towering Inferno" and "The Poseidon Adventure" distracted audiences from Watergate, runaway inflation, the energy crisis and other feel-bad issues.

    These days, we're at least as deep in feel-bad doo-doo, but "2012" isn't going to make you feel any better if you care even remotely about such vital cinematic elements as a credible story line and sympathetic characters.

    The screenplay (credited to Emmerich and his "10,000 B.C." co-writer, Harald Kloser, who also contributed to "2012's" bombastic musical score) piles up so many credibility-defying situations -- inevitably accompanied by suitably ludicrous dialogue -- that you feel for the poor performers trying to refresh material so far past its sell-by date. (Some of them, wisely, don't even try -- notably Woody Harrelson, having a hammy blast as a wild-eyed radio prophet who's an expert on the impending apocalypse.)

    Mostly, though, we await the arrival of the latest volcanic fireball or cascading tsunami -- to take out the most annoying characters. With so many worthy candidates, it's tough to determine who deserves it most, but let's hope at least one manages to find Emmerich.

    Contact movie critic Carol Cling at ccling@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0272.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 3 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Besh Cooper wrote on November 13, 2009 03:26 PM: Sadly, Tim has been misled by the straw men.
    This is the end of times guaranteed. There is no reason to think that we have a hope for days after Dec 21, 2012.


    ...


    BUT...
    If not 2012 then 2039 for sure we are doomed when a big asteroid hits us!

    AND

    If not 2012 or 2039, then...there will be something else...


    Jerry Wayne wrote on November 13, 2009 08:30 AM: I wish it would also predict the end of Carol Cling's career as a movie critic.


    Tim wrote on November 13, 2009 08:21 AM: Emmerich has already said in interviews that he's tired of doing these kinds of movies and that this is his last for this genre. So he figured he'd just give everyone what they want and wipe out everything. By the way, the Mayan calendar only predicts the end of a cycle, not the end of the world.