Ocean's Twelve

User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 227 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 81 out of 227
  2. Negative: 65 out of 227
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. ThugThug
    Nov 17, 2005
    3
    One of the worst movies I have seen recently. Oceans 11 was good. This... is not.
  2. MatthewM.
    May 8, 2006
    0
    I think this is the worst film I have ever seen. The Slate review had it right. All smarm. Tries to be far more clever than it actualy is. A plotless piece of self-indulgence from start to finish, this is the only film I have ever considered walking out of. The only reason I didn't was because I thought it had nearly finished..... it hadn't.
  3. JohnD.
    Dec 12, 2004
    1
    Worst... movie... ever. Well, not that bad, but a hell of a stinker. Doesn't touch the first one, which itself wasn't anything close to a masterpiece. Save yourself the trouble and avoid this lame duck.
  4. DilipK.
    May 2, 2005
    0
    I can't believe that reviewers are still saying nice things about such entirely inconsequential trash. Endless fawning remarks concerning Soderbergh's genius only show the minimal objectivity of most of the media critics. This is a rip off. It's not funny, has no plot and no plausibility.
  5. RobertR.
    May 3, 2005
    0
    Trash!
  6. StephenB.
    Aug 14, 2006
    0
    I was stunned at how unbearably dull this film was. Please do not think that the first film was good so how bad can the sequel be. Its awful. There are some talented actors on the screen, however all the wit and verve of the first film has been removed with a dreadful script and surprisingly poor pacing and direction from Soderberg. Please avoid.
  7. RonK.
    Dec 20, 2004
    1
    [***SPOILERS***] This has to be one of cinema's great over-rated failures. It has a completely perplexing screenplay which offers little explanation nor the subtle dialogue required by the viewer to discern the plot theme. No flow, little forethought to the ending vs the middle vs the beginning. Annoying little scene with Bruce Willis, playing himself, which adds absolutely nothing of[***SPOILERS***] This has to be one of cinema's great over-rated failures. It has a completely perplexing screenplay which offers little explanation nor the subtle dialogue required by the viewer to discern the plot theme. No flow, little forethought to the ending vs the middle vs the beginning. Annoying little scene with Bruce Willis, playing himself, which adds absolutely nothing of entertainment value to the film and Julia ($20 million dollar baby) Roberts will wnat to forget this role almost as much as Ben and J-Lo wish to put "Gigli" behind them. I felt cheated by the promotional scenes and feel that Soderburgh owes me seventeen bucks.....I'll pay for the stale popcorn. Also, have him explain to me how it's possible to raise a masonry structure from it's foundation without disturbing it or the buildings connected to it????? And why bother with the putty and paint to repair the divot in the wall??? For that matter......why proceed with the false theft at all???? They purportedly had already stolen the real Faberge egg. Expand
  8. MikeN.
    May 13, 2005
    0
    The movie kept flashing forward, and back and forward - you didn't know where you were; and you were looking for a big finish - and nothing happens.
  9. Ian
    May 3, 2005
    2
    Boring, slow, terrible. Enjoyed Oceans Eleven but this ranks up to one of the worse movies I have seen.
  10. JamesP.
    Jun 21, 2005
    3
    Compared to the first not even worth a look in.
  11. LeighM.
    Dec 15, 2004
    2
    This Movie was so boring i just wanted to get up and leave! It is nothing like the first one! If you wanna go and see a good movie go and watch the Oceans 11!
  12. AlexA.
    Dec 17, 2004
    1
    This movie was very painfull to sit through. While Matt Damon was hilarious, the rest of the movie waned in disilusion with a terrible plot. I had been waiting for quite some time and it was a dissapointment.
  13. JosephH.
    Dec 22, 2004
    2
    Badly directed, badly written, and way too long -- who in the world could have greelighted a heist script where every trick and twist is unbelievably dumb. There isn't a single five minute stretch of this film that doesn't feel like a seventh-grader's idea of a heist film. Biggest howlers of the year: the Night Fox reveals how he bypassed the intricate laser defense system. Badly directed, badly written, and way too long -- who in the world could have greelighted a heist script where every trick and twist is unbelievably dumb. There isn't a single five minute stretch of this film that doesn't feel like a seventh-grader's idea of a heist film. Biggest howlers of the year: the Night Fox reveals how he bypassed the intricate laser defense system. Tied with the method the Ocean Twelve's crew reveals at the very end to steal the worlds most valuable object -- which any two-bit pickpocket could pull off. And which, by the way, would seem to make the rest of the movie unnecessary. Awful. Expand
  14. RonK
    Dec 23, 2004
    3
    I was sucked in by the original and that with this cast, it couldn't be as bad as the critics were saying. But it is. What a waste of talent and 2&1/2 hours of my time.
  15. bryan
    Dec 28, 2004
    2
    Whereas the first installment maintained a focus, this film was scattershot. it appeared to me that instead of creating a story and further developing characters to woo the audience, those involved chose to exploit the beautiful locations and toss in ad hoc problems and implausible solutions. the movie steamrolled into complete absurdity when julia roberts' character impersonated Whereas the first installment maintained a focus, this film was scattershot. it appeared to me that instead of creating a story and further developing characters to woo the audience, those involved chose to exploit the beautiful locations and toss in ad hoc problems and implausible solutions. the movie steamrolled into complete absurdity when julia roberts' character impersonated julia roberts. why didn't don cheadle just imitate himself? and to have new characters added all the way to the end of the movie showed that the storyline was thin. my only wish was that the movie would have been much shorter. either that or never to have made the movie. Expand
  16. JamesC.
    Dec 11, 2004
    2
    You can thank me later for saving 2 hours and 20 minutes of your life. I had to sit through this awful movie and no one else should have to be this unlucky. Mr. Soderbergh, just because you throw in slick music, it does not mean the scene is slick and arty. It's a collage of really bad scenes with snappy music that makes you think you're just a having a ball watching this movie. You can thank me later for saving 2 hours and 20 minutes of your life. I had to sit through this awful movie and no one else should have to be this unlucky. Mr. Soderbergh, just because you throw in slick music, it does not mean the scene is slick and arty. It's a collage of really bad scenes with snappy music that makes you think you're just a having a ball watching this movie. The audience I had, got up so many times to go to toilet, you would have thought they were giving away free popcorn. To be honest I'm sure the sound of flushing toilets was more entertaining than this sad excuse for a film. Why did I give it 2 stars instead of 0? It's the holidays and I'm in a giving mood. Expand
  17. GraemeD.
    Jan 24, 2005
    0
    This movie is so amateurish. Terrible script and cinematography! It appeared that this was all first-take material and is an embarrassemnt for the actors involved. I was sooooo bored.
  18. Laura
    Feb 26, 2005
    3
    Watchable yet cringeable, the whole film is a whole pile of either obvious(bordering on slapstick) jokes and other "jokes" that you feel like your not quite getting(like your somehow out of the loop!). Frustratingly boring robbery in the end after all the lead up to it.
  19. LeeY.
    Dec 20, 2004
    1
    Loved '11'...wanted to walk out of '12'. to the guy who said this was a 'thinking' movie, well, if you thought too much about the holes in the plot, then it'd get a 'zero' from me. the bruce willis 'subplot' was ludicrous, as was the laser beam dance (coulda swore more than 1 passed thru his body). very disappointed...
  20. MarkB.
    Jan 10, 2005
    1
    You know that Steven Soderbergh's sequel to his diverting caper-movie remake Ocean's Eleven is in deep, deep trouble during a scene in which professional criminals George Clooney and Brad Pitt are somnabulistically muttering to one another while watching a Happy Days rerun, and you desperately want the camera to go back to Richie and The Fonz. Lewis Milestone's 1960 Rat You know that Steven Soderbergh's sequel to his diverting caper-movie remake Ocean's Eleven is in deep, deep trouble during a scene in which professional criminals George Clooney and Brad Pitt are somnabulistically muttering to one another while watching a Happy Days rerun, and you desperately want the camera to go back to Richie and The Fonz. Lewis Milestone's 1960 Rat Pack Vegas heist film (the original Ocean's Eleven) was, terrific surprise ending notwithstanding, not a good film by any standards, but at least it delivered plenty of what everybody paid to see: Frank, Dino, Sammy, et. al. Soderbergh's 2001 remake featured lots of big names (Clooney, Pitt, Julia Roberts, etc.) working hard but clearly having a good time, backed up by genuinely amusing supporting turns by Carl Reiner, Elliott Gould and Bernie Mac. The second, excuse me, THIRD time's clearly not the charm here: most of the stars' work here epitomizes the dictionary definition of "picking up a paycheck" (sadly and ironically in the manner of Sinatra, Martin and Davis Jr, in 1981's Cannonball Run, and at least in that instance they had the partial excuse of being old and not in the best of 2004's most pretentiously, off-puttingly directed film since Coffee and Cigarettes; the difference being that in that one Jim Jarmusch wouldn't move the camera if you put a gun to his head, and here Soderbergh is so irritatingly hyperactive with it that health.) Meanwhile, Reiner, Gould and Mac are virtually nonexistent! Worse still is that this is you want to sneak some Ritalin into his Evian water. (One similarity between the two heavily star-driven films is their filmic snobbery: both feature bit players with quite a few lines of dialogue who are obviously overjoyed to be there with the big guns, and clearly are acting their hearts out, only to be rewarded by their directors' smug refusal to show their faces onscreen.)Soderbergh can't or won't focus on two people having a simple conversation if he can spin the camera around an empty room, or out a window with nothing of particular interest outside, or into a badly -lit corner. Perhaps he thinks he's emulating the overachieving compositions of Sidney J. Furie, who would bury perfectly serviceable mid-1960s thrillers like The Ipcress File beneath a ton of flashy, superfluous Chinese angles, but I was reminded more of the work of the late Doris Wishman, the inept auteuress of such zero-budgert softcore grinders from the same period as Bad Girls Go To Hell and My Brother's Wife, in which two characters would chat and we'd be treated to three minutes of a shoe tree or a table lamp. Stylistically, F. Gary Gray's relatively straightforward handling of The Italian Job in 2003 reveals that Gray is a thousand times more confident in the strength of his material. On the other hand, perhaps Soderbergh is once again demonstrating a peculiar kind of self-loathing specific to Soderbergh; everytime he has an enjoyable, accessible box office success he feels perversely compelled to kamikaze himself with his next effort. Just as he followed the engrossing and poignant debut sex, lies and videotape with the maddeningly obtuse Kafka, so Soderbergh further punishes himself (and us) for pulling off three consecutive critical and popular $100 million-plus smashes (Erin Brockovich, Traffic and Ocean's Eleven) with a Trifecta O' Unwatchability that includes Full Frontal, Solaris and this. One final note to Julia Roberts, who plays the central figure in Ocean's Twelve's most talked about sequence (a showbiz-meets-reality-meets showbiz farrago that reminded me that my time in supermarkerlines is better spent composing my next shopping list than perusing Us, People or tabloids): I realize that Soderbergh is a dear friend and you feel you owe him a lot, but at this point you're only being an enabler. When you get off celebrity maternity leave in a couple years and Soderbergh starts approaching you again for roles, please, PLEASE in the name of all that's good and decent: READ. THE. SCRIPT. FIRST. Expand
  21. [Anonymous]
    Jan 16, 2005
    0
    This movie...sucked! Do this so called actors...have too much money and time on their hands. If anything, this movie reminded me not to go to an film that has one or all of them in it again. Their intelligence...is not there....how disappointing that some people stoop so low to make trash out of trash.
  22. ToddF.
    Jan 17, 2005
    1
    Worst movie I have seen in a long time. Don't waste your money. Oceans Eleven was much better.
  23. johns.
    Feb 7, 2005
    1
    I hope the actors got a big fat paycheck for this pierce of dribble. Because there aren't gonna be an oceans 13 after this crap. A box office flop. The story is weak and the actors like Brad can't act so there you go.
  24. J-DubS.
    Feb 7, 2005
    0
    This movie was a terrible waste of talent. Oceans Eleven was great. This movie made me wish i had had a denist's appointment..... it was that bad!
  25. KenK.
    Dec 12, 2004
    1
    Yuck! Bad plot, bad dialogue, bad acting.
  26. MarkDavidC.
    Feb 9, 2005
    0
    If you want to see a bunch of celebrities parading around telling each other how amazing they are (which makes up 95% of this movie) watch the Oscars, they're free.
  27. JohnS.
    Mar 22, 2005
    1
    The only reason this movie even rates a 1/10 is the usual style added by Brad & Cathy. The rest is awful, probably the worst movie I've ever seen, certainly the worst I've ever paid to see. The makers of this movie deserve to be dragged through the streets and to forced to payback every penny paid by audiences throughout the world before being banned permanently from anything to The only reason this movie even rates a 1/10 is the usual style added by Brad & Cathy. The rest is awful, probably the worst movie I've ever seen, certainly the worst I've ever paid to see. The makers of this movie deserve to be dragged through the streets and to forced to payback every penny paid by audiences throughout the world before being banned permanently from anything to do with movie production & creation. It is the worst case of making a movie to make money under false pretences ever. It should be investigated under inaccurate trade descriptions acts as falsely claiming to be entertainment. Total and absolute rubbish. It doesn't have a story, and the one it does even makes the bad actors look like idiots. And Ron Cheadle? You're a good actor, but you should be ashamed of this performance. Expand
  28. EricS
    Apr 18, 2005
    0
    This movie is pure trash, I cannot believe it made it by the screeners. This proves that Hollywood, throw 14 stars in a movie, that has NO plot, hard to follow, and BRAIN NUMBING boring will want to take your money away. if I wanted that, I would just watch Entertainment tonight, this was like the movie version of it.
  29. GAustin
    Apr 20, 2005
    0
    Most unwatchable movie I have ever rented. Thank God for fast forward and mute on DVD's. Anyone who had the misfortune to have paid to watch this crap would of had no choice but to walk out- the earlier the better.
  30. GregT
    Apr 25, 2005
    1
    I took this movie off of the DVD player after 1 hour. It was disjointed, jumbled up, all over the map, and lacked any suspense. A cast of thousands like a Cecil B. DeMille epic and not one character had anything to say of interest. Rubbish.
  31. CrapmovieBadmovie
    Dec 13, 2004
    0
    Boring, random and just made to make quick cash.
  32. JeromeB.
    Dec 13, 2004
    1
    I'm moving to Hollywood to become a screen writer; I promise a better script than this mush. The actual heist and ending were particularly lame. Think about it; people get paid serious money to crank out this junk. I found this movie to be about as exciting as doing my bi-weekly laundry.
  33. mikeb.
    Dec 13, 2004
    3
    Well the first one was really good but this was the same movie minus all the things that made the first one good. How can you create a movie about robbing when you dont even spend time on the details and tricks of the robbery. This filmed forced creativity and tried to hard to make the audience think "man these guys/actors are cool" The difference is the original rat pack was naturally Well the first one was really good but this was the same movie minus all the things that made the first one good. How can you create a movie about robbing when you dont even spend time on the details and tricks of the robbery. This filmed forced creativity and tried to hard to make the audience think "man these guys/actors are cool" The difference is the original rat pack was naturally cool, these guys are just trying to hard. Expand
  34. BrittP
    Dec 15, 2004
    1
    Maybe i would have been sucked in by he movie magic of this film had I not seen Ocean's 11. the ending completely surprises you and it is such a masterpiece you could watch it over and over. Ocean's twelve left me feeling like the whole thing was an inside joke that I missed. Pehaps I did. I was hoping for a more intricate piece but all I saw was fluff.
  35. DanijelD.
    Dec 18, 2004
    3
    What a dissapointment, the movie ends up making a fool of itself with the excession of "stylish" scenes. The only thing that was heisted was the cinema-audience.
  36. BobA.
    Dec 18, 2004
    3
    "Ocean's Eleven" was an entertaining, high energy film. The sequel, therefore, had everything going for it - good reputation of the previous film, all star cast, beautiful locations throughout Europe and the addition of Catherine Zeta-Jones. Instead, we got a collection of disjointed scenes, absolutely no pace (a prerequisite for a film of this genre) and a plot that didn't "Ocean's Eleven" was an entertaining, high energy film. The sequel, therefore, had everything going for it - good reputation of the previous film, all star cast, beautiful locations throughout Europe and the addition of Catherine Zeta-Jones. Instead, we got a collection of disjointed scenes, absolutely no pace (a prerequisite for a film of this genre) and a plot that didn't really get off the ground. Traditionally, you would say that most films introduce the characters, set the premise, and off they go. Ocean's 11 did that quite well. But this film never started cooking. I felt as though the whole cinema was shifting about in their seats. Scenes lingered for far too long, actors weren't putting energy into their performances and I'm sure that somehow the "Deleted Scenes" portion of the DVD was included entirely in the film. Loud, pacey music couldn't even keep the tempo high. It is disturbing when you're in a film and you start to think about how you're going to rate it on Metacritic - for me, it hovered between 1 and 3 out of 10. The wheels really fell off when Tess, played by Julia Roberts, was coerced to fly to Rome to play - wait for it - Julia Roberts. The concept of the hologram egg just screamed at me, "We don't have a plot!" It is acceptable to make allowances in films of this genre, but introducing absolute science fiction SFX bordered on the desperately ridiculous. The only highlights were the European locations - Rome, Amsterdam, Paris and coastal scenes. Fans of Catherine Zeta-Jones may get some value - she looks pretty, rather than sexy. She too was wasted in this film. And I couldn't really say who Ocean's 12 were - one would assume Catherine Zeta-Jones, but even this wasn't all that strongly emphasised. See it on DVD if there's nothing else available at your video library. Better yet, why not track down the original "Ocean's Eleven" with Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin and Sammy Davis Jr. Expand
  37. ZinStar
    Jan 12, 2005
    2
    Just check it out when DVD come out, casue the $$ you spend in the cinema will be bteer donated to Tsunami Victim. Trus me I like big buff movie just for the HYPE of it, but this is worse then T3 and all the biggest flop that been out lately.
  38. richardd
    Jan 18, 2005
    0
    This was a boring, contrived movie that couldn't hold itself together, and made little sense. What a disappointment after the original. Next time, they should have a script before shooting begins.
  39. Captainc
    Feb 18, 2005
    3
    Ho Humm.. Proves you should leave a good thing...or a relitive good thing, alone!
  40. PrateekG.
    Feb 25, 2005
    3
    One question: why? As fun as the first movie was, this wasn't. The plot stunk, the twist in the movie was horrible. I usually enjoy Pitt, Damon, Clooney, et al, but this was about as bad as Clooney's Batman movie.
  41. TyS
    Mar 27, 2005
    2
    Laura took the words out of my mouth.
  42. BowenL.
    Apr 14, 2005
    0
    Worst excuse for a movie I have ever seen. The star power never jells; they only smile when the receive their paychecks. Crap extordinare'.
  43. JoeY
    Dec 17, 2004
    1
    Another one of those movies that revolve around rich self-absorbed celebrities involved in the generic get-rich heist movie plotline. It's just another attempt for hollywood to make themselves look better than everyone else in this celebrity lovefest.
  44. Dec 18, 2011
    2
    Ocean's Twelve has lost the main thing that made its predecessor a fun diversion - pace. In this sequel, nothing happens, and it happens slowly - it's only in the last fifteen minutes or so that anything makes you sit up and pay attention. The returning characters are still pretty dull and under-developed, and the new ones are uninspired. The script isn't by any means awful, andOcean's Twelve has lost the main thing that made its predecessor a fun diversion - pace. In this sequel, nothing happens, and it happens slowly - it's only in the last fifteen minutes or so that anything makes you sit up and pay attention. The returning characters are still pretty dull and under-developed, and the new ones are uninspired. The script isn't by any means awful, and stylistically the film is polished, but this doesn't make the film entertaining enough overall. The best part of the whole film is Don Cheadle saying in his cringe-inducing mockney drawl "the accent is crucial - the first thing people notice is the accent", and I sincerely hope this was a bit of self-deprecating humour on the script writer's part. In the end though, chief among Ocean's Twelve's crimes is not that it's boring, or empty, or even that the actors appear to be doing it purely for the money, it's that it is unashamedly smug. Expand
  45. Jul 23, 2013
    3
    Ocean's Twelve gives ammunition to those who are against the concept of sequels. It started out ridiculous, dragged quite a bit, became mildly interesting, became even more ridiculous, then was stupid, and then finally even more ridiculous. The acting was once again fantastic but outside of a few main characters, none of the side characters seemed to get any further development or decentOcean's Twelve gives ammunition to those who are against the concept of sequels. It started out ridiculous, dragged quite a bit, became mildly interesting, became even more ridiculous, then was stupid, and then finally even more ridiculous. The acting was once again fantastic but outside of a few main characters, none of the side characters seemed to get any further development or decent screen time. Bernie Mac and Don Cheadle especially seemed like almost wasted roles because they were both so underutilized. Yes, George Clooney and Brad Pitt got more screen time and Catherine Zeta-Jones got quite a bit as well but still, it felt like the great cast just wasn't used properly. The writing was the worst part though. It's almost like they said "hey, let's make a movie and then if the ending doesn't work, let's just make some stupid stuff up and if it doesn't really make sense or seem plausible, who cares, at least we get the ending we want." Expand
  46. Nov 29, 2013
    3
    Ocean's Twelve replaces the fun, simple plot of its predecessor with less wit and humour and a densely complex plot which confuses, rather than entertain.
  47. Nov 9, 2014
    3
    Ocean's Twelve replaces the fun, simple plot of its predecessor with less wit and humour and a densely complex plot which confuses, rather than entertain.
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 26 out of 39
  2. Negative: 5 out of 39
  1. 63
    Even frothier and more frivolous than the first movie: It's a heist picture so laid-back and unconcerned, even the heist feels like an afterthought.
  2. As soon as it's over, and you find yourself back in the harsh light of the workaday world, you'll be hard-pressed to remember what happened. Except that you'll remember enjoying yourself - immensely.
  3. Isn't just a double whammy, it's a whammy squared - a goofy, stylish heist movie that'll steal moviegoers from other pictures.