Believe it or not, Roland Emmerich actually explores a common theme in most of his disaster movies. He is very concerned with how people unite during a catastrophe and is interested in how they come out of it as human beings. Now there’s obviously nothing nuanced about Emmerich’s approach and his conclusions aren’t every very logical or meaningful, but there is a method to the madness beyond blowing stuff up real good.
With 2012, Emmerich blows things up real good and then some in creating one of the biggest and baddest disaster pictures of all time. It is a ridiculous motion picture in just about every sense of the word, but it delivers a thrilling first half and packs a slew of awe-inspiring visuals into its colossal runtime before running out of gas when Emmerich tries to put too fine a point on things.
2012 is of course Emmerich’s take on the various disasters predicted for the end of the world. It invokes a host of myths about our planet’s grand finale, ranging from the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar to the beliefs of the Mayans. The earth starts to get in trouble due to solar flare bombardment, we are told, and that causes a series of events that plunge the world into destruction. California falls into the Pacific, for instance, and a slew of earthquakes and tsunamis wreck the joint with style.
Through it all, Emmerich has us follow a cast of unnecessary characters. John Cusack is one, playing a writer from Los Angeles that manages to make it through a zillion improbable circumstances with his ex-wife (Amanda Peet), two kids and his ex-wife’s new man (Thomas McCarthy). Danny Glover gets to be president, too, and Thandie Newton is the president’s daughter. There’s also a host of scientists and crazies warning the planet, including Woody Harrelson as a hermit/conspiracy theorist.
2012 manages to roll its improbable, silly scenario out for a good long while thanks to some absolutely dazzling effects. Watching the destruction of Los Angeles is especially thrilling, as Emmerich lets the ground gobble everything up in brilliant light and colour. The tsunamis and earthquakes do their stuff and give the characters lots of cool crashing stuff to fly around and drive through. This provides copious amounts of popcorn-munching entertainment and should be seen on a big screen to truly appreciate it.
Of course, Emmerich does eventually drop the ball. Things get a little fuzzy and repetitive when the various large-scale attempts to survive start emerging. There’s a whole bunch of “arks,” apparently, and they were built by the private sector to ensure the survival of society’s elite. This was done in secret until the last minute, amazingly enough, and their existence generates the movie’s ethical quandaries.
Emmerich just isn’t very good at the ethical stuff, though, and the film stumbles when he starts to thin things out. Telling the “human story” doesn’t particularly work with this disaster flick, especially when it involves more dogs and kids than Independence Day. The problems emerge when it becomes obvious as to where certain characters are gravitating, making for many a groan-worthy moment in what was a pretty slick, deadly disaster pic.
In the end, 2012 gets a pass because it delivers the goods in a big way. It’s worth a look or two just to see how cool the effects look and how well Emmerich can blow stuff up when he really wants to. His patience and timing with the destruction is especially admirable, as he doesn’t “Michael Bay” it with overwhelming motion. The Los Angeles scenes are incredible. But when things start drawing to their conclusion, don’t be surprised if you find yourself looking at your watch.
5.9/10
Trailer:
