2012 - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

2012 Reviews

Page 1 of 1959
September 15, 2017
The running time is a bit long for sure, but 2012 has amazing visual effects as well as intense and exciting apocalyptic scenes that keep you entertained.
September 7, 2017
The plot is thinner and worse than The Day After Tomorrow, but the wonderful CGI saved this film.
September 5, 2017
Thought the movie was good not great. Good action and I like Oliver Platt he plays a great prick.
½ August 12, 2017
Roland Emmerich might be good in delivering world wide destruction, but when it comes to storytelling, he lacks of it. "2012" would have been a great, thrilling movie if it weren't for it's out of date, self-aware humor and it's stereotypical characters. Plus it's too long and too coincidental when certain characters meet. How can a movie about the end of the world be so boring? A missed opportunity.
August 8, 2017
Fun action film and one of the best 'End of the World' themed movies I've watched
July 26, 2017
Dear God, this movie was stupid. Maybe it's just my extreme distaste for junk science and annoying main characters. I don't know. But don't waste three and a half hours of your life watching this. It drags on and on and on. It's nothing but eye candy (which is actually pretty good, by the way). The only thing I really liked besides the awesome special effects was the philosophical question propelling the whole thing forward: if the world ever came to an end, how will we choose the survivors? Wealth? Power? Fame? Or character?
It had potential, I'll give it that much. But it didn't carry it through. I found myself laughing throughout most of it because it was so badly done and wasted time almost pointlessly. It brings in random people, makes a big deal about them, and then kills them off, without explaining anything about the character or why they're important. It's really just a big special effects fest.
If you enjoy films with lots of eye candy and destruction, then you'll probably like this. But if you're looking for a good, intelligent, thought-provoking movie, this isn't it.
I gave it two-and-a-half stars for great special effects, decent acting, and potential. I personally didn't like it, but that's just me. If you don't mind a film being more "brawn" than "brains", then you will probably not hate it. But I don't think anyone will love it.
July 9, 2017
For me it is a very good disaster movie
½ July 7, 2017
story is not that good, you don't give a #### actors, but it a giant popcorn movie that you can have allot of fun
July 5, 2017
CAN'T WAIT, I want to see what all the exitement about this movie really is :) looks great!
July 1, 2017
8 out of 10: I love disaster movies. I love "good" disaster movies such as The Towering Inferno and The Poseidon Adventure. I love "bad" disaster movies such as The Swarm and Independence Day. I even enjoy, if not love, "Horrible" disaster movies such as Syfy channel stalwarts Megafault and Magma: Volcanic Disaster.

2012 is solidly in the "good" disaster movie genre. As I have stated before in my The Core review "Disaster movies always seem to do better when the disaster is local in scope. A city threatened by avalanche, a tower threatened by an inferno, a Poseidon threatened by an adventure, that kind of thing. Earth killer movies are always a harder road." 2012 dodges this bullet slightly by having neutrinos from a massive solar flare penetrate the Earth and cause the temperature of the core to increase rapidly. "Like a microwave" one scientist very helpfully explains. Of course why these same neutrinos don't cause the oceans to boil is a plot hole that the movie delightfully ignores. Still compared to The Core or The Day after Tomorrow, 2012's science is practically textbook.

Now since the core is expanding this causes the earth's crust to erupt in different directions (think a Jiffy Pop container). This allows disaster footage from all over the earth. And we all know where disasters strike first. That's right monuments. Vegas, Washington DC, Vatican City, Los Angeles, Yellowstone, Hawaii, and others get their turn in the special effects blender. The set pieces are generally well thought out often with sly commentary attached. (A giant rolling donut in LA, A slick atheist "Where is your God now" rub at the Vatican.). The special effects are all magnificent.

I will briefly talk about the actors in a minute (Generally speaking they all do fine) but the star is the effects. The detail work (as can be seen in the disaster porn pictures below) is simply amazing. Director Roland Emmerich puts his 250 million dollar budget on the screen. For once the buildings that collapse have people in them. The disasters do not happen in the rain or at night and the camera doesn't jerk around as if directed by an epileptic sugar glider.

Both the location work and the disasters are very creative. (Let's face it a tsunami driving an aircraft carrier into the White House is imagination at work.) In addition, the story is a fairly grounded version of that old When Worlds Collide plot where all the smart, rich and good looking people get on a spaceship and escape Earth while all the less attractive people all die horribly.

The movie halfheartedly tries to address the unfairness of "who gets chosen" but we really didn't come for a civics lesson and honestly there are worse ways to go than just picking attractive rich people. We also didn't come for the acting, but unlike many of its contemporaries, the acting in 2012 seems solid across the board.

Some of the various side plots do fall a little flat (for example taking into consideration 2012's two and a half hour length, the old guys on the boat subplot should have been jettisoned in its entirety.) On the plus side Zlatko Buric as the Russian billionaire ex-boxer and Woody Harrelson as the crazy mountain man (doing his best Matthew McConaughey impression mind you) are the stand outs among an above average cast.

Overall we came for the disaster porn and simply put 2012 delivers some of the best disaster porn ever seen on screen, and manages this feat with fewer of the bad acting and horrible storyline distractions that usually accompany such films. Bravo.
June 27, 2017
If I could ask John Cusak one question, it would be, "is this the most ridiculous film you've been involved with"? Actually two questions "is this the most ridiculous movie ever made"? Seriously, it's crap....unless you're male and 10 to 12 years old.
June 17, 2017
Just breathtaking visual-effects. An amazing job Roland Emmerich. He didn't dissapoint me as usual like he didn't do in Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow and 10.000 BC. Good job !
½ June 9, 2017
A LAUGHABLY bad film that puts a ridiculous spin on the mistaken "prophecy" that the world would end. In actuality, the calendar just completed a cycle and restarted. The world didn't end.
½ June 6, 2017
2012 has a perfect balance of action and drama to make it Emmerich's best movie ever.
June 1, 2017
In true Michael Bay style, 2012 features way-too-many explosions, improbable actions scenes, dumb-as-nails characters, and nothing to redeem it.
May 17, 2017
Lots of the main characters die!
April 28, 2017
Other people's lives must be much more exciting and creative than mind...and they must see the most wonderful movies and out of the millions of movies made they easily find 5 star movies. I must live on the wrong planet because I WOULD recommend this film to anyone who loved Independence Day and for thoise who did not, well there is always Disney
½ April 26, 2017
The movie's a pain in the ass. One problem: it recycled elements from "Independence Day".
April 20, 2017
2012, is a long film that has a poorly written script and has way too much stuff happening at the same time that it becomes a film not worth watching. But, it does have some thrilling scenes that sort of help this terrible film...
½ April 13, 2017
This movie has to be one of the most ridiculous movies along with all of the other natural disaster movies.....
I really wish they would stop making these movies such a waste of money and time.........
Page 1 of 1959