2012英文影评谁有啊！！急用！！1500字左右的,2012英文电影影评
网友回答
Meh.
If you have a load of free time (at least two hours and thirty eight minutes) and enough money for a movie ticket and a medium popcorn and a refreshment to wash down that oozy, gooey goodness down, you could do a lot worse than watch "2012." Which is to say that the film in question is escapism that will be forgotten long before the DVD and Blu-Ray es out; there isn't enough memorable stuff to make this a lasting feeling. I suppose this is a problem -- the film attempts (read: poorly) to make you believe that the end of the world is near, and they have inprehensible science to prove it! I don't know about you, but if the end of the world is anything as tame as it is in the film (what, with John Cusack -- "Martian Child" John Cusack, not "High Fidelity" or "Say Anything…" John Cusack -- as a divorced dad whose children call him by his real name rather than the traditional "dad" or "father"), I'd prefer a mercy killing. Sitting in a theater seat and having to listen to everybody "ooh" and "aww" at all the moments of suspense, I was expecting the kind of cheese ball goodness that I'm usually given during these disaster flicks. You know, shots of Japan in chaos with citizens speaking perfect English, crying out "Nobody can save us but Abra!"
It's not like that at all. Sure, there are a few moments of inpetence that you just have to giggle in your seat while the person on your left moves awkwardly, but not as much as I'd like. I had such a ball whenever the ground started to crack and Cusack's character tried to out-drive the end of the world in a limo -- a limo! -- or whenever the boyfriend of Cusack's ex-wife (played by the delightful Amanda Peet) who only had a lesson or two behind the wheel of a plane flies like it's nothing special. You know, whenever you are sucked to the Earth's core and you have to fly upwards through the resistance, dodging crumbling buildings and an Amtrak or two.
So much of "2012" is just geologists and other apparently relevant scientists arguing about how quickly the Earth will be destroyed. They use big words a lot, and build these "space ships" (…um…) that can apparently withstand all the hellish things that happen. I didn't leave my seat for the bathroom once, and I didn't play that "guess how many pieces of gum are under my seat" game that I play whenever I find myself excessively bored, but damn it all if I didn't find myself scratching my head while trying to make heads or tails out of the math and science that apparently was so logical to everybody in the movie. I'm unsure if a second viewing will ease my bafflement.
Is the acting any good? I feel it obligatory to mention how well the actors meshed with the material, even if the film is more of a music video rather than something of substance. Cameos by Woody Harrelson and Danny Glover are frustratingly and infinitely more interesting than the leads we're forced to ride with while the Earth sees its last days. Why, may I ask, did the screenwriter think we'd want to delve into the classic failed romance theme whenever, you know, there are more interesting things to wrap ourselves around. You know, for a movie that shows us what happens on the last days of Earth, it sure as hell seems destined to distract us from the big picture. I thought watching buildings shake and break and trains careen into their doom would play a bigger importance than romance. I guess I was wrong.
Oh, and another thing: "2012" attempts to cater to my heart way too much for its own good. At least three times (I may be off by one or two), a tearful phone call is had between a father and their children as they say goodbye. These goodbyes don't pack the emotional punch you'd expect, though; we hardly know the people that have minute long phone conversations, so we find it hard to fall in a puddle of our tears. I'm reminded of an infinitely better disaster (and romance!) film, "Titanic," and that short shot that we're all familiar to: when an elderly couple we haven't seen before and will never see again cuddle in their bed one last time as water enters there room, soon to drown them. As much as I hate to give more credit to a director with such a large ego, James Cameron knows how to grab that sentimental tug much better than Roland Emmerich can ever aspire to. Emmerich, you may remember, directed "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Independence Day" -- neither being tearjerkers. And that's perfectly okay, if only the movie didn't try endlessly to get us to feel something.
I'm nitpicking. For a film as hard to follow -- especially during the climax, which you'll agree is quite important to follow -- as "2012" is, there's enough explosions and whatnot to make you feel not pletely gypped out of your hard-earned cash. For what it's worth, the movie flew by, even if it was at the expense of us getting any relatable characters. There are too many great movies out this season to waste your money on something like this -- unless you do have a coupon to get in for five dollars and you want a carefree Saturday night with no intent on learning anything from a movie. In that case, enjoy.
网友回答
2012 is a 2009 disaster film directed by Roland Emmerich. The film stars John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Amanda Peet, Oliver Platt, Danny Glover, Thandie Newton and Woody Harrelson. It was distributed by Columbia Pictures. Filming began in August 2008 in Vancouver.
The film briefly references Mayanism, the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar, and the 2012 phenomenon in its portrayal of cataclysmic events unfolding in the year 2012. Because of solar flare bombardment the Earth's core begins heating up at an unprecedented rate, eventually causing crustal displacement. This results in an onslaught of Doomsday event scenarios plunging the world into chaos, ranging from California falling into the Pacific Ocean, the eruption of the Yellowstone National Park caldera, massive earthquakes, and Megatsunami impacts along every coast line on the Earth. The film centers around an ensemble cast of characters as they narrowly escape multiple catastrophes in an effort to reach ships in the Himalayas, along with scientists and governments of the world who are attempting to save as many lives as they can before the disasters ensue.
I think,it will be, for its audiences, one of the most satisfactory films of the year and it really can be called the "mother of all disaster movies".