Posted by Arktoris on 2009-11-18 05:47:54

l saw it Saturday. yeah, I agree...a great special effects movie. I also like how they focused on the more plausible source of global warming instead of that carbon emissions crap the ignorant masses are enthralled with.

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2009-11-18 07:22:00

You liked knowing = me don't listen to you

Not that that will bother you :)

Posted by PurpleChest on 2009-11-18 11:22:41

Exact opposite to Arktoris. The christian propaganda and global warming denial agenda i found laughable, spoiling an otherwise decent effects movie. iwish hollywood would add signs: 'WARNING: This film is pandering to the american right'. then sane people could just avoid.

I mean seriously america, it's like the whole creationist myth, you guys are the ONLY ones that are still wittering on about either, get with the program.

Posted by fly on 2009-11-18 13:08:45

my brother said, the first half is boring, then there's kickass special effects. heck, is a good story really not needed anymore? it's the same as with cyanide bb.... good looks but bad or lousy content.

Posted by bobafettsmum on 2009-11-18 13:34:29

Roland Emmerich makes the same movie for about the third time. Basically Independance Day without aliens or Day After Tommorrow without the deep freeze. If you can easily suspend your disbelief or you like big dumb blockbusters then go see it. If not avoid like the plague! Harry Brown however, what a dark, gritty and compelling movie. Michael caine is a legend!

Posted by Melmoth on 2009-11-18 14:06:59

I was very dissapointed...Another Hollywood Movie you dont need to see...

Posted by Grod on 2009-11-18 15:14:18

Knowing was OK, but I would give it more like 6/10. I am curious to see the 3-D movie Avatar, which isn't out yet.

Posted by Deej84 on 2009-11-18 16:55:06

Avatar looks amazing, but 2012 is the next movie i'm seeing, recently I have seen Jennifers body (cr4p) and Harry Brown (Awesome). Good to know 2012 won't be a let down though, and even better as my sister works at the local cineworld so I get in free WINRAR! lol

Posted by CaptainBringdown on 2009-11-18 17:12:11

2012 looks, quite simply, awful. But i'm intrigued to the casting decision of John Cusack. Just what the hell is he doing in this movie?! Needed to pay off some loan sharks, or a divorce, or drug habit perhaps?

Posted by Quadros on 2009-11-18 17:32:09

I hated 2012. I can't explain without adding tons of spoilers, but it pretty much left all logic at the door. I know that it's lame to expect a film to be completely scientifically and logically flawless, but it's like they didn't even try. And the explanation for why it was all happening was barely explored and the tiny explanation they gave was laughable. 'These things have never caused a reaction before but now they are! No time for explanations, THE WORLD IS ENDING!!!one!'

Posted by Psilocybe on 2009-11-18 21:59:54

1. its a fiction movie
2. it does not NEED to explain the world situation
3. its pupose is just to make people come together and relax and have a good time
4. everything has been done and seen before
5. if everything you can only focus on is negative stuff like propaganda etc, then you are missing the point with a movie and you should go see a doku instead if you want the explenation to why the world is going fubar or did you also critisise E.T. for flying with a bike ??

now try to relax and take a fictional movie for what it is, or the stupid one is actualy you for spending money on something you knew was going to disapoint you just because it did not do this, or did do this, or had this in it, or someone said this.
then you can go on and on and on and on and... next time your in the movie theater, try to ignore it and just enjoy the movie for what it is, a movie !

Posted by Quadros on 2009-11-18 22:28:58

At the risk of sharing spoilers;

I'm just going to take one example here. Remember the bit at the end, when jackson's messing with the gears? (I'm being vague so as not to spoil it.) Why would there be a camera there? Like, right there, where it's most convenient? 'Because it's a movie'? No offence, but think about where they are. Underneath the grated floor of the animal compound. Who in their right mind puts a high quality colour camera (with a microphone, for some reason) directly below the place where animals defecate?

Also, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure every major world leader doesn't own a Sony Vaio. Now I'm willing to look past these things normally, but the pure blatant disregard for logic and realism completely destroyed any sense of immersion. I was very aware that I was watching a very bad film which I had paid a very real seven quid for. When you see a good film, you get immersed, you don't just sit there thinking 'this film is brilliant', because a good, or even competent film makes you part of the storyline, makes you connect with it. The unabashed idiocy and brazen disregard for logic actually ruined the immersive aspect of the experience as a whole and failed to deliver as a film.

I'm not a person who goes around pointing out flaws in every film I see, and I'm normally very forgiving, especially when dealing with films like this. But this went way beyond stuff you can ignore, both in the magnitude of each ridiculous moment and the quantity of them in the movie. If you could actually sit there and think 'yeah, this is plausible' then I know a 'Nigerian prince' with 'a very fantastic financial opportunities' who would LOVE to meet you.

In short, I merely threw in my opinion, for good reasons, and I would appreciate not being called stupid. Especially by someone who can't spell 'actually', capitalise, or tell the difference between 'your' and 'you're'.

Posted by Psilocybe on 2009-11-18 22:42:23

sry wasnt mean to insult you or anyone else in any way, but mearly meant is being stupid as in "beliving hollywood would ever make a movie like this wich would be realistic" ofc theres alot of propaganda etc hidden brand commercials and such but like i said before, try not to think about it and look the other way when all those sony screens pop up etc, i can ignore it and therefor enjoy what really is after my opinion a good movie. If on the other hand i had to critisise it i could find LOADS of stuff to critise and write down about it, like why didnt anyone else see the "cracks" in the earth comming ? why wasnt a specific guy wasted for speaking about this when.. you know ? why was the homeless dude with the sign there at that precise moment, the carbrands, the monitors, etc, like i said then you could go on and on forever.
and sry for being danish and not that good at writting perfect english, but on the other hand i would love to see you write in danish ;)