Can't stand the director but have to admit "2012" wasn't quite as bad as I remember having seen it on cable recently. I'd say it was more bland than anything, and Rolland likes toppling the Washington Monument and the President (Glover) in a huge tidal wave. What was impressive were the graphics and the giant waves and floating ships. Peerless in that regard. But some of the characters are terribly cliched. I know. It's still not very good. The scene that I missed was everything is falling all around them and somehow Cusack still drives through it like a locomotive. Not even suspension of disbelief worthy. I prefer one foot on the ground through it all. I believe also Woody Harrelson had a brief part in it as a doomsday quack. Again unreal visuals, but that's about all I remember.
I think he's a bit of a comic book director, he always gets great visuals, but you wouldn't want a subject that's dear to your heart directed by him. My main problem with 2012 was that the leads were always driving/running/taking off in a plane with the ground crumbling just a foot or two behind them, like in a cartoon. I'd say, a great eye, but no taste.
Call it a guilty pleasure but I really enjoyed 2012. I like the characters and its a visual treat. Top of the line CGI for its time. This from someone who hates everything else Rolland Emmerich has ever done.
Unlike you three, I've been a massive fan of Emmerich all the way since STARGATE, and love basically everything he's done (except ANONYMOUS, which was a dud). The "master of disaster" and an expert at stagings, spectacle and narrative buildup. Often with a subversive 'glimmer in the eye', as we say in Norway (it's well worth seeking out some interviews of his where he goes into this). I know that he's often a target of critical scorn, but that only amplifies my love of him.
2012 was not on the level of THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW, but is still highly, highly enjoyable, of course. Seen it maybe some 5-6 times (for example, I saw it once last year and then again this year when it was available on Netflix). His first acts, filled with anticipation for the coming armageddon, are always amazing. And then when it kicks off, it's thrilling.
2012 and the Day after Tomorrow are decent enough sunday afternoon time wasters and fairly enjoyable entertainment. Looking back, i think i found most of his films mostly to be okay enough for one watch.
I think Emmerich's worst two films have been his last two, Independence Day Resurgence and Midway were both really awful.
His earlier films were 'crowd-pleasing hokum' on a Grand scale. I can see why they were massive successes. I enjoyed them too, for what they were. His latter films have been pretty sh!t, ID2 was truly awful and I never saw MIDWAY (or ANONYMOUS, for that matter). I'm also often guilty of confusing his films with Wolfgang Petersen!! (must be the German thing).
So do I. It's terrible, but not un-enjoyable. And extremely well mounted. Although the first hour* is miles better than the second (and I hate the final quarter with the Raptor Godzilla's in the Sports Arena Complex).
* I love the oppressive, rainy atmosphere and the build-up that Thor alludes to.
The only GODZILLAs I've ever cared for are the Emmerich version, and the two new ones. So sorry to all those fans of the Japanese ones that seem to frequent this forum.
I absolutely LOVE that baby Godzilla/JURASSIC PARK raptor-like sequence. Tense!
I'm also often guilty of confusing his films with Wolfgang Petersen!! (must be the German thing).
Yes, it's an apt link that I've often made myself. Both are Germans doing a lot of overblown Hollywood extravaganzas - kinda like an outsider both celebrating and being satirical towards the 'patriotism' of their host country. I love that!
The only GODZILLAs I've ever cared for are the Emmerich version, and the two new ones. So sorry to all those fans of the Japanese ones that seem to frequent this forum.
I absolutely LOVE that baby Godzilla/JURASSIC PARK raptor-like sequence. Tense!
I'm also often guilty of confusing his films with Wolfgang Petersen!! (must be the German thing).
Yes, it's an apt link that I've often made myself. Both are Germans doing a lot of overblown Hollywood extravaganzas - kinda like an outsider both celebrating and being satirical towards the 'patriotism' of their host country. I love that!
The film is cringe worthy and not enjoyable at all and that is NOT Godzilla. No American film has gotten Godzilla right. The only thing I enjoyed was the baby-zillas raptor rip-off sequence.
The only thing I enjoyed was the baby-zillas raptor rip-off sequence.
Good thing we can agree on that sequence, at least.
I'm not a Godzilla "purist". I don't give a flying f**k about any of the previous Japanese movies. I'm only in it for a well-made creature feature, and Emmerich's GODZILLA delivers in spades. I'm well aware this view is in opposition to most Godzilla fans, but I don't care.
The only thing I enjoyed was the baby-zillas raptor rip-off sequence.
Good thing we can agree on that sequence, at least.
I'm not a Godzilla "purist". I don't give a flying f**k about any of the previous Japanese movies. I'm only in it for a well-made creature feature, and Emmerich's GODZILLA delivers in spades. I'm well aware this view is in opposition to most Godzilla fans, but I don't care.
Then don't call it Godzilla. Otherwise I'd have no issue with the monster they put on screen.
Yep. No point in doing Godzilla if you design a completely different image. That raptor bit was when I finally wanted to give up since it was just a retread of something else. If they'd have used the original design of Godzilla with all the then new sfx everybody would have been happy. Result! But someone always thinks they know better and end up displeasing at least half of the audience they're aiming at. As a Doctor Who fan, believe me, I know this.
I disagree with that basic (conservative) sentiment. A lot of fans of James Bond, Star Trek, Star Wars, Godzilla, you name it, seem to want any new reiteration to be EXACTLY like the one they grew up with. No changes allowed. I'm not of that opinion. I think franchise properties are dynamic entities that can be pulled and stretched -- within reason. Which is why I like stuff like STAR TREK: DISCOVERY or STAR TREK: PICARD. Or THE MANDALORIAN. Or even ALIEN: RESSURECTION (although that took me a while) or PROMETHEUS. In each of these cases, the fictional universe is the same, but they're very different from their origins in style and tone and even design. And that's perfectly fine! In fact, it's refreshing and sometimes even better than their origins.
Of course the important words you used there Thor were "within reason", and has been proven time and again -just on this site alone - everyone has their own version of that.
For me, I don't mind the plot or anything else about Emmerich's Godzilla, simply the redesign. Keeping the original would have given the customer what they really wanted, the good old character they've watched for decades finally realised with DECENT fx for once. New customers (who couldn't care less what it looked like) would get what they got anyway, just an entertaining film end of story.
But what we got was some other creature with the same name. That's the problem.
Of course the important words you used there Thor were "within reason", and has been proven time and again -just on this site alone - everyone has their own version of that.
For me, I don't mind the plot or anything else about Emmerich's Godzilla, simply the redesign. Keeping the original would have given the customer what they really wanted, the good old character they've watched for decades finally realised with DECENT fx for once. New customers (who couldn't care less what it looked like) would get what they got anyway, just an entertaining film end of story.
But what we got was some other creature with the same name. That's the problem.
The creative licensing was not within reason. Emmerich's Godzilla was an irradiated french iguana. It's fundamentally not Godzilla.
Of course the important words you used there Thor were "within reason", and has been proven time and again -just on this site alone - everyone has their own version of that.
For me, I don't mind the plot or anything else about Emmerich's Godzilla, simply the redesign. Keeping the original would have given the customer what they really wanted, the good old character they've watched for decades finally realised with DECENT fx for once. New customers (who couldn't care less what it looked like) would get what they got anyway, just an entertaining film end of story.
But what we got was some other creature with the same name. That's the problem.
The creative licensing was not within reason. Emmerich's Godzilla was an irradiated french iguana. It's fundamentally not Godzilla.
