f13.net

'2012' Trailer HD (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz86TsGx3fc&feature=player_embedded)

2012 - Exclusive Scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZxBYItj2sM&feature=player_embedded), (it's a full 5 minutes of insane shit, so spoilers, duh)

Searched and didn't find a thread, this movie looks hilariously awesome.

This movie will have no substance... However, I want to see it cuz the destruction so far looks awesome.

Yep, this is the BIG EXPLOSIONS movie of next summer.  It will be awesome just for that.   The Aircraft Carrier scene is like they set out with one intention; outdoing ID4 as best White House destruction scene.

The question is, will the acting and writing be at least to the tolerable level.

The trailer is awesome. When it came out, I watched the wave come over the mountains, watched it again, watched it again. Best tsunami special effect ever.

This will also bring the "2012 is the end" believers out of the woodwork. I used to know a girl who had absolute faith that 2012 would be the end of the world, when the aliens would come and people's consciousness would ascend, etc. When I pointed out how ridiculous this belief was and that it isn't actually the end of the Mayan calendar (which is the background to all the twisted versions of the 2012 beliefs), people nearby sprang to her defence.

You mean of this November. And I can't wait.

Also, when 2012 isn't the end of the world, it'll be our best chance to destroy religion. So all the crazies better hope the shit hits the fan.

Eh?  Damn Fundamentalist Mayans and their massive special interest groups...?

I don't have any faith in Roland Emmerich to deliver a good movie.  His directorial credits for the last 10 years:

10,000 BC
The Day After Tomorrow
The Patriot
Godzilla (1998)

Every good scene in 2012 was likely included in the trailers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW2qxFkcLM0

If it was actually like THAT trailer it might actually worth watching  :awesome_for_real:

It doesn't matter which religion it is. Even if it's a mostly dead one.

Hate to deliver the bad news, but the last gazillion or so millennial scares stretching back into the early medieval era haven't done much damage to religion in general. In fact, a lot of end-of-the-world folks don't even take much of a hit to their own congregation or following.

Don't need Mayans for this anymore. It's been adopted by New Age types: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_phenomenon

The people I knew who were into this stuff, had grown up with New Age parents and got into the Techno/Trance rave scenes of the early 1990s, fell out with the drug culture and went in search of natural highs. They always had the latest copy of Nexus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexus_(magazine)).

The Jehovah's Witnesses are still around, and they were founded by a kook who pronounced the end of the world in his lifetime.. disappointment ensued (lol, "disappointment"), but they just adjusted the date... and then again and again and again. They keep on pulling that shit, and the religion simply does not die. You can not kill stupid.

Or maybe! Just maybe the end of the world already happened, and we are all actually living in hell.. Simply for the fact that you can't kill stupid here.

I prefer the Shadowrun version of 2012.

It's a tabletop RPG and a few shitty computer/video games that has 2012 as the date when magic "cycles" back into the world and things like Dragons awaken.

Seriously, there isn't a question about it at all. You know the writing will suck on a scale as massive as the destruction. Three words: Day After Tomorrow.

Outrun the cold!

Plot?????

(Spoilered as this is really inspired guesswork. Add your own)

...however...

But are there snakes on that plane?

(and I only say this because I really can't think of anything that'd make this movie watchable with the serious tone they seem to be taking)

Next month, eh?  I thought it was a summer blockbuster, my mistake.


I wasn't implying it would be good.  Just a question of would it be Volcano bad or Day After Tomorrow bad.

lol he fell through a skylight.

This movie shows the only way that California is likely to solve it's budget issues. Also, a tidal wave cresting several hundred feet above the Himalayas is entirely plausible. Maybe I'm just being overly picky about my end of the world movies, but they could have put more effort into coming up with a better way of destroying Tibet, maybe something involving plate tectonics.

If that gay cowboy could outrun the cold, then by god we can have waves over Everest!  :drill:

So how does the world die this time?

   

I bet at the end, Jesus pops out and saves everybody.

The ending of the movie is pretty much telegraphed in the trailer, along with the major plotline.

bang zoom to the moon baby! right to the moon!

This was always a great read, if not necessarily for the same reasons that the authors wrote the articles.

We can only wish.  That would be fucking spectacular.

Why the hell is everyone spoiler'ing guesses based on trailers from a movie not out yet?!

Don't read down!! OMG! The Mayans gonna come git ya!!



John Cusack the conspiracy nut is driving with part of his family, talking about 2012/end of the world, and the government's plan to save people on giant arks. He doesn't say arks nor rockets, but I am going with arks because they're giant near-future ships shown floating on whatever rolled over the continentn. There's a clip of them is in the 5 minute trailer. So yea, it's him getting his current and ex- family together, flying through carnage with a guy who can't fly but happens to own a Cessna and can fly it with all the skill of Tom Cruise, geting to the sooper-sekret bunker/dock/port/whatever where they somehow sneak/beg/graft their way onto it. To be saved with the rest of the huddled masses.

This is an IMAX-required cheesefest where you turn your brain off. If I spoiled anything for anyone, you gotta go get some air.

I got as far as the Mayans being the 'world's oldest civilisation' and turned it off.

As interesting as its having an expiration date, the Mayan calender is also interesting for having a start date. If one were to take it seriously, and assume that the Mayan civiliation existed for that start date... then it would be the world's oldest civilization. Unfortunately for pseudoscience, not even the Mayans themselves thought that was remotely plausible.

This is going to be the film of the year.

I could be mistaken, but in the trailer John Cusack says he's chartered a plane... but I think the guys in the front seat when its flying are John and his ex-wife's new husband.  i.e. - neither of them know how to fly, which would explain why they don't just fly up and get the hell out.

The Oscar's should really create a category for "Best Destruction of The White House Scene".  I just love seeing directors go over the top in trying to one up each other.

FIFY.

I'd give real money to see the movie end like that.

"Where do we go now?" and John Cusazk shrugs.

Except that people who don't know how to fly would be way better up in the air. There's way less stuff to run into the higher up you go and lots more space to recover from a stall. Don't even get me started on that scene...

Also, they aren't rocket ships. One of the trailers shows the back of one for a second and there's a giant screw on it. Giant ships that are probably designed to be submersible or at least run with most of it below the water. That way IT WILL BE IMMUNE TO TITAL WAVES, CURRENTS, AND GIANT ASTEROIDS, RAWR>.

Also x2, 10,000 BC was fucking horrible. But a girl in my anthropology class thought it was a good movie to do a paper on for extra credit. My mockery made her cry. Many people thought I was total dick about it, but when your mastodon hunting movie cavemen with names like Tic-Tic track slavers to ancient Egypt/Persia from 300 that happens to be full of Phorusrhacidae... But the telescope was the ... I can't even put it into words. I guess I should just have been happy that their anachronisms didn't span across more than two geologic epochs.

Well, their calendar is pretty damn accurate.  However the whole concept of 2012 being the end of the world is the result of a very limited understanding of the Mayan calendar  Essentially, 2012 is when the current cycle ends and the next one begins...

I know that. What does that have to do with the comment you quoted?

The Epic of Gilgamesh predates the Mayans by a good couple of millenia.

Not a damned thing.  I misread it.

I can promise you whoever was overseeing your tearing her apart was only conflicted in knowing he couldn't be too nasty to the girl in question or let you upset her too much. Unless you were lucky enough to have someone with tenure, in which case he would have defended her if he wanted to bang her.

Yeah, pretty much. Having now seen Year One I have to say it was almost certainly the result of Jack Black watching 10,000 BC and thinking "WTF?". They're practically the same movie, just one is intentionally funny. Actually, Year One would be more historically accurate.

Was I the only one watching 10,000 BC and waiting for it to go full Stargate on us? Like I was just waiting for their god to be an alien or something.

Apparently, the creators (I use that term loosely) of 10,000 BC (also the creators of Stargate) considered tying them together in just that way, but decided against it.

Isn't there another stargate direct-to-dvd movie in the works right now ?

I am excited about this movie, it is out tomorrow.

Saw a preview screening last night. Excellent destruction porn - should be called "Roland Emmerich Destroys America". Has a quite a few disaster movie cliches and ultimately you want to see the Russian twins die just because, but it keeps going at a fair enough clip that you generally get over it. Well acted too from some roles - Cusak delivers his everyman persona, Chiwetel Ejiofor is solid despite some awful dialogue. Oliver Platt phones it in (christ, he used to be so good) but although he's meant to be the 'evil' guy, it is hard to argue with a lot of what his character says about how things have to happen, so he delivers it well. Some of the accents are terrible though.

Biggest problem? Length. It's 2.5 hours. It's got every single disaster film in it - a ship overturns, volcanoes erupt, things fall in sinkholes, etc, so no disaster category is left unturned.

Probably the best role in the film is Woody Harrelson's nutball. He's just fun. Also I don't know who the American Captain is, but I got a kick out of his Grand Admiral Moff Tarkin vibe.

If you want to you could pick the movie to pieces, but I just enjoyed things falling down / blowing up.

That guy is good at everything.

Pretty much.

Can't you guys just be happy to see tons of this blow up and be destroyed?

Sure.  You just need to watch the trailers for that though.  Nobody should feel the need to sit through the two and a half hours this movie runs.

If you think that the spectacle of those effects are done justice by the trailer, then I'm thinking you haven't actually seen the movie.

At least give the artists some love.

I work at a theater, so yeah I've seen the movie.  I'm actually not a particularly huge fan of the special effects here, because I'm not really into CG (although it is fairly well done CG here for the most part, but there's also some shit that looks really bad too), and because some of the situations are fairly ridiculous and take away from the special effects.

Man, yeah, but you know? I've been watching the world blow up three times per summer for the last fifteen years.

I don't think I've seen it in a theater since Independence Day though. Maybe you see too many blockbusters?

I don't know, the destruction was a little too... clean I guess for my tastes. When I see that much shit falling apart I'd like to see a little more dust.  It didn't feel like the end of the world, it felt like an amusement park ride.

Sooo.. you didn't see the huge dust clouds that were all over the place? 

Not as much as I'd have liked.  The sequence where they're flying out of L.A. in particular just didn't do if for me, largely because it seemed like they wanted to be able to focus on things like people falling out of collapsing buildings and such.

The trailer was right. All future catastrophes will be compared to this film.

I had a fun time. I couldn't really stop laughing during the plane takeoff. It was just great. I completely lost it when they flew under the train.

Saw it yesterday and disagree with the opinions voiced so far.

The movie is one giant plot hole after another and the only purpose of the plot is to string the different scenes of the destruction of the world together in some form of coherent way (which fails miserably).

The destruction itself feels like a sanitized disney theme park ride and left me totally cold. I didn't care about any of the people who died (mostly heroically) and I didn't even care about the destruction itself because it felt and looked totally aseptic. The only blood you see at all is from the guy whose leg got crushed in the door mechanism and you never actually see anybody die.

It felt like a giant 'meh' that made no sense whatsoever. Worse, unlike Independence Day it took itself way to serious. My buddy I watched it with even went so far as to say that Armaggedon was a better movie than 2012, which really say it all.

I'd suggest Deep Impact if you want more realism or Armaggedon (or even ID 4) if you need more comedy. 2012 is just 'destroyed in seconds: the movie' narrated by John Cusack.

I came to watch the world burn and stayed for the WE DIDN'T LISTEN!, which i did not actually get.

Which sounds better than Deep Impact or Armageddon. If John Cusack had joined Goldblum and Smith on ID4, it would've been the most amazing blockbuster ever.

I mean seriously, what the fuck do you people want from a movie like this?

Jeff, you should really watch ID4 and Armageddon again. The latter is total ass and the former wasn't even self-aware. Perhaps you all have crossed neurons in your brains with Men in Black, but ID4 took itself COMPLETELY SERIOUSLY.

You could tell by that one serious expression Bill Pullman held the entire movie.

I actually enjoyed 2012 because I went in expecting a fairly shallow movie with an amazing special effects show. That's what I got. It's the ID4 of the next generation.

You could tell because it took itself seriously. Not because Bill Pullman is a ridiculously third rate Emilio Estevez, who himself is a terrible actor.

I actually think it is the exact opposite.  Just look at the cast: Harvey Feinstein, Brent Spiner, Harry Connick Jr., Judd Hirsh, Goldbloom, Pullman, Fox, Smith.   The filmmakers were fucking with people the whole time with a smirk on their faces. I mean, the "unlikely hero" of the story is Eddie Johnson from National Lampoon's Vacation. The whole thing is a put on.

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/39720/f13/goldblum_small.png)

I really wish I could pull off a salmon-colored scarf.

So does Jeff Goldblum.

Yeh any film with Randy Quaid and Bill Pullman has got to be somewhat tongue in cheek.

I've read somewhere before that the actors all thought it was a spoof as well, and had fun with it.  They were surprised that what came out in the theaters wasn't a comedy after all.   So yes, the Actors hammed it up but the director, apparently, took it seriously.

Emmerich is proof that our fascination with Ed Wood is never ceasing.

Wuh? It was a comedy. It just wasnt Naked Gun style in-your-face dumbfunny.

I just watched this on DVD. It was horrible. It was an action/disaster movie where nothinghappened for the first 45 minutes. The destruction is caused by mutated(?!?) neutrinos that microwave the Earth's core... turning it to molten rock!!!!!!. The special effects aren't anywhere near good enough to make the movie worth watching, and there isn't a single character in the movie worth giving a shit about.

I can't fucking imagine what would happen if the Earth's core turned to molten rock.  Oh, wait.  It already fucking is (http://martianchronicles.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/103949main_earth10.jpg), isn't it?

Still haven't seen it, but yea, that's a nice facepalm to learn about. And what the hell's a mutated neutrino? I could get passed hacking alien computers and insta-freeze superstorms, but this sounds like Emmerich has either completely gone around the bend, or is just openly mocking his audience.

Yeah, this.

But that's what happens when you write CGI scenes of destruction, then build characters and stories AROUND those shots.

Earth is believed to have a solid ferrous (iron) core, surrounded by a moving molten core. You'd know this if you watched educational films like "The Core" (http://"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/").

Jeezus, worst movie ever. There wasn't even good eye candy. I didn't mind Delroy Lindo's character, but that's about the only positive thing I can say about it.

You complete me.

"The Core" had a great cast. Insanely stupid, but a good cast.

Watched parts of 2012 this weekend. I'd Tivoed it, the wife started playing it while I was in the shower. I missed probably about 1 hour of the film, watched it to the end, and decided there was nothing in that missed hour that could possibly make what I'd just seen any less of a skullfucking travesty. This movie literally cockslaps you with insipidness.

And yet, the film made an unholy amount of cash outside of the States. I couldn't believe it when I looked at the numbers it grossed.

So there is money to be made making a film about the destruction of the USA?

That was the first joke that jumped into my head as well, but then I remembered that the movie shows a lot of cities outside the US getting destroyed as well.  So maybe everybody in the world just likes the idea of their neighbors dieing.

I actually found the first hour enjoyable until it went posideon adventure.  Then it went to snoresville.