Difference between revisions of "2012"

From Awful Movies Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by RockyBalboaFan (talk) to last revision by Bradyreino)
Tag: Rollback
Line 37: Line 37:
 
#*When the film first shows Yuri, Tamara, Sasha and the boys in Vegas, their plane is on a hoist and Sasha shakes his head at Yuri, indicating his private plane is not going to be able to fly (implying something has happened to it). Then, when they are in the terminal, Sasha hurries in and says he has found an Antonov that was just about to take off but the tower would not let them. So... the Antonov isn't Yuri's plane, but the cars in the hold apparently are — the ''Bentley''<nowiki/> is programmed to start at his voice command.
 
#*When the film first shows Yuri, Tamara, Sasha and the boys in Vegas, their plane is on a hoist and Sasha shakes his head at Yuri, indicating his private plane is not going to be able to fly (implying something has happened to it). Then, when they are in the terminal, Sasha hurries in and says he has found an Antonov that was just about to take off but the tower would not let them. So... the Antonov isn't Yuri's plane, but the cars in the hold apparently are — the ''Bentley''<nowiki/> is programmed to start at his voice command.
 
#* It is never explained as to how the family was rescued from or even escaped from the emergency flood control barriers; this comes across as rather jarring.
 
#* It is never explained as to how the family was rescued from or even escaped from the emergency flood control barriers; this comes across as rather jarring.
  +
# The film has too many protagonists as secondary characters, that instead of developing them correctly throughout the plot, it is the plot that must adapt to them, in addition, that it is very difficult to sympathize with the characters since most are completely flat in personality, and none of them show advancements throughout the film.
# The characters are flat and cardboard, with it shows no likability or progression to be seen throughout the entire film; other characters in the film, more specifically Yuri Karpov, are also rather annoying and unpleasant.
 
  +
## Even the characters are inspired more than anything by the stereotype or the typical trope of the destruction movies:
  +
##* Jackson Curtis: he is the typical protagonist who, by chance of fate, knows that the world is ending and seeks to save his family.
  +
##* Adrian Hemsley: It is limited to the scientist with morals who discovers that the world is ending and he can do nothing, since he has no power or authority.
  +
##* Laura Wilson: She is the typical moralistic woman who helps the scientist and falls in love with him in the end.
  +
##* Gordon Silberman: It is the traditional boyfriend of the ex or rival of the protagonist who in the end dies or becomes his best friend.
  +
##* Thomas Wilson: He is the typical altruistic or moralistic president who decides to die instead of being saved.
  +
##* Carl Anheuser: He is the head of the scientist who has no morals that his only motivation is to save himself and in the end he survives.
  +
##* Kate Curtis: She is the traditional ex or girlfriend of the protagonist who decides to accompany him and in the end they stay together.
  +
##* Charlie Frost: He is the typical crazy conspiratorial who knows the world is ending and dies from disaster.
  +
##* Noah Curtis: The typical rebellious or misunderstood son who hates his father but finally reconciles with him.
  +
##* Lilly Curtis: She is the traditional little daughter who loves her family and is not fully aware of everything that happens around her.
  +
## Apart from what was highlighted in point 1, this film has several degradable or annoying characters that the only thing they do is serve as a hindrance in the plot, apart from that none causes an impact or importance within the film.
  +
##* Yuri Karpov: Perhaps the most despicable of the entire film, he appears as a millionaire who seeks to survive the catastrophe, but instead of expressing seriousness about the situation, he appears more like a tantrum or arrogant subject who acts on impulse, apart from the fact that it is very difficult to sympathize with him, he shows at all times an extremely arrogant, indifferent and abusive bully personality, even his death that happens in the blink of an eye, does not lead to emotional but very tragicomic.
 
#There are multiple filler moments throughout that could easily be removed without affecting the nonexistent plot.
 
#There are multiple filler moments throughout that could easily be removed without affecting the nonexistent plot.
 
# Mediocre acting from the actors, especially from John Cusack, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson.
 
# Mediocre acting from the actors, especially from John Cusack, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson.

Revision as of 21:39, 22 April 2021

2012
MV5BMTY0MjEyODQzMF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMTczMjQ4Mg@@. V1 SY1000 CR0,0,672,1000 AL .jpg
What was the point of making a disaster movie based on the 2012 hoax when it never actually got to happen?
Genre: Sci-Fi
Disaster
Directed By: Roland Emmerich
Produced By: Harald Kloser
Mark Gordon
Larry J. Franco
Written By: Harald Kloser
Roland Emmerich
Starring: John Cusack
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Amanda Peet
Oliver Platt
Thandie Newton
Danny Glover
Woody Harrelson
Photography: Dean Semler
Distributed By: Columbia Pictures
Release Date: November 13, 2009
Runtime: 158 minutes
Country: United States
Language: English
Budget: $200 million
Box Office: $769.7 million
Sequel: 2013 (cancelled)

2012 is a 2009 American science fiction disaster film directed by Roland Emmerich. It was produced by Harald Kloser, Mark Gordon, and Larry J. Franco, and written by Kloser and Emmerich, and opened in cinemas on November 13, 2009.

Plot

In the year 2012, the billions of inhabitants are unaware that the planet of Earth has an expiration date on December 21, 2012. With the warnings of an American scientist, world leaders begin secret preparations for the survival of select members of society. When the global cataclysm finally occurs, failed writer Jackson Curtis tries to lead his family to safety as the world starts falling apart.

Bad Qualities

  1. The film is rather pointless, as it is based on the 2012 phenomenon also based on the Mayan calendar, which ended up becoming inaccurate after December 21 of that year.
  2. It is pretty much another generic and forgettable disaster film which heavily relies on the over-the-top action sequences and visual effects, even more so than either the story, plot or any character growth or development.
  3. 2012 tries so hard to be fun and exciting but fails in doing so, ending up becoming rather dull and exhausting.
  4. The setting is supposed to be based on the real world, yet there is barely any logic in this movie, with the family being able to survive underwater in the ark for over three minutes, despite how the average human being is only able to survive underwater for only three minutes without dying due to a lack of oxygen[1].
    • On top of that, it also suffers from several extremely exaggerated and outlandishly unrealistic geographical and geological errors, all of which are nonsensical, with the climax showing a rather large tsunami flooding the Himalayas, and after the waters recede, the Drakensberg mountains are now the tallest mountain range in the world, even though the Earth could run out of water if that were to occur, and the tsunami could easily flood the Drakensberg mountains as well.
    • It is supposed to be set during December 21, 2012, almost around the time of Christmas, but for some strange reason, there are no Christmas decorations set up, there is a lack of snow in Yellowstone National Park, among other things.
    • After the Ark 4 engines start, clouds of soot emit from the exhaust stacks, implying that the engines are diesel-powered; requiring a ship designed to survive an apocalyptic flood, with no set duration to how long it may be at sea, to rely on such a limited consumable as diesel fuel would be an incredibly poor design choice.
  5. The film only involves the family was trying to find a way to escape the end of the world in December 2012, but after the climax, the rest of the movie boils down to into more than two hours of filler, in which barely anything is going on throughout the movie, at all.
  6. There are several internal inconsistencies and contradictions throughout the film:
    • An officer claims that all global ground communication has ceased, yet Dr. Satnam Tsurutani is somehow able to call Dr. Helmsley to warn him about the tsunami.
    • Jackson removes the strap holding the Bentley's front tire in place, but he never removes the strap from the back tire; it is still in place when Gordon gets in the car; it is never explained how they were able to leave if this were the case.
    • Much is made of the engines being non-functional while a door is open, with there being no explanation as to why the vessel would have been designed or built that way; in fact, it would require engine power to repeatedly close and open the doors, as well as power all the electronic and hydraulic systems shown; it is eventually shown to be underway with every door open, despite what had previously been established.
    • While escaping Los Angeles, Gordon is reluctant to pilot the plane (a twin-engine Cessna 340), describing how he has only had "a couple of lessons," yet almost immediately afterward he is shown executing advanced maneuvers and nearly flawless landings, even navigating to Las Vegas. Multi-engine aircraft are much more complex than single-engine, which is why beginner pilots almost invariably start their training on single-engine aircraft. Even if Gordon had received some sort of training in a multi-engine aircraft, a "couple of lessons" would not begin to account for the skills displayed in the film.
    • When the film first shows Yuri, Tamara, Sasha and the boys in Vegas, their plane is on a hoist and Sasha shakes his head at Yuri, indicating his private plane is not going to be able to fly (implying something has happened to it). Then, when they are in the terminal, Sasha hurries in and says he has found an Antonov that was just about to take off but the tower would not let them. So... the Antonov isn't Yuri's plane, but the cars in the hold apparently are — the Bentley is programmed to start at his voice command.
    • It is never explained as to how the family was rescued from or even escaped from the emergency flood control barriers; this comes across as rather jarring.
  7. The film has too many protagonists as secondary characters, that instead of developing them correctly throughout the plot, it is the plot that must adapt to them, in addition, that it is very difficult to sympathize with the characters since most are completely flat in personality, and none of them show advancements throughout the film.
    1. Even the characters are inspired more than anything by the stereotype or the typical trope of the destruction movies:
      • Jackson Curtis: he is the typical protagonist who, by chance of fate, knows that the world is ending and seeks to save his family.
      • Adrian Hemsley: It is limited to the scientist with morals who discovers that the world is ending and he can do nothing, since he has no power or authority.
      • Laura Wilson: She is the typical moralistic woman who helps the scientist and falls in love with him in the end.
      • Gordon Silberman: It is the traditional boyfriend of the ex or rival of the protagonist who in the end dies or becomes his best friend.
      • Thomas Wilson: He is the typical altruistic or moralistic president who decides to die instead of being saved.
      • Carl Anheuser: He is the head of the scientist who has no morals that his only motivation is to save himself and in the end he survives.
      • Kate Curtis: She is the traditional ex or girlfriend of the protagonist who decides to accompany him and in the end they stay together.
      • Charlie Frost: He is the typical crazy conspiratorial who knows the world is ending and dies from disaster.
      • Noah Curtis: The typical rebellious or misunderstood son who hates his father but finally reconciles with him.
      • Lilly Curtis: She is the traditional little daughter who loves her family and is not fully aware of everything that happens around her.
    2. Apart from what was highlighted in point 1, this film has several degradable or annoying characters that the only thing they do is serve as a hindrance in the plot, apart from that none causes an impact or importance within the film.
      • Yuri Karpov: Perhaps the most despicable of the entire film, he appears as a millionaire who seeks to survive the catastrophe, but instead of expressing seriousness about the situation, he appears more like a tantrum or arrogant subject who acts on impulse, apart from the fact that it is very difficult to sympathize with him, he shows at all times an extremely arrogant, indifferent and abusive bully personality, even his death that happens in the blink of an eye, does not lead to emotional but very tragicomic.
  8. There are multiple filler moments throughout that could easily be removed without affecting the nonexistent plot.
  9. Mediocre acting from the actors, especially from John Cusack, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson.
    • In specific versions of the film dubbed in other languages, the dubbing for much for the characters feel either out-of-place or forced; this is more noticeable in scenes with Frederick West, Captain Michaels, Dr. Satnam Tsurutani, Yuri, Alec and Oleg Karpov, respectively.
  10. A rather poorly-written script that sounds like it was written by someone who watched way too many disaster films.
  11. There are forty-five minutes of useless subplots that only exist just for filler.
  12. The film suffers from forty-five minutes of useless subplots that seem to only exist just to extend the length of the film; seriously, remove said subplots and the film and characters would not be affected whatsoever.
  13. The family seems to have the most plot armor[2] out of all the characters in the entire movie, as they are somehow able to survive every single disaster in the movie, even more so than Indiana Jones ever did. While almost everyone else is screaming and dying, the family is escaping safely.
  14. Multiple bland and clichéd lines throughout the entire film.
  15. It is pretty much insulting to other nations; even though plenty of Presidents of the United States of America have been creeps, not all of them have been, and the characters can accept a heroic president in this film... but it is insulting to have other world leaders follow him blindly, and have him behave so nobly, going down with his country; the Queen of England is also portrayed as one of the loathsome billionaires buying her way out, which is also insulting considering that the Queen Mum made a point of staying in London during the blitz.
  16. There is a use of product placement in the film; Froot Loops, All-Bran, Rice Krispies, Shredded Wheat, Raisin Bran, Crunch and even Randy's Donuts, as well as Chevron logos, are present during the store scene.
  17. Anachronism: The film is supposed to be set in December 21, 2012, even though there is a presence of things that existed in 2009.

Good Qualities

  1. Epic and fantastic soundtrack that was performed by Harald Kloser and Thomas Wander, especially "The End is Only the Beginning".
  2. The credits songs "Time For Miracles" by Adam Lambert and "Faded like a Photograph" by Filter are very nice.
  3. The visual effects are very great, even for 2009 standards.
  4. Its dark tone is surprisingly handled pretty well.
  5. Some action scenes, such as the earthquake destroying Los Angeles, are intense, well shot, and pretty good.

Reception

Critical response

The film received mixed-to-negative reviews from critics and audiences, with praise for its visuals effects, but criticism of its screenplay and runtime. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film holding a 39% critic rating and 47% audience score, based on 244 reviews and an average rating of 5.02/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Roland Emmerich's 2012 provides plenty of visual thrills but lacks a strong enough script to support its massive scope and inflated length." On IMDb it had a 5.8/10, and a 49/100 on Metacritic, indicating "mixed or average reviews."

Box office

2012 grossed $166.1 million in North America and $603.6 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $769.7 million against a production budget of $200 million, making it the first film to gross over $700 million worldwide without crossing $200 million domestically. Worldwide, it was the fifth-highest-grossing 2009 film and the fifth-highest-grossing film distributed by Sony-Columbia, (behind Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy and Skyfall).

Renewed hype

In 2020, nearly eleven years after the movie was released, it gained renewed interest during the COVID-19 pandemic, becoming the second-most popular film and seventh-most popular overall title on Netflix in March 2020.[3]

Trivia

  • The movie was reportedly banned in North Korea. The year depicted in the movie was the 100th anniversary of the birth of their nation's founder, Kim Il-sung; any film depicting the year negatively would be deemed offensive by the North Korean government. Several people in North Korea were reportedly arrested for possessing (or viewing) imported copies of 2012 and charged with "grave provocation against the development of the state".
  • This film was going to have a sequel/spin-off TV series titled 2013 set to air on ABC. It would've been about the survivors of the supposed 2012 disaster in the film and how they will build a new world and what will it look like. However, the series was scrapped due to budgetary reasons.

Videos

External links

References

Comments


avatar

Agent Joestar

18 months ago
Score 2
Strange how today is the 10 year anniversary of the movie
avatar

Wyoming

16 months ago
Score 1
I felt so utterly confused and frustrated after watching this film - I'm so glad it's on this wiki.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

16 months ago
Score 8
I liked this film though. I thought It was fun. :)
avatar

The7Guy

25 days ago
Score 1
I didn't watch the entire movie, but I agree with you
avatar

FreezingTNT

15 months ago
Score 1
There was only one scene in this entire movie that I felt any real emotion for. One.
avatar

ItMeansNothing

15 months ago
Score 7

2012 in a shellnut.

Oh noes the world is shaking.
avatar

HuyyBoii 05

12 months ago
Score 3

Don't kill me

I actually love this movie
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

11 months ago
Score 2
Trust me, I liked this movie too, and I added it here, and I'm here with you. ;)
avatar

SporeShroom2007

11 months ago
Score 3
I prefer The Day After Tomorrow
avatar

JDM4678

10 months ago
Score 2
2012 was a fucking hoax and Columbia got the guts to make that shit
avatar

Caulipower

9 months ago
Score 0
But isn’t every foreign movie banned on North Korea?
avatar

Awildderperappears

8 months ago
Score 3
I think they banned it because 2012 marked 100 years since the birth of their founder and god, Kim Il Sung, so they don't want people to think 2012 was a bad year.
avatar

GAMRKNIGHT352

one month ago
Score 1
It was super-banned
avatar

EliTheLooneyTunesFan2008

9 months ago
Score 1
I like this movie and it's fun, if 2012 doomsday happened, it will look like the movie.
avatar

Collin from DOAWK

8 months ago
Score 1
I like 2012
avatar

Space0720

8 months ago
Score 2
I regret liking this movie now.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

8 months ago
Score 2

Let me guess, was it because of COVID-19 compared to 2012?

For me, I also do not like the 2012 memes at all, nor do the COVID memes.
avatar

Crs3011

7 months ago
Score 0
More like "The end of good things in the world".
avatar

Villarreal892FIFA

7 months ago
Score 1
It should be called 2020 instead of 2012
avatar

MineGuy13

5 months ago
Score 0
You mean 2021 right?
avatar

EliTheLooneyTunesFan2008

7 months ago
Score 0
No just keep the title.
avatar

ChocolateHamburger

3 months ago
Score 1
Something tells me people are going no longer going to to believe In Mayan stuff now Huh?
avatar

AgentLocke

2 months ago
Score 0
I wonder how that 2013 tv show was gonna turn out
avatar

FightFireWithFire

2 months ago
Score 1
You know you reached there where you made a movie so terrible that even Kim Jong Un agrees with us.
avatar

SPEEDYBEAVER

2 months ago
Score 0
If this film ever got a sequel It would be called 2013.
avatar

YukariWayne

2 months ago
Score 1
That was going to be the name of a TV series sequel which was cancelled.
avatar

Master Chief

one month ago
Score 1
Why bother making a movie that will be outdated only 3 years after its' release?

You are not allowed to post comments.