RSS

50DMC Day 23 – A movie you think is critically or commercially overrated

19 Jun

More info on The 50 Day Movie Challenge here and here.

While Roland Emmerich’s disaster spectacle 2012 received mixed reviews from critics, it did good business at the box office. 166 million dollars domestically and 767 million worldwide, which makes it the 36th highest-grossing film worldwide of all time (ahead of The Da Vinci Code and just below the Star Wars). I repeat: People paid 767 million dollars to watch this movie in theaters. 767 million. 767. That’s a lot of money.

I was not a contributor to its box office gross, I’m happy to say. I waited until the DVD. Maybe something was lost in the journey from theater to home, but a bad film is a bad film no matter where you see it, and God I hated this movie. I’m not expecting deep complex characters and a poignant multilayered story with tons of subtle themes when I sit down to watch a big budget disaster flick like this. I do, however, expect thrills, action that makes me go “ooooh”, fun characters and excitement. I expect fun. I expect to be entertained. This I did not get from 2012. Instead, I got boring characters running around from plot point to plot point via empty CGI-filled shells of world-destroying action scenes. For 158 ungodly bloated minutes that managed to feel even longer than that. The cast isn’t bad (John Cusack, Oliver Platt, Thandie Newton, Woody Harrelson, Danny Glover etc.), but they’re given nothing to work with here.

So it’s a complete turd of a movie. And yet it made 767 million dollars. If that’s not “commercially overrated”, I don’t know what is.

No single clip could ever hope to encompass the absolute drudgery that watching this movie is, so here’s a trailer instead. It’s full of explosions and stuff falling to pieces, so if that’s your thing, you’re in for a treat.

Advertisements
 
2 Comments

Posted by on 19 June, 2011 in 50 Day Movie Challenge

 

2 responses to “50DMC Day 23 – A movie you think is critically or commercially overrated

  1. timothy torrance

    22 June, 2011 at 19:25

    this is a stupid pick. lots and lots of shit films get lots of money, for example the second and third pirates of the caribbean films, or alice in wonderland of 2010.

    2012 is not critically rated, it has 5.8 on imdb and 39% on rotten tomatoes

     
  2. Emil

    23 June, 2011 at 09:13

    “Critically OR commercially overrated”. I went with the latter. How is this a stupid pick?

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: