Saturday, November 14, 2009

"2012" (2009) - Movie Review

As much as director Roland Emmerich makes preposterous film which sometimes beckons a better word for the sham, he can be called as a passionate man to beautify a catastrophe. Sure he is not aiming for a moving human drama but he spends budgets that would solve world wide property on crumbling and crushing the Earth and its inhabitants effectively and pats himself on the back for a job well done.

Generally I shun away from the trailers but it is an itch. Knowing plot lines is bothering for a good movie going experience and for “2012” you should definitely know the plot line, which is that everything is going to burn down. The Earth as we know will undergo the phenomenon Emmerich and his cowriter Harald Kloser would cook up to get earth quake, volcano and Tsunami cover down in sequences for the nature to calm down before the cheesy fatty and melty ending.

In this destruction festival, John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Amanda Peet, Thandie Newton, Oliver Platt and Danny Glover would put on a brave face to the abysmal writing. They are on a suicide mission and they proudly take it as they did the money poured on to them. But let us pull aside the conscience and ethical machine for a second and see what does “2012” has to offer. It has the most breathtaking and hard worked graphics we have ever seen in the era of nothing but visual effects. For the calamity mother nature does, this is one hell of a show in the department of visual effects and Emmerich loves to draw scenarios for it.

The governments of countries around the world begin to observe the beginning of the expected fall of humanity in the current year. Those government officials ! Counting money and always in the business of hiding and playing under the radar. They succeed admirably while the great young scientist Adrian (Chiwetel Ejiofor) will begin to steer this known fate for a little more prosperity in the end. Drama happens, action happens and lot of plump and badly uttered one liners happen.

Films like these have plots to finish up their glory road of creating such immense feat. How can you destroy Los Angeles, Washington DC and Las Vegas? Wait, how about great cities and landmarks all over the world? It should be chaotic but a coordination for the characters the audience rooting for. It should consist of major landmarks falling down and an aerial shot. There should be timely helps for novice pilots and calculated deaths to pave way for the broken romances to reunite. And believe it or not, it can be done badly over the atrocity of the mundane ritual or can be elated into making us getting played into it. “2012” rides on the border lines in between these two.

There is not a single shred of hesitation from my side that the film would draw the biggest box office collection and I do have to admit with some embarrassment that this two hours and thirty eight minutes show kept me occupied. It brought me down to its level rightly and played in the field it is best at. Well played Emmerich. You truly are a genius in this game. But I am too stubborn to give up the so called artistic obligation I crazily and selectively believe. And this time around I need it more than ever because I will lose my sanity over this.

Few years from now, there will be a time when I will be sick at home. I would have got cable by then and may be I still have a job. The job which allowed me to take day off from for the sickness. I am laying on the couch and there is nothing I can do. The day is dull which does not help the fever, cold and cough. I slowly extend my hand out of the blanket to the lifeless remote in the coffee table. And I switch on and cruise through the channels. By the greatness of the chance and probability, there is TBS shining through the screen for “2012.” It is a TV film and it should rightfully belong there buried in between thoughtful commercials having more humanity than “2012.”

3 comments:

Mathi said...

Nice review, specially the ending sounded really good, i enjoyed it.

Ashok said...

Thanks a lot Mat !

Niyati said...

The beauty about 2012 is that it was even more disappointing than I had anticipated. The plot is yet another enactment of the Bible, Noah's ark complete with animals on board! The acting is terrible, it is a complete contrast to the amount of money they spent... I mean wasted.... on the special effects. Some of my favorite scenes were when they outran an earthquake in a limo and flew through volcanoes and falling skyscrapers and oh. John Cusack climbing out of the earthquake was ridiculous.
There is just nothing believable about this movie, not even the accents. The inexcusably fake Indian and Russian accents made me cringe in my seat.
Finally, the much talked about special effects; those were deplorable. There were parts of the movie that looked like a bad attempt at photoshop. Characters literally looked like they were cropped into a scene, they did not seem affected by their surroundings at all. No snow or volcanic ash could lay on the lead actors.

Your review is unjustly kind to this movie.