I loved the Core (really, I did), the Day after Tomorrow and both Armageddon and the chick flick version, Deep Impact. So lets just say I ran to see 2012 yesterday.
I never thought I'd say this, but there was too much dialog in that movie, not enough explosions. And they did not start early enough and ..HELLO...PLOT?
And did you see? They used the same "plane through the falling buildings" routine in both LA and Vegas. C'mon let's have some originality! What about a train through a collapsing mountain? It would work!
And don't get me started on the ending.... what-ever.
I came home and watched the spoof trailer...2012! Its a Disaster! Waaay funnier and just the right length for the subject matter.
Here it is..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW2qxFkcLM0
Enjoy...
And, from media reports, the (fictional) destruction of various landmarks associated with various religions, leaves an important landmark and religion out. Cowards.
RN- I was curious about the recent trend of destroying aircraft carriers. The USS Roosevelt in Transformers 2 and the USS Kennedy in 2012.
Suppose the next movie will be 2062? The year that Sir Isaac Newton time-lined the biblical apocalypse
I think what movie producers look for is an image that looks cool, whether it makes much sense or not. Destroying an aircraft carrier probably beats destroying a rowboat in this case. Is there ever much point to the wanton destruction in these movies?
RN- what religious symbol did they miss? I guess they missed Mecca...not up on my religious symbols...
I must say the family had much mocking fun with that movie! I thought my physicist-trained husband was going implode with the neutrino induced boiling water....LOL!
Ahhh, Hollywood.....where do they get the investors for that crap?
Leslie
quote:
Michael Bay just saw Roland Emmerich's "2012". Good job Roland...but I'll do better!
Guess we can look forward to the movie 2012 the Sequel: 2013? Ironic quote since Michael Bay destroyed the first carrier, which pissed me off since i served in The Gulf War on that ship, and Roland Emmerich/Ute Emmerich destroyed the second carrier. Most likely he is talking about Transformers 3...btw, according to his facebook he is close to signing Spinal Tap to do the soundtrack...bizarre.
Edited to add:
I've decided that movie special effects are an art form all their own, and there are some people who appreciate such movies just because they appreciate that particular art form.
I figure it's a valid art form, after all. You don't expect some kinds of paintings or sculptures to have plots, right?
[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited November 17, 2009).]
quote:
I've decided that movie special effects are an art form all their own, and there are some people who appreciate such movies just because they appreciate that particular art form.I figure it's a valid art form, after all. You don't expect some kinds of paintings or sculptures to have plots, right?
To a certain extent, I expect a work of art, whether a story with plot-and-character, or just a representation of some scene, to move me on some intellectual or emotional level...I react to the painting, or the sculpture, or the movie, in some way...I engage with the work.
And the work also has to engage with me. Back in the 1990s, maybe I might have been more moved by something like Independence Day...but the events of September 11th, 2001, eliminated that for me. I see a building collapse and I can only think of how many people died in it. (How many people would have died in the events of 2012?
The movies that have moved me the most lately were the two most recent Disney / Pixar movies, Wall-E and Up. Certainly they are special-effects-laden---you could hardly do an animated movie on computers without special effects---but they have a story, they have characters, they have a point...they go somewhere and get somewhere. (The segment in Up called "Married Life" on the DVD is among the saddest film sequences ever done.)
quote:
I see a building collapse and I can only think of how many people died in it.
I certainly agree with you there, Robert. That's why I probably won't go see 2012, and why I'm not really interested in disaster films in general.
There are other kinds of special effects, as you pointed out, and lots of different ways they can be used in movies. And I prefer a plot with interesting characters as well.
Just trying to explain (understand?) the people who pack the box offices for movies with little or no plot and characterization, but gazillions of special effects.
But some movie do use their special effects to move character and plot along. Ghostbusters or The Lord of the Rings or even the Star Wars movies---it's not all about the bang and the boom. And some manage to be monumentally big hits at the box office, as well.
I cannot remember ever watching something so preposterous in my life. However, the special effects were amazing. Whoever said that seeing is believing?
Grade - D (It would have been an F if the effects had been as bad as they were unbelievable)
I got a certain amount of enjoyment out of the disaster movies of the 1970s, like The Poseidon Adventure or The Towering Inferno. (Saw the latter in a theater---it wasn't my idea to go, it was my parents', and we spent about three hours in line to see it---this was way before multiplexes were common.) I don't think they neglected character and plot (and mostly-better actors) as much as their mordern-day successors...The Poseidon Adventure in particular had a neat way of playing off the notion of "weak" and "strong" in who survived and who didn't as they journeyed through the sinking ship. Would that something like [i2012 put as much into it as they did...even though it wasn't much.
(Come to think of it, the first movie I ever went to see all on my own was Star Wars. Now there was an interesting movie with bang-bang explosions and a plot and characters. And Alec Guinness, too.)
(I see I left some kind of typo in the above entry, trying to italicize, I guess. Ordinarily I'd correct it, but it's been two days, and that seems a little long to go into it again.)
quote:
Would any mass-produced gadget, much less a robot, survive seven hundred years?
haha...yes because he was a cannibal, stealing the parts off other dead WallE's and using them on himself. I will always love that movie because it sparked the initial idea for a screenplay I am developing.
I would never hold Bugs Bunny to the same standards of The Wizard of Oz or Gone with the Wind (although Bugs did do Scarlet once). I would never hold The Secret of NIMH to the same standards as Return of the Jedi.
Good or bad, a live action movie receives greater scrutiny from me than a cartoon, especially when the movie is not portraying itself as fantasy.
quote:
I have different believability criteria for a cartoon (animated movie), than I do for live action
But, looking at Beowulf I believe that actors will someday be reduced to voice-overs, and all movies will be animated, and nearly impossible to distinguish from live-action.
DW, regarding your comment about animation one day replacing live action, I seriously doubt this will ever occur. One of the main reasons is the tabloids. People have a certain fascination with stars - the human kind. Beowulf did not have to use the likenesses of real actors. However, it was deemed that the movie would have greater success if it did. Even animated movie-makers feel that their movies will have greater success if they use the voices of real recognizable stars. Why spend millions of dollars on voices if it didn't pay off?
Back to 2012, though. Did the movie say what actually triggered all the disaster stuff? -- what happened on 21 Dec 2012 to get it all going, or did it just happen?
quote:
And it is only going to get worse. He is a status update from Michael Bay's Facebook page. He is the director of Transformers and The Island, I met him on that set and he is quite a dynamic character.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Bay just saw Roland Emmerich's "2012". Good job Roland...but I'll do better!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Guess we can look forward to the movie 2012 the Sequel: 2013? Ironic quote since Michael Bay destroyed the first carrier, which pissed me off since i served in The Gulf War on that ship, and Roland Emmerich/Ute Emmerich destroyed the second carrier. Most likely he is talking about Transformers 3...btw, according to his facebook he is close to signing Spinal Tap to do the soundtrack...bizarre.
Oops I was joking but looks like Michael Bay really will be directing 2012 the sequel (2012: The War of Souls)...which will be out in 2011.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/
The untitled Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay project has me wondering too.