MOVIE MIX  
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 103

Disney Apocalypse: Why 2012 Sucks

Even by the popsicle-stick standards of its genre, the disaster movie 2012 is so dumb you actually want everyone to die.
November 26, 2009  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Movie Mix headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

It is among the most wondrous mysteries of the ancient world: how did the Maya, a civilization that preceded Rex Reed by millennia, know about plot spoilers?

By ending their "long count" calendar precisely on the 2012 winter solstice, the most advanced Mesoamericans allegedly gave away the date of the world's end. The details of what will happen are a matter of debate among the 2012-ers, both professional and amateur. But those who bother to write and speak about 2012 agree that something big and very possibly bad waits on the other side of the countdown -- which might as well have begun with last week's release of the Roland Emmerich blockbuster.

Not surprisingly, Emmerich chose to run with the most catastrophic interpretation of the soon-to-expire pre-Columbian calendar. The director has always used the biggest hammers at his disposal, from Godzilla, to aliens, to climate change. This time, 2012 end-time theory offers the ultimate canvas for the director's Bosch-meets-Benji style. According to his version of it, the 2012 climax comes fast and furious when solar flares, gamma rays, and "evolved" neutrinos combine to wreak atmospheric and tectonic havoc on our home planet.

Amazingly, say the starry-eyed soothsayers, the Maya saw it all coming. Centuries before Cotton Mather's Puritans invented the Rapture Bunny to pass those long New England winter nights, they figured out the exact date, one tied to the observable events of a solstice and higher-than-usual sun flare activity.

If it seems a little eerie that the Maya picked a day that lines up with solstice and sun flares, it really shouldn't. Solstices and sun flares are common cyclical events. The first occurs every six months, the second every 50 to 100 years. Despite the 2012 publishing boomlet, there is zero scientific evidence backing up theories of impending calendric cataclysm in three years time. Throw in the modern Mayans' own disavowal of apocalyptic readings of their own calendar, and the 2012 doomsday freak-out looks doubly dubious. We moderns don't usually take seriously the teachings of ancients who practiced ritual toddler sacrifice. Yet when it comes to the end of the Mayans' peculiar calendar, a growing number of Amazon.com shoppers and History Channel viewers seem eager to make an exception.

In honor of the plot spoiling Mayans, here's another 2012 giveaway: the new Emmerich film is worse than anyone predicted. There are those who may tell you that it is so bad that it is actually good. Don't believe it. If you want to see what the end of the world looks like, see John Hillcoat's The Road, not this Disney apocalypse.

The movie finds its hero in the Dad-of-the-Year heroics of John Cusack, a failing novelist. Cusack's character takes his brats camping and meets a short-wave radio conspiracy spaz (Woody Harrelson) and the scientist (Chiwetel Ejiofor) who is in the process of ringing the alarm over impending doom. Cusack then leads his family through a mind-numbingly improbable apocalyptic adventure-course, pausing to enjoy Hallmark moments that would get laughed out of a creative session for the next Maxwell House campaign. An hour after the film should have ended, Cusack is still at it, performing a feat of underwater endurance not seen onscreen since Sho Kosugi's ninja B-movies of the 1980s. He and his family then sail boldly into the Year One dawn, which looks and sounds like a combination of Ronald Reagan's 1984 reelection commercial, "Morning in America," and a diaper ad. (The film's last line is actually a blatant product placement for Huggies Pull-Ups.)

If the story arc and idiocy level sound familiar, it's because the expensive template used for 2012 is the one Emmerich pressed five years ago in The Day After Tomorrow. It's becoming a very popular template. Steven Spielberg is using something similar for his 2010 remake of When Worlds Collide, the 1951 sci-fi classic that first used the myth of the American Adam in the context of secular apocalypse. Hopefully, When Worlds Collide will flop and achieve burnout for a genre that should never have existed in the first place: the planetary holocaust feel-good movie. But that's unlikely; 2012 is already one of the year's biggest hits.


submit to reddit
Alexander Zaitchik is a Brooklyn-based freelance journalist and AlterNet contributing writer. His book, Common Nonsense: Glenn Beck and the Triumph of Ignorance, will be published by Wiley in June.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
See more stories tagged with: 2012, john cusack, disaster movies, emmerich
 
Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

lunch break
Posted by: DHFabian on Nov 26, 2009 5:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What if the Mayans ended the calendar on 2012 because someone said, "That's far enough for now. Let's break for lunch," expecting future generations to further the calculations over time? A calendar for the future could continue to be worked out indefinitely, but the effort would get mighty tiresome.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: lunch break Posted by: willymack
» RE: lunch break Posted by: jimmyaj
» RE: lunch break Posted by: praedor

Comments are closed-

I wish...
Posted by: Bbear41 on Nov 27, 2009 4:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...2012 could be the beginning of a new era. This one is worn out, we need a new one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I wish... Posted by: willymack
» RE: I wish... Posted by: Dboy

Comments are closed-

What Did You Expect?
Posted by: javajoe on Nov 28, 2009 3:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I liked it. Sure it was a lousy movie. My warning was that it was produce and directed by the director of "Independence Day", one of the worst movies ever made. I didn't expect anything more than great heaping piles of CGI special effects and that's what I got. Sometimes you want good characters, good plot, good story and good dialogue; sometimes you just want a great catastrophe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» id expect better reviews Posted by: brianct
» RE: What Did You Expect? Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: What Did You Expect? Posted by: PeterW

Comments are closed-

In defence of 2012 part 1, and against popcorn reviews by jaded intellectuals
Posted by: brianct on Nov 28, 2009 3:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just read your turgid review.Obvioulsy, this film was not for you. Its a spectacle (or as you snidely put it: planetary holocaust feel good movie) not kitchen sink realism.

Maybe you had a bad batch of popcorn,or was it the title and the mayan reference
But ive seen the movie 4 times and really enjoyed it.
So what did i see that you missed?
You may have missed the humor that runs thru the film, which may explain why Cusack was picked for the role. Silberman the 'pilot'.


Whether you or anyone believes in 2012, is no excuse to pan a movie, or we'd only be seeing social realism films...No vampires, no elves, no cyb orgs...No 2001, let alone Lord of the Rings...
Science tells us there are no vampires of elves etc..
'We moderns don't usually take seriously the teachings of ancients who practiced ritual toddler sacrifice.'

We??? Many moderns still believe in ancient religions and philosophies..You may not. So please dont pretend to speak for more than yourself.

Now, this is one of Emmerichs best films...what is it about disaster that brings out the best in him?Maybe his imagination is set alight by the thought of all those critics left behind?
The story may be implausible, and the tsunamis, but spectacle like surrealism thumbs its nose at dull critical 'realism'. What Emmerich gives is is a grand spectacle with state of the art special effects. Its not the character but the audience that is his target. To move the audience with spectacle you need excess.So the cataclysm in everyday Southern California: the familiar being obliterated.
Las vegas looking like Sodom...
Tsumanis washing over the himalayas...
Seeing a subway train sale into space or waves flowing over the himalayas: the shock and awe is the whole point of this type of spectacle.

You may wish the genre burns out...but its been in existence for centuries, or have you never heard of Book of Revelations,myths like Raganorok, John Martins paintings(His pic of The Great Day of His Wrath looks just like scenes from the destruction of califonia in the film) etc. They may come and go in cycles but they always return. Doom is always impending, and the common man wishes to survive: he is confronted by unholy choices: who should live and who should not.
Beyond the spectacle, the common story, the audiences entrance is thru the family, we have the social criticism of the G8 ruthless love of secrecy, the decency of ordinary people; the survivors ending up in the third world, and where humanity began, it must begin again.

Its not a dull film: the dialogue is very good and and well delivered: and varies from Cusacks droll witicisms, to Ejiofors earnest defence of the people.
The film may be a spectacle,BUT its foregrounded in its characters. You may think Curtiss kids are brats, but the Curtiss dont think so. Their readiness to sacrifice their own lives for their children, when it looks as if they wont get on board the ships may not impress a jaded sophisticated critic,but it did this viewer.

The familys survival is one thread in the story.
The other is: Ejiofor the compassionate idealist who nearly destroys Ark 4, and Platt the ruthless pragmatist, who is ready to kill for the sake of humanity...they provide a nice running dramatic contrast.

(cont)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

In defence of 2012 part 2...why your review sucks
Posted by: brianct on Nov 28, 2009 3:56 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The BIG MACS of empty calories...maybe you ignored the human stories..there were at least 4, and 2 viginettes (the two old men on the ship). The dialogue was crisp, sharp memorably delivered esp by Platt and Ejiofor, clashing .

'Confronted with the task of creating a single believable or sympathetic human being or relationship, Emmerich and his co-writer Harald Kloser are as powerless as their doomed masses. '

There were several, esp Platts Anheuser, and Ejiofors Helmsely

'The moment nea rly came after Ejiofor's expository speech on the need to save the billionaires at the gate.'

You must have missed them..the chinese/tibetan workers...they were the guys bright yellow. Even Anheuser, the ruthless pragmatist noticed them.
Thruout the while film, front and center, is Dr Helmselys continued concern for ordinary people.

You saw 'billionaires at the gate' he saw people: a few billionaires (how many are there in the world?), and a mass of workers, and those selected....

' Emmerich expects us to bunch our fists over the fate of a yappy purse dog. But we don't'



again with the tyrannical WE...Please stop imposing your views on 6 billion other people.



'You don't want this family to reunite, to make good on broken promises, or to carry the American flame forward into the reset future. You don't want them to do any of that'



Well, i do...what i dont want is some critic telling me what u should like like like or think...Isnt that a bit tyrannical?

The american flame is carried by other survivors.

Returning to your :Planetary holocaust feel good movie...yes, the film is large and generous..the film barrels along: moving swiftly thru several registers, like a symphony and like life: comedy ('stop telling them im a pilot'), even black comedy, terror, romance, awe, calamity..we may laugh at Woody harrlesons character (or caricature) of the Conspiracy theorist who is right, but the sight of a train plunging into space, the sound of the airtraffic controller screaming of Tamaras drowing is unmixed. Humor is not allowed to rob these moments of their dread and terror.

Finally, the contrast between the snidely jaded sophisticate contrasts unpleasantly with the generosity of the tibetan family, and the readiness of the Curtiss family elders to sacrifice themselves for the youngest members.

If this critic is an eg: I hope the selectors chose not to include any film critics in the Arks passengers...they offer nothing positive to aid humanity in starting again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

You, we, never I? Critic as Anheuser
Posted by: brianct on Nov 28, 2009 4:31 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a further comment:

'Even by the popsicle-stick standards of its genre, the disaster movie 2012 is so dumb you actually want everyone to die.'

what films were u comparing it to?

But whats with this 'you' 'we'?
I didnt feel that way at all? Are u trying to force your views onto your readers?

You may want everyone to die...in which case YOU should have enjoyed the film as almost everyone DOES die!

You may wish to preserve only the best and let shoddy filmmakers perish...but then that shows the perceptiveness of the filmmakers...For who best embodies your character than Anheuser, the bureacrat, who thinks not of individual people but masses and species....

Like Helmsely, the Curtiss and Charlie Frost and Laura Wilson, i prefer everyone to survive...

========================

'Nothing makes a catastrophic polar shift seem overdue like a stylized product placement for Bentley Motors, set against the death of a billion Chinese.'

Now you notice them...earlier they vanished behind your 'billionaires at the gate'.

You also managed to write your review with not one word about the tibetans! the family that helped the Curtiss band was tibetan....they were a key plot point..

Your problem seems to be that you saw 'Mahyan', '2012' and your social realism conditioning kicked in, so the story vanished as you endured 2.5 hours of spectacle munching dutifully popcorn....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

In Terms of Catastrophe. . .
Posted by: eruditeogre on Nov 28, 2009 4:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . it was horribly contrived, numbingly improbable, and so cartoonish as to be little more than a pandering panorama of apocalypse porn.

It was awful. But people went for excess, "escape," and fetishized fulfillment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: In Terms of Catastrophe. . . Posted by: richholland

Comments are closed-

de ja vue.....
Posted by: Captainmagic on Nov 28, 2009 4:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How long ago did that fellow...what was his name....er...thats right, Noah float around for,...yup....a great mess of shit built up so quickly with all those animals on board...why he had to stop for a while and clean all the crap overboard...there was so much of it...and then to have a chap by the name of Columbus come along, after some millennia later, (1492)and discover it....and i saw the movie and said...hang on a minute ..."Not again"

Just the facts please...LoL


Captain OUT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

I saw the trailer for this movie at the theater
Posted by: moloko velocet on Nov 28, 2009 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...it was the most frenetically disturbing overload of CG images and noise. If you weren't epileptic before you went in, you'd probably be so by the end of the film!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» you just cant please 'em! Posted by: brianct

Comments are closed-

Still waiting on the Catastrophe of 2000, or was that 2001?
Posted by: Purple Girl on Nov 28, 2009 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact there are some faiths whov'e be waiting on their own version for decades, centuries, millenia.
The full blow 2012 paranoid is not just afraid of what might happen, but have a morbid, obsessive, facination with it.
End of Dayers regardless whether they think an astroids going to hit us, the cruste shifts, or God decides to destroy his creation in a rash moment of indignation ( A Temper tantrum).

Tell me- what the hell are we going to do about, regardless of these Supreme causes? so why worry about it?
The only thing we can do is NOT hasten it through our actions or ideologies.
American, along with many others around the world are not concerned about what is going to happen in 2012, they are worried about what is going to happen to them tomorrow.
Fretting over 2012 is an intellectual and emotion luxury many people can not afford.
Don't give a damn about the movie or the prophecy. Both cost too much, in coin and conscience.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

best movie review ever
Posted by: internetweary on Nov 28, 2009 8:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I completely agree with your aversion to this movie. Your review is spot on so much so that I joined the forum just to voice my opinion. Who cares how visually stunning a film is if it is depicting the mass destruction of human life? What is with people and their disaster fetishes? And what's the fun in seeing a movie that follows a formula?

People who think that movies like this are spine tingling have no idea that the film industry is just blowing on their neck. This movie is crap. A complete wast of $250 million. You'll see it in the bargain DVD bin next year. More plastic for our landfills.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» worst movie review ever Posted by: brianct
» typos vs a bad review! LOL Posted by: brianct
» RE: worst movie review ever Posted by: MyLeftFoot

Comments are closed-

Not even wrong!
Posted by: frankly1 on Nov 28, 2009 8:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Firstly, this movie is already a success. It was made to make money. It will!
Second, It will mis-inform the already ignorant (but us Americans love this nasty violent end of the world stuff, who cares if the story is made up bullshit, it just has to sound half assed mysterious) movie-watcher. It's the effects...gooo... this stuff is cool, dude!
Third, The Myan calender is a complex system of observation of the cosmos, natual events, philosophy, religion and human behavior. Most of the Myan record has been lost and destroyed. (We have only just translated their hieroglyphics properly).
I would guess that their is a very small demand from Idiot America for Myan cyclical philosophy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» deadly serious lefties Posted by: brianct

Comments are closed-

re: In defence of 2012 part 1, and against popcorn reviews by jaded intellectuals
Posted by: vitalemrecords on Nov 28, 2009 8:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, this guy spelled Defense wrong.
So it makes sense that he would like Roland Emmerich.
He must have been paid by someone to write this review. There is no way someone pays to see a movie 4 times, and sit through a movie 4 times in a short amount of time.
He opinions do not reflect a real thought process, it sounds like a used car salesmen trying to get you to buy the car with the "true coat" (Fargo).
I hope he was paid appropriately for this damage control commercial.
res ipsa loquitor

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Man-eating Gears and Iron Hoses
Posted by: scajomar on Nov 28, 2009 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's when I wanted my money back: the big ol' gears that crunch up Cusack's ex-wife's new guy become, in the next scene, the same gears that get STOPPED UP BY A PNEUMATIC HOSE, preventing the arc from closing it's backside door. Seriously?

Puh-leeez.

I kept hoping for a tiger to drop into the mix and eat the slipper dog.

Two hours I'll never get back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» puh-leez! Posted by: brianct
» Two Hours? Posted by: Tat106

Comments are closed-

2012...we gonna die
Posted by: eosrk on Nov 28, 2009 9:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
look out, look out...lol...do they know the Mayans like beat the shit outta each other and wipe themselves out before the Europeans moved in

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

in all these diaster movies, I always wonder....
Posted by: eosrk on Nov 28, 2009 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
where in the hell they getting their power from...I mean, there's some kind of underground power plant somewhere, cause in every one of them the fucking lights are on somewhere...ever notice that!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

A waste of time
Posted by: tatamchwh on Nov 28, 2009 9:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A friend phoned and asked me if I wanted to go to the movie with her. I said no, but she sounded disappointed, so I said yes without asking about the movie. The movie 2012 is just another waste of time to sit through. All the special effects depict events that are against the laws of physics and the movie maker surely has never seen a real volcanic eruption. The social interactions were equally unreal. The only real part of the film was the total waste of time -- it was designed for viewers who have no mental capacity. It's just another presentation designed to reduce the thinking ability of the average citizen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A waste of time Posted by: EdinIowa

Comments are closed-

Lazy Critics
Posted by: sylvanlake on Nov 28, 2009 9:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So your kinda hung over, and you don't feel like thinking a whole lot.
But you gotta write this damn movie review.
You pick the dumbest most obviously for profit hollywood tripe and then
write a scathing review. Your well informed indignation is coupled with a few pretentious Asian or European movie references to give you some bona fides.
Hit Submit.
Job done. Your career as a AltMag "film critic" is secure.
Go back to bed. Yawn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lazy Critics Posted by: cwilsondrum

Comments are closed-

Science and Apocalypse
Posted by: aberdeen on Nov 28, 2009 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's odd that AlterNet has no problem believing in the many Apocalyptic scenarios painted by modern science, not to mention the global mass pollution, nuclear, bio and star-wars fallout downside of modern science. Yet they want to mock every ancient prediction of the same, as if we are somehow more advanced here in a 21st Century of mayhem, woe and pending doom. No doubt the twin gods of science and education will eventually blow us all to kingdom come, if they don't first manage to burn all our trees and food up and starve us to death, just give them a little time...

WHO WOULD JESUS BOMB?
www.FreedomTracks.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't you know? Posted by: Sekhmetnakt

Comments are closed-

The apocalyptic theme
Posted by: bodhidude on Nov 28, 2009 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This movie is interesting because of the genre it represents. It has nothing to do with the Mayan conception of 2012 which despite the popular culture that is building up around it has nothing to do with a literal end of the world. The Mayans were talking about the end of an age of man. A transition of societal paradigms and I would say we are indeed seeing that. But its not really about erupting volcanos or super earthquakes, its about evolution of consciousness. Well that doesn't make for a blockbuster movie. Oh well.
What is interesting is that as we go through a transition in consciousness we see this disaster process playing out not only in movies like this but in how we treat the planet, each other and conduct world affairs. Not really anything new although increasingly more destructive. Its ironic that for a movie that has as much to do with the Mayan view of 2012 as Michael Moore has in common with Sarah Palin it reflects the very end of paradigm fear based hysteria that the Mayans may have predicted at the end of a world age. The real disaster is of our own making and within our own psyches, I think we're in a process of becoming aware of that so we don't have to keep projecting it externally.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The apocalyptic theme Posted by: lightwing1
» Too little too late? Posted by: goodyweaver

Comments are closed-

All right, already
Posted by: willymack on Nov 28, 2009 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, I went and saw the movie, along with my son and a friend.
So, the flick had a Whitley Srtiberesque aspect to it.
So, maybe it WAS a trifle overdone, what with all the close calls and superhuman heroics.
The movie was spectacular with all the special effects, and the story was a hoot.
I don't think I wasted my time and money and what's sure to become a cult classic like the Rocky Horror Picture Show.
At least, I don't think so, but you never know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

This article doesn't deserve more than 32 comments!
Posted by: HoboHomo on Nov 28, 2009 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nuf said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe just one more? Posted by: djnoll

Comments are closed-

RIP
Posted by: QQOblivion on Nov 28, 2009 11:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't care if this movie was the GRANDEST MOVIE EVER MADE(!!!).
It sounded like crap to me even before I read this review. I know I sound prejudice. But I am against seeing ANY movie these days made by Hollywood, especially if it is a big-budget blockbuster marketed to the masses.

As for the End Of The World. The gods have tricked us. December 2012 will come and pass without an apocalypse. But then... BANG!... just a month or two later, after Sarah Palin takes office, full-scale nuclear war!
And if that doesn't happen, climate-change or Peak Oil will kill us all off soon enough anyway.

Rest in peace, humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Are you sure
Posted by: Archie1954 on Nov 28, 2009 12:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the reference to the end of the world hasn't got a lot more to do with the return of the Republicans to power in the US in November 2012? That as a disaster of doom is much more plausible than this movie scenario.

As an aside, how did we allow the worst Anglo Saxon curses to become common fare in discussions of everything from a to z?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Movie was a real stinker!
Posted by: red porch on Nov 28, 2009 1:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Made me wanna stick a fork in my eye.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Movie was very good Posted by: brianct

Comments are closed-

Spielberg's Remake of "When Worlds Collide" Likely to Be Far Scarier
Posted by: SkeeterVT1 on Nov 28, 2009 2:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't seen "2012" -- and frankly, I'll wait until it comes out on DVD. I wasn't all that impressed with Roland Emmerich's "Day After Tomorrow."

I wouldn't put it past Stephen Spielberg, with his stature, to come up with a far scarier doomsday film with his remake of George Pal's 1951 classic, "When Worlds Collide," due out next year. Even after more than a half-century, "When Worlds Collide" can still cause a few chills.

I find the prospect of a celestial catastrophe -- a comet or an asteroid slamming into the Earth or the Sun going supernova -- far more frightening than either climate change or Emmerich's version of the end of the Mayan calendar.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

I am always amazed
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Nov 28, 2009 6:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
at the way people jump on these theories,always foretold by a civilization that couldn't predict their own extinction. so much for the soothsayers. duh? myans,incas,romans,all caught short on the retirement planning. they weren't that fucking smart!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

For All The Wrong Reasons...
Posted by: Eric.Arthur.Blair on Nov 28, 2009 6:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will, in part, defend the movie. By rights, I should be prepared to hate it, since there are a number of warning flags up for me: first, it's a Roland Emmerich film, whose works always start out looking impressive but falling flat on plot; second, I think the whole 2012 and end-of-the-world stuff is silly; third, it's getting more attention than it deserves.

However, all the negative comments remind me of the criticism leveled by writer, philosopher and professional skeptic Martin Gardner against 1977's Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Gardner flayed the film for the apparent expectation that the viewers were supposed to accept it as some sort of documentary. I saw it as Spielberg's vision of an alternate world, one where, if these events did occur, this is what they might look like. Spielberg, however, is a much better imaginer than Emmerich.

When it comes out on DVD, and I can get it from my public library for free, that's when I'll watch 2012. I rather enjoy massive death and destruction as long as it's imaginary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

2025 and not 2012
Posted by: mistery509 on Nov 28, 2009 7:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Say Folks, look around you. Fires in Australia, flooding everywhere, the Far North is melting, horrible weather everywhere, and many creatures are dying. The oceans are polluted. This is reality. This is really happening. Are we afraid of that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2025 and not 2012 Posted by: richholland

Comments are closed-

Critics
Posted by: Romantic Violence on Nov 28, 2009 7:37 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know what I say about critic? Until you personally make a movie..shut the fuck up...I hate critics. Thye're the type of people who will find something wrong with anything. Give them a winning lottery ticket for billions on a sunny day and they'll find something fucked up. Hey..have you wondered maybe you're fucked up and the world is just fine?

FTW

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

2012 is NOT the end of the Mayan calander, it is just
Posted by: drfun on Nov 29, 2009 4:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
one end to many of their long counts that have had endings before without any catastrophe from its result. The Mayans have long count calendars that go beyond Dec, 21st 2012; yet you don't hear anyone mentioning these calendar counts.

The Balloon Boy's father believed a solar flare is going to wipe out the world in 2012 and was desperate to get $'s to build a shelter, not realizing if this were to happen, you can't get deep enough in the earth to protect your ass, nor lay enough supply to sustain yourself, let alone a family.

It is so absurd for people to take the Mayan calendar out of context to serve their own agenda, but look what others do with the Bible.

One must remember movies are for entertainment purposes unless its a documentary, so the imagination is permissible to run wild.

As for myself, I can save many $'s where I live by purchasing a DVD version if I chose to do so, in many cases just days after a movies release.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

OMG... I just realized...
Posted by: Feltixx on Nov 29, 2009 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the calendar on my wall ends on December 31st!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! ;-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

I like that Saving Private Ryan movie
Posted by: eosrk on Nov 29, 2009 4:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that there is what war looks like

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Not A "Movie"
Posted by: jmmartin on Nov 29, 2009 4:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The stars of this one should be embarrassed to call themselves actors; presumably the leads were getting rich. We no longer go to theatres or rent DVD'S to go to "the movies." The movies died out circa Jaws and what we are seeing now is a technical hybrid with effects-driven plotlines and characters who do not act but only interact. Often poorly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

I can’t afford to look that far into the future.
Posted by: TomTom on Nov 29, 2009 5:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have enough money to survive until the end of 2009 (and it’s not even my money). Based on my past experiences chances of finding employment before then are rather grim. With no family or friends to help I’m facing the end this year. Solar flares in 2012 or whatever nonsense they come cum with to get your money doesn’t really concern me. Everything ends.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

2012 Sarah Palin / Glenn Beck
Posted by: PaulK on Nov 29, 2009 6:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's the Saturday Night Live version.

I would understand the idea that Wall Street completely collapses in 2012, according to the Mayan prophecies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

2012 does what it's designed to do
Posted by: truthlover on Nov 30, 2009 1:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This film is intended to be over the top and feel-good. Having seen the trailer, we went expecting it to be a light-hearted diversion and laughed, cheered and booed through it (in an almost empty cinema). If you got end-of-the-world realism it would be depressing – but no one with any sense thinks it is that kind of film.

The reviewer evidently feels superior and sophisticated, but isn’t it a mark of adulthood to be able to enjoy something for what it IS, rather than griping that it should have been unrecognizably different?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

eye-candy and new-age stoopids
Posted by: DaBear on Nov 30, 2009 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The whole "Mayan calendar" bullshit was invented by yet another asshole white guy new ager trying to pass himself off as a shaman.

Anyone who takes it seriously has never talked to an actual Mayan and deserves all the ridicule that comes with listening and taking new age fuckheads seriously.

That said, the special FX were fucking awesome and my ears were ringing for hours... I totally got high...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The world ends on (this!) New Years!
Posted by: LightningJoe on Nov 30, 2009 8:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, that's right. The world will end at midnight, December 31st, 2009!

This is official, because my calendar only goes that far! Don't tell me they just HAPPENED to run out of paper for more calander months, on THAT VERY DAY!

Our only hope is to take over the printer's shop and post haste print more pages!

Thank God, that this is such an easy fix. Maybe we can get it done under the wire.

Not so simple, however, for the Mayan Calander. They had to carve stone, for theirs, and some of the figures are indistinct at that; we won't know if we have the new extended version done right, until the date comes. Think of the suspense, wondering if we did it right, as the zero minute approaches!

I can't stand it!

It's such a burden, knowing the end is coming! Maybe if I had a brain, I could think of the way out of this impending doom!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

meet charlie frost
Posted by: brianct on Dec 3, 2009 1:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
comic gems
this is the end

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Audio Converter 8.1 LP2
Posted by: bukoo on Dec 3, 2009 6:49 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what wonderful the Disney land!
Rip Blu ray ,Blu ray Ripper for mac

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

zero scientific evidence?
Posted by: ugotstahwonder on Dec 10, 2009 5:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't seen the movie, but felt compelled to comment on this line of the story: "Despite the 2012 publishing boomlet, there is zero scientific evidence backing up theories of impending calendric cataclysm in three years time." Really? Science today is a veritible font of information about nearing catalysms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

To the author
Posted by: eeuropean2000 on Dec 14, 2009 5:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will probably see the movie at some point, because I enjoy big, over-the-top, stupid disaster flicks such as the one where a passenger ship came sailing down Fifth Avenue in New York (sorry, don't remember the name). I do want to point out, though, that there are actually four solstices in the year, not two -- the spring, summer, autumn and winter solstice more or less coinciding with the change in seasons. But thanks for a very interesting review.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» stupid ? Posted by: brianct

Comments are closed-

ed hardy
Posted by: mxcm428 on Dec 22, 2009 4:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS