I love love love disaster movies. Sorry, but it is true. I always have, I think. But I only got aware of that when I realised how happy I was leaving the theatre after seeing The Day After Tomorrow, 2004. I made a little trip back in time and remembered many disasters movies that gave me the same enthralling happiness.
So, in order to watch San Andreas, I chose a theatre with moving chairs, called here as dropbox. I usually avoid those seats - the movement takes me out of the movie, not puts me in it, contrary to what most people say (of course it is, being me, the contrary person in essence). I enjoy being dragged into the movie, and I usually do that alienating myself from others and from what is around me. The moving chair makes this alienation impossible.
But a moving chair in a earthquake movie? Too tempting. And It was amazing. It happens that I am also fascinated by earthquakes, even if I'm scared as hell of it. I have some spooky (not big, though) stories about it. I was so mesmerized by the action in the movie, gripping my chair in fear to fall down, that other aspects really didn't matter much: stereotypical characters, the same old heroic father trying to atone for his sins, a family stronger than natural disaster... all this is there, but that is ok. It is a part of its charm, actually. And Dwayne Johnson is not a small perk also (No pun intended - and I blame my niece for liking him, it is not my fault :).
PS: I was at my sister's house at Chile some years ago, taking a nap before going to a conference at a college there. All of a sudden, the bed started to vibrate. Still asleep, I told the dog to stop moving under the bed. Stop it, I told it. The peaceful dog looked at me like I was crazy, and in that moment I saw the whole room moving, the mirror in front of me shaking. Ok, it is not the dog, I thought. It was such a minor tremor that nobody at the house felt it. But I did, as so many others that I had the chance to experience in different unexpected places as my city, or alone at a hostel at Minas Gerais, for example. At Chile, this was an ordinary day in life though, except for me.
PPS: I've seen some posts on facebook about how San Andreas is an enjoyable movie, but bad science - too many laughable errors, they say. I don't doubt it. Good science is nice to see in the movies - Interestellar, 2014, is here to prove that, but I'm not picky about it in disaster films - or in any SciFi productions, actually. The truth is elsewhere, I think. But the controversy reminded me something. I was at my mother's house some years ago (about ten, actually), watching The Core, 2003, in the living room, when my niece Mari decided to see it with me. It had already began so she made some questions. What is that about? My summary: The earth's core stopped spinning, so a group of scientists have to go there to restart it in order to avoid the end of the world. Ok, she said, this is impossible, not true. Right, I said, and began to tell her the details to situate her in the story. That some people had died suddenly, as also pigeons. That's because the electromagnetic field was affected when the core stopped, she told me. Exactly!, I said. They sustain this idea in the movie. I continued my narrative: people get worried, and ask a scientist about it. It would be a geophysical specialist, she said. Yes! It is, I replied. And now they are heading to the centre of the earth. Hum, they would have to get through some tectonic plaques. They doing just that, I answered, already starting to think that it was not so impossible after all. And it was like that until I looked at her and finally asked: How is it not true if they got everything right like you are saying it should be? Big question :)