2012

O potencial de entretenimento aproveitado em todo o seu potencial. Cenas individuais podem ser clichés, mas como um todo não conduzem por caminhos totalmente previsíveis e entregam mais do que os trailers. Nem em um momento tive a sensação de que o filme estivesse a fingir ser mais sério do que devia ser - Roland Emmerich é surpreendentemente hábil desta vez em compensar o grau de cada absurdo com uma dose adequada de humor (o passeio de limusina de L.A. que, entre outras coisas, apanha um duche de um camião de limpeza de fossas é pura comédia e não tem nada a ver com um thriller catastrófico), ao mesmo tempo que consegue surpreender também (as incríveis ondas de maré). Mas o que mais me surpreendeu em 2012 e porque é que lhe dou 4* (não, nem sequer foram os efeitos por vezes medíocres, e certamente não o look de câmara digital barato a que obviamente teremos de nos habituar, mesmo com eye-candy big-budgets) é a abordagem política. O personagem menos ético de todo o filme é o chefe do governo americano, a classe rica é criticada por se salvar à custa dos operários, e a salvação do mundo aqui desta vez não é a bandeira americana, mas um mapa com «CHINA» escrito através do ecrã de cinema. A bandeira americana é bastante ridicularizada aqui em ligação com o personagem cómico de Woody Harrelson (grande cena na colina com vista para o vale, falando disso). E cada grande nação/continente é aqui representada ou por uma figura muito apropriadamente escrita e escolhida (os três russos + o seu cão lideram), ou pelo menos lembrada através um símbolo significativo (África...). 2012 é um filme catastrófico tão folclórico e espetacular que, de mãos dadas com o seu elevado nível de diversão, ganhou todas as minhas simpatias. E o facto de ter a Mona Lisa a olhar pela janela do Louvre na Torre Eiffel não me importa. ___ Segunda projeção: Se Emmerich estivesse na política mundial, não haveria guerras e estaríamos todos de mãos dadas amigavelmente (e iríamos ao cinema). O que você pode sentir mais deste seu filme é o quanto ele adora o bom e velho Hollywood catastrófico de aventura. Ultimate guilty pleasure. (05/11/2009)

Five minutes of fun are always ruined by half an hour of boring and incredibly dull bollocks. Where are the days of Independence Day and Godzilla? They didn’t have such megalomaniac destruction, but their stories held together and they were fun and tense throughout. If we consider the contents, the runtime of 2012 is so excessive that by the end (or rather, the last hour) it was hard for me to refrain from doing something else and leave the film on as background noise. Maybe it’s good for the undemanding audience craving for a CGI orgy, but I’m unable to turn off my brain thoroughly enough to say the same. (03/12/2009)

You're quite a guy, Roland. For my fifty, I enjoyed the Himalayas of royal entertainment. Several family action scenes also attack the master of spectacular idiocy Michael Bay, but best of all: Roland has learned to poke fun at himself. Whether it's the engagement of the bristled Cusack, the figure of the Russian oligarch (his "it´s Russian" aspires to be the line of the year), or small jokes with animals. At times, I felt like I was watching a parody of The Day After Tomorrow. Of course, to put it bluntly, 2012 is a typical Roland destructive exhibition, beautifully pointed out in the author's guileless optimism. The 3 hours flow by quickly, and during wooden conversations, hard-core fans of Emmerichisms will be satisfied in a solid state, the effects suggest that water is still not quite where it needs to be, and authentic digital will say that Roland wants to go with the times. He essentially does his own thing. I hate to say it: I used to like him because I was able to make fun of him, but now, after his best Hollywood film, which 2012 undoubtedly is, I simply like him. He is so beautifully and peculiarly PURELY... fill in the noun according to your opinion. (13/12/2009)

For the first two hours, I figured I wouldn't give it full stars just because the American president Roger Murtaugh didn't declare "I’m too old for this shit!" at the sight of a rolling wave. During the third hour, I wondered why Emmerich had to add a bonus to his "best-of" that would make it hard for me to give it three stars. Yet my happy feelings prevailed. Together with Kloser, they know how to make fun of themselves, foreign policy, and genre mischief, which they’ve pulled off countless times before. Although the ending (the most boring thing this "most American German" ever made) will stay with me for a long time, the over-the-top special effects orgy, fine actors, and actually the whole overblown atmosphere will keep it at four stars. However, a second watch on DVD doesn't add to that. (18/11/2009)

A lot of nice effects popped up, but the stupid story is just unforgivable. The whole world revolves around John Cusack, who drives under a falling skyscraper to escape all manner of disasters on air, land and sea by a hair’s breadth a hundred different times. Not to mention the unnatural reactions of his entire family. A long, long waste of time. A weak 2 stars. (22/12/2012)