2012
Last Friday I went out to see 2012.
I have sure seen a lot of criticism of this movie from my Twitter friends and from professional reviews. The criticism seems to be aimed at the low intelligence of the dialog and the predictability of the action (everything blows up but the heros get away just in time). Also, people don’t like that director Roland Emmerich is basically remaking the same movie that he always makes.
OK, I understand all the points. Fair enough.
Here is my problem… I feel that people criticize anything that don’t see as Great. I mean Great as in: Citizen Cane is a Great movie.
2012 isn’t Great in that sense, but I don’t think it needs to be. It is about blowing up the world. Come on! I was entertained for almost 3 hours and felt that I got my 11 bucks worth out of the experience. If my name was in the credits, I would be bragging about it…
Furthermore, it is OK with me if Roland Emmerich keeps blowing up the world’s iconic buildings and places every few years. If you are good at something, stick to it. We can all learn something from that.
I think I am the only person in the world who admits to liking The Day After Tomorrow and somewhere in my basement are Laser Disc copies of Independence Day and Stargate. I actually appreciate the dialog with lines like “Grab my hand, Reach!!!” as someone is hanging off the edge of a high place.
Sure, it is corny and doesn’t challenge your mind, but it makes you smile and I think that should be enough sometimes.
Tags: 2012, action, corny, destruction, dialog, emmerich, greatness
“The 3D timelines look absolutely stunning”
I finally saw 2012 last week and I liked it. It’s a fun disaster movie, amazing effects, great sound, silly, over the top, but ultimately entertaining. Shouldn’t some films be entertaining as well as those that are more challenging?
Admittedly I don’t like all Emmerich movies, I thought “10,000BC” was awful; I liked “Godzilla” and “The Day After Tomorrow” too.