November 14: 2012 movie review, 2012 end of the world: it is an engrossing experience. Director Roland Emmerich has done a marvelous but ridiculous job in 2012! These contradictory epithets describe well the disaster movie that outshine all the of a decade’s similar Hollywood movies put together.
Enduring blow-ups and bloodbaths, crumbling skyscrapers, and a set of fairly compelling characters that fight all the horrible things neither they nor the audience can even imagine.
At bottom, the disaster flick is all about the saga of the unsuccessful and scruffy novelist Jack Curtis who first doesn’t bother a bit about his comely ex-wife Kate and their two kids, but later gets closer to them thanks to the outbreak of quakes, volcanoes and tsunamis. John Cusack and Amanda Peet play the hubby and wife.
Characterization is where the writer-director Emmerich and co-writer Harald Kloser applied good wit and deserve praise.
That said, the eye-bulging visual effects that can shake your sense to the bottom will fetch them more praise.
Reviewers across the media say in unison that 2012 is essentially an outrageous flick that can surely satisfy its very own kind of audience.
What else verdict can they give a movie that vows and amuses you with scenes of tsunami waves climbing the Himalayas?
source
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
Monday, November 16, 2009
2012 Movie Review: A big effects blockbuster this holiday season
Volcanoes! Earthquakes! Tsunamis! 2012 throws it all up on the screen in an epic scale. Literally, it may be the most grandiose destruction movie ever created. The mother of all disaster films for sure. However, is the visual splendor enough to detract from the film’s shortcomings? Let’s put it this way; you have been warned.
The flimsy plot really just barely connects this sprawling, two-hour film. Basically, the Mayans predicted back in ancient times that the world as we all know it would cease to exist in 2012. Sadly, those premonitions are now coming true. As explained by scientists in the beginning of the film, the heat from the sun has become so intense that the earth’s core is overheating in an extreme manner, bleeding out into the crust and causing the whole thing to quake, break, and melt away.
When all of the turmoil strikes first in California, Jackson is one of the many scrambling to get his family to safety before the world literally falls out beneath him. With knowledge that a select group of Americans (including government officials and millionaires) are on their way to China to board a spaceship that will save them, Jackson rents a plane and heads towards salvation.
One thing that can be said about 2012 is that it delivers with special effects! Unlike other movies of its kind, audiences won’t have to wait until the climax for the big effects moment. Oh no, director Roland Emmerich is not satisfied with that notion. Instead, he offers up no less than four huge set pieces, spread out through the span of the film. The special effects in each moment are spectacular and exhilarating, using superb effects and displaying the horror in a very vivid manner.
Still, it’s a shame it couldn’t be more fun. By the time the audience watches the third land mass get wiped off the screen, 2012 has become exhausting. The initial breathtaking erosion of California withstanding, the movie dissolves into a series of iconic cities collapsing and mass death. Furthermore, even though director Emmerich knows the disaster film like the back of his cliched hand (Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow), he also forces half-baked drama and corny dialogue on the viewer. No one really cares about any of these poorly drawn characters or situations, and any likability comes from the actors’ natural charms (who couldn’t love John Cusak!?).
As 2012 moves past the two hour mark, it becomes clear that the filmmakers were out to make some kind of disaster movie to end all disaster movies. Almost tipping into parody, the climax is still reasonably exciting, but as mentioned, any kind of fun has long since been drained from this flimsy, effects driven extravaganza. Still, one can not argue the movie delivers on its most intended level in spades. Just don’t expect anything else from 2012.
source
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
The flimsy plot really just barely connects this sprawling, two-hour film. Basically, the Mayans predicted back in ancient times that the world as we all know it would cease to exist in 2012. Sadly, those premonitions are now coming true. As explained by scientists in the beginning of the film, the heat from the sun has become so intense that the earth’s core is overheating in an extreme manner, bleeding out into the crust and causing the whole thing to quake, break, and melt away.
When all of the turmoil strikes first in California, Jackson is one of the many scrambling to get his family to safety before the world literally falls out beneath him. With knowledge that a select group of Americans (including government officials and millionaires) are on their way to China to board a spaceship that will save them, Jackson rents a plane and heads towards salvation.
One thing that can be said about 2012 is that it delivers with special effects! Unlike other movies of its kind, audiences won’t have to wait until the climax for the big effects moment. Oh no, director Roland Emmerich is not satisfied with that notion. Instead, he offers up no less than four huge set pieces, spread out through the span of the film. The special effects in each moment are spectacular and exhilarating, using superb effects and displaying the horror in a very vivid manner.
Still, it’s a shame it couldn’t be more fun. By the time the audience watches the third land mass get wiped off the screen, 2012 has become exhausting. The initial breathtaking erosion of California withstanding, the movie dissolves into a series of iconic cities collapsing and mass death. Furthermore, even though director Emmerich knows the disaster film like the back of his cliched hand (Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow), he also forces half-baked drama and corny dialogue on the viewer. No one really cares about any of these poorly drawn characters or situations, and any likability comes from the actors’ natural charms (who couldn’t love John Cusak!?).
As 2012 moves past the two hour mark, it becomes clear that the filmmakers were out to make some kind of disaster movie to end all disaster movies. Almost tipping into parody, the climax is still reasonably exciting, but as mentioned, any kind of fun has long since been drained from this flimsy, effects driven extravaganza. Still, one can not argue the movie delivers on its most intended level in spades. Just don’t expect anything else from 2012.
source
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
'2012' spells doom for its competition at the box office
The end-of-the-world epic takes in $65 million in the U.S. and Canada and $225 million worldwide. Disney's 'Christmas Carol' finishes a distant second.
Even the Maya would have struggled to forecast an opening weekend this big.
Sony Pictures' "2012," the latest end-of-the-world epic from disaster director Roland Emmerich, took in $65 million in the U.S. and Canada and an earth-shattering $160 million elsewhere for a worldwide weekend total of $225 million.
The 162-minute thriller, based on a purported Maya prophecy that the world will end Dec. 21, 2012, will easily make back its production and marketing costs for Sony long before that date rolls around. The movie cost about $200 million to make and tens of millions more to market. Most industry observers and pre-release forecasts had "2012" opening above $50 million domestically.
It has yet to open in several major international markets, including Japan.
"It's going to be a very big success for our studio," said Rory Bruer, Sony's distribution president.
For Emmerich, "2012" had his second-biggest domestic opening, behind his 2004 disaster film "The Day After Tomorrow," which opened to almost $70 million. However, that end-of-the-world movie was released on a three-day holiday weekend.
Walt Disney Co.'s "A Christmas Carol," which did not have the best of starts last weekend, had a strong second week, pulling in $22.3 million. That's a decline of only 26% and a good sign that the holiday remake should have a healthy theatrical run. About 14% of the movie's box-office take came from Imax screens.
"It absolutely played the way we thought it would," said Chuck Viane, president of domestic distribution for Walt Disney Studios. Though last week's $31-million opening was by no means small, the consensus was that it should have opened bigger and that perhaps moviegoers weren't quite in the holiday spirit a mere week after Halloween. Viane said the studio wanted to get six weeks on 3-D screens before 20th Century Fox's "Avatar" premiered.
The indie movie "Precious," which Lionsgate bought at Sundance for about $5.5 million, took in about $6.1 million in just 174 theaters in nine cities for an impressive $35,000 per-screen average. The drama, with Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry as executive producers, will expand to 600 theaters in 100 markets next weekend. It finished fourth, just behind Overture's George Clooney comedy "The Men Who Stare at Goats," which took in $6.2 million in wide release.
"The exit polls from last weekend indicated strong word-of-mouth," said David Spitz, Lionsgate's executive vice president who oversees distribution. "Precious," about a Harlem girl trying to overcome an abusive family, is already seen as a big Oscar favorite.
Also having a strong opening in limited release was 20th Century Fox's "Fantastic Mr. Fox," which made its debut at four theaters in New York and Los Angeles and took in $260,000, for a $65,000 per-screen average. It will open wide the day before Thanksgiving.
Lost at sea was "Pirate Radio" from Focus Features, which made just $2.9 million at almost 900 theaters. Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, the movie about illegal radio stations in Britain boasts a great soundtrack but apparently wasn't exactly what the iPod generation was looking for this weekend.
source: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-box-office16-2009nov16,0,2718075.story
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
Even the Maya would have struggled to forecast an opening weekend this big.
Sony Pictures' "2012," the latest end-of-the-world epic from disaster director Roland Emmerich, took in $65 million in the U.S. and Canada and an earth-shattering $160 million elsewhere for a worldwide weekend total of $225 million.
The 162-minute thriller, based on a purported Maya prophecy that the world will end Dec. 21, 2012, will easily make back its production and marketing costs for Sony long before that date rolls around. The movie cost about $200 million to make and tens of millions more to market. Most industry observers and pre-release forecasts had "2012" opening above $50 million domestically.
It has yet to open in several major international markets, including Japan.
"It's going to be a very big success for our studio," said Rory Bruer, Sony's distribution president.
For Emmerich, "2012" had his second-biggest domestic opening, behind his 2004 disaster film "The Day After Tomorrow," which opened to almost $70 million. However, that end-of-the-world movie was released on a three-day holiday weekend.
Walt Disney Co.'s "A Christmas Carol," which did not have the best of starts last weekend, had a strong second week, pulling in $22.3 million. That's a decline of only 26% and a good sign that the holiday remake should have a healthy theatrical run. About 14% of the movie's box-office take came from Imax screens.
"It absolutely played the way we thought it would," said Chuck Viane, president of domestic distribution for Walt Disney Studios. Though last week's $31-million opening was by no means small, the consensus was that it should have opened bigger and that perhaps moviegoers weren't quite in the holiday spirit a mere week after Halloween. Viane said the studio wanted to get six weeks on 3-D screens before 20th Century Fox's "Avatar" premiered.
The indie movie "Precious," which Lionsgate bought at Sundance for about $5.5 million, took in about $6.1 million in just 174 theaters in nine cities for an impressive $35,000 per-screen average. The drama, with Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry as executive producers, will expand to 600 theaters in 100 markets next weekend. It finished fourth, just behind Overture's George Clooney comedy "The Men Who Stare at Goats," which took in $6.2 million in wide release.
"The exit polls from last weekend indicated strong word-of-mouth," said David Spitz, Lionsgate's executive vice president who oversees distribution. "Precious," about a Harlem girl trying to overcome an abusive family, is already seen as a big Oscar favorite.
Also having a strong opening in limited release was 20th Century Fox's "Fantastic Mr. Fox," which made its debut at four theaters in New York and Los Angeles and took in $260,000, for a $65,000 per-screen average. It will open wide the day before Thanksgiving.
Lost at sea was "Pirate Radio" from Focus Features, which made just $2.9 million at almost 900 theaters. Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, the movie about illegal radio stations in Britain boasts a great soundtrack but apparently wasn't exactly what the iPod generation was looking for this weekend.
source: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-box-office16-2009nov16,0,2718075.story
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
FX Makes Date for "2012"
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - FX has snapped up TV rights to "2012," the disaster movie that just enjoyed a blockbuster $225 million opening weekend worldwide.
Appropriately, the Roland Emmerich-directed Sony movie will premiere on the basic cable network in the beginning of 2012.
In addition to "2012," FX has acquired another Sony film that opened at No. 1 this fall, the horror-comedy "Zombieland," which will be available at the end of next year.
The license fee for both movies is said to be standard, about 12% of their domestic box office.
If "2012" crosses the $200 million mark in North America, as expected after its big $65 million opening weekend, it could fetch as much as $24 million. For the Woody Harrelson starrer "Zombieland," which grossed $73 million domestically, the price tag is estimated to be $8 million-$9 million.
Hit movies, especially big, special effects-heavy disaster flicks, have done well on FX, including the Emmerich-directed disaster duo "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Independence Day."
source: http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=9092094
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
Appropriately, the Roland Emmerich-directed Sony movie will premiere on the basic cable network in the beginning of 2012.
In addition to "2012," FX has acquired another Sony film that opened at No. 1 this fall, the horror-comedy "Zombieland," which will be available at the end of next year.
The license fee for both movies is said to be standard, about 12% of their domestic box office.
If "2012" crosses the $200 million mark in North America, as expected after its big $65 million opening weekend, it could fetch as much as $24 million. For the Woody Harrelson starrer "Zombieland," which grossed $73 million domestically, the price tag is estimated to be $8 million-$9 million.
Hit movies, especially big, special effects-heavy disaster flicks, have done well on FX, including the Emmerich-directed disaster duo "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Independence Day."
source: http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=9092094
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
2012 Movie Review: CGI Porn For The Masses
Roland Emmerich returns to the big screen with a sequel of sorts to his hit blockbusters Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow. Some reviews will mention Godzilla, but given how few people saw that movie, it shouldn’t be considered because 2012 is the really the end of the trilogy that started with Independence Day.
My expectations going into the movie were mixed: on one hand, reviews said it is what it is, and it does it well, while others said it’s somewhere close to Transformers 2, but without the soft porn provided by Megan Fox.
I’m happy to report that it was the former. Unlike Transformers 2, 2012 shamelessly suffers its lack of serious plot and acting by overwhelming the senses with CGI porn; Transformers 2 looks like something my son plays in his bedroom by comparison.
John Cussack takes the role as the lead in the trilogy in the footsteps of Bill Pullman and Dennis Quaid before him, but brings a decidedly Gen X take to the role. Here’s a character in his mid to late 30s, divorced with a hot ex wife and some kids who struggles to keep up with his now ex-family.
Fortunately…or unfortunately I just described most of the 30 minutes of the movie, well throw in Woody Harelson as a grade A nutter and some global conspiracy theories for good measure. No, Ron Paul didn’t direct, but he would have been proud.
All you need to know about the first 30 minutes is the world is going to end, then the CGI porn flows from about that point, and by god it is the CGI equivalent on Heidi Klum taking it in a twosome…but even hotter.
If you’ve seen the trailer, you’ll get some of the rough idea. As a visual treat 2012 is the world ender when it comes to a disaster movie, because no other movie will ever be able to beat the CGI and story concept again: how after all can you beat the end of the world?
If I had to criticize, it’s that Emmerich softly decided only to destroy American and Christian icons, as opposed to being truly global (and unbias) in his vision of the end of the world; apparently he was worried about a jihad or something, which says soft to me.
If you love your CGI, you’ll love 2012. If you want to see a movie with a serious story line, stay well away.
3 1/2 stars.
source: http://www.inquisitr.com/47838/2012-movie-review/
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
My expectations going into the movie were mixed: on one hand, reviews said it is what it is, and it does it well, while others said it’s somewhere close to Transformers 2, but without the soft porn provided by Megan Fox.
I’m happy to report that it was the former. Unlike Transformers 2, 2012 shamelessly suffers its lack of serious plot and acting by overwhelming the senses with CGI porn; Transformers 2 looks like something my son plays in his bedroom by comparison.
John Cussack takes the role as the lead in the trilogy in the footsteps of Bill Pullman and Dennis Quaid before him, but brings a decidedly Gen X take to the role. Here’s a character in his mid to late 30s, divorced with a hot ex wife and some kids who struggles to keep up with his now ex-family.
Fortunately…or unfortunately I just described most of the 30 minutes of the movie, well throw in Woody Harelson as a grade A nutter and some global conspiracy theories for good measure. No, Ron Paul didn’t direct, but he would have been proud.
All you need to know about the first 30 minutes is the world is going to end, then the CGI porn flows from about that point, and by god it is the CGI equivalent on Heidi Klum taking it in a twosome…but even hotter.
If you’ve seen the trailer, you’ll get some of the rough idea. As a visual treat 2012 is the world ender when it comes to a disaster movie, because no other movie will ever be able to beat the CGI and story concept again: how after all can you beat the end of the world?
If I had to criticize, it’s that Emmerich softly decided only to destroy American and Christian icons, as opposed to being truly global (and unbias) in his vision of the end of the world; apparently he was worried about a jihad or something, which says soft to me.
If you love your CGI, you’ll love 2012. If you want to see a movie with a serious story line, stay well away.
3 1/2 stars.
source: http://www.inquisitr.com/47838/2012-movie-review/
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
2012: Movie Review By Lexi Feinberg
The world is ending yet again, and this time it's because the planet is melting at the core. The ancient Mayans knew that Earth would cease to exist in 2012 (not really, as it turns out, but shh) yet government officials couldn't be bothered to explore such things or warn the people of their imminent demise. They were too busy mastering the art of being totally useless.
This is essentially the premise of "2012," the latest ridiculous apocalypse movie from hack writer/director Roland Emmerich ("Day After Tomorrow," Independence Day"). While the film contains eye-dazzling special effects -- courtesy of a bloated $265 million budget -- it's nothing short of horrendous. It may be cool to watch buildings fall like dominoes and to witness the Sistine Chapel implode, but the film clocks in at an "are-you-kidding-me?" 2.5 hours, and much of that is surprisingly low on action.
When mass destruction isn't reigning supreme, there's a whole lot of tedious filler involving a failed novelist (John Cusack), his estranged wife (Amanda Peet) and their two irritating kids. On the political side, there's a government-advising geologist (Chiwetel Ejiofor) who warns the chief of staff (Carl Anheuser) and president (Danny Glover) of the world's coming expiration. Oh, and let's not forget the crazy prophet (Woody Harrelson, this time not hunting for Twinkies) who broadcasts his conspiracy theories on the radio.
Emmerich obviously isn't seeking brownie points for originality or, gasp, effort, but would it kill him to make a halfway decent movie? Every line is more baffling than the last (writer Harald Kloser is also to blame) and the dramatic tension is nonexistent. "2012" a long, lackluster exercise in bad filmmaking, featuring an occasional massive tidal wave or out-of-control fire beam. It's like a drawn-out Playstation 3 challenge without any of the fun. Game over.
source
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
This is essentially the premise of "2012," the latest ridiculous apocalypse movie from hack writer/director Roland Emmerich ("Day After Tomorrow," Independence Day"). While the film contains eye-dazzling special effects -- courtesy of a bloated $265 million budget -- it's nothing short of horrendous. It may be cool to watch buildings fall like dominoes and to witness the Sistine Chapel implode, but the film clocks in at an "are-you-kidding-me?" 2.5 hours, and much of that is surprisingly low on action.
When mass destruction isn't reigning supreme, there's a whole lot of tedious filler involving a failed novelist (John Cusack), his estranged wife (Amanda Peet) and their two irritating kids. On the political side, there's a government-advising geologist (Chiwetel Ejiofor) who warns the chief of staff (Carl Anheuser) and president (Danny Glover) of the world's coming expiration. Oh, and let's not forget the crazy prophet (Woody Harrelson, this time not hunting for Twinkies) who broadcasts his conspiracy theories on the radio.
Emmerich obviously isn't seeking brownie points for originality or, gasp, effort, but would it kill him to make a halfway decent movie? Every line is more baffling than the last (writer Harald Kloser is also to blame) and the dramatic tension is nonexistent. "2012" a long, lackluster exercise in bad filmmaking, featuring an occasional massive tidal wave or out-of-control fire beam. It's like a drawn-out Playstation 3 challenge without any of the fun. Game over.
source
Sponsored Links 3
Best Filipino Internet Marketer | Best Places In Asia | Philippine Franchise List | House and Lot For Sale Cebu | Cebu Condominiums For Sale | Cash In A Flash PDF | HR Outsourcing Services
Friday, November 13, 2009
Improbable movie moments: outrunning stuff
Run! Run! RUN! Go! Go! GO! Don't look back! NOW!
Have finer words been spoken in the history of the motion picture? If so, I have not heard them. Yes, today, let us salute the long, improbable, unappreciated history of outrunning stuff in film. Which, it must be noted, is not the same as running away or merely jogging. A true outrunning-stuff moment requires remaining a step ahead — a step, inches from failure, the hot breath of fate at your neck.
Film history may be marked with technical innovation and aesthetic breakthroughs so seamlessly assimilated its value is taken for granted — the birth of sound, the hand-held camera shot, the Technicolor process. But why spend time swooning over middling innovations like those when Roland Emmerich has a new disaster movie coming out? "2012" opens Nov. 13, and will feature, as most of his films have, virtuosic scenes of characters outrunning all sorts of stupid stuff. Indeed, Emmerich, the German-born auteur who made "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Independence Day" and that remake of "Godzilla," and a bunch of other entertaining junk tailor-made for 3 a.m. on a Tuesday, has raised the device to an art.
Let us not mince words: He is the Orson Welles of outrunning stuff —the standard bearer. He did not originate the cliche, though. Movie characters have been outrunning stuff since the earliest Tarzan adventures, since the Keystone Kops first gave chase, since (sorta) silent-film comedian Harold Lloyd first stepped unwittingly out of the way of certain death. As connected as the idea is to the impossible, however, outrunning stuff didn't really take fruit until the 1950s, when special effects gained in prominence. There are a pair of two classic precedents from this period: a town running from "The Blob" (1958) and Cary Grant running from a crop duster in "North by Northwest" (1959, pictured below). Beginning with Sean Connery, James Bond has outrun the bullets aimed at his feet for decades. And of course, Indiana Jones famously outran an enormous boulder in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981).
Still, those are tangible things. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Sylvester Stallone and Bruce Willis perfected the art of outrunning the fireball. "Star Wars" (1977) and "Alien" (1979) popularized the idea of outrunning shock waves. So, yes, characters have even outrun physics for decades. But Emmerich, I believe, made it safe for Hollywood to consider the outrunning of truly insane things — a breeze (" The Happening," 2008), a sunrise ("The Mummy Returns," 2001) and a black hole ( "Star Trek," 2009). He also imbued his sequences with a sweaty, breathless, albeit impossible, sense of scramble such moments often lacked. And so, what follows is a brief history of outrunning stuff in Roland Emmerich movies — arranged not in cinematic but geological order, sorta.
Watch Pacquiao VS Cotto Live
Have finer words been spoken in the history of the motion picture? If so, I have not heard them. Yes, today, let us salute the long, improbable, unappreciated history of outrunning stuff in film. Which, it must be noted, is not the same as running away or merely jogging. A true outrunning-stuff moment requires remaining a step ahead — a step, inches from failure, the hot breath of fate at your neck.
Film history may be marked with technical innovation and aesthetic breakthroughs so seamlessly assimilated its value is taken for granted — the birth of sound, the hand-held camera shot, the Technicolor process. But why spend time swooning over middling innovations like those when Roland Emmerich has a new disaster movie coming out? "2012" opens Nov. 13, and will feature, as most of his films have, virtuosic scenes of characters outrunning all sorts of stupid stuff. Indeed, Emmerich, the German-born auteur who made "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Independence Day" and that remake of "Godzilla," and a bunch of other entertaining junk tailor-made for 3 a.m. on a Tuesday, has raised the device to an art.
Let us not mince words: He is the Orson Welles of outrunning stuff —the standard bearer. He did not originate the cliche, though. Movie characters have been outrunning stuff since the earliest Tarzan adventures, since the Keystone Kops first gave chase, since (sorta) silent-film comedian Harold Lloyd first stepped unwittingly out of the way of certain death. As connected as the idea is to the impossible, however, outrunning stuff didn't really take fruit until the 1950s, when special effects gained in prominence. There are a pair of two classic precedents from this period: a town running from "The Blob" (1958) and Cary Grant running from a crop duster in "North by Northwest" (1959, pictured below). Beginning with Sean Connery, James Bond has outrun the bullets aimed at his feet for decades. And of course, Indiana Jones famously outran an enormous boulder in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981).
Still, those are tangible things. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Sylvester Stallone and Bruce Willis perfected the art of outrunning the fireball. "Star Wars" (1977) and "Alien" (1979) popularized the idea of outrunning shock waves. So, yes, characters have even outrun physics for decades. But Emmerich, I believe, made it safe for Hollywood to consider the outrunning of truly insane things — a breeze (" The Happening," 2008), a sunrise ("The Mummy Returns," 2001) and a black hole ( "Star Trek," 2009). He also imbued his sequences with a sweaty, breathless, albeit impossible, sense of scramble such moments often lacked. And so, what follows is a brief history of outrunning stuff in Roland Emmerich movies — arranged not in cinematic but geological order, sorta.
Watch Pacquiao VS Cotto Live
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)