This is a subject that has been given too much attention by the whole world. Based on the extremely arrogant visual effects, it has truly achieved the incomparably old storyline and various American stereotypes derived from the storyline. One of the most deadly points is that a movie that explores the topic of how to continue human civilization has become an escape theme visual effect show that can make filmmakers and viewers so happy.
Disaster master Roland Emmerich's obsession with special effects technology in recent years has really reached the point of sophistication and obsession, so that old-fashioned and bad scripts are put on visual effects one by one. The glamorous coat was applauded and popular. From "The Day After Day" to "Ten Thousand Years Before History" to "2012", I have tried repeatedly and I am not tired of it. But the pioneering and creative achievements he showed in "Stargate" and "Independence Day" earlier are gone forever.
[About the performance of clue characters and actors]
"2012" revolves around the escape process of a family.
(The "Voiceover" film tells us: Only a divorce can make a husband back to justice; the second husband is only a temporary gas station for a woman's spiritual and economic transition during the transition period; true love will never happen in the second marriage, and a woman will return to her original partner after all But when a disaster strikes, taking a child and possessing two men at the same time is the magic weapon for a woman to survive to the end.)
Why disaster movies always can’t escape the clue of the “escape” of the “divorced family”, Male No.1 (child’s biological father) is always transformed into an American savior by a small man who lives on dreams—American-style shabby Wenqing in various coincidences in troubled times. Male No.2 (child’s adoptive father) is always The rich lord who was portrayed as a clumsy, poor, unpleasant picture, was removed from the story with disdain before he could be fully understood.
In contrast, the second clue character of the film, Carl Anheuser (Oliver Platt), is handled very well. This is a character with a personality, and the promotion of the plot is just right. I was shocked by the action of throwing my son onto the deck with all my strength before dying, but he fell into the deep valley. ("Voiceover" is here, the film tells us: The status of mistress will never reach the height of a child. So let's give up the great dream of being nurtured, and reincarnation to be a rich second generation is a serious matter. Even if it fails, be a dog , Are better than being a mistress.)
Watching the entire movie, the only person who can make an impression on the performance is Oliver Platt, who plays the boxing tycoon Carl Anheuser.
By the way, Lu Yan also acted bloodlessly in it. The act of beheading the chicken and the tone of good words when walking through the back door a bit brutalized the Tibetans (personal opinion only).
[The peak of visual aesthetics in disaster films]
Give me 80 yuan, and I will give you an American-style disaster family bucket, the top luxury version.
As a director who is good at disaster vision, Emmerich’s aesthetic treatment of disaster scenes in "2012" really achieved the highest level. I am afraid that it will be difficult for any movie to compare with it in disaster vision in the future. . The crazy visual presentation of Los Angeles and Paris in the process of urban destruction will still be very shocking to us who have been a little numb by various visual effects for many years. Emmerich does not need to plagiarize, every time he brings the audience a new scene and perspective. The use of long shots in the description of the disaster in "2012" really made all viewers die.
The use of Chinese Tibetan elements makes the film dyed with oriental aesthetics and religion, which not only satisfies the curiosity of Western audiences, but also pleases the Chinese government and Chinese audiences. And that handsome Tibetan monk also attracted a lot of attention. But I think this area will be even more brilliant if you study it more carefully. For example, the conversation between the master and the disciple can be more "zen" and more "suspension"; the master should ring 3 bells when watching the oncoming tsunami (it feels a bit awkward to be submerged by the tsunami after 2 knocks...). (PS: The scene of the flooded temple is indeed beautiful.)
Only when the aircraft carrier shoots the US president who is with the people to death, it is cold. In Emmerich's eyes, the end of the world in 2012 is so calm, beautiful and warm. For human society and other organisms, huge solar storms, nine planets lined up in a row, and the earth’s magnetic pole shift are absolute catastrophes that occur once in hundreds of thousands of years. For celestial bodies in the solar system, only It was just a small sneeze. For the demise of life, more respect and calm escort should be given than fear and grief. At this point, the director handled it to make the audience more comfortable and even more enjoyable.
[It's technology, it wasted a peerless movie theme]
There was a comment that "2012" broke the back of other disaster film directors." I do not agree with this argument. If you are asked to shoot this subject, wouldn't you represent earthquakes, volcanoes, and tsunamis? Obviously, according to various "prophecies" and "scientific reasoning", the end of the world should be like this. Can it be called "the end of the world" if it is not so miserable? Destroy everything that can be destroyed. What is the Eiffel Tower, aircraft carrier, and Air Force One?
These are merely manifestations. The Eiffel Tower was also shaved off by a plane while falling into the abyss, which is probably a kind of contempt for the French-style male genital worship. The aircraft carrier smashed on the head of the US President is an indictment that the American military hegemony is self-inflicted and self-inflicted. Air Force One landed on Noah's Ark and fell apart underwater, expressing the dismissal of the history of human civilization for American politics.
Rather than "breaking the back of other disaster film directors", it is better to say "wasting a peerless movie theme." A subject that was originally worthy of digging into a big fuss was processed into a simple disaster visual blockbuster. If it is true or false, no director will make a fuss about this subject in the future, although there is still a lot to say. Unless before 2012 comes, another "2012 Prequel" and "2012 Postquel" will be shot.
[Selling sheep's head, selling dog meat]
In the name of "continuing human civilization", it does something to show off technology. The US$200 million investment has created only a technological pinnacle that no one can match.
"2012" can be regarded as a model of Hollywood-style large-scale production of visual effects, but it is a desert of human civilization. It’s not that the movie ruined human civilization, but that the movie of this subject should have made a big fuss about how to continue human civilization, but the director put all his energy on the crazy worship of technology, which made the whole In the process of the film, there is no way to escape the technical show-off carrier-the topic of "escape", which makes the conception of the whole film seem simple and superficial.
We can imagine that although many fans who have been following the movie "2012" for a long time have already explored the "2012 eschatology" related information, the vast majority of audiences who go to the theater to watch the movie still know very little about it, and even the relevant ones. Knowledge is nothing. The film’s eschatological predictions on the Maya’s astronomical calendar and the new discoveries and new theories in modern astronomy, geography, and physics have not systematically explained the supporting evidence for this eschatological theory. Let most audiences who do not understand "2012 eschatology" understand and achieve a convincing state of watching movies, and it will not satisfy the appetite of those who are more interested in the subject of "2012 eschatology".
In fact, just like "The Da Vinci Code" has made in-depth thoughts and explorations on the culture, art, and religion of the European Renaissance, the director of "2012" can also elevate this movie to a movie involving astronomy, geography, and In-depth science textbooks of physics, biology, culture and art. This is what I expected. "Mona Lisa" was preserved. I thought that the film would involve the highest achievements of many human civilizations, but it disappointed me more and more later: Michelangelo's "Genesis" was ruthlessly ruined; Elephants, giraffes, bull riding and other species were airlifted to Noah's Ark for storage, and then there was no more information. That's it.
However, the screenwriter of "2012", that is, the director himself, is obviously not a writer with extraordinary talent and knowledge like Dan Brawn; he does not need to spend a lot of money to ask for a world-class physics, astronomy, A think tank composed of geographers, biologists and astrologers went to pack this story into a more mysterious and difficult to express. Obviously, this subject matter has already been given too much attention. The director only needs to achieve the true ultimate in his strength-the visual effect, so that all the audiences who come here are really cool and high. enough. High box office is already doomed.
[Magnificent Noah's Ark and the scribble ending of the movie]
Regarding the mythological story in the Bible—Noah's Ark (Noah's Ark), I think this movie should arrange some fusion or coincidence of mythological elements and reality, which will make the movie It looks more interesting. For example, in the second half of the movie, elements such as the cleaning of various human dross and infectious diseases are added, or the elements of life and civilization are used to highlight at the end. Even copying the entire classical story structure of Noah's Ark will be better than it is now.
(Related information about the legend of Noah's Ark: http://baike.baidu.com/view/7765.htm )
Emmerich created an exceptionally magnificent escape in the history of film, but it was broken in the end. At the end of the film, it tells everyone that the world-class rich and politicians on these three big ships have survived. Seeing the calm new world, it hastily finished. The director only allowed humans and other species to land geographically, but did not talk about the landing of other creatures and human civilization, and did not elicit and discuss the reconstruction of the new order of human society and the sublimation of human civilization after the Great Purge. Even if you fly out and stay the pigeons... the ugly, pampered pet dog did not play any role in the development of the plot, but it still shined at the end and was taken as a "rich and poor child family". The symbol of "pro" friendship is far-fetched.
[Regarding the rationing of other species and later]
I saw a giraffe, an elephant, a rhinoceros, an XX, and a XX that were transported by helicopter to Tibet by air... The brutal configuration of species makes people straighten up. Pimple...
Next, I really dare not think about depression, mania, promiscuity, suicide one after another? Or is it reproduced asexually or cloned?
Terrible human beings.
Species have survived, but they will all be raped by humans and become living products, just like the endless loop of "McDonald's" and "KFC", losing the original meaning of the species, and eternally serving a single higher species-human beings.
I can’t blame me for thinking too much. I can only blame the director for focusing on showing off his skills in the process of "human escape" and for failing to give any explanation for more important issues.
In short, as a visual effects entertainment blockbuster in 2009, "2012" is absolutely no challenge. It is not an exaggeration to say that it can make future disaster film directors think twice; but as a professional movie fan worldwide, it has high hopes. One of the major "epic" themed movies in China is still lacking too much.
Author: Ye Fei | Y.Phoenix
2009-11-17
View more about 2012 reviews
