2012

In some ways, it'd be a blessing if the world did end in 2012. For one, we wouldn't have to sit through the shame of Britain's Olympics going really badly (over-budget, late, silly-looking designs even when complete, that kind of thing, never mind the actual performance of British athletes). We could probably also avoid getting hyped-up about a possible second Obama term, as well, with all the incumbent rhetoric of hope that may or may not ever get fulfilled.

Those aren't things that are important to the latest end-of-the-world film, 2012, which seems to try to take a more realistic view of the whole affair. Hey, they've even got scientists predicting stuff...and getting the schedule wrong! A writer whose book about the end of the world, in which people acted selflessly, is criticised for being naïve. So, the makers of 2012 probably don't want us to think that they're pulling any punches.

But...are they pulling any punches? There might be a bit too much sentimental 'we all need to pull together in the cause of common humanity' stuff (rhetoric of hope?) to avoid such an accusation, but it's still quite touching. Yes, maybe the closing scene is a bit optimistic, but only because of the things it misses out. In fact, there's a lot missing here that would make it much bleaker a film.

Now, let's be honest. The way the trailer plugs this is very much about the effects. The film's main draw is the utter (and I mean utter) destruction of the world. It seems to be the first of two (probably more) films this year to involve 'the end of the world as you know it' (the other, curiously, is Sherlock Holmes, not a subject known for its apocalyptic overtones). There may be a modicum of science thrown in – something about solar flares and neutrinos – but it's basically about watching the planet ripping itself to bits while people scramble to get out of the way. Various governments have been tipped off by science, and so have started building ships, or arks as they're known (watch out for the kid called Noah...see what they did there?).

That 2012 comes from the same director (Roland Emmerich) as he who did Stargate and Independence Day should come as no surprise. Similar sort of people – with immediate access to the US President – bustling through corridors of power, slightly incomprehensible scientific tecnhobabble...oh, and devastation on a planetary scale.

And what devastation! The rumbling, rising of Yellowstone is especially fun, and fictitious plane flights have probably never been so harrowing. There's some slightly improbable dashing away from oncoming danger – lucky then, that John Cusak's character is professional driver, able to race away from what seems like a huge, angry mole in hot (underground) pursuit.

Moments like Woody Harrelson's harmless (and spot-on) conspiracy nutter getting blasted into smithereens are rewarding, as is the one when the President's daughter gets dewy-eyed as the attractive, principled scientist makes a moral case for the sake of humanity, very much in her father's style (the way that ends up is all a bit predictable). Less rewarding are moments like the wanton destruction of a load of flashy sports cars – beautiful things, absolutely no need to trash them. Sometimes, it feels like destruction for the sake of it.

Mind, that's what the trailer advertises, so it shouldn't be a surprise. Plot: hammy. Ending: dodgy. Sense of governments dealing with difficult situations: hope-inspiring. General note of apocalypse: amazing.