








6.6| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
8.4 13 |
7.3 47 |
6.4 65 |
6.2 94 |
5.9 95 |
6.3 46 |
6.4 364 |
| Women: Votes: |
9.4 8 |
7.7 44 |
6.8 46 |
6.6 53 |
6.5 28 |
7.2 25 |
7 206 |
| Total: Votes: |
8.5 23 |
7.5 95 |
6.6 112 |
6.2 154 |
6 127 |
6.7 74 |
6.6 599 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
What a waste of a potential good story and great special effects. As it stands, the movie is totally ridiculous in an orgy of special effects that make no sense. Just because computer animation can be used, does not mean it should be way overused. Even in such action movies, there needs to be the slightest slightest amount of believability or sense, for us to suspend our disbelief. This was excrutiatingly ridiculous. Towards the end I was praying it would all blow up and end immediately. An immense disappointment.
| 2/10 | hfm0002@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
Simply put... wait for it to go to the $1 cinema in the decarie square.
| 5/10 | jeffk29@ - 27 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
Worst disaster movie ever! 1954 Godzilla movie is way more entertaining and thrilling.
| 2/10 | thresherit@ - 2 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
Awesome! Special effects are great. Unrealistic but really good!
| 9/10 | lolipop_303@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
Not bad but not great either. Lots of hype for a mediocre movie. A movie to watch if you have absolutely nothing better to do!
| 5/10 | blake__roxxs@ - 87 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
We loved it. It was an exciting movie, lots of fun, and good acting. Not really realistic.
| 8/10 | sbandurka@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
This movie is interesting. Great special effects with all the destructions of buildings, streets, etc. The story is typical, about survival instinct and human kindness... Similar to movie "The day after Tommorrow".
| 8/10 | canary28185@ - 137 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
This movie was excellent, Lots of action, suspense and the graphics were awesome. Woody Harrelson was great in his role in this movie. This is a must see movie.
| 9/10 | army_and_trucker@ - 297 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
Well as a comedy maybe a 7. Poor acting, terrible one liners, didn't Danny Glover or John Cusack read this script? Felt like Titanic, Posiden and The Day after tomorrow all in one. The effects were pretty good however thats where it ends, don't waste your money wait for the video if you have to see it.
| 3/10 | ktpearse1@ - 9 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
If it is a Sunday afternoon and you are in the mood for a "big screen epic", knowing in advance that it is obviously not going to be realistic (but who cares) then this film is a great place to eat some popcorn, and have a change of pace with either your friends or family. Of course, the special effects these days keep getting better, so that's a given. Despite the obligatory wise cracks (that never happen in real crises) there are a few deeper questions raised about ethical issues. Naturally, Hollywood can be counted upon to continue to teach us all to swear because we were in danger of forgeting - but that's life in North America today. Bottom line: Good big screen flick - better to see in theatre rather than at home. (P. S. Since you can see that my age is 50 to obsolete, you can take my comments with a grain of salt (water)
| 7/10 | friendsroom@ - 9 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ |
Good FX poor scenario and too much last minute save. I enjoyed it for the effect and action but this is not a movie you will want to watch over and over.
| 6/10 | daden3@ - 108 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
Exactly what I expected, a very entertaining popcorn movie. It's hard to understand all the animosity towards this movie, after all, there are few movies where it's so totally clear what you are going to get.
| 8/10 | beyleclarin@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
It could have been easy to fall into the ridiculous side, but this special effect-pack movie got lots of emotional scene. 2012 is a beautiful mix of emotions, action and moral content. Even thought this movie is 2h30 long, you just don’t see time past. Special effects are a big part of the movie. They are well executing, realistic-looking. You almost feel like you’re there. This movie does keep you on the edge of your seat. There are some more slow moments but it never boring. There is no real evil character. It’s more the good versus the elements. 2012 have beat my expectations. I do recommend this movie to the entire family. -Lama Orgueilleux.
| 9/10 | rlld@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 13-17 |
Lot's of fun with great special effects. Could have been half hour less.
| 8/10 | drummer@ - 20 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
You know, the 2012 thing is just fake and a bunch of lies. But the movie was great. Even if I dont believe this 2012 trash, the movie is still great! You got to see it!
| 9/10 | marcr103@ - 50 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 1-12 |
There's no doubt: the special effects/graphics are excellent. If you like to see the world fall apart in exquisite detail, then this is your movie. The overall storyline is not bad, either. The one thing that is plain annoying is the exaggeration in what the main characters undergoe. Driving through a building that's collapsing, just always being missed by falling debris,... Sure, it's nice to have suspense, but here it's over the limits.
| 8/10 | filip.van-petegem@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
Nice movie, but I was expecting a better introduction to the cataclism! Special effects that is one of the reason to go to see the movie to the cinema!
| 7/10 | alanmo21@ - 11 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
I loved it! OK, the script and the acting are just OK, but this movie is not a documentary and was not made to prepare us or scare us in any way; it was made to entertain us like any other action movie. Best special effects ever!
| 8/10 | stdenis.ouimet@ - 2 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ |
It is painful to see how most of the negative reviews attacks the film's topic rather than its content. As with any movies, if you don't like the topic - DON'T WATCH IT. This film delivers exactly what it is set out to present - a fictional hypothesis on the end of world. If you go into the theatre expecting a Ph. D paper in documentary style, you're mad. This film has stunning CG effects, above average plot and an excellent theme. If you enjoy its premise, then you'll definitely enjoy the film.
| 10/10 | jacksun007@ - 3 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 - One reply |
The special effects are absolutely incredible, and they help me give this movie a 6/10. But the story is very weak, swiss cheese weak, full of holes and gaps and fluff and... don't get me wrong, I understand this is a popcorn blockbuster, but it is possible to have a huge budget movie with a great storyline... The Dark Knight and Star Trek prequel are perfect examples. This movie is not bad, it's just not very good either. 6/10, and definitely should have been so much better.
| 6/10 | rimbaud1972@ - 239 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
WOW!!! Where do I start? Great special effect, no story. The movie did not make sense from beginning to end.
| 3/10 | big_cami@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
Not even worth the $3.00 to rent it at Blockbusters! Total waste of 2 hours of my time! Worst acting, totally exaggerated!!
| 1/10 | theprez007@ - 8 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
This is truly a waste of my time and money. I had hoped for a movie that had some semblance of historical fact of the Mayan theory. I can't believe that we have another "blockbuster" on the horizon with its anaemic plot, sub par acting (especially the insulting bastardized Russian accents)with the "America saves the world" message.'Cause we all know that its only the US that has intelligent humans that can save the human race. Give me a break... !!! I can't believe I even wasted a calorie of energy to walk to the theatre to watch this piece of cinematic trash!
| 2/10 | italdavid@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
Similar to "The day after Tomorrow", typical Hollywood movie, nice effects but nothing really special. The theory behind the whole movie, the neutrino part and microwaves, anyone who has a little bit more knowledge in physics would realize its actually false. ;P I will not reveal what since I do not want to ruin the surprise...
| 6/10 | iveto1@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 - One reply |
It was a good movie, the special effects exceeded my expectations. But the story line could've been better. There were some scenes that I thought shouldn't have been there but overall this movie kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time. It's definitely worth seeing on the big screen!
| 8/10 | canadka_2006@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
Pretty much what the trailers depict; a bit of tongue in cheek at times but entertaining. Probably won't be in the running for the oscars for acting and script writing but the computer generated effects are something. Best out this week.
| 7/10 | northspoon@ - 9 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ |
The special effects were very well done, but the weak acting, unsimpathetic characters, and disconnected and implausable plot would otherwise make this a second rate rental at best. In between the mayhem, the dialoge was so boring I almost fell asleep. If you like big special effects, see it on the big screen otherwise give this one a pass. Why waste what little time we have left. ;)
| 5/10 | thill01@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ |
After 20 minutes the thought of leaving occurred. After 40 minutes I was embarrassed. After an hour I was gone. Do the people behind hollywood really think that we are that big a bunch of dumbfounded dipsh**s, to be taken by all this doomsday hoax propaganda. The sad thing is, most people are. Please wake up people. The world is not going to end and global warming is a hoax to make you beg to be taxed. Stop letting them manipulate you.
| 1/10 | itisallabiglie@ - 3 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 - One reply |
The special effects were excellent... but the characters and story line... not so good. It's good for the action and that's about it... extremely far fetched but overall, it was entertaining.
| 6/10 | mrs.jim.morrison@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
Being in Montreal right now, but actually living in LA, I found this film quite fun and entertaining for the mere fact that I have never seen people drive so well and so fast on the freeways there. Perhaps it takes a giant fault line chasing everyone down the 10 freeway to get things really moving in LA 'cause one of Mother Nature's other devices, rain, seems to just grind everything to a halt. Also, watching famous locations around the world destroyed in a matter of seconds made me feel that I need to travel more before I get too old to see these places. Although I just don't think I am ever going to see the White House and the USS John F. Kennedy aircraft carrier side by side in my lifetime unless the Smithsonian has some space open that I'm not aware of. Obviously this movie is not meant to change the world, even if it actually does it itself. But it sure was great Saturday night popcorn entertainment done at its lowest intellectual level and highest production level. My only negative comment would be that I found the close ups a bit home video in their look. If the filmmakers bragged about spending almost 200 million on it then I think they should have spent it on film instead of those new Sony Digital cameras that are not quite there yet -- then again, Sony made the film so I guess they had to use them. But here's a question -- since they did use Sony cameras on a Sony movie, why did it cost so much in the first place if the cameras were in all reality, after studio accounting practices, free -- Anyway, no one will care about this "video" point so Sony go ahead and buy yourself and everyone at your studio a bagel and some sushi -- you deserve it. Meanwhile, I'm gonna head back to LA, get stuck in traffic and hope for an earthquake. Boy, I miss LA.
| 8/10 | wrightcheese@ - 2 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
Enjoyed the movie, theatre was packed, no one walked out and everyone seem to enjoy it as well. The special effects were fun to watch, it is amazing what computers can do. The movie kept my interest and the time flew by.
| 8/10 | rjmcgoo@ - 65 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
The movie was very disapointing, it was too long for no reason. Very cheesy. No stuggle. Too good too be true. I rate it a 5 on 10. Definitely do not recommend this movie for anybody. Just wait for it to come out on video.
| 5/10 | atika_mouaj@ - 7 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
I wish children were not in in, they get in the way. One is always lost etc. etc. Terrific special effects. See it in the theatre, but most of us has our own sound system and large flat screens anyway. If you have, see it at home.
| 5/10 | jgordon@ - 115 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Disappointing. What a great and epic story, the end of all mankind, but what director Emmerich (Hollywood) makes of it is the usual Hollywood kitsch, including the divorced family that (of course) finds together at the end. Some nice special effects though, most of them complete nonsense (man running faster than explosions)
| 3/10 | zentralsachse@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
This is the worst movie ever. Don't even waste your money.
| 1/10 | daviddorm@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
Suspend your disbelief, grab a bag of popcorn, and settle in for some mindless entertainment. Expect anything more and you'll most certainly be disappointed. There isn't much of a plot, and the aresenal of characters is outrageously cliche, but the effects are good and the action sequences are captivating, even if ridiculously far-fetched. This film fails to meaningfully portray mankind's struggle to survive the apocalypse, but it's visually impressive and enjoyable in a light-hearted-end-of-the-world-way. The simple truth.
| 6/10 | crooker41@ - 165 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
It's a blockbuster... weak plot, abbreviated characterization, implausible internal logic and a complete divorce from the laws of physics and earth sciences. But we all knew that going in. It's tense and distressing and an orgy of horror for the eyes. If I had one legitimate complaint, it would be that everyone's reaction to the fact that THE WORLD WAS ENDING seemed underplayed, and underutilized as a narrative element. If you are thinking of seeing this film at all, it goes without seeing, that you ought see it on the big screen.
| 8/10 | somerled@ - 31 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 - One reply |
I personally loved the movie, I never felt bored, and time flew by. Although the main characters probably should have died at least 100 times, it was still a very good movie. The effects were awesome. A must see for sure!
| 9/10 | kirstilee_@ - 2 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
Believe me, if you don't watch this movie with the sounds and the big screen, then you'll be missing one of the best parts of the movie! I really enjoyed the movie, I have my own opinion in how some characters were "Terminated" at then but then again, I am writing a review not the movie LOL overall, worth seeing it, big time! Not a full moment and makes you thing about your own life, watch it! Over two hours well spent!
| 8/10 | mobile.me@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
There may have been a good movie lurking under the overburden of noise, too many subplots, improbable/impossible/unlikely action, and so on. But the committee making the scripting and casting decisions made a committee kind of movie and it's just noisy and pell-mellish. A few frames were food for thought. The character of the US President was subdued and respectable. There is actually a caldera under Yellowstone, and the ground is bulging. The shot of the Lady in the Blue Coat was hilarious. Like most movies the many really big explosions were supposed to make up for care and detail in construction. One could pick out many incredibilities, like how the aircraft get from Hawaii to Tibet when it was just about out of fuel? And why does the door to the ark have both hydraulic retractors and helical gears? I guess the sequel will be called "Back to Africa."
| 6/10 | eql@ - 38 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ - One reply |
Complete, deplorable, wretched, waste of film, time and money.
| 2/10 | jhdirks@ - 2 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 - 3 replies |
Great special effects, but the story is weak, and scenes where actors are not realistic. Question how does any thing survive what is equal to an atomic blast, yet the writer would have you believe it is possible. Only in the movies.
| 2/10 | kfd880@ - 3 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 |
This movie was excruciating. Watching grass grow is far more enjoyable and exceedingly less painful than watching this drivel. The only reason anyone should watch this 'movie' is if they can't find broken glass to walk on in their bare feet. (Note: the broken glass walking would be more fun) Stay away at all costs.
| 1/10 | time.2.run@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 - 6 replies |
*DISCLAIMER* I have a science degree... but not in physics... I don't know very much when it comes to the workings of the sun... So the idea of mutated nuetrinos is something I am not sure actually occurs. 50 trillion of them pass through the earth each second (yeah I wikipediaed that. Since it is so small in mass it passes harmless through the earth without any effect I am not sure that a mutated neutrino would have any effect, let alone boiling the outer core (which is silly since it is already boiling and thus creating our magnetic field. On to the second part of the hypothesis about how the crust (actual physical poles would reverse) Since the magnetic filds have reversed several times in the past... it would make sense that it is only the magnetic field that actually shifts (this makes more sense to me as a scientist) not the thin outer crust like the movie suggests. Guess that's what happens when movie producers get hold of a theory... let's just really twist it and and sensationaize it and totally get it wrong for the sake of making a killing off a bunch of people who are buying into the doom and gloom running rampant on the globe right now So if you are are expecting credibility on this premise expect to be majorly disappointed... Still the movie did have some superior CGI effects in its favor. And if you go expecting to be entertained then you definitely will get your moneys worth.
| 6/10 | dwm21057@ - 17 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 50+ - 4 replies |
Bad story! Not comparable to Armageddon nor Perfect Storm.
| 3/10 | yangallenlun@ - first review 15.11.2009 - age: 26-35 |
Annoying all the way through; really annoying.
| 1/10 | angberr@ - 111 reviews 15.11.2009 - age: 36-49 - 2 replies |
Great movie! The effects are top-notch, of course, but the story is good too. There are some good jokes, some sad moments, some scary ones, but at the end it's a fun ride. People even were applauding at some parts. Some pats were EPIC :)
| 10/10 | alexsher@ - 2 reviews 14.11.2009 - age: 18-25 |
AWESOME. Excellent movie for those who want action and entertainment! CGI are impressive. [...] What is credible about the end of the world? This is an action packed movie created for ENTERTAINMENT. [...]
| 8/10 | casper999@ - 91 reviews 14.11.2009 - age: 50+ |
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.