It's a bit stupid to make a disaster movie set in the year 2012 in my opinion. By the time it comes on TV it will already be 2012 and people will think it's a documentary and get really scared.
[cite]Posted By: jimmymelrose[/cite]It's a bit stupid to make a disaster movie set in the year 2012 in my opinion. By the time it comes on TV it will already be 2012 and people will think it's a documentary and get really scared.
Apparently there is another prediction that the world will end in 2012, apparently the Mayans??? The person who told me said its December 2012, so its still worth building the Olympic stadium.
[cite]Posted By: DA9[/cite]Went last night, awesome film, the best CGI I have ever seen, makes The Day After Tomorrow look tame, genuinley unnerving in some parts.
If you like disaster movies, this will blow your socks off.
Cheers DA9, going to see it this afternoon so looking forward to it now.
[cite]Posted By: jimmymelrose[/cite]It's a bit stupid to make a disaster movie set in the year 2012 in my opinion. By the time it comes on TV it will already be 2012 and people will think it's a documentary and get really scared.
Apparently there is another prediction that the world will end in 2012, apparently the Mayans??? The person who told me said its December 2012, so its still worth building the Olympic stadium.
PS CGI = Computer Generated Images
The film was inspired (although not set around) the Mayan Calendar prediction
December 21st 2012 is the end of the Mayan calendar. Some people think it means the end of the world, others the dawn of a new beginning.
Personally, i think on December 22nd 2012 ill be in a boozer somewhere with a silly hat on singing xmas songs the same as every other year.
Special effects are amazing and worth going to the cinema just for that.
Film itself, don't expect anything startling ... it's a typical disaster movie ... definitely the type of film that you should see at cinema rather than DVD.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Si[/cite]Apparently they spent over $200m on the CGI. Now, CGI is EXPENSIVE, but that is just ridiculous. There must be like 20 minutes at least of pure CG?[/quote]
More like 90 minutes. The Special FX are sensational.
I was gonna go see it tonight, but every performance is at like 8 or 8:30 and its like 2 hours long, so I wouldnt get back home til like 12am, and then i'll have to be up at 8:30am
[cite]Posted By: NathanPrior[/cite]I was gonna go see it tonight, but every performance is at like 8 or 8:30 and its like 2 hours long, so I wouldnt get back home til like 12am, and then i'll have to be up at 8:30am
was on at 7.20 this evening at vue cinema in the o2 in greenwich
[cite]Posted By: NathanPrior[/cite]I was gonna go see it tonight, but every performance is at like 8 or 8:30 and its like 2 hours long, so I wouldnt get back home til like 12am, and then i'll have to be up at 8:30am
Number 1: - The vast majority of films are like 2 hours long or more like nowadays, and like have been since about like 1948
Number 2: - If the nearest cinema to you showing like the number 1 film at the UK box office is like 2 hours away from you - you must live on the Goodwin Sands like
Number 3: - That still gives you like eight and a half hours in bed like
Yes, but when I was looking at the times it was like 6:15pm, and I would of still had to have dinner and got ready then met someone who was gonna come with me and then get to the cinema
[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]Crap story, crap acting, crap characterisation. Awesome special effects - but I don't go to the cinema for special effects, I go to see a film.
Agreed - I like disaster / apocalyptic films (and books even more eg. Wyndham) but this is a poor film - well not a film as such really, 100% a "movie" - great special effects but pretty empty behind that.
Pleasant enough way to spend nearly 3 hours on a wet afternoon with the kids, but I wouldn't say they are even raving about it.
Loved the effects and cgi, good film until the last 20 minutes, when it became the normal rubbish ending that most disaster movies are. Woody Harleson was great
[cite]Posted By: Algarveaddick[/cite]What didn't you like about it Leroy?
Crap story, crap acting, crap characterisation. Awesome special effects - but I don't go to the cinema for special effects, I go to see a film.
Perhaps I was so bowled over by the effects I missed all that?
I guess I go with different expectaions depending on the genre of the film, if it's escapist nonsense (like this) I don't expect too great a story line or characterisation. If it's something deeper, like The Soloist, I expect good acting and realistic characters. Perhaps I should be a bit more discerning?
Not at all. Everyone goes to the cinema for different reasons. If explosions, noise and screaming floats your boat, that doesn't mean you're 'missing out' - it's just what you enjoy. I get pissed off with all these film buff ponces who think it's their right and duty to tell people what constitutes a 'good' film. Just because I like more cerebral fare, that doesn't give me the right to take the piss out of someone else who doesn't.
Probably the most overhyped piece of garbage this century, if this is the best Hollywood has to offer then I'm glad the world's gonna end in a couple of years...
Comments
Apparently there is another prediction that the world will end in 2012, apparently the Mayans??? The person who told me said its December 2012, so its still worth building the Olympic stadium.
PS CGI = Computer Generated Images
Cheers DA9, going to see it this afternoon so looking forward to it now.
Did you see it, what did you think?
The film was inspired (although not set around) the Mayan Calendar prediction
Personally, i think on December 22nd 2012 ill be in a boozer somewhere with a silly hat on singing xmas songs the same as every other year.
Film itself, don't expect anything startling ... it's a typical disaster movie ... definitely the type of film that you should see at cinema rather than DVD.
More like 90 minutes. The Special FX are sensational.
was on at 7.20 this evening at vue cinema in the o2 in greenwich
Number 1: - The vast majority of films are like 2 hours long or more like nowadays, and like have been since about like 1948
Number 2: - If the nearest cinema to you showing like the number 1 film at the UK box office is like 2 hours away from you - you must live on the Goodwin Sands like
Number 3: - That still gives you like eight and a half hours in bed like
The film's pooh btw.
Like.
"Oh my god it's Huge"
"It's Rrrrrrusian"
Pleasant enough way to spend nearly 3 hours on a wet afternoon with the kids, but I wouldn't say they are even raving about it.
Perhaps I was so bowled over by the effects I missed all that?
I guess I go with different expectaions depending on the genre of the film, if it's escapist nonsense (like this) I don't expect too great a story line or characterisation. If it's something deeper, like The Soloist, I expect good acting and realistic characters. Perhaps I should be a bit more discerning?