Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 13, 2009
5.4
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 639 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
253
Mixed:
207
Negative:
179
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
6
ZioRApr 12, 2010
Entertaining, but leaves you feeling at some points if they were actually trying to be somewhat realistic or not. I also felt it strange that in the midst of the several billion inhabitants of earth being obliterated, that someone felt it Entertaining, but leaves you feeling at some points if they were actually trying to be somewhat realistic or not. I also felt it strange that in the midst of the several billion inhabitants of earth being obliterated, that someone felt it would improve the movie by sprinkling in a little comedy into the movie. Worth a view if bored, not worth seeing in the movies or owning however. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JessLApr 13, 2010
I'm another person who doesn't understand the bad ratings! I thought this movie was amazing, and I'm not even usually a fan of disaster films, and actually haven't even liked most of Emmerich's other films! The pace I'm another person who doesn't understand the bad ratings! I thought this movie was amazing, and I'm not even usually a fan of disaster films, and actually haven't even liked most of Emmerich's other films! The pace was great, I didn't even notice how long it was. The effects were amazing - definitely a movie to be seen on as big a screen as possible. And yes, maybe it was a bit prescriptive in terms of who lives, who dies, pulling at heart strings at predictable moments and all that, but it's a blockbuster people! Enjoy! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
StephenU.Nov 13, 2009
A movie that will make you weep for the entertainment standards of the average US citizen. Not surprising, but depressing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JohnnynumberfiveNov 13, 2009
Just saw this and it pretty much missed the mark at every level. It suffered from gaping plot holes, to many characters with no true lead and poor character development. The only redeeming quality is the CG and it's not good enough to Just saw this and it pretty much missed the mark at every level. It suffered from gaping plot holes, to many characters with no true lead and poor character development. The only redeeming quality is the CG and it's not good enough to spend almost 3 hours on for what turns out to be a laughably horrible movie. The scenes that were supposed to be sweeping and moving were simply terrible. The movie was stupid and it couldn't decide if it wanted to be a action blockbuster, drama, tragic comedy or a buddy flick ... two words describe this movie: identity crisis. It's not even worth a watch on DVD ... wait for it to hit the premium cable subscription circuit. All this from someone who was more pumped for this than anyone else. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MauricioL.Nov 13, 2009
Wow the king of all disaster movies, best 10 bucks i ever spent, they really made one of those movies that everybody is going to talk about all year, if you did.nt like it , i know what you will ever like... so as you can see you have to see Wow the king of all disaster movies, best 10 bucks i ever spent, they really made one of those movies that everybody is going to talk about all year, if you did.nt like it , i know what you will ever like... so as you can see you have to see this movie and on the big screen. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
EnzoP.Nov 13, 2009
2012 is intense gripping and makes you bite your nails. Well, for some parts in the movie not always. In the start of the film I was getting ready to leave the theater from the cliches and lame jokes. I was thinking I can't take this 2012 is intense gripping and makes you bite your nails. Well, for some parts in the movie not always. In the start of the film I was getting ready to leave the theater from the cliches and lame jokes. I was thinking I can't take this for two more hours. But the more it went on the better it got, once the disaster scenes kicked in I was very pleased. If it was in 3-D I would of been glued to my seat. But if it were in 3-D it would be boring for most parts because a lot of the movie is just talking so the 3-D would be useless. Something else that is useless about this movie is that it is very long. Many parts just repeated it self but to different people in different places. Not everything in this movie was useless. For instance it was filmed very good each scene captured the moment, like when John Cusack (Im not saying the character's name in the movie) was driving around california to get to the airport. That was a gripping scene he was dodging everything he even dodged a giant donut and a bridge falling, he just squeezed through. Know wonder he was hired to drive these chubby russian rich kids to the airport. One thing I do not get about the critics is why are they all saying that the special effects were eye popping. They weren't that good. sure it was better then most movies but seriously you have to be more picky then that. Well I guess I am. Overall 2012 is good enough for the money. The action scenes keeps it interesting but I warn you don't leave the theater by the boring start of the film, or you will be missing out on a lot of explosions. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MichaelHNov 13, 2009
It's expected for a movie like 2012 to press emotional buttons but the director ham-fistedly slammed against those buttons until you felt more used and manipulated than moved. Next scene would be a of unimaginable brutality as entire It's expected for a movie like 2012 to press emotional buttons but the director ham-fistedly slammed against those buttons until you felt more used and manipulated than moved. Next scene would be a of unimaginable brutality as entire cities were wiped out, complete with adults and children screaming and grabbing for their lives. Despite the fantastic imagery the action scenes were typically lifeless with ancillary characters dying for what appears to have been laughs. I wanted to like this movie and was fully-prepared to suspend reality for the conspiracy theory stuff but the problem was that so many of the deaths were setup to be 'personal' right before the victim was snuffed. Overall a painful movie apathetic to the fact that they killed more people than every horror movie monster ever dreamed of. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
surajsurajNov 13, 2009
No matter what the critics say i had best 2 hour entertainment ever. for me fun is what is important not the storytelling.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JohnBNov 13, 2009
Ugh ugh ugh ugh UGH. A movie that only cares about the visuals. and panders to the whiny angsty teenager who hates the human race because he can't get girls to talk to him. Forget having the cheesiest, stupidest plot in history and the Ugh ugh ugh ugh UGH. A movie that only cares about the visuals. and panders to the whiny angsty teenager who hates the human race because he can't get girls to talk to him. Forget having the cheesiest, stupidest plot in history and the dumbest melodrama. Can we try to have all those things without eye-rolling misanthropy? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChrisA.Nov 13, 2009
A truly amazing film that i would recommend to teenagers. Who love action and adventure, but it is still a good enough for an adult to enjoy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
SeanismynameNov 14, 2009
This tired "The Day After Tomorrow" clone has yet ANOTHER broken family patching things up as they "just barely" outrun the destruction of the earth's crust. They "just barely" outrun crumbling buildings, fissures, volcanoes, and tidal This tired "The Day After Tomorrow" clone has yet ANOTHER broken family patching things up as they "just barely" outrun the destruction of the earth's crust. They "just barely" outrun crumbling buildings, fissures, volcanoes, and tidal waves at least five times. All the convenient people die after serving their purpose predictably. John Cusack takes needless detours so that we can chuckle along with the eccentric Woody Harrelson. Queen Elizabeth saves her corgis. All I can say is, "Thank God for online streaming." 2 points for the CGI. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
RichardBNov 14, 2009
Excellent special effects if you are still able to suspend your disbelief at the drop of a... well... you name it! Everything is falling apart in this movie, including physics. Still it is fun if you can let your logic and reality go. Excellent special effects if you are still able to suspend your disbelief at the drop of a... well... you name it! Everything is falling apart in this movie, including physics. Still it is fun if you can let your logic and reality go. It's all eye candy that will fade in the light of the next fx flick. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JohnSNov 14, 2009
It might have been the unsatisfying ending, the Biblical reference Emmerich goes to no length to shroud, or the convenient series of coincidences that allow our protagonists to reach safety, but this movie just left me frustrated and angry It might have been the unsatisfying ending, the Biblical reference Emmerich goes to no length to shroud, or the convenient series of coincidences that allow our protagonists to reach safety, but this movie just left me frustrated and angry at myself for wasting two and a half hours on one of the worst movies of this decade. With the exception of Cusack, Glover and, surprisingly, Harrelson, the acting is mediocre at best, and not even Cusack's sarcasm and air of intelligence could salvage this array of absurdities (one of the members of their party just happens to have taken a couple of flight lessons, and is subsequently able to steer a small plane between falling buildings). As Travers put it, this is Transformers 2's biggest competition for the worst movie of this year and possibly this decade. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
ChrisNov 15, 2009
Wow. It's been a long time since i've paid good money to see a film THIS bad. I'm giving it a couple of points for effects, but they are literally the only thing remotely good about 2012. It's just so... so... dumb. And Wow. It's been a long time since i've paid good money to see a film THIS bad. I'm giving it a couple of points for effects, but they are literally the only thing remotely good about 2012. It's just so... so... dumb. And not dumb in a fun way, just dumb in a dumb way. If it wasn't so loud, I could have happily fallen asleep through it, which would have been a far better use of my time. Ugh. It was so unbelievably bad it actually made me a little angry. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
AaronR.Nov 15, 2009
The thing that a lot of people don't seem to understand is the fact that the Mayan/Aztec Calendar doesn't predict the end of the world when that Calendar ends. It simply is predicting the end of an age. Now compare this with the The thing that a lot of people don't seem to understand is the fact that the Mayan/Aztec Calendar doesn't predict the end of the world when that Calendar ends. It simply is predicting the end of an age. Now compare this with the Catholic belief that the Archangel Uriel will come into control of the world in 2012 (the Archangels all take care of shaping the world every few centuries by switching shifts in a way), who was in control when the renaissance came around, and you have a very bright future to look forward to. The movie itself, while getting its subject material completely wrong, was just below mediocre. The special effects were good and the acting was decent. But there wasn't much plot other then the world is ending and i must protect my family. This team has been doing this thing over and over again, and they just don't be seeming to get the hint. I suppose that can be attributed to the fact that they're movies always have good advertising. But if you don't know how bad their previous works are, these are the guys that did the 1998 Godzilla. This is a popcorn flick, nothing more. I can't recommend it, but if you want the Transformer experience (lots of action, little [or stupid] plot) then i suppose you may come away entertained. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
NeilBNov 15, 2009
Its amazing that every plane take off, the plane has to drop then, swing up. Didn't know Vegas had that from the airport to the bellaigo
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JHNov 15, 2009
This was the most god awful big budget movie I've ever seen!! It made Independence Day look Oscar worthy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
HollyC.Nov 16, 2009
I loved this movie - felt as though I had been on a huge roller coaster when I left the theater. I was pleased that there was very little "2012" in it. It's classic end-of-the-world-hold onto your pants thrills!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MiKENov 16, 2009
Even the special effects couldn't save this movie! Over the top non believable action sequences got boring really quickly, to the point where you knew that the main characters were going to survive. Taking the suspense completely out for me.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
ClaytonDNov 16, 2009
Fun movie but you had to check your understanding of physics and geology and earth science at the door. My favorite line was "...29,000...". I will be very careful the next time I visit Yellowstone.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
G.M.Nov 16, 2009
A good movie with touching moments & good tension with some comedy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ClintonMNov 16, 2009
I'm not kidding - This is the worst movie I have ever seen. At least 1/3 of the audience walked out before it ended. I skipped the last 10 minutes or so because I couldn't bear it. I hope the world ends before seeing this again.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
jaybNov 17, 2009
I am a sucker! I look forward to disaster films and the big special effects, but when I come out of the theatre I feel cheated and bored. This goes for all the big disaster films of the past decade, and I really thought this one would be I am a sucker! I look forward to disaster films and the big special effects, but when I come out of the theatre I feel cheated and bored. This goes for all the big disaster films of the past decade, and I really thought this one would be different (despite the reviews---GOD! For once I should listen to the reviews and stay away!). I know it's hard to ask for an ounce of reality in this type of blockbuster and to slice out a little of the cheese, but what was I thinking. It's always a dumbed-down idea in the script and I rolled my eyes throughout the film. Gimme back my money!!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MichaelRNov 17, 2009
Yes, the coincidences & narrow escapes are preposterous. And yes, the science is silly. But c'mon people this is not Shakespeare. It's a thrill ride better than anything at a theme park. The CGI effects are spectacular, and even if Yes, the coincidences & narrow escapes are preposterous. And yes, the science is silly. But c'mon people this is not Shakespeare. It's a thrill ride better than anything at a theme park. The CGI effects are spectacular, and even if you know that most of the heroes will come out all right, it still manages seat-gripping suspense. If you want high drama go see something like Precious. If you want a fun ride, don't miss this state-of-the-art spectacle. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JoshRNov 18, 2009
I've never been so bored in all of my life. The acting was crap, the script was crap, the storyline was crap, even the cgi's which have been so hyped up, were nothing special. I really do believe this is the nastiest, tackiest hunk I've never been so bored in all of my life. The acting was crap, the script was crap, the storyline was crap, even the cgi's which have been so hyped up, were nothing special. I really do believe this is the nastiest, tackiest hunk of junk I have ever been to see in my life. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChrisONov 19, 2009
Simply amazing... it's shocking how some people or critics can rate this movie low (people who only like Mario and Harry Potter I'd bet) Must see!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
LukeGNov 21, 2009
This movie was so cool. The Only bad thing about it was that there were not one, not two, but three shots where they were escaping danger somehow in the nick of time. Otherwise this movie was awesome.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KevonANov 21, 2009
From the director if Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow, you'll expect in 2012 you'll get some mass destruction of unspeakable disasters as the world would end. And that's exactly what you get. The plot could have From the director if Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow, you'll expect in 2012 you'll get some mass destruction of unspeakable disasters as the world would end. And that's exactly what you get. The plot could have been better but it's overshadowed by Grade 'A' special effects and brilliant acting. It's a must watch. Total Immersion and a classic disaster movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
CarolynMNov 20, 2009
This epic *had* to be over two hours long in order to cram in every imaginable cliche and every trite plot device. No twists here: whatever happen--you saw it coming from the beginning. The script is plodding and even good actors give This epic *had* to be over two hours long in order to cram in every imaginable cliche and every trite plot device. No twists here: whatever happen--you saw it coming from the beginning. The script is plodding and even good actors give underwhelming performances. Yes, the special effects are amazing, but nothing will be lost if you rent the DVD in 6 months. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JeffSNov 22, 2009
If you go to this movie expecting Gone With the Wind, then you'll be disappointed. But, if you go to it expecting great visuals and a 2.5 hour roller coaster ride that's not to be taken seriously, then you'll have some fun. If you go to this movie expecting Gone With the Wind, then you'll be disappointed. But, if you go to it expecting great visuals and a 2.5 hour roller coaster ride that's not to be taken seriously, then you'll have some fun. This is a popcorn movie, plain and simple. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MikePNov 23, 2009
I have to say that I fell for the marketing campaign on this movie. All the trailers, billboards, ads, etc. Even worse I do this for a living and I let this happen!? Where did I go wrong? Well for one believing that the cast could pull this I have to say that I fell for the marketing campaign on this movie. All the trailers, billboards, ads, etc. Even worse I do this for a living and I let this happen!? Where did I go wrong? Well for one believing that the cast could pull this off. Unfortunately impossible. John Cusack and Danny Glover. Wow. Should have really saw that coming. And how about the action in the movie? Well nothing you didn't see in the trailers except horribly repeated. OK OK. I know, the premise? Well I have to give in there. It might happen - we'll have to wait a few years to see, but I'll give them a few points for that. But all in all, a waste of $9 and 2 hours/50 minutes that I would like back please. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DavidINov 24, 2009
This film had all the hype surronding it purely because of the impressive trailers. Unfortunately the trailers do not tell the full story by a long way. Firstly the novelties: There is no plot and the so called "acting" is none existent. The This film had all the hype surronding it purely because of the impressive trailers. Unfortunately the trailers do not tell the full story by a long way. Firstly the novelties: There is no plot and the so called "acting" is none existent. The average person wont really care about that though so lets get on to the thing everyone is talking about realated to this film. The special effects. Special they may be but to be brutally honest you can find most of the CGI stuff in Emerichs other films let alone the genre on Disaster. Ok so they are impressive (hence the 5) but they are in no way believable even in the context of the film! If you go to the cinema today and you want to see a good film dont see this. If you want to see a film with 70% recycled special effects and 0% talent/ plot then go ahead and waste 2 and a half hours. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
SteveGNov 26, 2009
I didn't care that the movie would be implausible or lack a great screenplay. That's to be expected. What I didn't expect was how flat-out BORING the movie would be. When you have a boring action movie, it ceases to even be a I didn't care that the movie would be implausible or lack a great screenplay. That's to be expected. What I didn't expect was how flat-out BORING the movie would be. When you have a boring action movie, it ceases to even be a movie anymore. It becomes an exorcise in tedium and frustration. I'd rather give myself a root canal than watch 2012 again. 1 point for Woody Harrelson, who did his best. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MickLNov 26, 2009
There's something to be said for a formula picture done almost to perfection. In 2012, Emmerich gives you everything you expect, but gives it to you bigger.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BradGNov 26, 2009
Think Airplane or Scary Movie done with a huge budget, talented technical staff and an absolutely straight face. Reading the professional reviews, I can't help but think that most of the critics missed the joke - I was in tears for Think Airplane or Scary Movie done with a huge budget, talented technical staff and an absolutely straight face. Reading the professional reviews, I can't help but think that most of the critics missed the joke - I was in tears for fully half of the movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
RyanSNov 27, 2009
This movie was pretty typical Hollywood fare given that it was about the end of the world. Everything seemed stilted and fake. The dialog was atrocious. All the same... you get plenty of escape sequences with the main characters narrowly This movie was pretty typical Hollywood fare given that it was about the end of the world. Everything seemed stilted and fake. The dialog was atrocious. All the same... you get plenty of escape sequences with the main characters narrowly avoiding falling into the crumbling landscape. But even that grew kind of repetitious pretty fast. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
AidanLNov 28, 2009
This movie was bad. Very bad. The script was bad, the acting was bad, and the camera work was bad. The only redeeming factor this movie has is the CGI, which is actually pretty good. I would not recommend this movie to anyone.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JameCNov 28, 2009
Absurd but fun. Got more laughs out of it than a comedy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
NicholasBNov 28, 2009
Let's face it; you didn't come for the horrible story, or the cheesy lines. You came for the glorious CGI destruction! And glorious it is, with buildings collapsing, tidal waves of epic proportions, mass tornados destroying vast Let's face it; you didn't come for the horrible story, or the cheesy lines. You came for the glorious CGI destruction! And glorious it is, with buildings collapsing, tidal waves of epic proportions, mass tornados destroying vast amounts, 2012 has it all. One particular scene stands out, in which a round building collapses, and rolls along, crushing hundreds of fleeing people. I have to give credit to the actors, they were adequate, and didn't do too bad, but the absurd story messes that up. Come for the destruction, stay for the destruction. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MokshJDec 1, 2009
I loved the special effects in the movie. Acting was just about good in the movie. But the whole Armageddon in the movie takes the cake.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
BryanKDec 12, 2009
After not seeing a film for over two months, I sat down to Roland Emmerich's newest disaster film, 2012. The film was overall a very well designed motion picture. The acting from the cast came off as more realistic than in other films After not seeing a film for over two months, I sat down to Roland Emmerich's newest disaster film, 2012. The film was overall a very well designed motion picture. The acting from the cast came off as more realistic than in other films of this genre including "The Core" (2003). John Cusack was excellent in the main role while Woody Harrelson came off as more if a parody than a serious character. The only reason this film would not a 10 out of 10 involves the special effects. In disaster movies it appears CGI has taken over and replaced the classic model based effects. During the 1970's at the height of the disaster these effects were common, even some of the late 90's disaster films like "Volcano" used these effects. After a while, the disasters becoming annoying because its obvious it was created in a computer system and not by people by hand. Their is not feeling of what could be considered realism in this film. As a disaster film it was pretty well done , for now, but as an masterpiece in the genre as some have claimed, it isn't. It's a decent film, nothing more, nothing less. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JuliaH.Dec 13, 2009
Well, that was 2 and a half hours of my life that I'll never get back. I couldn't wait for it to be over and found myself wishing that the earth would actually split open and swallow up the theatre so that it would be. Special Well, that was 2 and a half hours of my life that I'll never get back. I couldn't wait for it to be over and found myself wishing that the earth would actually split open and swallow up the theatre so that it would be. Special effects were ridiculously over the top and the storyline was beyond predictable and cheesy. I've seen better plotlines in beer commercials. Painful. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
KeenanS.Dec 17, 2009
Oh come on! Why are people so mixed about this film. This film is spectacular and is one helluva ride from start to finish. You mean to tell me, you'll go see New Moon and rave about it, yet hate this film? 2012 rocks and is easily one Oh come on! Why are people so mixed about this film. This film is spectacular and is one helluva ride from start to finish. You mean to tell me, you'll go see New Moon and rave about it, yet hate this film? 2012 rocks and is easily one of the best action films I've ever seen, and is definitely a huge step up from the convoluted and disappointing film The Day After Tomorrow. GO AND SEE THIS FILM AND IGNORE THE HATERS! IT ROCKS! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
Sam'sMomDec 23, 2009
This movie was OK. Not that great, a little slow & boring. Way too long.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
EliWDec 23, 2009
I enjoyed it quite a bit. The special effects were amazing, the acting was so-so, and the story was very compelling.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JamesMDec 4, 2009
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen (worse than "I know who killed me"). There isn't a single redeeming thing in this entire piece of junk!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
KateMDec 9, 2009
Just another movie about what America would look like in a disaster, with the occassional mention of what's happening in other countries, but, as usual, it all happens in the USA and the comic relief characters are those crazy Just another movie about what America would look like in a disaster, with the occassional mention of what's happening in other countries, but, as usual, it all happens in the USA and the comic relief characters are those crazy foreigners, of course. It suffers from a problem that many films have, which is that it tries to be both a kids and an dults film at the same time. It has too much swearing to be a disney movie and not enough gore to be plausible. Too many close calls, typical main characters (almost exactly like War of the Worlds) and is dragged out for far too long. The worst part is the whole humanity BS the geologist guy goes on about. The best part is the graphics. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ThomasCNov 13, 2009
Terrible. I hope the $6 I paid for admission doesn't encourage the production of more films like this one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
fantasyNov 13, 2009
This is not a movie for everyone as either you love it or hate it. It is strictly a popcorn disaster movie of epic proportions. There are plot holes galore but if you can overlook them the movie is good natured fun which it was intended to This is not a movie for everyone as either you love it or hate it. It is strictly a popcorn disaster movie of epic proportions. There are plot holes galore but if you can overlook them the movie is good natured fun which it was intended to be. Just don't take it to seriously. The running time of 2 hours 38 minutes is a bit long but otherwise the special effects are great. 260 million spent on CGI to blow up the world. Enjoy! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
leefNov 13, 2009
A lot of fun, worth the price of a matinee ticket today!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
NathanNov 13, 2009
Sooooo many earthquakes. This is a movie you will see for the effects. Unfortunately the cliche dead beat hero (with his family) story didn't quite do it for me, and was struggling to stay awake once I was desensitized to all the Sooooo many earthquakes. This is a movie you will see for the effects. Unfortunately the cliche dead beat hero (with his family) story didn't quite do it for me, and was struggling to stay awake once I was desensitized to all the earthquakes and tidal waves. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JasonTNov 13, 2009
So through all the suspense you know that majority of the main characters are going to make it through each hair raising cliff hanger moment (literally). You know that destruction is going to be taking down every landmark in CGI that has So through all the suspense you know that majority of the main characters are going to make it through each hair raising cliff hanger moment (literally). You know that destruction is going to be taking down every landmark in CGI that has been done in every other doomsday movie but even considering that I think......I love this movie! It kept me rooting for the characters and there was some great actors that did wonderful jobs with their characters. The volcano scene was absolutely stunning. I've seen all the CGI movies greats but that was incredible! This will be the reason why I will buy a blueray dvd player for the home system. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
LexiMNov 14, 2009
I loved this movie. One of my favorite disaster movies of all time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JuneNov 14, 2009
Special effects blow you away, body and soul - the escapism you want from a movie! The comedy flirts with the intensity and seriousness of the disaster! Thank goodness for some seconds of comedy as the world comes to an end!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
TomHNov 14, 2009
Insulting, insipid script and hackneyed cliches ruin any chance the special effects might have had to redeem this waste of time. I wanted to like this, but the only part I liked was the dialogue at the end that was so corny it was Insulting, insipid script and hackneyed cliches ruin any chance the special effects might have had to redeem this waste of time. I wanted to like this, but the only part I liked was the dialogue at the end that was so corny it was unintentionally funny. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
TDKinDallasNov 14, 2009
Crazy fun night at the movies. The ultimate disaster movie, even if it is exactly what you expected from the trailers. What is up with the critics? It is as if they did not know what kind of movie they were going to see and were shocked to Crazy fun night at the movies. The ultimate disaster movie, even if it is exactly what you expected from the trailers. What is up with the critics? It is as if they did not know what kind of movie they were going to see and were shocked to find cheesy dialogue and a stupid plot? Duh! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
ToddZNov 14, 2009
A dreadfully poor movie that made me feel embarrassed as a person with a brain. The catastrophe scenes were so huge and overwhelming that there was no context. The writing so poor that the acting was terrible. Melodrama at it's worst. A dreadfully poor movie that made me feel embarrassed as a person with a brain. The catastrophe scenes were so huge and overwhelming that there was no context. The writing so poor that the acting was terrible. Melodrama at it's worst. Stay away. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
ChadSNov 14, 2009
Jackson Curtis(John Cusack) lives inside his head; he writes science fiction novels, he's hardly what you would call a man of action. But there goes the fabulist, hunched behind the wheel of a stretch limo, saving the family from a Jackson Curtis(John Cusack) lives inside his head; he writes science fiction novels, he's hardly what you would call a man of action. But there goes the fabulist, hunched behind the wheel of a stretch limo, saving the family from a fast-approaching fault line, in a car that somehow performs like a Porsche. Emasculated by his ex-wife's new husband, who ridicules the number of books that Jackson has in print, the modestly successful novelist regains control of the household(that he had sacrificed for his "art"), forcing Gordon(Tom McCarthy), a successful plastic surgeon, to take a backseat, literally, as the father of two drives his familial passengers(plus the medical "boobie fairy") to relative safety. During their death-defying escape from a destabilizing crust, Jackson's progress is impeded when he encounters a slow-moving vehicle, commandeered shakily by an oblivious old woman, for comic relief, of course, since the end of the world is supposed to be fun. (Not gloomy like Don McKellar's 1999 indie "Last Night".) Not soon after the moviegoer laughs at the moribundity of lady geezers, the earthquakes gets them. Off-screen, naturally: blood is a bummer. Actual bloodshed means that people are actually dead. Death becomes less abstract. Asking a blockbuster diaster movie to account for the staggering amount of lives lost in "2012" with anything approaching gravity would kill the box office, so at the very least, the filmmaker tries to make us care about this one family(and if the scientist played by Chiwetel Ejiofor gets to bed the president's daughter played by Thandie Newton), in the midst of all its CGI effects. Does it? Sort of. Who doesn't like John Cusack? Or Amanda Peet? When Gordon pilots the plane(usurping Jackson's position as the provider, for the moment), the moviegoer wonders what heroic deed Jackson will perform to ultimately win the battle of the dads. (Hint: think James Cameron's "The Abyss".) But so much importance given towards this human drama seems disproportionate to the human tragedy at hand, and makes these people ludicrously self-absorbed, and annoying. But all in all, "2012" is pretty damn great for a stupid ass movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SylvieKNov 15, 2009
Awesome movie!!! Makes you appreciate life a little bit more. CGI's are really good, it did not feel like we were watching for 2h40 mins!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
HyperSNov 15, 2009
I told myself, "if this car exits that plane I'm walking out," and despite a laugh-out-loud joke by the Russian billionaire in the car seconds earlier... walk out I did. First time I ever walked outta a movie and I nearly left long ago I told myself, "if this car exits that plane I'm walking out," and despite a laugh-out-loud joke by the Russian billionaire in the car seconds earlier... walk out I did. First time I ever walked outta a movie and I nearly left long ago when a plane for about the 3rd time flew off a runway that was crumbling right behind it, followed by some occurance forcing the crew to have to navigate their way through falling debris and buildings, rather than simply being able to pull up to avoid it all. The special effects look great (and will have you going to watch this movie no matter how many bad reviews and warnings you read), but are waaaay too over-the-top and absurd in the worst Hollywood cliche of ways. Cars jumping gaps ala Speed; always being chased by an impending doom perfectly timed to be one sec behind the hero; vehicle being hit by meteor-sized volcanic debris yet still drivable; etc. Everything is pushed to such an extreme degree that its just too ridiculous to believe or bearable to watch over and over and over and over again. The movie became so cheesy I found myself laughing at things I wasn't supposed to be laughing at (e.g., dialogue exchanges that the director wanted to be emotional). Yeah, that's right... daddy's going down into molten lava in a Winnebago, his kids are screaming "Daddy, NO!", and I'm laughing my *ss off at the unbelievable silliness of the situation and how it got to this point. This movie's script is so mind-numbingly dumb that subjecting the audience to it for anything longer than 1.5 hours should be classified as torture. Unfortunately this movie goes on for 2.5+ hours. (you've been warned.) Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ShimmyNov 16, 2009
Very pointless movie. Waste of money, time and effort. It's sad to see such good actors wasting their time on such a bad movie. Avoid at all cost.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ritahNov 16, 2009
I liked this movie - even though I read the reviews before I did and after I saw it I relay don't understand what not to like - this is a good movie ... ( as far as actors they all played well including John C he is very good ).
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AlejandroC.Nov 17, 2009
Simply horrible...1 pt. for CGI which gets stale after the first few times you see what you already saw in the trailer...the script was actually insulting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
CherMNov 17, 2009
Scientifically accurate, it ain't. Freaking Awesome, IT IS! Roland Emmerich takes you on a two hour tour through some of humanities greatest fears. Drowning? check. Drowning in a typhoon? check. Drowning after an earthquake hits the Scientifically accurate, it ain't. Freaking Awesome, IT IS! Roland Emmerich takes you on a two hour tour through some of humanities greatest fears. Drowning? check. Drowning in a typhoon? check. Drowning after an earthquake hits the Washington D.C. and topples the Washington Monument and the USS JFK smushes the President (Danny Glover, FTW!)? check!!! (maybe that one is just MY nightmare) Needless to say, this is not a movie rooted in reality. It may have started in reality (as in Emmerich deciding, "Hey, let's have humans in this movie instead of a giant lizard or space aliens!") but the movie is a spectacle. It's that train crash you can't look away from. The gravity-defying cake that YOU KNOW is going to topple onto the bride at any moment. The 2008 Presidential election (I kid, I kid...) Regardless, if you like action movies...if you like AMAZING CGI/special effects...if you like REALLY BIG BOATS...Go see 2012. Ignore the impossibility of the events, and ignore all the dialog in the last hour of the movie and you will love it...and go back again, just like I am. and again. and again.... and again. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
RyanAANov 18, 2009
Maybe this movie science is little ridiculus,and the story line is confusing at early movie part, but it's fun..the CG is awesome, that's make difrence from other disaster movie in last decade, i imagine if this movie can be make Maybe this movie science is little ridiculus,and the story line is confusing at early movie part, but it's fun..the CG is awesome, that's make difrence from other disaster movie in last decade, i imagine if this movie can be make as thrill ride..it will be totally AWESOME. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
OmarBNov 18, 2009
It is simply an excellent film, special effects are impressive, besides, if they wanted a film where everything is scientifically credible, expect to make a documentary fiction. For me, the best movie I've seen, with touches of It is simply an excellent film, special effects are impressive, besides, if they wanted a film where everything is scientifically credible, expect to make a documentary fiction. For me, the best movie I've seen, with touches of laughter, excitement, love, action ... Finally, movies are not 100% accurate, A movie is for us to ENJOY OK? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
R.LopezNov 19, 2009
In Stargate(1994) he took us to a whole other world, In Independence Day(1996) He Invaded the planet like no ones done before, In The Patriot(2000) He showed us the trials and tribulations of The Americans in there fight for freedom and In In Stargate(1994) he took us to a whole other world, In Independence Day(1996) He Invaded the planet like no ones done before, In The Patriot(2000) He showed us the trials and tribulations of The Americans in there fight for freedom and In The Day After Tomorrow he gave us a glimpse of what Global Warming can do to our planet. It's 2009 and Roland Emmerich has created his disaster film masterpiece and that film is called, 2012. 2012 is epic, exciting, smart, heartfelt, dramatic and powerful, It's one of the most potent and sweeping action drama's to hit the screens in years. I haven't been this moved or shocked by a disaster film since I saw The Poseidon Adventure(1974) and The War of the Worlds(2005). The story is centered around an academic researcher and his family as they try and out run the end of the world as predicted by the ancient Mayan calender which states the world will end on 12-21-2012(Which will never happen.) It starts out like all disaster films setting up events and scientists telling you there is nothing to worry about and wigged out people telling you that there lying and the world is coming to an end. Then you meet the hero of your story, in this case John Cusack and you get to see his troubles and find out some things about him, and then the the Earth starts to shake and the Global destruction begins and Cusack and his family are on the run from the danger that seeks to destroy them. Sounds pretty clique, huh? Well truthfully it's not, because once the Earth starts a go-in' the drama and power starts a flow-in'. It's one of the most satisfying films of the year and delivers on it's promise to shock and wow, and boy does it ever. John Cusack delivers an awesome performance as the father and hero of the story, Cusack gives off a great sense of loyalty and selflessness in this film which is rare to see him do seeing as he has never played a part quite like this. Amanda Peet is great as Cusack's ex in this film, she plays the part of the concerned ex and mother very well and gives much emotion to the role than she has done in the past. Chiwetel Ejiofor does great here as the sympathetic and tough scientific adviser to the President. He brings more power to the film and adds more to the dramatic punch the films has. Oliver Platt is nothing short of brilliant as the self-absorbed and crass as the President's Chief of Staff. He is the villain of the film and makes a rare role out of it (seeing as in all disaster films nature is the enemy.) Platt is cunning ,ruthless and smart he adds to the energy and flare of the film and by the end you'll hate his guts. But all in all the cast delivers knockout performances in this film and really raise the bar for this genre. 2012 is a film you have to go into with an open mind so you can fully comprehended the statement it is trying to make. It's one of those film that when you walk out it leaves you gasping for air and also leaves you thinking about how much we don't respect life sometimes. It's a good film, with a powerful message and a great story that resonates with the heart and soul. All in all 2012 delivers. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
BernieBNov 23, 2009
Anybody expecting serious human drama or even realistic acting is simply watching the wrong movie. This is all about spectacle and visual delight, and on that score, the movie delivers! The presence of bad rich, elitist villains is enough to Anybody expecting serious human drama or even realistic acting is simply watching the wrong movie. This is all about spectacle and visual delight, and on that score, the movie delivers! The presence of bad rich, elitist villains is enough to carry whatever drama is needed to fill the non-disaster portions, but otherwise, if you want to see the world fall apart spectacularly, you will not be disappointed. That's what it's all about! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
FatManNov 23, 2009
This is awesome! I love it, I don't know why people are acting like idiots saying "It's scientifically impossible!" Course it ain'! It's a freakin movie! And a dang good one too. What about CG? Without it, all the This is awesome! I love it, I don't know why people are acting like idiots saying "It's scientifically impossible!" Course it ain'! It's a freakin movie! And a dang good one too. What about CG? Without it, all the smashing and bashing and explosions wound't be there. And people say there's too much relianse on that. HAVE THEY SEEN THE TRAILER? It's meant to show what you can expect, and I got what I expected. 2 hours of the world coming to an end and cool effects(especially when the USS JFK topples on the White house and when the Yellowstone Caldera erupts. Watch this movie! It's awesome. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
LiorCNov 24, 2009
First movie this year I wanted to leave the theatre in the middle of the movie. A formula movie done cliche after cliche. It seems as if a robot directed it. Good CGI, though.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DanKNov 26, 2009
2012 takes the disaster movie -- once content simply to threaten the Earth with a comet, or blow up the White House -- to its natural conclusion, the literal end of the world.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
BenL.Nov 27, 2009
I am a person who doesn't become paranoid about end of the world, and when I saw this movie I thought about how ridiculous the idea of the earth bubbling up and being destroyed. Even with that in mind though, the improbable escapes and I am a person who doesn't become paranoid about end of the world, and when I saw this movie I thought about how ridiculous the idea of the earth bubbling up and being destroyed. Even with that in mind though, the improbable escapes and action scenes contribute with this well acted movie. The director even threw in a dash of comedy, but most of it was a touch of sadness. Anyway I thought this movie was pretty good. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ZackVNov 29, 2009
It was okay, I would say. It wasn't the worst but was not the the best either. I was hoping jumping up and down action and a lot of disasters. But unfortunately I found myself sitting almost asleep in my chair.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JRNov 29, 2009
Well me and my son went to watch the movie tonight ! And we absolutely loved it! Adventure,action,a little comedy, and great special effects! The story telling was not hard to follow,unlike some others that loose you in the middle of the Well me and my son went to watch the movie tonight ! And we absolutely loved it! Adventure,action,a little comedy, and great special effects! The story telling was not hard to follow,unlike some others that loose you in the middle of the movie! Sure noone knows when the world is gna end! But it's good to make believe and watch something so terrific, but dn't listen to all the critics, Go watch it yourself! tell you something i would of loved to save my on the past movies ive watched over the last few weeks! My money today was well worth it!!! Great job well done to everyone involved in this movie! !!!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
SimianNov 29, 2009
Great special effects do not make a good movie. Just so predictable that it becomes boring. The "close calls", one after another - each more implausible than the last - make the movie laughable to watch. Just silly. It could have been a Great special effects do not make a good movie. Just so predictable that it becomes boring. The "close calls", one after another - each more implausible than the last - make the movie laughable to watch. Just silly. It could have been a "Wow!" movie, but instead it was "Wow, that was boring and stupid." This was the worst movie I've seen this year. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JohnLDec 19, 2009
PAINFULLY HORRIBLE.... I havent seen a movie in the theaters for about 2 years before I saw this one and Im probably never going back.. There are so many things wrong with movie, I dont know where to start.. The sad thing is this could have PAINFULLY HORRIBLE.... I havent seen a movie in the theaters for about 2 years before I saw this one and Im probably never going back.. There are so many things wrong with movie, I dont know where to start.. The sad thing is this could have been a great movie if they have put the right people on it.. Danny Glover as President?? Please. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MetalMan95Oct 28, 2010
Typical disaster movie, yet still entertaining. The destruction of Los Angeles is beautiful. There is no really deep characters. Once you get used to the destruction, its a meh movie. But I was still entertained to the end. But if you want toTypical disaster movie, yet still entertaining. The destruction of Los Angeles is beautiful. There is no really deep characters. Once you get used to the destruction, its a meh movie. But I was still entertained to the end. But if you want to watch destruction that forces you into the moment, watch until they team up with the russian dude. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
muzzikloverJun 4, 2011
After all these disaster films that Emmerich has thrown at us, he closes with an unsurprisingly stupid encore that is 2012 and yes this is the last disaster film he's going to throw at us, thank god. Like all the previous disaster films heAfter all these disaster films that Emmerich has thrown at us, he closes with an unsurprisingly stupid encore that is 2012 and yes this is the last disaster film he's going to throw at us, thank god. Like all the previous disaster films he made, lets list the obvious stupid: Lots of plot holes, inconsideration with factual science, tacky acting and the ability to make you look stupid. Since this film tackles the issue or at least try to of the survival of the human race, it is done so hypocritically and insensitively that you completely have no sympathy whatsoever. The main character is pretty much indestructible while the supporting characters are either death chowder or annoying plot devices and has completely no shame in thinking that the audiences are dumbasses. Upside; Effects look quite good. 'Nuff said. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
RyanGeeSep 28, 2010
Just when I thought that Transformers 2 was the epitome of ridiculous movies, Columbia Pictures once again distributes a ludicrous film with 2012. Films are at times meant to create an alternate world for the audience to experience, but inJust when I thought that Transformers 2 was the epitome of ridiculous movies, Columbia Pictures once again distributes a ludicrous film with 2012. Films are at times meant to create an alternate world for the audience to experience, but in this case, it does not apply to situations that are purely coincidental to the point of inanity. Roland Emmerich's 2012, is a speculation of what will occur on the infamous date of December 12, 2012. The film focuses on Jackson Curtis (John Cusack), a failed writer who has recently gone through a divorce and is attempting to reestablish his family relationships. Meanwhile, the government is trying to cover up the pending apocalyptic event in order to save a select few individuals by building indestructible ships. When the earth-ending event occurs, Jackson Curtis tries to save his family in unbelievable and idiotic ways to reach China, the location of the modern day "Noah's Arc".

Up to this point, I have not qualified my complaints to this movie. In short and concise words, the whole movie is preposterous. For example, when Cusack is driving through the streets of Los Angeles, the whole city behind him is collapsing as he drives through it. Is it a coincidence that the earth shattering is occurring in the direction he is driving his limousine? Additionally, Cusack reaches a plane to escape to find out no one has the experience of piloting. His ex-wife's husband states that he has had two lessons and then he coincidentally drives the plane to almost near perfection. These are just some examples of 2012's ludicrous and laughable moments. They obviously speak for themselves and is the major flaw in the movie.

While these laughable moments of the film are its most significant blemishes, the dread does not stop there. As the same company that distributed Transformers 2, it seems that the company possesses a certain low standards of acting. With Megan Fox-tier acting - if you deem that acting - executed by the majority of the cast, it is a wonder why Woody Harrelson would succumb to be in a cast of this many D-listers. John Cusack does the same exact character he seems to always do, and that obviously is not of quality. Even though the cast is not top notch, the dialogue is even shoddier than the acting itself. With endless cliches ("we're tearing apart" *ground splits*), and strange European accents, nothing about the characters in the movie was redeeming.

2012 is another example of a modern day film with a hefty budget and lack of quality. To compliment the movie to some extent, the CGI was spectacular and is the superior aspect of the film. If extensive & mind-numbing entertainment is your type of movie, then by all means watch this film. But 2012's poor acting, plot, and dialogue were just too much for this movie-goer to the point of extreme revulsion.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
TubieNov 2, 2010
After watching this movie I wanted to world to end. I was so mad about wasting my money on this instead of waiting for it to come to cable (probably in the year 2012 haha). Only a good movie if you want to see special effects and thingsAfter watching this movie I wanted to world to end. I was so mad about wasting my money on this instead of waiting for it to come to cable (probably in the year 2012 haha). Only a good movie if you want to see special effects and things crumbling down. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
DKaasbradenOct 2, 2010
I must confess to being a little confused by this doomsday themed movie. Whilst obviously a cleverly constructed and well shot sequel, it appears to have picked up almost none of the story threads, none of the characters, and certainly noneI must confess to being a little confused by this doomsday themed movie. Whilst obviously a cleverly constructed and well shot sequel, it appears to have picked up almost none of the story threads, none of the characters, and certainly none of the actors, from the movie that started the franchise. It's a fast-paced narrative, set 11 years after the end of the first movie, and introduced to a small group of new characters, led by the always reliable John Cusack, who confront a number of omens foretelling imminent cataclysmic events. As expected, they are soon struggling with a rapidly escalating series of natural disasters, always escaping with seconds to spare. In common with the first movie, there is a major plot-line involving contact with an alien race, but it is a completely new race of beings, at a very different stage of technological development, and with their own set of reasons for journeying to earth and assisting the human race. There is no doubting the craft and skill that has gone into the convincing creation of this chaotic world, and yet, I kept feeling shortchanged by the apparent abandonment of the storyline from the original movie. The glossing over of this discontinuity detracted from the spectacle, and I found myself wishing for more emotional substance to the story. Perhaps just a few scenes with the original movie's main characters David Bowman and Frank Poole would have provided this, not to mention some more time with the apes. On the plus side, it's filled with stunning scenes of destruction and mayhem, and who isn't excited by that kind of stuff? People scream and flee for their lives. Buildings crumple and crunch and snap. It's all very satisfying in the usual disaster movie way. There are frequent shots of cities and towns suddenly transforming into vistas of mass death and suffering, and who doesn't like to gorge on that kind of imagery? Clearly, it's a crowd-pleaser. Grab some popcorn, and go see it. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
FrostbiteOct 13, 2010
2012 is a pity. It could honestly be such a great movie, and at times it shows that potential. But marring with the amazing sight of a private plane barely soaring over a crumbling Las Vegas is the horribly shallow characters and the2012 is a pity. It could honestly be such a great movie, and at times it shows that potential. But marring with the amazing sight of a private plane barely soaring over a crumbling Las Vegas is the horribly shallow characters and the paper-thin plot line. The movie talks about a family and how they are able to magically survive disasters that kill billions of other people. Of course, the stepfather just received a pilot's license yet can navigate through narrow gaps between falling pieces of earth during a massive earthquake, why shouldn't he be able to? Even worse than the main characters were the secondary characters; you don't learn really anything about the Russian guy except that he has two kids and a wife. The worst part is near the end, when they throw away the stepfather and forget about him as if he never existed. If you want some amazing setpieces, this movie is for you. If you don't, then just forget about it. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
moviefreak12Jan 17, 2011
great movie for the family. the best disaster movie ever made, special affects one the best of 2009. The acting sucks but thats not why i went to go see it i went because this does what hollwood is supposed to do entertain me. so if you havegreat movie for the family. the best disaster movie ever made, special affects one the best of 2009. The acting sucks but thats not why i went to go see it i went because this does what hollwood is supposed to do entertain me. so if you have nothing to do on the weekend go but or rent 2012 and enjoy yourself. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
RumblebeeloveDec 13, 2010
The effects are well done and it does ooze the panic you expect from a disaster movie like this. With all of that there isn't much of a reason to care. The characters are developed, but only a little bit. If you can switch off your brain forThe effects are well done and it does ooze the panic you expect from a disaster movie like this. With all of that there isn't much of a reason to care. The characters are developed, but only a little bit. If you can switch off your brain for 2 hours, you too can survive and smile at the glaring mistakes to physics. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
TheGorillaJan 16, 2011
woow i can not believe how stupid and dumb this movie is, and i can not believe that many people liked it and if anyone gives a score above 4 must be a retard for real. 1 point for special effects, nothing else. this movie is like thewoow i can not believe how stupid and dumb this movie is, and i can not believe that many people liked it and if anyone gives a score above 4 must be a retard for real. 1 point for special effects, nothing else. this movie is like the disaster that happened in the actual scenes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
xShayneDec 10, 2010
I went into the theater not expecting much of this movie - and was positively surprised.

The film looked as good on big screen - if not even better - as it looks in the trailer. The special effects were beautiful, huge, effective and
I went into the theater not expecting much of this movie - and was positively surprised.

The film looked as good on big screen - if not even better - as it looks in the trailer. The special effects were beautiful, huge, effective and haunting. Sometimes there was almost too much going on, because there was so much movement on the screen that you could not possibly look at it all.

Of course there were a lot of surreal surviving skills performed by the cast, but a disaster movie is nothing without its core-characters surviving, right? So let's skip the obvious errors and just enjoy the destruction/re-shaping of the planet Earth.

There was more plot into this than I thought possible, and many human dilemmas. Some of them were a bit too underlined, but all in all there were many emotions that really should move the audience. There was also undeniable and well-placed humor within the story, getting many good laughs out of me. I had to roll my eyes surprisingly little during this movie, all in all.

I think this movie deserves its four stars because despite some obvious errors in physics and laws of nature - not to mention the insane amount of pure luck - this movie manages to look beautiful and massive all the same, and bring us a story of survival and compromises.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
NickJDec 18, 2010
It was basically the "Dude Wheres My Car" of disaster movies, plus it was too long, they could have chopped off 50 minutes and it still would have made sense.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
MichaelDDec 31, 2010
It's a good movie. The special effects were just unreal. But it's a little repetitive because of the movie The Day After Tomorrow. Still it's an awesome movie and I would recommend this to anyone.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
JonnyFendiJan 10, 2011
2012 like I predicted before, It will be a controversial movie. If we talked about the end of the world, issue about some religions was avoidable. Thiz movie itself started with a major box office world-wide. People came to the theaters2012 like I predicted before, It will be a controversial movie. If we talked about the end of the world, issue about some religions was avoidable. Thiz movie itself started with a major box office world-wide. People came to the theaters wanted to know how the world ends. Thiz is totally just theme-victory. The Director is Roland Emmerich, who I called The Master of Apocalypse. Before 2012, Emmerich often brings the topic about the end of the world, such as: â Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
asthobaskoroApr 3, 2011
**** ****!1 ****!!!!!!!!!!!11 This movie well not scare the hell of me. Y'know this movie contains absurdities and cheesiness, multi-layerred cheesines.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Watermelon789Jul 27, 2011
2012 barely even catch the main theme, thinking that the world is going to be affected by natural disasters grabs my attention , but for a performance that mix's funny moments, exaggerated moments that feels unbelievable ( okay no movie is2012 barely even catch the main theme, thinking that the world is going to be affected by natural disasters grabs my attention , but for a performance that mix's funny moments, exaggerated moments that feels unbelievable ( okay no movie is true of course ) . 2012 needed more realism and taking care of seriousness. Wait for 2013 people Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Khunter4382May 31, 2011
A visual spectacular of Earth-shattering events! Lots of fun to watch, but ultimately turns to pure cheese in the third act making me say to myself, "No way! Whatever!" This film could have been great, but that third act forces it inevitablyA visual spectacular of Earth-shattering events! Lots of fun to watch, but ultimately turns to pure cheese in the third act making me say to myself, "No way! Whatever!" This film could have been great, but that third act forces it inevitably into the good category. Still worth a look to see the world ripped to pieces! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
aaronpaul121May 21, 2012
2012 is certainly not a "WOW" movie but it is just a "good to average" movie. The special effects were the shining part of the movie. But still, there are flaws which makes 2012 an inconsistent movie. There are also scenes which are2012 is certainly not a "WOW" movie but it is just a "good to average" movie. The special effects were the shining part of the movie. But still, there are flaws which makes 2012 an inconsistent movie. There are also scenes which are predictable especially the death scenes and there are scenes that are great, more like 70%- predictable scenes, 30%- great scenes, I wanted to be more surprised and shocked with the movie. But I must say that overall, it does not deserve bad ratings because of the stellar special effects and the good flow of the story. Great concept but they didn't quite hit on the execution... Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
JAM123Dec 2, 2011
If you ask me, this movie isn't all that bad. It's actually one of my favorites. I don't understand why it's getting so much crap. The special effects were some of the best I have ever seen and are great for 2009 and just this time. I saw itIf you ask me, this movie isn't all that bad. It's actually one of my favorites. I don't understand why it's getting so much crap. The special effects were some of the best I have ever seen and are great for 2009 and just this time. I saw it in theaters and it astonished me at how our film industry has evolved computer animation. the part in the film where John cusack and his family are escaping L.A. in the plane and in the limo is just spectacular and in a strange way, beautiful (even though the earth was crumbling around them). But enough about that, the storyline I thought was good too. It wasn't the best but still kept my attention throughout the whole movie. I was on the edge of my seat when the action began and stayed that way. It seemed scientifically accurate but I'm not a scientist or anything so that's not for me to judge. It was funny at times and just plain awesome. But every movie has it's ups and downs. The storyline was good, trust me, but kinda empty and stale. A divorced father trying to get a better understanding of his kids who don't exactly like him (especially his son) and then begins a race with time to save his family after he gets inside knowledge from a crazy radio show host (Woody Harrelson) that the world is going to end on the date of 12/21/12 which the Mayans prophecized of millions of years ago. So the storyline isn't the best part of the film, also some parts of the film made you just shake your head. But not every movie is perfect, right? So this movie is not the worst movie ever made and if you ask me, one of the best. Well, not the best but you know what I'm getting at. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Potter17Dec 23, 2011
Well, it is not difficult to talk about Emmerich's "2012". Basically, it follows the same pattern formula of other tragedy pictures: brainless action, bland characters and excellent visual effects. But seriously, by now they should haveWell, it is not difficult to talk about Emmerich's "2012". Basically, it follows the same pattern formula of other tragedy pictures: brainless action, bland characters and excellent visual effects. But seriously, by now they should have realized that emotional attachment to the protagonists creates more impact than the unstoppable destruction that we see here. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
JoseRochaPTOct 3, 2011
Actually I'll just wait for the day that supposedly the world will end, to make my criticism, then I'll have more critics where to get the facts. For now leave this brief message to remember.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
MediaCriticOct 19, 2011
This movie was a joy to watch. However it didn't have the best plot/story. It didn't have a proper story to it really, apart from the world ending. You get to meet some interesting characters along the way, but there's no real emotionalThis movie was a joy to watch. However it didn't have the best plot/story. It didn't have a proper story to it really, apart from the world ending. You get to meet some interesting characters along the way, but there's no real emotional connection with them like you do with characters in other movies. The CGI and visual effects are stunning, unlike anything I've seen before. Most of the movie was done digitally and most of the landscapes they were on were computer generated. The ending was okay, and the action scenes were stunning. It shows the true force of mother nature at her worst and just how easy it can tear apart a single planet. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
SachiNov 13, 2011
2012 was a nice movie, maybe there were a few elements that need to be fixed but other than that no. The plot maybe needed some fixing but visual effects and the script were mostly fine. The movie is stil a movie worth watching for a quick2012 was a nice movie, maybe there were a few elements that need to be fixed but other than that no. The plot maybe needed some fixing but visual effects and the script were mostly fine. The movie is stil a movie worth watching for a quick entertainment fix so it may have flaws but it is still worth watching.
Breakdown for 2012, Presentation: 8, Plot: 7, Acting: 8, Script: 8, Lasting Appeal: 7. Overall Score: 7.9 out of 10 "Good"
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
vini1904Aug 14, 2012
I particularly did not see any fun in this film is a kind of story that has been widely Wears and if you are not in order to see a movie "Everything is running out to save yourself if you can" again, then do not watch this movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
ZilcellMay 11, 2012
I get the feeling that people give this film bad ratings because they are scared of 2012. Don't give it bad ratings unless you think its really a bad movie, not because you are scared of the year 2012. This disaster movie is pretty chaoticI get the feeling that people give this film bad ratings because they are scared of 2012. Don't give it bad ratings unless you think its really a bad movie, not because you are scared of the year 2012. This disaster movie is pretty chaotic with the effects and there is quite a bit of character development, even if the story is a tad bit wobbly. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews