PDA

View Full Version : 2012 - The Movie (Spoilers) Thread



Atraveller
2009-Nov-16, 02:36 AM
Saw 2012 on the weekend - I expect it, and Avatar will be dukeing it out for the best special effects oscar.

They credited 7 main stream CG companies in the credits - and 12 also rans. I am assuming that is almost all the CG companies there are in Southern California.

The movie itself was a wonderful romp - if your idea of fun is watching 6 Billion people die... There were a few too many close calls, and happy coincidences for me - but was quite entertaining none the less.

Any one else see it yet? Any other opinions?

grant hutchison
2009-Nov-16, 02:51 AM
There's a thread over here (http://www.bautforum.com/bad-astronomy-media/84353-2012-movie.html), with some opinions.

Grant Hutchison

ToSeek
2009-Nov-19, 05:30 PM
There's a thread over here (http://www.bautforum.com/bad-astronomy-media/84353-2012-movie.html), with some opinions.

Grant Hutchison

We've had some questions about what happened to the thread pointed to here. Unfortunately, it was apparently deleted by accident when a moderator was dealing with some spam.* Our apologies.







*Actually, our Illuminati masters made us delete it, but we're not supposed to say so.

greenfeather
2009-Nov-21, 06:02 AM
Saw 2012 on the weekend - I

Any one else see it yet? Any other opinions?

I just saw it. Yeah seeing people die etc. wasn't fun...but the big picture sure was, let's say AMAZING... really REALISTIC scenes of California being destroyed, the Yellowstone supervolcano, ash raining down on DC, the floodwaters filling up the Himalayas etc.

It sure delivered on the promise that Deep Impact wimped out on... "destroying the world".

My fave part was "Charlie", the guy with the crank radio show, standing on the edge of the volcano and Exulting!

I just wish script writers would quit using the SAME plot over & over... "big Govt officials hatch a secret plan so that They can survive the catastrophe".

And we could do with a few less mawkish, tearful goodbye scenes and scenes of kids screaming while various people get mashed & crushed. I'm more interested in the really big picture... what it looks like when the Earth gets rearranged. Hey, it really has happened in geologic history!

I came to this thread to see if people are gonna debunk the whole 2012 thing. After all, I don't think there is any scientific truth to it, or any evidence that some kind of Big Nasty is heading towards us, any suns colliding etc. Is there?

Hey! i'd have liked to see some actual Mayans in the movie! Maybe they should have rescued a few of them from that OTHER Mayan movie, Apocalpyto??:lol:

greenfeather
2009-Nov-21, 06:03 AM
PS, speaking of Mayans...I hear that the real Mayans are reaping a little benefit from 2012, namely all those tourists that are coming thru!

korjik
2009-Nov-21, 06:19 AM
PS, speaking of Mayans...I hear that the real Mayans are reaping a little benefit from 2012, namely all those tourists that are coming thru!

Cool. Now I find the whole 2012 thing alot less annoying. Well, at least it is annoyance that has a silver lining.

:)

clint
2009-Nov-22, 07:46 PM
The last hour of the movie was a waste of time: Poseidon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon_%28film%29) revisited.

hewhocaves
2009-Nov-22, 09:11 PM
Wow.. i just read through the synopsis on wikipedia. This movie is... godawful is an understatement. What's higher up..? Pantheon-awful?

From the site: "American geologist Adrian Helmsley travels to India to meet his friend Satnam, who has discovered that neutrinos from a massive solar flare are acting as microwaves and causing the temperature of the Earth's core to increase rapidly"

So.. magic neutrinos? Too bad we don't have transporter technology. TT can counteract neutrinos. Or positrons. I forget which - It's been awhile since I've seen ST:TNG.

I do plan on seeing it (I have a free movie voucher). But I also plan on rooting for the earth - Die, pink fleshy parasites!

One can only hope that Roland Emmerich was in his LA home when the city slid into the Pacific. That would make it all worthwhile. If Michael Bay were also home, then this might qualify as a "Comedy". lol

Terrrible.. terrible stupid movie.

ShadowSot
2009-Nov-22, 09:52 PM
Still surprised at the number of people I know who fell for the adverts for this movie, or consider it be a possible imagining of the future.

Big Brother Dunk
2009-Nov-22, 10:00 PM
I find it interesting that the survivors end up in Africa. The continent where humans first arose will be the home of mankind's second start.

Van Rijn
2009-Nov-23, 12:23 AM
I came to this thread to see if people are gonna debunk the whole 2012 thing.


Search the forum for "2012". It's been debunked so many times on BAUT there isn't much point in repeating this stuff. For a start, here is a link to list of threads and articles on the subject (and there are more, many more):

http://www.bautforum.com/1332675-post4.html

Atraveller
2009-Nov-23, 01:19 AM
My fave part was "Charlie", the guy with the crank radio show, standing on the edge of the volcano and Exulting!
?:lol:

Woody Harrelson was amazing - playing an authentic WOO WOO CT - who was right....

Especially his last scene where he gets blown away by the volcano - Here's to Woody Harrelson for best supporting actor - yeah!!!

closetgeek
2009-Nov-23, 02:05 PM
The last hour of the movie was a waste of time: Poseidon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poseidon_%28film%29) revisited.

Did you notice that once they got to the "ships" the quality of the film and screenplay took a bigger nosedive than California? I love disaster movies and the first half was interesting but it a bit like someone said "hey! let's make a disaster movie that combines every other into one film." It was good but typical and predictable (maybe I just see too many movies). Then, they get to the arcs and suddenly it was like watching a cheap disaster movie on the Syfy channel.

Jim
2009-Nov-23, 06:04 PM
PS, speaking of Mayans...I hear that the real Mayans are reaping a little benefit from 2012, namely all those tourists that are coming thru!

I think you have the explanation for the Mayan prophecy!

Tourists flock to the Mayan lands to see for themselves. The Mayans take full advantage, building hotels, restaurants and casinos, starting tour companies, expanding the souvenir industry. Their economy flourishes.

Then, on Dec 21, 2012... nothing happens.

On Dec 22, all the tourists go home, no new tourists come, and the Mayan economy collapses. Their world comes to an end.

Just like their calendar predicted all along.

hewhocaves
2009-Nov-23, 10:45 PM
...so you're suggesting 2013 is a great time to pick up some Mayan real estate? ;)

Atraveller
2009-Nov-24, 01:14 AM
Did you notice that once they got to the "ships" the quality of the film and screenplay took a bigger nosedive than California? I love disaster movies and the first half was interesting but it a bit like someone said "hey! let's make a disaster movie that combines every other into one film." It was good but typical and predictable (maybe I just see too many movies). Then, they get to the arcs and suddenly it was like watching a cheap disaster movie on the Syfy channel.

Actually the last bit in the ships reminded me of an old 50's disaster film - "When Worlds Colide" - some of the sets they used seemed familiar... :lol:

Bolasanibk
2009-Nov-24, 05:17 PM
Among all the things getting destroyed and blown up(including my brain cells) I might have missed this, but was there a reason given in the movie for choosing the Himalayas as the location for building the arks. Seems kind of odd choice of location.

Drunk Vegan
2009-Nov-24, 05:58 PM
Presumably because of their distance from the ocean, and high elevation. Makes it harder for a tidal wave to wallop you.

Although the funniest part of the movie is when they are bemoaning the incoming tidal wave, "1500 meters" high... and when it does finally arrive, it nearly covers Mt. Everest, which is almost 9000 meters high.

Atraveller
2009-Nov-26, 03:41 AM
Presumably because of their distance from the ocean, and high elevation. Makes it harder for a tidal wave to wallop you.

Although the funniest part of the movie is when they are bemoaning the incoming tidal wave, "1500 meters" high... and when it does finally arrive, it nearly covers Mt. Everest, which is almost 9000 meters high.

You are expecting some sort of accuracy from Hollywood? We have come to expect very little from them...

The science was total rubbish, but the special effects were fantastic.

I wish they had made this movie in 3D - would have been even better special effects... You could feel like you were standing right beside Woody when he gets blown away...

kabutar
2009-Nov-29, 03:53 AM
From the site: "American geologist Adrian Helmsley travels to India to meet his friend Satnam, who has discovered that neutrinos from a massive solar flare are acting as microwaves and causing the temperature of the Earth's core to increase rapidly"

O_____O

Is this even possible?! Wow. lol my family is all ooh aah 2012! I refuse to watch it lol.

AndreasJ
2009-Nov-29, 10:35 AM
Is this even possible?!
On the off chance you're seriously wondering: no, it's not possible.

kabutar
2009-Nov-29, 07:57 PM
On the off chance you're seriously wondering: no, it's not possible.

no, I was being rather more tongue in cheek lol but thanks anyway :P I hadn't thought about 2012 in aaaaaages but had to come and check out what you all were saying about the movie! hehe.

SeanF
2009-Nov-30, 02:59 PM
Norm MacDonald mentioned this movie on Conan O'Brien last week. First he wondered why the movie was released now instead of, say, December '11. "How are people supposed to react? 'Gee, I'm going to be really scared in three years'?"

Then he said he wasn't worried because the Mayans are terrible "predicters" - "They predicted the world would end in 2012, but since then - they've all died."

I laughed. :lol:

Selenite
2009-Dec-01, 02:07 AM
Woody Harrelson was amazing - playing an authentic WOO WOO CT - who was right....

Especially his last scene where he gets blown away by the volcano - Here's to Woody Harrelson for best supporting actor - yeah!!!

I agree Woody was one of the more interesting characters in the movie, but I still don't get the plot point as to why his diet seem to consist only of pickles to the point of having his RV's fridge stocked exclusively with pickles...and beer.

HenrikOlsen
2009-Dec-01, 07:35 AM
He liked them?

Or some sort of wooism about how only naturally preserved food would be contaminant free.

In case you wonder, beer is naturally preserved drinking water.

Atraveller
2009-Dec-04, 05:58 AM
I agree Woody was one of the more interesting characters in the movie, but I still don't get the plot point as to why his diet seem to consist only of pickles to the point of having his RV's fridge stocked exclusively with pickles...and beer.

What? You have a problem with a diet of just pickles and Beer? Sounds like pretty good fare to me...:lol: (I have met more than one WOO WOO with a "distinctive" diet - so perhaps that is the point? Equating bizarre diets with WOO WOO's?)

Hey, and Here is to Woody in "Zombie land"!!!!

Atraveller
2009-Dec-04, 06:00 AM
O_____O

Is this even possible?! Wow. lol my family is all ooh aah 2012! I refuse to watch it lol.

But it is okay, because you really CAN recrystalize di-lithium crystals by using Photons captured from a old style nuclear reactor and re injected into the Di-Litium chamber... :lol:

IOW - you expect something to make sense from hollywood?

hewhocaves
2009-Dec-06, 03:18 AM
So I finally got to see the movie tonight. Went with two fellow geologists. That was fun. I haven't laughed that much in a long time.

My favorite part? When the subway comes out of the tunnel in California. All my brain could say was "Wheeee!"

I also could hear the MST3K people in my head in the start of the movie when they were panning past the planets going "Excuse me, movie. Are you lost? Do you need directions?"

Some of the more memorable stupid science and stupid movie moments include...

...the previously mentioned tidal wave problems.

...the ash cloud making it from Yellowstone to DC in 8 hours, but a winnebago on a dirt road can outrun it.

... Yellowstone, WY is apparently a day trip from LA.

... Los Angeles sinks, coast-side first into the pacific.. but the pacific plate itself doesn't sink.. nor is there sufficient explanation for the mantle displacement.

... mention of the subsurface crust. As opposed to the above-surface crust?

... anything mentioning the word "neutrinos". Neutrinos are only properly used when used in conjunction with transporters or the main deflector dish.

... going on to China from Hawaii because there's no place in between (the rest of the Islands, Midway, Wake, Guam, et cetera. et cetera.

... amusingly taking all the african animals when africa is the only continent spared.

... why giant arks were required when sumbersibles or possibly even hot air balloons seem to be able to do the job just as well.

.. why the ark has to be gas powered rather than nuclear. for awhile i thought they might have even been coal powered


and so many more. But make your own lists. itll be the next big party game.

Selenite
2009-Dec-06, 04:30 AM
nd so many more. But make your own lists. itll be the next big party game.

I'll go with the cell phone call from India to the heart of the Himalayas after the plot has firmly established that all global communication have been knocked out, Wisconsin is now the South Pole, and a giant tsunami is engulfing most of India. Uh-huh.

That and John Cusack's character in the heart of LA, still being able to pick up the conspiracy theorist's radio signal from his ramshackle RV radio station in Yellowstone.

closetgeek
2009-Dec-12, 05:00 PM
Okay, I went to see it with my boyfriend, who also loves disaster movies but doesn't enjoy me pointing out the bad science. We got into an argument about the amount of water needed to cause the final destruction. I said I had a problem with the exaggeration with the tidal waves but may or may not be understanding the consequences. I can understand displacement, California fell into the ocean and like throwing ice cubes in a glass of water, it would rise. However, for a surge to be big enough coming from either side of the Eurasia continent and meet in the middle, would there be enough water to continue to cover the opposite side of the planet? He kept arguing displacement and saying the water did recede but I just can't accept that there was enough water to do what the movie claimed in the first place. So, for arguments sake let's say all of the garble that happened leading up to the giant waves can actually happen, is there enough water to do as the movie claimed?

clint
2009-Dec-13, 09:12 AM
If I got that right, it was not so much the height of the tsunami,
but rather the sinking of the Eurasian plate that made the water reach the Himalayas.

Not that this makes the scenario much more realistic... :neutral:

closetgeek
2009-Dec-13, 03:41 PM
Ah, well that would come closer to justifying it.

mazzz_in_Leeds
2009-Dec-15, 01:12 PM
I absolutely, unashamedly loved the movie. Well, I could have done with less cheesy bits and uplifting speeches (*snore* bring on the mass destruction please...), but I LOVED the effects and I adore grand scale disasters on the big screen in general.

Who cares that the science was a bit, er, silly (to be polite)? It's part of the fun of going for something to eat/drink after the movie, discussing/arguing about it with your friends and most importantly laughing about it!

I'm generally pedantic about science being correct in the real world (I get really annoyed when people mention "muscle turning into fat" for example), but at the movies, so long as it doesn't take you out of the story TOO much... well, it's all a bit of fun really, isn't it?

What made me want to tear my hair out was people going to see this film and grumbling about it not being high-brow enough: er, were you expecting French Arthouse cinema...?

clint
2009-Dec-16, 09:37 AM
...er, were you expecting French Arthouse cinema...?

Nope, but I had already seen lots of other (and much better) submarine disaster movies (Poseidon, Hunt for Red October, Das Boot, etc.)
So I really didn't need that last hour or so of 2012.

Before that, all was according to expectations, all right :)

mazzz_in_Leeds
2009-Dec-16, 11:05 AM
Nope, but I had already seen lots of other (and much better) submarine disaster movies (Poseidon, Hunt for Red October, Das Boot, etc.)
So I really didn't need that last hour or so of 2012.

I'd class Poseidon as more of an action film, tbh. I tend to equate "disaster movie" with "grand scale natural disaster movie" I suppose!
Have not seen Red October (one for the christmas list!)
I watched Das Boot for the first time a few weeks ago (the 3.5 hour film version) - what a film! The tension was palpable.
Can you really have too much submarine disaster?! :-)



Before that, all was according to expectations, all right :)
Oh, absolutely!

I must say, my "Were you expecting French Arthouse cinema" comment was more directed to those who grumbled about it being a trashy blockbuster...