Amber Branson2012 - Blu Ray
Basic summary: According to the Mayan calendar, the world (as we know it) will end in 2012. The movie follows the attempts of a writer and his family to survive the apocalypse.
2012 was not Oscar material, but it's definitely an adrenaline-pumper. I hate to sound like a poster, but it's edge-of-your-seat action with some of the most beautiful explosions I've seen in a while.
It's cliche, of course, the standard disaster flick. (Should I review Disaster Movie too?) It's entertaining, but I have a few complaints.
1) Why is is that only disaster movies have African-American presidents? (Feel free to prove me wrong.) I understand that in 2012 Obama would still be president, so it's realistic in this case, but that struck me as I was starting the film. The only non-disaster movie I can think of is Head of State, but that's a movie about a black man becoming president, so it's Your text goes herecompletely different.
2) I heard this complaint when the movie was still in theaters, but really, how many collapsing ground near-escapes do you need in one movie? (3 runway, one driving, and that's only halfway through the film.)
3) Too many characters! With so many characters and only two and a half hours, there's not enough time to actually develop and connect with them. They are archetypal, which was the only way to draw the audience members in, I suppose.
Even so, I do appreciate the way the filmmakers showed the human impact of each disaster. In a usual movie, when the metropolis collapses into the earth, you see buildings, cars, explosions... but in 2012, you see people hanging from the buildings and freeways as they collapse, people watching the tidal waves coming to crush them... no disaster is without a human cost, and no scene of disaster is shown without victims.
When all is said and done... at least this was better than Knowing.
2012 was not Oscar material, but it's definitely an adrenaline-pumper. I hate to sound like a poster, but it's edge-of-your-seat action with some of the most beautiful explosions I've seen in a while.
It's cliche, of course, the standard disaster flick. (Should I review Disaster Movie too?) It's entertaining, but I have a few complaints.
1) Why is is that only disaster movies have African-American presidents? (Feel free to prove me wrong.) I understand that in 2012 Obama would still be president, so it's realistic in this case, but that struck me as I was starting the film. The only non-disaster movie I can think of is Head of State, but that's a movie about a black man becoming president, so it's Your text goes herecompletely different.
2) I heard this complaint when the movie was still in theaters, but really, how many collapsing ground near-escapes do you need in one movie? (3 runway, one driving, and that's only halfway through the film.)
3) Too many characters! With so many characters and only two and a half hours, there's not enough time to actually develop and connect with them. They are archetypal, which was the only way to draw the audience members in, I suppose.
Even so, I do appreciate the way the filmmakers showed the human impact of each disaster. In a usual movie, when the metropolis collapses into the earth, you see buildings, cars, explosions... but in 2012, you see people hanging from the buildings and freeways as they collapse, people watching the tidal waves coming to crush them... no disaster is without a human cost, and no scene of disaster is shown without victims.
When all is said and done... at least this was better than Knowing.
