by Daniel Giamario
I recently went to see the film “2012,” as I was curious about how they would treat the subject. Additionally, it’s part of my job description to know what is out there in the mainstream about this topic. First and foremost, it is a disaster movie to end all disaster movies. A big budget affair with enormously impressive special effects, and a big name cast, including John Cusack, an actor I generally like.
The Cosmology Was Missing
Mostly, however, I was troubled by how the film dealt with the issue of 2012. Part of my curiosity in seeing it was to see if there would be an intelligent expression of the cosmology. Not only was there very little mention of it, what was expressed was communicated by a hilarious and crazed Woody Harrelson, as a parody of an Art Bell/George Noory “Coast to Coast” type show. The actual show is far more rational and mainstream than what this film depicted and the Mayan prophecies are mentioned only in passing in “2012.”
I was pleased that Charles Hapgood and the HAB theories of crustal displacement were mentioned, although again only in passing. That material, popularized in the 1970’s, is actually quite plausible in my view. It was interesting that the “trigger” for the global disaster in this movie was from the Sun; not an asteroid, or some human caused circumstance. Some Mayan interpreters, notably Adrian Gilbert, have argued in favor of this scenario.
The most troubling aspect of the movie was how the information of the coming disaster was purposely withheld from humanity. Only the global elite knew about what was coming and they financed the building of the arks for the few that could afford to purchase a seat. While there is the inevitable subplot of letting some of the workers on board at the last minute, I found myself rooting for the demise of the arks at the end, because they were primarily populated by the military, corporate tycoons, government elites, and international mafia types.
I found this disturbing because of how accurate this most likely is should humanity face such a scenario. Another aspect of the film I didn’t care for was the obligatory Hollywood romantic storyline that involved the rekindling of love between the characters played by John Cusack and Amanda Peet. It was an irritating contrived plot device that rang false for me. The death of her husband was certainly not required. He was a good guy. At best, this is a movie that I can only recommend for curiosity’s sake as it does not have much that inspires or informs. My hope is that modern mainstream cinema could one day (hopefully soon) truly inspire the transformational possibilities we so greatly need at this rapidly accelerating apex of the Turning of the Ages.