Welcome to Gaia! ::

While I wasn't particularly fond of the movie either, I have to say that your review was a bit...harsh.

What I disagree with:

The portrayal of the government's actions in response to the disaster is, I feel, very accurate; if you have the knowledge that the world is going to end, (And soon,) and you are in control of the preparation for that situation, the steps you would take -should- be along the same lines.

- Telling the general public, (At least, at first,) is a terrible idea. This only leads to panic, -especially- if you have the means to prepare to save specific individuals. (I disagree with the ability to BUY a seat, but that's for another argument.) It would lead to riots, irrational behavior in all accounts and overall mayhem.

- Thus, keeping the secret safe is also -key-. Sure, they revealed it a bit too late, but it's a good idea to keep it under wraps until you're actually prepared to do something about it. So, the actions of the government in the assassination of blabber-mouths -- yeah, that could definitely happen. If you're a threat to the general plan, history has shown that they'll do something about it.

- It's key to protect the intelligent and the recognized. In a world with no symbols and no intelligence, we get a world like the ones portrayed in post-apocalyptic stories, such as Fallout. Symbols are important for the people, and intelligence is important for the rebuilding of society. Not only this, but they had limited time and resources; saving the important people was the best decision, albeit a morally challenging one.




Next, the "Incredible funny/dumb scenes"...Well, it's a movie. Who knows what could actually happen? It's a fictional representation. I personally found some of those scenes at least worth a chuckle.

And character-death predictability is impossible to avoid. It's like with "And Then There Were None". A brilliantly written novel, but you can't honestly tell me that you didn't expect a majority of the deaths when most of them involved a "Stay here, I'll go do x". It's hard to pull off a "OH WOAH I DIDN'T EXPECT THAT" in the death business.



The main characters being stuck-up and boring...I'm going to need an example or two of this. If anything, the SURROUNDING evil/condescending characters were more stuck-up and boring. It's an apocalypse movie; the most interesting role you can follow is a father and a family. What, you're telling me the story would have been sufficiently more well-written or supported if we saw it through the eyes of a random civilian who had absolutely no family connections?


And finally, it's an APOCALYPSE movie. Idunno how you would suggest you make a "EVERYTHING'S EXPLODING" scene less repetitive than another, but for the most part I found them very entertaining and thrilling.




What I agree with:
It wasn't the most impressive movie I've ever seen, sure. And it was a little...bland when there was no actual drama in the movie at all; most of the main, good-hearted characters escaped without a single scratch, and ALL of the evil or bad-hearted characters met a terrible fate.


Personally, I felt the movie was average. At the most, it was worth a rental, but certainly not worth the movie theatre prices.

Source on the teenager thing? I never heard that, but if that's true damn. I mean, I knew of the website but I assumed that noone would be stupid enough to think that was real.



And don't get me wrong; I think the whole ideas behind 2012 are utter bullshit. But making it into a movie definitely makes the whole "theory" seem a lot less convincing. Did it make more money off of a doomsday theory? Sure, but any disaster movie is based off of some theory or some predicted event. That's what a disaster movie is. At any rate, Idunno. "Cashing in" on it wasn't my idea of it. In making a movie about 2012, it feels like they fictionalized the idea. They made it something that only happens in a movie, much like other movies.



That doesn't really make sense. How does that work better? What's the point in imprisoning a liability? That's like supervillain logic, dude. "You have the potential to ruin the plan. So, instead of ending this now, I'm going to assign essential manpower to guard you in a room with the potential to fail."

They're about to face the APOCALYPSE. In all honesty, all procedure and morality would crumble in government; they have one goal: The preservation of humanity by its strongest roots. Anyone that is a threat to that simply couldn't be IMPRISONED.

I have to agree with YumaKirosaki, I didn't like the movie either. It was pretty bad and very repetitive. Just more regurgitated Roland Emmerich style film making and it was old 5 minutes ago. But I think your review was a little bit harsh.

While most of the characters were annoying, some were enjoyable and fun. Woody Harrelson was by far the most enjoyable part of the movie. He couldn't save it, but he was one of the few bright spots in what would otherwise be a dismal film.

I might have given this film a 0/10 if I had higher expectations, but being a Roland Emmerich film I went in there expecting a sub-par film that plays out like every other Emmerich film, and pretty much got what I was thinking I was going to get.

I would overall give the movie a solid D. A few good moments, might be enjoyable for someone who love Emmerich or disaster films, but on the grand scale of things, still a pretty bad movie with pretty effects.