User Score
5.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 575 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. JayD
    Mar 5, 2010
    2
    I just wasted 2 and a half hours on this rancid film. How Roland Emmerich keeps making bad blockbusters with seemingly no accountability for them is a mystery to me. The main characters are painfully bland. There is no chemistry between any of the actors. Absolutely no character in the movie was developed. All you get is eye candy(CGI) and scenes that will make any physic professor reel I just wasted 2 and a half hours on this rancid film. How Roland Emmerich keeps making bad blockbusters with seemingly no accountability for them is a mystery to me. The main characters are painfully bland. There is no chemistry between any of the actors. Absolutely no character in the movie was developed. All you get is eye candy(CGI) and scenes that will make any physic professor reel in horror. Expand
  2. MitchM
    Jan 3, 2010
    0
    The fact that this movie made it to the big screen proves without a doubt that the human race is in fact doomed. It is truely depressing to see that so many of my intellectually challenged countrymen enjoyed this. All copies of this movie should be destroyed and everyone who had a part in creation of this visual filth should be banished to an island to prevent them from making another The fact that this movie made it to the big screen proves without a doubt that the human race is in fact doomed. It is truely depressing to see that so many of my intellectually challenged countrymen enjoyed this. All copies of this movie should be destroyed and everyone who had a part in creation of this visual filth should be banished to an island to prevent them from making another movie as terrible as this. Expand
  3. RobertH
    Mar 12, 2010
    1
    Before seeing this movie, I already knew what to expect, a few death defying moments, some "wow, this is impossible" survival tactics, and stuff getting messed up, when I actually saw the movie, it left me with a "been there, done that" type of feeling. The entire family aspect of the movie was garbage. Everytime they showed that family on the screen made me want to turn it off. It seemed Before seeing this movie, I already knew what to expect, a few death defying moments, some "wow, this is impossible" survival tactics, and stuff getting messed up, when I actually saw the movie, it left me with a "been there, done that" type of feeling. The entire family aspect of the movie was garbage. Everytime they showed that family on the screen made me want to turn it off. It seemed like everything went exactly perfect for them. Every thing feel exactly into place, and they are surviving all of these outragous scenes while the other billions of people in the world are dying. Really? That's bull. The entire movie wasn't horrible, a lot of the speeches between family members (ie. Father-son, father-daughter, grandfather-granddaughter) scenes were extremely good, aside from the main family of course. It just seemed too happy ever after for me. All of the people in the movie that most people would want to kill of end up dying while the main family stays perfectly fine. A load of steaming "our family can survive anything" dog crap. Take the main family our of it and its a really great film, but seeing how it was geared towards them, really blows. Expand
  4. ShelbyS
    Mar 16, 2010
    0
    This movie was a hideous mess and particularly painful because of its length. What went wrong with this movie? Everything.
  5. MrL
    Jun 10, 2010
    0
    Oh my god so horrible boring, action with this horrible patriotic we will save everyone feeling, sorry but fire loud and boomboom with expensive special effects is not exiting in this setting. today not acceptable anymore.
  6. PriyaR
    Dec 9, 2009
    1
    Released a bit late in certain cities in India. But save your money and time at least on this one. I am sure this question must have been answered 1000 times. But why is the American family always portrayed to be dysfunctional? And the kids, why do they pass judgment about everyone? It becomes too predictable. There is nothing left for your imagination and the excitement..YAWN.
  7. EliasC.
    Mar 16, 2010
    0
    You can count on a Roland Emmerich disaster film to be a disaster. In the tradition of his '10,000 BC' and 'Godzilla', '2012' stands as another badly acted, incoherent, poor science, awful CGI, and overlong film. Undoubtedly it made a lot of money in its initial release because that is what Emmerich does best and will continue to do. I really tried to like You can count on a Roland Emmerich disaster film to be a disaster. In the tradition of his '10,000 BC' and 'Godzilla', '2012' stands as another badly acted, incoherent, poor science, awful CGI, and overlong film. Undoubtedly it made a lot of money in its initial release because that is what Emmerich does best and will continue to do. I really tried to like this film. I did not expect 'Citizen Kane'. But this film is awful in it's impossible misuse of every science in the known universe. If you must watch this film, do it as I did: Consider it a comedy. You will laugh yourself silly. I will spoil it for you right from the start: Ask yourself how John Cusak can drive with 2 young kids in a limo from southern California to Yellowstone National Park, back to southern California, and then back again to Yellowstone National Park in 2 days. Destined to be a midnight cult classic of bad filmmaking. Expand
  8. Jan 18, 2012
    4
    Here we have an example of how to make a disaster movie. The formula is simple: add a boring plot that is completely science-fiction; slap on dull, uninteresting characters; and finally, make the story so ridiculously predictable that you can tell what is going to happen at the end during the first 40 minutes. While the special effects are incredible (easily some of the best I've seen in aHere we have an example of how to make a disaster movie. The formula is simple: add a boring plot that is completely science-fiction; slap on dull, uninteresting characters; and finally, make the story so ridiculously predictable that you can tell what is going to happen at the end during the first 40 minutes. While the special effects are incredible (easily some of the best I've seen in a movie), it suffers from bad characters, a dull story, and it's overly long length. Expand
  9. Nov 7, 2011
    3
    This movie is brain damage on a projector screen. The special effects were clumsily misused so that rather than making something intense and interesting - it's boring and predictable. Cut the special effects from this movie and you are left with very little. But blaming the film makers is simple minded, it's the retarded adult movie goers who are to blame by watching and then letting theseThis movie is brain damage on a projector screen. The special effects were clumsily misused so that rather than making something intense and interesting - it's boring and predictable. Cut the special effects from this movie and you are left with very little. But blaming the film makers is simple minded, it's the retarded adult movie goers who are to blame by watching and then letting these film makers get away with this rubbish. We actual could have a better film industry with better movies if people had bigger minds and weren't so easily entertained by this laughable joke. LAME. Expand
  10. Jul 16, 2012
    3
    This movie is exactly what's wrong with most CGI-driven blockbusters. There is no character development, the acting and dialogue stink, there isn't a single original idea in the whole movie and it relied too much on bad science moments. Unimpressed to put it lightly.
  11. Nov 18, 2011
    3
    Although 2012 is very visually impressive, the film is very scientific incorrect and is very far fetched. The film many consists on SFX and BS moments instead of a good story.
  12. Nov 23, 2011
    1
    A movie where you find yourself laughing where you shouldn't have been laughing. It's in the film that you find yourself laughing at parts that are unintentionally hilarious, due to sloppy writing and the usual special effects driven trash. There's almost nothing in this movie to review, it was just a 2 hour coma, occasionally interrupted by a couple of special effects sequences, all ofA movie where you find yourself laughing where you shouldn't have been laughing. It's in the film that you find yourself laughing at parts that are unintentionally hilarious, due to sloppy writing and the usual special effects driven trash. There's almost nothing in this movie to review, it was just a 2 hour coma, occasionally interrupted by a couple of special effects sequences, all of which are ridiculous in nature, and all of which look less and less impressive each time we are shown them. The characters are painfully bland and uninteresting, no depth to them whatsoever. Emerich's previous film in the disaster category; The Day After Tomorrow, should have been a clear indicator that the guy can't write inspired disaster films very well.There is far, far too much emphasis on special effects in this film. One thing that also intensely grated me was when I watched a trailer for this film, with the bold assertion on a title card "It could really happen". Sorry, Emerich, but when science and the Mayans themselves attach no special significance to 2012, don't try and think you can market your film as being scientifically supported and expect me to swallow the kind of **** you're selling. You did the same with The Day After Tomorrow, I didn't fall for it then, don't expect me to this time. Try making good films, Emerich, you might learn something. Expand
  13. Dec 12, 2011
    3
    (January 14, 2010)
    Are you ready for the year 2012? So many venues claim that come 2012 the world as we know it is going to come to an end, so why not make a generic, soul less, explosion happy film about it?
    When I first heard that a movie was being made based off the happenings of 2012, I had hope that it would be more than a cliche end of the world movie, and actually go in depth on the
    (January 14, 2010)
    Are you ready for the year 2012? So many venues claim that come 2012 the world as we know it is going to come to an end, so why not make a generic, soul less, explosion happy film about it?
    When I first heard that a movie was being made based off the happenings of 2012, I had hope that it would be more than a cliche end of the world movie, and actually go in depth on the behind the scenes topics of the year. Sadly clichÃ
    Expand
  14. Jun 27, 2012
    2
    Well, people justify a positive review by comparing this film with common movies made in Hollywood, and recently baked ones. Exactly, presently made in Hollywood. Except the universe is not Hollywood neither cinema was born today. If you still believe cinema was created a few years ago and you think the film industry gravitates Hollywood, well, you're wrong and you probably ate too muchWell, people justify a positive review by comparing this film with common movies made in Hollywood, and recently baked ones. Exactly, presently made in Hollywood. Except the universe is not Hollywood neither cinema was born today. If you still believe cinema was created a few years ago and you think the film industry gravitates Hollywood, well, you're wrong and you probably ate too much popcorn. You'll love this one if that's the case. Not in case, you'll only taste a synthetic audience statistics bombastic and orgasmic glutton of a C series packed with good actors. That's all, you'll be hungry few minutes after you've seen this rubbish, and when you get home you'll be pissed for wasting your money, believing in fairy promotional cultural religious tales. But as you said, it's Hollywood! Expand
  15. Dec 22, 2012
    3
    So, John Cusack, Oliver Platt and Zlatko Buric are total dabblers in acting and Roland Emmerich is completely untalented in terms of writing. But 2012 is no 0-points-movie. There are some nice actors in this box-office-success and when the German director is making whole LA drown, it is impressive. But this movie is just unfavorable. This so damn overlong film is fully packed withSo, John Cusack, Oliver Platt and Zlatko Buric are total dabblers in acting and Roland Emmerich is completely untalented in terms of writing. But 2012 is no 0-points-movie. There are some nice actors in this box-office-success and when the German director is making whole LA drown, it is impressive. But this movie is just unfavorable. This so damn overlong film is fully packed with buildings crumbling, waves overflooding great areas, earthquakes destroying whole cities and CGI everywhere. Too much of that, Mr. Emmerich! I have to grant him that he managed to put emotion in it with the family stuff surrounding John Cusack's role. This guy totally sucks at acting and his movie kids relegated him when they were playing together, but this one particular scene at the end of the movie touched me. But for all that it's not really hard to make such a scene emotional when you've got a nice soundtrack and a near-death-experience with a family as the story. So, is 2012 worth watching? Not really, because the FX aren't that good to make you enjoy the movie (I just overthought the movie and I get that you can never really enjoy a movie with such a plot!) and the dialogues are plain stupid. However, it's not that bad because of some nice actors and good editing, score and cinematography stuff. Expand
  16. CoreyN
    Jan 7, 2010
    4
    Very good premise, expertly ruined by the director who loves to destroy America, but make them look very much the patriot. we have the President who will not leave his lawn, because he is the hero, yet our Queen is on the 'boats' with her beloved corgis. the cast are okey, but we have the typecast people we have all come to know and love in these films, and anyone who stays with Very good premise, expertly ruined by the director who loves to destroy America, but make them look very much the patriot. we have the President who will not leave his lawn, because he is the hero, yet our Queen is on the 'boats' with her beloved corgis. the cast are okey, but we have the typecast people we have all come to know and love in these films, and anyone who stays with the dos lives!! despite the admittedly good effects, this film isn't about humanity and people coming together as one, this is about Cusaks charachter and all the people who have caused him harm, dying in fantastical ways. it's way too long, relies too much on effects and not plot or script, and the ending and final lone are vomit inducing. not a very good film Expand
  17. Sam
    Mar 20, 2010
    5
    I love mindless destruction. I really do. I don't like mindless destruction when it's the same 'OH MY GOD IS THE PLANE GOING TO MAKE IT' bullshit every 10 minutes for 3 HOURS. Yeah, there were some cool scenes of destruction, and Woody Harrelson was hilarious. But for the most part it was painful to watch. and yes, while I did say some of the destruction scenes were I love mindless destruction. I really do. I don't like mindless destruction when it's the same 'OH MY GOD IS THE PLANE GOING TO MAKE IT' bullshit every 10 minutes for 3 HOURS. Yeah, there were some cool scenes of destruction, and Woody Harrelson was hilarious. But for the most part it was painful to watch. and yes, while I did say some of the destruction scenes were cool, most of them looked like rubber falling apart. Ugh. fuck this movie. Collapse
  18. JackS.
    Jun 2, 2010
    4
    I give this movie a 4. Why because it focuses way to much on the special effects and way to little on the story and character. You barely get to any characters. The only character they really tell you about is Jackson Curtis. Other characters like Charlie and the U.S President made the movie exciting, but the others just made it crappy. Don't go and see this movie. It would be a I give this movie a 4. Why because it focuses way to much on the special effects and way to little on the story and character. You barely get to any characters. The only character they really tell you about is Jackson Curtis. Other characters like Charlie and the U.S President made the movie exciting, but the others just made it crappy. Don't go and see this movie. It would be a waste of you time. Expand
  19. TinaC
    Jan 1, 2010
    4
    I thought that this movie was going to be the best movie ever but after sitting in the theater for 2 1/2 hours i was like why the heck did i come here. It was like Transformers all over again. The only reason i gave it a four was because of John Cusacks acting made me want to stay and finish it.
  20. Ranel
    Nov 29, 2009
    4
    The special effects were amazing, but the movie had too many flaws. First, it was very depressing, if you want to see GOOD people die over and over again, then be my guest. Secondly, the characters were boring, so you have to see the boring first half before things get destroyed to really feel how boring the characters are. Finally, the movie is very unoriginal, the whole movie is a The special effects were amazing, but the movie had too many flaws. First, it was very depressing, if you want to see GOOD people die over and over again, then be my guest. Secondly, the characters were boring, so you have to see the boring first half before things get destroyed to really feel how boring the characters are. Finally, the movie is very unoriginal, the whole movie is a modern day Noah's Ark, in almost ALL ASPECTS. I haven't been disappointed in a movie I was looking forward to in awhile. Expand
  21. KaileyD.
    Mar 26, 2010
    3
    This movie has way to much death. It's also really sad. I say there is to much death because the president , pope, and pretty much all of California dies.
  22. AngelinaM
    Mar 29, 2010
    1
    my rating is ONLY for the visual graphics as for the story line it just seems so ridiculous that the whole plot is a family running away from the world. It doesn't address any issues or cover any of its flaws like how everything miraculously appears before the protagonists e.g the jet being there just in time. Anyway I just wanted to say I will see you all in 2013, when someone my rating is ONLY for the visual graphics as for the story line it just seems so ridiculous that the whole plot is a family running away from the world. It doesn't address any issues or cover any of its flaws like how everything miraculously appears before the protagonists e.g the jet being there just in time. Anyway I just wanted to say I will see you all in 2013, when someone decides to make a real movie. Expand
  23. EliJ.
    Jun 13, 2010
    1
    I don't know why the main characters have to dodge death twenty times in the movie. Its a disaster movie so i'd expect one or two times where death is avoided only by a few feet...but wow it felt like every other scene in this movie. i'll give it a score of 1 because the special effects were pretty cool. the writing and acting were terrible though. why is there always some I don't know why the main characters have to dodge death twenty times in the movie. Its a disaster movie so i'd expect one or two times where death is avoided only by a few feet...but wow it felt like every other scene in this movie. i'll give it a score of 1 because the special effects were pretty cool. the writing and acting were terrible though. why is there always some snotty kid who calls his father by his real name? that right there, is the question. Expand
  24. SRowe
    Jun 15, 2010
    0
    Nearly as bad as "Speed 2". For example, the family just make it into a plane and just manage to take off, and just avoid falling buidlings / trees / mountains in the plane - 3 times. It was like de ja vu all over again.
  25. CaptainNemo
    Jun 18, 2010
    0
    Two... hundred... million dollars! FOR THIS?! After stopping it twice, I finally watched it through to the end simply through morbid curiosity, and now I'm genuinely infuriated at it! I'm going to the DVD store and asking the shy timid counter boy for my money back at full volume!!! Then I'm going to buy all the copies they have and BURN them in a fire out the front of the Two... hundred... million dollars! FOR THIS?! After stopping it twice, I finally watched it through to the end simply through morbid curiosity, and now I'm genuinely infuriated at it! I'm going to the DVD store and asking the shy timid counter boy for my money back at full volume!!! Then I'm going to buy all the copies they have and BURN them in a fire out the front of the shop so that the stupidity doesn't spread any further. Then I'm going to find out where the director, the writer AND the producers live and have them all savaged by starving komodo dragons until only their molars remain.... Every terrible cliche was there... the black president, the doombringer scientist, some idiot saying "By God.... That's impossible!", the lowly scientist being sent straight to meet the President, the useless divorced husband winning the wife and kids back.... I am now certifiably down to 50 IQ points with the rest of the people who watched this piffle. They should rename it "Daddy Runs From Armageddon" in reference to the six, count them, SIX times Cusack drives a car, a plane, a campervan or whatever.. out of the incoming firestorm/wave/pig stampede. It now tops my list as the worst movie I've ever seen. Expand
  26. LA
    Nov 16, 2009
    2
    If my review were based only in special effects, then the movie deserves 10/10. However all the good effects are lost in a lame and unrealistic plot; some humor is also injected in disastrous situations which is totally unnecessary. The main characters never suffer a scratch and they made it to the other part of the world, where everybody else...well...dies. Silly movie. Please skip this one.
  27. Sausage
    Nov 19, 2009
    3
    Continents displace, super volcanoes erupt, cities vanish, tidel waves swallow the Himalayas...every distaster you could possibly imagine is in this movie...except one that shouldn't be....THE SCRIPT!!!!!
  28. ZackA
    Nov 20, 2009
    2
    Just real bad.
  29. JoshM
    Nov 23, 2009
    3
    Although I enjoyed the great CGI and all the explosions and firey balls of doom, the script was just so cheesey it was unbearable. Any movie with the lines 'it's a suicide mission!' and 'we have to wait for dad!' (right before he pulls him self from the bottom of a crevasse) is just bound to be crap.
  30. O.Q.R.
    Nov 24, 2009
    1
    What a waste of time. Whoever worked in the dialogues and the story of this movie, please don't disappoint us again or please just change career. I give it one point because I had a good laugh at the joke of the Russian guy in the car.
Metascore
49

Mixed or average reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 34
  2. Negative: 6 out of 34
  1. Reviewed by: Stephen Farber
    70
    Eye-popping special effects ensure that this movie will be a smash hit, and while it's entertaining for most of its excessive running time, the cheesy script fails to live up to the grandeur of the physical production.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    80
    The visual effects are pretty sensational, delivering the cutting-edge CGI goods auds want and expect. It will be hard to watch "Earthquake'' ever again after this one.
  3. Reviewed by: Chuck Wilson
    50
    The two-hour-and-40-minute 2012 is overstuffed with special-effects, but the Curtis clan's mad dash out of town is the closest the movie gets to actually being fun.