Can't sleep, as usual, and found myself thinking things I might have discussed with Bee in a few emails. So instead, I'm putting it up here.
I watched 2012 again tonight and realized what, to my mind, would have fixed it (under cut in case you've missed it):
1. John Cusack's character should have been a successful first time novelist (which would explain his tunnel vision while writing the book and thus the failure of his marriage, albeit temporarily). He'd still have access to the limo (as in taking him from the camping trip to a book signing - and a plane, as in waiting for him to take him to an interview). That way, his book would have more of an impact while at the same time, he's too new of a successful novelist to have the money required for tickets. I think the book could have had a major impact on the movie and the actions of more than just one character, which would have tied the movie together much better (like being part of the reason the President stays behind)
2. The new 'husband' should have been a boyfriend only - thus his appearance would still be required (to fly the plane) and yet, we could easily accept that she didn't love him yet and still loved her husband
3. I love Oliver Platt, but his character needed to die - unless they could have found a way to reform him - but honestly, I think it was more important that he not survive, that he be a kind of a reversal of Moses. Platt's character was clearly the real rule-maker, in as much as he decreed that those who would tell - would die. He just didn't get that you don't kill to save so, yeah, he needed to die to make way for the right kind of leader (namely Dr. Helmsley)
4. I think both young Russians (Tamara, the wealthy Russian's gf, and Sasha, the pilot that ultimately saved their lives in China) should have lived, and I don't mean just romantically - but rather that they could then represent the 'new' Russia.
5. I think Hemsley's speech that convinced everyone to allow all those who were supposed to be on the ark that broke down, on board the remaining arks, should have included all the relatives he and others had to leave behind - that was a major component of 'family' as in a "world family" and an overall theme combined with how a good chunk of humanity, when faced with certain catastrophic death, will rise to their best, not their worst.
6. And finally, I think it would have been so much better if all roads led to their ultimate survival. By that, I mean that instead of Cusack and his family being the reason that the ark was nearly destroyed, it was the fact that they'd been snuck aboard and were stuck that allowed them and everyone else to see a fault with the gate - thus Cusack can 'sacrifice' himself (although he survives, natch) to fix it. Meaning that by one man giving in and allowing not only his own family to sneak aboard, but by being generous, he allowed their savior in the form of Cusack and his family, aboard as well. That would have been far more powerful and given substance to the idea of saving lives whenever possible instead of more selfish motives.
I like the whole idea of God preparing the way, even to the smallest details, for the survival of man and wish the writers/producers had spent a bit of time to develop that, you know?
It's kind of like the writers of SG1. I know, your eyes just bugged out as you thought, "What on EARTH does 2012 have to do with SG1???" (Bee and I would have found a way to bring it to TS or LotR, though *g*)
Well, in SG1, the producers saw man making a bunch of mistakes, thus putting Earth in constant jeopardy (and if you're wondering where that came from, the producers - as in BW and RC - said so in one of the televised interviews prior to the start of season...was it five? Ten? Whatever. And of course, they said the same thing about SGA. But we fans saw the whole thing as a way for the world to be prepared ahead of time for the Goa'uld. Humans are explorers, it's what we do. And in SG1, all the components were given to Earth in order to defeat the Goa'uld. First, we find the gate - then, years later, a young scientist (at the end of his rope, so to speak) is brought on board and figures out how to open it. One of the civilians gives the scientist an amulet that was found when the 'gate was and that sure came in handy later, didn't it? A tough Colonel (on a suicide mission) is assigned to go though the 'gate and destroy it - but wow, his mind is changed by the influence of the young scientist and the people of Abydos, which turns out to be a good thing a year later when it turns out there are more bad guys out there. With ships.
To me, it's again a way for God or whomever you believe in (or what), to pave the way, to provide all the details, big and small (like a brilliant theoretical astrophysics and a Jaffa who switched sides in order to 'free his people', and so on *g*), in order for Earth to carry the day.
To me, that's how 2012 should have been and I think it would have been a far more successful film. :) YMMV.
Well, I've typed as long as I can comfortably and need to lie down, so no more movie thoughts.
But maybe one TV thought: Steve McGarrett looks as good in camouflage as Jim Ellison. *happy sigh*