I've recently watched 2012 during a press screening in Ramt Gan, Israel - and it's everything you can expect from a movie like this. The special effects are top notch. So breathtaking, intense and gripping that at times I found myself sitting at the edge of my seat. The main premise is the usual mix, with a family, a scientist and the president of the United States all struggling to make it through the end of the Earth. The latter two stories are filled with clichés and very predictable. However, I did feel emotionally connected to the angle regarding John Cusack and his on screen <more>
family's struggle to survive - and since they were the main focus of the story anyway, it worked well in my book. Also, throughout the film there is an incredible sense of urgency, which contributed greatly to the build up.The story is your basic end-of-the-world chaos thingy. This time around, the Earth's crusts are shifting - causing earthquakes and volcano eruptions on a global scale, followed by unfriendly tsunami waves. The governments of the world have some sort of a solution, in the shape of giant ships located in China not spoiling anything here, this is said from the beginning of the film and is indicated in the trailer as well , and the movie follows the family's journey towards their destination, en route to China. As expected, they manage to flee and escape most of the horrific events happening around them and stay intact. Meanwhile, we get to see most of the world's biggest iconic monuments get destroyed in vivid ways - including The White House, the Jefferson Memorial, the Christ the Redeemer statue in Brazil, the Vatican in Rome and many many more.As indicated earlier, a main reason the film worked for me was the emotional connection I felt towards some of the characters. The cast here is top notch, including some recognizable actors like Woody Harrelson, Thandie Newton, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Danny Glover, Oliver Platt, Amanda Peet - and of course, John Cusack. The cast seemed as if they were having a great time shooting this film, including some necessary tongue-in-cheek implications. Never the less, many philosophical and emotional elements of redemption and survival of the fittest were also added into the mix - making 2012 a better film than it had the right to be. Sometimes, one might even forget that the chances these events will all happen at once are small at best. Now, if only the clichés were a bit less over-the-top and the premise less predictable, this could have been one hell of a masterpiece. But then again, even when 2012 doesn't necessarily bring anything new to the table, it's still one hell of a roller coaster ride – and an excellent winter blockbuster to close the year with.
two and half hours of entertainment (by suryaprakash571991)
I have just seen the film and couldn't stop myself from writing this review. I heard many people saying that this film is a waste and it is just trying to give a wrong impression to the audience about the end of the world. i too don't believe in this whole thing, but still, why do we go for a movie? to expect some entertainment. isn't it? and i assure you of it.The visual effects are at their best. this stands next to lord of the rings in that category. apart from the graphic elements, the way the director brought together all the characters under one shed is good. he was <more>
successful in showing the love between parent and child, lovers.In the end, i want to say only one thing. Catch it or you will repent for losing some awesome entertainment.
Roland Emmerich clearly had fun making it. As we did watching it. (by Sirus_the_Virus)
Director Roland Emmerich returns with his newest film, 2012. Emmerich clearly has fun destroying the world. He did it in Godzilla, The Day after tomorrow, Independence day, Do i really need to go on? Every year I go to the movies for my birthday. Lasy year I saw Quantum of solace and really liked it. This year I saw 2012, the best disaster film I have seen in a long, long time. There have been some real crap ones too. Like Godzilla, if you call Transformers 2 one, then it is, and The day the earth stood still was one too. I was intrigued by every minute of 2012. The special effects in this <more>
movie were great. There are a lot of good actors in this, the plot is believable also, and this movie is a ton of fun.The film mostly revolves around an author named Jackson Curtis Played by John Cusack . Fpor years, the world has been predicting that the world was going to end in 2012. Because that is the end of the Mayan calendar. As I said, the film revolves around Jackson Curtis. When him and his kids go to Yellostone park he meets a wacko played by Woody Harrelson who is talking about this stuff about the apocalypse and other stuff. Soon, this wacko's predictions come true. And Jackson, his kids, his ex-wife Amanda Peet , and her new husband set off to escape the destruction including volcanoes, floods, and earthquakes. They are trying to get to China, where the government including Chiwetel Ejiofor, Oliver Platt and the president's daughter Thandie Newton and others are there, and there are these indestructible ships that could save everyone.This may sound completely unprofessional for me to say this. But this is one of the best films of the year. I did not see a problem with this film. Critics are hating it though. Richard Roeper gave it 1 star out of 5 saying that it is the stupidest film of the year. But I had a good time with this movie I think he is dead wrong.I was a big fan of this years Knowing, and that is also one of the best films of the year. Both of these films had great special effects and were a lot of fun. I am hoping that the world doesn't end in three years. This movie scared me shitless. And it will do the same to you. This could probably be the biggest disaster film of them all. And the best in a long time.
Most Amazing, Suspenseful Disaster film! (by flagg_01)
I just caught a charity preview in Plano, TX. I have to say this is one of the most suspenseful, edge of your seat movies that I've seen in a long time. The special effects were phenomenal and made me jump out of my seat a multiple times. The first part of the movie did seem a little slow during the character development, which is to be expected. But, once the action starts, look out! The director did a great job, starting out with low intensity events and building up the intensity of the events of the move to the final climax. This is an awesome movie that has to be seen on the big <more>
Hold onto your seat its going to be a bumpy ride!!! (by dale-carol-m)
I am a great lover of disaster movies and until now thought that this generations brand of disaster movie didn't hold a candle to the 1970/Irwin Allen run of them - Posiedon Adventure/Earthquake/Towering Inferno. Sure there had been a few that were not bad, independence day/the day after tomorrow/ Armageddon but nothing earth shattering... Boy am I eating my words. This movie was in my opinion, the Best disaster movie I have ever seen. I give it a 9.5/10. I would have given it a 10 if Chiwetel Ejiofor had of punched Oliver Platt! Boy did he deserve it!! With a fantastic cast, including <more>
Danny Glover, John Cusack - who incidentally was awesome in this role, Amanda Peet, Oliver Platt, and Woody Harrelson playing Charlie Frost, end of the world radio announcer and totally nuts, and h plays him so well, and someone I had never heard of before, Chiwetel Ejiofor, who played the major scientist of the piece. Not to forget the rest of the awesome cast, each of them adding to the layers of the storytelling. The movie was kept rolling along by telling the stories of several independent characters all facing the end of the world as we know it. The graphics were by far the best character of the movie and if you saw the trailer you would get just a hint of how exciting it is. I sat down at the start and said to my mom that if what we had seen in the trailer was all we were going to get when it came to excitement i would be very disappointed. Well I all the excitement I could handle.... and more! The story spent the first hour setting the premise for the film.... the world was ending... and the last hour and a half was spent holding on to my seat, squealing, ducking and weaving in the times of action, crying at the more poignant moments, getting angry at others, as we followed the stories of the characters. I think this movies stirred up just about every type of emotion. It was awesome. I have no doubt i will go see it again. Do yourself a favor and watch it on the big screen! Don't waste your time waiting for video, or watching it on the small screen. This Has to be seen on the big screen, with the big sound. It adds to the movies hugeness as much as everything else. I would not be surprised if we don't see some awards for the special effects for this movie. So, grab your popcorn and soft drink and get yourself settled because you have an hour to sit quietly after that all hell breaks loose!!!!
I Saw the premier of this Film at Adlabs Inox.....n believe u me This by far is " The Best Doomsday " movie i have ever watched.The team from TDAT has proved its metal.GroundBreaking CG effects,not so bad acting by John Cusack and the 3d Surround sound that will rock u off ya seats.Fall of Planet and awesome earthquake shatter continents down will get you all pumped up, if not there is always room for some 1000 ft tsunami that will get your attention .Its a Hit n well deserving of 9\10.If you want to see sum real awesome graphics with a Doomsday movie that at-least makes some sense <more>
2012 - The world as we know it will come to an end (by princeklub)
I was on my way out of a theater in Plano, Texas when I was lucky enough to be offered a free ticket to a preview showing of 2012 thirty minutes away. So let's just throw this out on the table: you heard and saw the entire premise in the trailers. Expect nothing more, and nothing less. 2012 is your typical disaster story, but it does contains deeper overtones and more spectacular special effects than what recent apocalyptic movies have been feeding us. The first half of the film, akin to The Day After Tomorrow, consists of nature's first "warning" signs and scientific <more>
exploration of how to prevent the destruction of the world, with, of course, the U.S. government leading the way. As the events lead to the fated date in 2012, we are introduced to the typical dysfunctional family of divorced parents and two kids, with Cusack as a father that neglects his children in order to pursue his writing career. Surprisingly, the large majority of the film is not centered on Cusack's character of Jackson Curtis or his family. A large handful of characters from diverse backgrounds share equal screen time, including Chiwetel Ejiofor as a government adviser, Danny Glover as the President, Woody Harrelson as a crazed fanatic, and Osric Chau as a Tibetan monk. Not to fear, acting was not a considerable problem among any of the actors/actresses. In fact, there were several unexpectedly emotional farewell scenes that were masterfully written in. This was a good move, seeing as a wide range of affected and interlinked characters prevented the clichés that would come from following just one family. That's not to say 2012 doesn't have its clichés. Like I said, the story doesn't deviate far from awesome destruction, to the narrow escapes, to the valiant attempt to preserve mankind. There is one thing I must say though: if you're going to watch it, do yourself a favor and watch it on the big screen. If you weren't able to tell from the previews, 2012 boasts some of the most incredible CGI sequences, probably in movie history. The movie consistently bombards the audience with scene after scene of satisfying disasters: the annihilation of California, the eruption of Yellowstone, and the volcanic destruction of Hawaii, to name a few. The action sequences were so thrilling and intense that several times I felt myself shaking in anticipation. When it comes to effects, there's never one second when 2012 fails you. Ultimately, the story winds down to the attempt to save mankind by boarding "arks" China has built. One problem: there's 15 minutes to go before tidal waves engulf China along with the rest of the Earth and there are still hundreds of people waiting to get on the arks. Here's where the clichés skyrocket with patriotic speeches and deep interpretations of humanity. Following the pattern of Independence Day and the Day After Tomorrow, the ending is a happy one and we'll just ignore that fact that almost every living thing on Earth has been killed ! Needless to say, even though 2012 touches on some deeper overtones involving us as human beings, the ending is slightly awkward and the action somewhat loses its luster.If you wanted to combine Titanic + The Day After Tomorrow + Independence Day, then you've got your perfect movie. As your all-around film, 2012 is satisfying to say the least. But as a disaster film, it takes destruction to a whole new draw-dropping level. Overall, I give 2012 a well deserved 8/10.
10 000 BC was and will always be the most disgusting movie I've ever seen. Ever since I payed for this movie, I hated Emmerich. Big surprise ! I know like him. Just because what I wanted to see was simple: big massive destruction, big massive action sequences, big massive movie. And what is better than a man driving a limo through a "going-down" California ? Nothing ! And as for the scenario, I thought it was OK. Everything was fitting together and the rhythm was perfect. Not boring, very pleasant and not one cliché !So don't bother trying to find out all about the meaning <more>
of life The Box for instance ... here is all about the meaning of having fun ! And nobody is stealing money from you !
For the haters: yes, we know this is not Lars Von Trier (by Infolag)
6 degrees of separation won't be enough to find a connection between Roland Emmerich and, say, Lars Von Trier. 12 degrees of separation couldn't establish a connection with their works. And about 50 degrees of separation, could not connect their fans. So, why this paradox? Why do cinephiles come here in flocks to rate 2012 with one star, one star,one star, half a star, zero star, one star? What were they expecting from a disaster movie? Having said that, a few thoughts about 2012. Yes, the science is laughable, and the plot holes are big enough for an Antonov to pass through. But you <more>
know, if you want your science hard, really hard, there is always NASA TV, where you can watch space shuttles getting launch delays for weeks. And regarding plot holes: they can be insulting when something pretends to be something that is not anyone remember the horrible Flightplan? . When there is an unspoken convention between filmmaker and audience that plot holes are exchanged for sheer indulgence, there is nothing really serious to complain about. It's a win win situation. Wait. Unless it's Lars Von Trier weekend.8 stars for 2012, the disaster movie to beat from now on.