IMDb > 2012 (2009/I) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
2012 More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 13 of 106: [Prev][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [Next]
Index 1059 reviews in total 

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Garbage...pure garbage

Author: Rob Macklin from Australia
21 March 2010

Thankfully this will be Rowland Emmerich's last disaster he says.

I think we've all had enough of this type of film now, where special effects take the place of story or plot.

If you haven't seen it already then don't. There's nothing we haven't seen before a thousand times, usually from the same director. Of course one needs to suspend reality constantly throughout the film and aren't we oh so bored with that?

So don't watch it and if it's special effects you're after then go and see Avatar again.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

piece of crap

Author: eweerstra from United States
20 March 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

this movie deserves a raspberry if I have ever seen one. OMG I cant even describe how much i hated this piece of crap film. Who are you John Cusack, and what have you done with the real John Cusack? Thank God I didn't pay $10 bucks to see this piece of crap in this theaters. I would rather watch Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus on ScyFi than this garbage. (My apologies to my cousin Mark Hengst who appeared in that shining example of cinematic excellence starring Debbie Gibson and Lorenzo Lameass. WTF Hollywood. I almost hope a giant earthquake does swallow up that stupid town if that is the kind of crappy movies they put out these days.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

One of the worst of a lot of bad movies...

Author: jasondeegan from Marietta, GA
19 March 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As terrible movies go, this one is up there with the best. It has all the elements of a rotten egg.

Hundreds of liberties. Check! Bad writing. Check! Sub par acting. Check! Idiotic dramatic pauses. Check! Drama for the sake of drama that doesn't advance the storyline. Check! 2:30 hrs in length. Check! Cheezy cinematography. Check! Racial stereotypes. (The government-hating crazy white guy and the old white guy who was such a racist he wouldn't even talk to his own son anymore because he married an Japanese gal) Check! And a couple of anti-Christian digs, notably the crack between Michelangelo's God and man at the Sistine Chapel.

This is typical Hollywood garbage.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Not the worst movie ever, but almost.

Author: toobigguy69 from WV, USA
22 November 2009

2012 was probably not the worst movie ever made, but it is close to being so. Vapid storyline, silly acting, cartoonish FX, Dukes of Hazard stunts, and 158 minutes long. I never wanted the world to end sooner than when I was enduring this bore of a movie. Out of the six billion people doomed to perish, I had to watch the half-dozen or so morons that I could not care less about. The endless sad goodbye's were terrible, but at least they offered some respite from the cartoon-like scenes of ultimate destruction, with horrible yawning chasms that always seemed to begin opening just where our stupid characters happened to be standing, or driving, or taking off from. The cars narrowly evading disaster and leaping over hazards, I swear I could hear Banjo's and YeeeHawwwwws!!!! in the background. The complete implausibility of the whole experience made me feel sick that I had lost 158 minutes of my finite life staring at the screen, completely un-entertained and wondering if maybe I am just too old to go to the movies anymore.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

will it ever end? (the movie, not the world ... )

Author: djscineaste from United States
4 October 2010

Quite frankly, I'd welcome the end of the world if it meant the end of this movie. It seems like the screenwriters got addicted to "and then ..." followed by the next wacky thing happening.

The result is a truly interminable film. It may have been marginally compelling if it ran 90 minutes or so (and not the 2 hours and 38 minutes of the final cut). Instead, it seeks to consolidate every other disaster film of the last several decades, with elements borrowed from Armageddon, War of the Worlds, Independence Day, even the Poseidon Adventure. Where are the editors when you need them?

Certainly among the dopiest sci-fi films ever made (don't get me started about the physics and geology). And certainly worthy of the "MST 3000" treatment.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

2,012 clichés in a single movie!

Author: cptnhook13 from United States
17 July 2010

Wow. This rancid trough of gruel may be the worst movie EVER made. Let's get right to the checklist of goods:

Divorced couple/failure father/mom with new rich boyfriend/torn kids? check.

Indian that constantly says "my friend" and "sir?" check.

African-American stoic President? check.

Smug, smarmy, fat, know it all, government guy? check.

Secret so big that it couldn't possibly be kept a secret? check.

Crazy wacky mad genius living in the woods? check.

Scientist with a cane and an Einstein accent? check.

Hero that can drive/sail/pilot/commandeer/ride/skate through ANY kind of danger? check.

I have to stop there, because that's just the first 30 minutes - but you get the idea. How this garbage gets a green light, funded, promoted, and made is beyond me. What is worse is that people pay for it - dearly. In this case, your money is the easy part of what you lose; the brain cells destroyed will not be replaced. Awful. Terrible. As punishment, I made myself watch infomercials for 2 hours and 40 minutes - including the Shake Weight, the Sobakawa Buckwheat Pillow, and Gilbert Godfrey's Shoedini over and over again to clear my mind.

I'm considering registering for a Tony Robbins seminar - so I can blow $200 that could otherwise potentially be spent within 100 yards of a movie theater in the next year. I will NOT allow this to happen ever again. This film is that bad.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Very unrealistic and poor story

Author: crazy-bro from france
11 April 2010

First, the plot of 2012 really disappointed me. I was looking for a great issue, explanations in how the world s gonna end and why. But instead we have a 2 minutes explanations. That's it...

Second, me being french, I couldn't stand when the "French" were speaking in the movie, I could barely understand them !! And that movie is trying to be realistic ?? They could not even have french guys.

Third, the whole story does not make any sense. Everybody is dying, everything is falling apart BUT ONE family survive !! Are they like superheroes or something ? They drive planes, they go trough falling buildings with a small plane. It just does not make sense.

Finally, this movie was way too long, i almost fall asleep.

The only good points are the special effects, that s why I give that movie a 2/10

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

hokey movie

Author: luvmylilqh from United States
7 April 2010

Wow...what a cheesy movie. The cast and acting pretty much lacked any talent except for John Cusack and he wasn't really the main character. In fact, I don't think there was a main character. Very convoluted. Notice who they cast for the good guys and who they cast for the bad guys. This is a typical movie for the present Hollywood mindset. It started out OK but went downhill right up till the end. The story became more unbelievably sentimental with each scene. The special effects were the only thing that made the movie worth watching. A waste of time...I started reading a magazine halfway through the movie and turned it off before the final scene. The underlying message is so heavy-handed and in-your-face, it's vomit-inducing. They should rename the movie "I'm OK, Your OK".

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Crevasses open up in the earth just behind the fleeing protagonists. For hours.

Author: kff from United States
30 March 2010

Yep, that's the movie. Science very much like that in "The Day After Tomorrow", which was very, very, very, very terrible. Really terrible. Continents move "23 degrees" in a matter of hours without causing any apparent negative consequences for the inhabitants. Fortunately, no character development is necessary, because there's no time for it between the fleeing and the crumbling. Then when the end of the story finally comes, they can't figure out how to end it for another 20 minutes.

I wish I understood why IMDb thinks a review does not count unless it has ten lines. Because you shouldn't even have to read this paragraph. Please don't; just read the first one.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

If it's not the stupidest movie ever. . .

Author: jonathanmhoffman from United States
4 March 2010

. . .What is? I like crash, boom, burn, as much as anyone. I like chase scenes. I like action.

BUT, I also like at least some of the laws of physics. Or, even if I don't "like" them, I appreciate that they have some relationship to how things crash, explode, etc. And when a movie persistently flouts every possible law of physics just to inject artificial drama into the scene, it results in less enjoyment of the action sequences, not more.

Also, I like love stories and human interaction. But when the clock is ticking down to the last minute or two of total annihilation, and people who are purportedly intelligent, thinking people, chose that moment to have an extended discussion of their feelings, GIVE ME A BREAK.

And I usually don't mind movie that run over 2 hours because, sometimes it just takes longer to help the audience understand the human motivation, or to give the plot enough time to evolve logically. But to waste over 2 1/2 hours and still wind up with a ridiculous, incoherent plot, with characters that are worse than implausible and who waste some good actors' talents? Ugh.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 13 of 106: [Prev][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history