2012
By Nick Manteris · 0 Comments · Leave a Comment
Roland Emmerich has previously destroyed the world in The Day After Tomorrow and Independence Day – and to a lesser extent, Eight Legged Freaks and Godzilla – but in his new film, 2012, he destroys the world like never before. The action sequences in 2012 are attached to the most basic framework of a story and enjoyment is inversely proportional to the amount you allow yourself to think about what is happening onscreen. For example, one of the first scenes takes place in an underground cavern filled with computers that, according to one of the characters, “sometimes heats up to one hundred and twenty degrees.” Computers are not well suited for high temperatures…and never mind that this takes place in India –where they measure temperature in Celsius – which would make one hundred and twenty degrees well over the boiling point. This is the first of many, many minor illogical quibbles that could eventually drive any rational person completely bonkers if they leave their mind switched on…just sit back, don’t think and try to enjoy the ride.
If you expect any sort of explanation regarding the science behind the eventual destruction of the Earth you will be disappointed, but you may be able to take comfort in the fact that it’s pretty much the exact opposite of what happened in The Day After Tomorrow. Also, if you’ve previously encountered the 2012 date because of the Mayan calendar or Terence McKenna’s timewave theory you will be similarly disappointed…the Mayans are only briefly mentioned and there is simply too much catastrophe that needs to be shown to waste time on such trivial elements. As far as character development is concerned, the filmmakers try to provoke emotional responses with all the subtlety of a car crash…it’s as blatant as George Lucas’ attempt to make you feel sad for the death of an animated family member in a podrace.
The thing that holds the film together though – aside from the spectacular scenes of death and destruction, of course – is coincidence. There are monumentally insane levels of coincidence that propel the characters on their journey and if even one of these moments were to be changed the story would end right at that point. Evidently, when the world comes to an end, being a good person is as useless as being rich or selfless because the most important quality is luck. And in the end, when the review is almost over, the message that remains is one of “it didn’t suck too bad and it was cool to look at.”
