2012 2.0*** (barely)


Believe it or not, “2012” cost 260 million dollars (that’s more than a ¼ of a BiIIion $$) and is 158 minutes long. At roughly 1.65 million dollars a minute, one might at least expect a thrill-a-second work of exciting entertainment. Unfortunately, the many millions spent on this overblown special effects “end of the world” movie are a colossal waste of epic proportions which the movie was meant to be..i.e,. of epic proportions. There is no plot to speak of – primarily it is about Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) learning of the impending end of the world and his trying to rescue his 2 kids and ex-wife ( Amanda Peet) from the disaster. That's about all that happens in the entire movie - for over 2.5 hours! And after you have seen Cusack and his family miraculously escape death, time and again and then time after time once more (whether by earthquake, plane crash, volcanic eruption, tsunami, etc., etc.) the whole thing becomes so wearisome and unbelievable that you almost find yourself rooting for the tsunami to end their desperation just so the movie can end and you can go home. For some, me included, watching this movie was like being hit over the head with a baseball bat multiple times until you eventually are stunned into an abject stupor.

So why are so many people flocking to see this movie…primarily for one reason, the SPECIAL EFFECTS. They are , simply put, amazing. Not credibly, mind you, but dazzling nonetheless. Unlike other disaster pictures, “2012” doesn't just involve a couple of major US locations ( Los Angeles, Yellowstone Park, Washington DC, New York City). It also involves the whole world and we get glimpses of San Paola, Brazil, London and even the Vatican being obliterated (I almost cried when they showed the Sistine Chapel in St Peters collapsing). AND, there are a whole variety of disasters. There are monstrous floods and tsunamis, 10 scale earthquakes, massive ash rain, horrific volcano eruptions... well, you get the idea. It's all very visually dynamic and the variety of it not only left me in awe, but also made me realize I was watching the ultimate disaster film. …the super “popcorn” movie of all time.

So, should you go or not. Yes and no depending upon whether you can completely disengage your brain and fully engage your other non-thinking senses..eyes and ears. Since I knew this going into this movie, I was partially able to enjoy it, especially the special effects. But only partially because my brain refused to be put on hold for 158 minutes. It re-engaged itself for the last 28 minutes and revolted against the near total illogic of the story…when I didn’t leave, there was almost a neurological meltdown. BUT despite this, “2012’ was still a fun, at times exciting, roller-coaster-ride visual experience and I don’t regret having seen it.

If you think you want to see, you MUST see it on the big theatre screen with the surround, multi sound system…you must…otherwise, don’t see it all.

Clark