So we watched 2012 on Saturday night and dear god, what a shitfest of a movie. I mean, we chose it simply for the epic amounts of destruction, not the nuanced acting it was sure to contain, but wow. It was like . . . I don’t even know where to start. There’s nowhere to start, really, it started out purely ridiculous and swiftly veered into some kind of bizarre filmmaking practical joke where each scene is even more hilarious than the next until it’s sort of like the director is just dry humping your eyeballs while the laws of physics unravel in a sad puddle on the floor. But it wasn’t the paper-thin plot; the action scenes that repeat themselves in various unexciting will-they-make-it scenarios while you fervently hope everyone will die, die, die in a lake of fire; or the multitudes of groaningly awful moments of bloated million-dollar effects; it was the repulsive attempt at emotion that was the true travesty, where characters lean to each other while in the midst of some insane brink-of-death situation and whimper things like, “Daddy, why don’t you like Mommy’s new husband?”

That said, I enjoyed every single one of 2012’s many, many minutes. Why? I was out of the house, kid-free, and I had me a box of candy. You could say my standards are pretty low, but that would be assuming I have any standards to begin with.

Comments

32 Responses to “Easily entertained”

  1. Donna on November 22nd, 2009 11:28 pm

    It was really really long wasn’t it? I did like Woody Harrelson in it alot though, not as much as in zombieland, but still good!
    Ooooh, I also loved me some russkey guy flying the plane too, he was hot hot hot, lol!

  2. haitian american family of three on November 23rd, 2009 12:24 am

    I just saw the movie today and it was horrible!! I totally agree with your review!

  3. Amy on November 23rd, 2009 12:40 am

    I was afraid of that, but I sooo love John Cusak. Oh well. I’d watch just about anything if it meant a big ol’ bucket of popcorn and no kids!

  4. pixielation on November 23rd, 2009 3:21 am

    Sounds like it lives up to my expectations! I watched the trailers and though – so the whole world dies, except maybe this one family. What a laugh. At what point do you start wishing that they WOULD fall into a flaming pit?

    But I’d be the same as you – I’d enjoy it, because it’s my precious time, and I don’t want to waste my time hating a movie, even if it deserved it!

  5. del on November 23rd, 2009 4:39 am

    Loved the review so much I showed the hubby.
    His response? “Awesome, wanna go see it!”

  6. Kat on November 23rd, 2009 5:30 am

    I saw it this weekend with my older kids and they loved it, teens must be the targeted audience, not adults with brains.

  7. beach on November 23rd, 2009 5:37 am

    I like that you don’t have standards..heehee.

  8. Michelle on November 23rd, 2009 6:24 am

    My husband and I saw it yesterday. I have to agree with your review, very spot on. Even
    to the point that I was just happy to be out
    of the house, it didn’t matter that the movie sucked.

  9. Christina on November 23rd, 2009 6:28 am

    Off topic, I was in Borders yesterday and my gawd there are million new Zombie books… or they looked new to me but I do not get out of the kiddie section much so therefore they are new to me. I was practically salivating over checking them out but I had a wee tot with me who only allowed me enough time to get the book I wanted to as a gift and then you guessed it off to the kiddie section… I told you this was off topic.

  10. Kristin on November 23rd, 2009 6:43 am

    My husband and I were going to see it this weekend (we also have very low standards), but babysitters fell through and we stayed at home. I was feeling a tiny bit sorry for myself until I read this. Maybe staying home wasn’t so bad after all! I did get to stay in my sweatpants…always a bonus on date night.

  11. Mrs. D on November 23rd, 2009 7:18 am

    I haven’t seen it yet, but it almost sounds like it’s WORTH seeing, just for the utter train-wreckness of it all! I love movies so bad that they are hilarious.

  12. Erica on November 23rd, 2009 7:30 am

    I saw in on Saturday, too, and completely agree with you. It was epic in its suckitude. However, I was away from my three year old and had grand time with contraband Mrs. Field’s cookies snuck into the theater in my purse and my $7 bottle of water.

  13. Maggie on November 23rd, 2009 7:30 am

    Ditto for me, but for New Moon. Cheese-tastic, but I was with a good friend and out of the house kid-free, so best movie of the month!

  14. Wendy on November 23rd, 2009 7:47 am

    Candy and no kids…I’d watch almost anything to get that blissful combination.

  15. Aunt Becky on November 23rd, 2009 8:57 am

    I was going to ask you what kind of candy, but then I realized that it really didn’t matter. Any kind. ANY kind, indeed.

  16. Shelly on November 23rd, 2009 10:33 am

    I fell asleep. Total head back, mouth open, full out snooze. My boyfriend was like, “WTF!?” I felt like a knob, but hey, I was sleepy, and 3 hours?!? Too long.

  17. Sarah on November 23rd, 2009 10:49 am

    I work with someone who recently published a book about 2012 and the Mayans… he went to the movie and said it was “amazing” as far as the effects “but such a STUPID movie! And they always have to have a broken family, don’t they?!” lol

  18. babelbabe on November 23rd, 2009 11:07 am

    and this is why i plan to sit thru New Moon this evening.

  19. SART on November 23rd, 2009 11:18 am

    My husband went to see this last weekend and came home talking about how it was one of the worst movies he’s ever sat through. That’s saying alot considering we went to see the second Transformer’s movie.

    I think he should just take a note from you and be grateful he got to go at all, leaving me at home with the 4 year old and 4 month old… I’d love to be able to leave the house and sit through a terrible movie with candy and not get the frantic phone call to come home immediately!

  20. Shelly on November 23rd, 2009 11:55 am

    I share your standards of a good movie!

  21. Gleemonex on November 23rd, 2009 12:25 pm

    As an Ivy League film studies graduate, I have to say: I am DYING to see this movie, and I want it on the big screen, bigger than life and FIVE TIMES AS AWESOME. Death, destruction, hilarity — what’s not to love?

  22. Tami on November 23rd, 2009 12:55 pm

    “dry humping your eyeballs” – I’m dying. You are hilarious. You would totally rock as a movie reviewer! Can you preview more movies for us?

  23. Jennifer on November 23rd, 2009 1:53 pm

    I hate movies that are effect after effect after effect just for the sake of blowing the film’s SFX wad. Feh. But! You got a night out from it so yay!

    Also, note to John Cusack: please get back to making good films. You’re likeable! And cute! And a good actor! YOU ARE BETTER THAN THIS.

    On the flip flop, I’ll be front row center at “The Road” on Thanksgiving. Happy holidays, everyone! Here’s your post-apocalyptic wasteland!

  24. Country-Fried Mama on November 23rd, 2009 1:59 pm

    It’s been so long since I was kid-free and eating candy in the dark, I didn’t even know there was a movie called 2012. But I’m sad to hear that John Cusack was in this “shitfest.” Maybe he just should have stopped after “Say Anything” so we could go on seeing him as a lovable misfit.

  25. Titanium on November 23rd, 2009 2:29 pm

    Rogers & Ebert REALLY need to just post your review and close the comments.

    You covered all the bases so equitably- there’s really nothing left to say.

  26. MRW on November 23rd, 2009 2:33 pm

    I love an apocalypse movie/book/TV show, but 2012 seemed too ridiculous even for me taking its place beside other classic suck fests like The Day After Tomorrow.

  27. lonek8 on November 23rd, 2009 2:38 pm

    I get precious few moments to myself, and very little money to spend during those moments, and so it was with great surprise (and disdain) that my family viewed my choice of going to see 2012 this weekend. “of all the movies out right now, you’re going to see 2012?” And yes, it was completely preposterous. Yes, the plot was thin and the acting lame. but it was exciting and escapist and fun to just sit in a theater and watch the world explode. I loved every minute, or at least every minute up until the last 15, when I had to pee so badly that my attention was diverted to praying I would make it out of the theater without wetting myself.

  28. Stillie on November 23rd, 2009 3:00 pm

    Dang. I was really hoping it would be good. I love researching the different ideas people have about 2012, but I guess I can forget it about the movie. Thanks for the review! I won’t waste my money now!

    I should have realized by now, any movie my students say they like means it’s actually a shit movie.

  29. Gnometree on November 23rd, 2009 4:04 pm

    Life is like a box of chocolates….

  30. Amy on November 23rd, 2009 6:05 pm

    Wow, you pretty much echoed my experience at New Moon the other night. Totally.

  31. mnerva on November 24th, 2009 12:29 am

    I used to rank Cusack right after Kiefer on my list of fave actors. But after reading this http://tomatonation.com/?p=2318 about him (especially since I’ve been a server for years on end) I just can’t stomach him at ALL. So I’m almost glad to read that the movie sucks, as I’ve already vetoed it. Thanks, L.

  32. Azero on December 27th, 2009 9:48 pm

    The end was sooooo unexpectable! Anyways, its probably one of my favorite movies this year, loved it :D btw if anybody is looking you can get it fr3e on WikiBlast . n e t

Leave a Reply