Roland Emmerich’s blockbuster film 2012, released last year to critical disdain yet destined to become one of the highest grossing films in history, gives voice to the latter perspective – the one that Kirsch calls ‘the Godless Apocalypse’. The end as Emmerich portrays it comes as a result of the displacement of Earth’s crust, which in turn was caused by a massive solar flare that warmed our world’s core. Scenes of epic destruction follow, mostly coming in the form of thousand-foot tsunamis. We see the story unfold largely through the eyes of bumbling divorcee/limousine driver/science-fiction author Jackson Curtis (played by John Cusack), whose by-and-large pathetic character amounts to the Messiah: as the world is quite literally crashing down around them, he and his family inevitably escape with nary a scratch. Woody Harrelson’s self-parodying yahoo, whom Curtis meets in Yellowstone while camping with his two children, makes vague reference to the Mayan calendar and to Revelation. But it is obvious that the religious story is simply a pretext; what is at play here is the inevitable and grandiose doom that the film concedes to all humanity who isn’t John Cusack – or a member of the international elite.
Harrelson informs Cusack and the audience that the world’s most powerful and wealthy have known about the coming disaster for years, and they all plan to escape onto Chinese spaceships (or something like that) when it arrives. Tickets, he proclaims, are one billion dollars, and space is very limited. When the impending catastrophe finally strikes, we see Harrelson delightedly engulfed in the eruption of Old Faithful, and Cusack corrals his ex-wife, two children, and the wimpy doctor that his son calls “uncle” and tries to make it to China in time to get on-board one of these arks. Disturbing in its absence is the public’s right to know and prepare for the breathtaking destruction about to engulf them. Apparently the destruction of the world is the best-kept secret in history. Within the realm of 2012, no one ever bothers to question why only Powers That Be have a chance at salvation.
This is not of consequence in the plot of the film (Yes, Cusack and the kids survive, and save all that remains of humanity in the process), but the context of the film is, to me, far more consequential. These visions, spawned and financed by the most powerful elements in media, have irrevocably entered into our collective conception of what lies ahead. Though the earth itself is destroyed in 2012, the upper class’ staying power is never questioned; on the contrary, it is asserted as the most permanent, powerful, and true thing on this fungible globe. In this blithe depiction, 2012 recalls that mad scene in the “Big Board” room of Dr. Strangelove, the ultimate parody of disaster films, where Strangelove convinces many of the generals that the world will be just dandy for them if they push that button. While today we envision the end as ecological in cause, the makers of 2012 are guilty of the same fallacy. Though this sad and stultifying vision of a Godless Apocalypse has been successful propaganda, the prophesized shift – if it comes – will require much more imagination from each of us than Hollywood can provide.
I haven’t seen this movie yet, but it seems to be connected to the movie I saw, Knowing because the end of the world in both comes as a result of a change in the Sun. In this movie, that connections seems a bit more relevant because the date 2012 is attached to Mayan calendar based on the Sun. I am not very sure if I want to see this movie, the elite surviving is a bit off putting. Maybe I am jealous that I cannot afford the 1 billion-dollar ticket to salvation. )I thought buying salvation was done during the protestant reformation.)
This is a brilliant analysis of the movie, and I loved it. What blew my mind in particular was the pointing out of the lack of concern for public welfare. That is, the lack of information given to the general public, though I do understand why a government might do this. There are moral negatives on either side of the equation – on the one hand, tell the public and watch panic ensue, which seemingly ends in disaster anyway (though perhaps people can figure their own way out, a la Cusack’s character, though his actions on a wide scale would have doomed all the ships and thus all of humanity), or let the people live calmly, since the disaster will come anyway. It seems awful to have to make the choice, but I think the governments ultimately made the right one.
Thanks for your comments, Jon and Grecia. My issue and my fear is not, ultimately, with the lack of information given to the film’s fictional public – it is that, as we approach this actual date, millions upon millions of impressionable eyes have already seen the “end” go down this way. Funded and produced by the Hollywood elite (they would have tickets on those silly arks), 2012 promotes a reflexive complacency. It seems more and more likely that some sort of solar-inspired shift will indeed be occurring in the next few years (if it is not already: 2010 to date is the most seismically active year in over 400 years), and the decision to inform the mass of humanity should not, I believe, be left to figures who have an interest in saving themselves and their power before their the lives of their constituents. We’ll talk more in class! I’m looking forward to it.
Hi Sam,
Can you edit this post to place it in the appropriate categories (your name, and the week of the response)? This will help us keep everyone’s work in order.