Articel w/trailer.
I remember all the disaster movies from the 70s. This seems to fit that mold. Should be interesting to see how they keep an earthquake interesting for 90 minutes.
San Andreas
Saw it on the flight home this weekend. I'm going to include minor spoilers.
I'm not a geologist or engineer, but I have to assume the film was filled with a lot of bullshit.
The Rock is a veteran and hero who pilots a rescue chopper after serving overseas. He's so badass that he not only pilots it, but will also jump out to do some rescuing, which is bullshit, but whatever. Anyway, he has a daughter (with amazing eyes) and a future ex-wife who's diddling a billionaire. They had another daughter, but tragedy struck to give us foreshadowing.
Anyway, Paul Giamatti is a scientist who has discovered how to predict earthquakes just in time for the big one. This role was weird because I could see this movie taking place without any of the Giamatti scenes and the only thing it'd be missing is Paul explaining where the earthquakes are striking and when they're coming.
Earthquakes aren't super exciting visually, so they really had to stretch things to make the film continue to be interesting between quakes. Buildings would continue falling long after the earthquakes, the inevitable tsunami, fire, etc.
The whole movie has the Rock abandoning his duties in LA to rescue his daughter in SF. So the first part of the film sets everything up, then you have the quakes, then it's a buddy film with him and his wife traveling to SF, then the conclusion where they find their daughter within 30 minutes of arriving in SF despite having no idea where she went. Hollywood magic!
Insert all the typical script writing 101 junk like the rich new boyfriend being a tool, the heroic love interest, bad things killing everyone around a primary character yet somehow they stay alive, etc.
C'mon, you know what you're going to get with this movie: The Rock being The Rock, cool effects, and bad science. See it for free when it hits Netflix or your streamer of choice.
Edited By Leisher on 1447685807
I'm not a geologist or engineer, but I have to assume the film was filled with a lot of bullshit.
The Rock is a veteran and hero who pilots a rescue chopper after serving overseas. He's so badass that he not only pilots it, but will also jump out to do some rescuing, which is bullshit, but whatever. Anyway, he has a daughter (with amazing eyes) and a future ex-wife who's diddling a billionaire. They had another daughter, but tragedy struck to give us foreshadowing.
Anyway, Paul Giamatti is a scientist who has discovered how to predict earthquakes just in time for the big one. This role was weird because I could see this movie taking place without any of the Giamatti scenes and the only thing it'd be missing is Paul explaining where the earthquakes are striking and when they're coming.
Earthquakes aren't super exciting visually, so they really had to stretch things to make the film continue to be interesting between quakes. Buildings would continue falling long after the earthquakes, the inevitable tsunami, fire, etc.
The whole movie has the Rock abandoning his duties in LA to rescue his daughter in SF. So the first part of the film sets everything up, then you have the quakes, then it's a buddy film with him and his wife traveling to SF, then the conclusion where they find their daughter within 30 minutes of arriving in SF despite having no idea where she went. Hollywood magic!
Insert all the typical script writing 101 junk like the rich new boyfriend being a tool, the heroic love interest, bad things killing everyone around a primary character yet somehow they stay alive, etc.
C'mon, you know what you're going to get with this movie: The Rock being The Rock, cool effects, and bad science. See it for free when it hits Netflix or your streamer of choice.
Edited By Leisher on 1447685807
“Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole.” - Dr Thomas Sowell
Yeah, the Paul G scenes really didn't do much. They were there to heighten the tension of what's coming, but seriously - Everyone (viewer) knows what's coming. It's a flimsy premise that doesn't even matter.
The domino effect of disasters was kinda funny.
Sure hope it was worth all those people in LA dying.
Seriously, how many movies have "Blue-collar divorced husband has to save family who lives with mega-rich new husband/boyfriend?"
But yeah, this movie is exactly what you expect it to be. For better or worse.
The domino effect of disasters was kinda funny.
The whole movie has the Rock abandoning his duties in LA to rescue his daughter in SF
Sure hope it was worth all those people in LA dying.
Insert all the typical script writing 101 junk like the rich new boyfriend being a tool
Seriously, how many movies have "Blue-collar divorced husband has to save family who lives with mega-rich new husband/boyfriend?"
But yeah, this movie is exactly what you expect it to be. For better or worse.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Yes, but also that guy's a worthless asshole who doesn't deserve her love.GORDON wrote:Is it telling women to dump the regular guy and she'll find the rich man?TheCatt wrote:Seriously, how many movies have "Blue-collar divorced husband has to save family who lives with mega-rich new husband/boyfriend?"
It's not me, it's someone else.