The end of the world..2012..now in movie!

Romero Zombie

So a new movie coming out in November called 2012...heard of it?



New Trailer is here

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810045661/video


There was a teaser a while back with the monk guy banging on his gong...and whoosh...monastery on the mountain engulfed in water.

This movie is directed by the guy who likes to make movies about the planet getting destroyed, Roland Emmerich. He also did Independence Day, where the aliens pew pew our planet. Also did Day After Tomorrow where our planet froze...or something. Let's not forget Universal Soldier, where Jean Claude kicked a lot of people.

The movie basically depicts the world ending on 12-21-12. Why is the world going to end in 2012? Kind of an odd year one might say to one self. Well, this is based on the old Mayan long count calender which supposedly stops on 12-21-12. Some say it is because the world ends on this date. Some say it just resets back to zero. Some say Mayan's were crazy...and got bored and just quit on this date because making calenders for that long sucked....well not really. But you get the point. Want to read about the Mayan calender?

Here!

www.google.com
Find it yourself lazy.

So let's use this thread to discuss the movie. Which is bound to have mass quantities of things exploding and people dying and crying. Let's also use this to discuss the possibility of the world ending on this date. Will you be satisfied with your life if the world ends in the next three years?

Discuss away!

Desert_Eagle25

I'll pretty much be watching this only for John Cusack and Amanda Peet. Love em both to bits.

juice for jesus

The Mayans were not "Mankind's Earliest Civilization". What the hell. Why would they feel the need to embellish that?

Drakeon

I look forward to the media doing several (if not many, especially if this is popular) stories about the world possibly ending in 2012. Oh wait, no I don't. I'm not sure why, but this myth gets to me, especially after hearing what the myth was actually based on.

BloodySloth

Drakeon wrote: »

I'm not sure why, but this myth gets to me

The fact that it's so easily proven to be bullshit? Anyone who Wikipedias the Mayan calendar for more than 15 seconds would know that this "world ends in 2012" thing is a total fabrication. The Mayan calendar certainly doesn't end at December 12, 2012. Shit, Mayan inscriptions have gone so far as to schedule a celebration of the anniversary of sorts for one of their rulers in the year 4772. It's absolutely clear that they didn't think the world would come to an end a full 2000 years before that happened.

Anyway, movie. After I was somehow compelled to see The Day After Tomorrow, there's no way I'm putting money down for this one.

Handsome Costanza

Aren't there people who say this every 5 years or so? Each time the world doesn't end they just switch to a new date.




Wasn't the world supposed to end in 2000 also? and like 1998 or something like that.

AJAlkaline40

2012 is the year I get my degree in Neuroscience. It's also when Obama goes up for re-election. Coincidence? I think not.

Taximes

My girlfriend's dad believes the 2012 myth.

We, too, fear that year, but not because of poorly researched urban legend. No, we fear it because any stupid time that anything goes wrong during that year, it's going to be, "Ooooh you guys, it's the evil year 2012!"

evilintent

The effects look really great.


juice:

Advances such as writing, epigraphy, and the calendar did not originate with the Maya; however, their civilization fully developed them.

Zzulu

dang mayans :x

Duffel

I'm a sucker for even really bad apocalyptic movies, but since this one is based on erroneous pseudoarchaeology (which is increasingly popular, le sigh) I'll probably miss it.

I also have a feeling it will increase in cult/ironic popularity around 2013 or so.

Bionic Monkey

Duffel wrote: »

I'm a sucker for even really bad apocalyptic movies, but since this one is based on erroneous pseudoarchaeology (which is increasingly popular, le sigh) I'll probably miss it.

I also have a feeling it will increase in cult/ironic popularity around 2013 or so.

I love Independence Day and Day After Tomorrow, so I'll definately be dragging my wife to see this with me. I was laughing my ass off at that trailer.

Quid

juice for jesus wrote: »

The Mayans were not "Mankind's Earliest Civilization". What the hell. Why would they feel the need to embellish that?

You mean, as opposed to all the other complete exaggerations?

Duffel

Quid wrote: »

You mean, as opposed to all the other complete exaggerations?

Well, there's exxagerations and then there's just being completely, historically wrong. I don't mind a bit of stupidity in my movies because they're, you know, movies - the absurd laws of physics in movies like The Core or Day After Tomorrow don't bother me because it's not really meant to be taken seriously. But saying the Mayans were "mankind's earliest civilization" when they actually weren't anywhere close to it by a few thousand years is as silly as saying that the United States was founded in 1000 AD and showing George Washington decked out as a knight in shining armor.

This is probably because of my field though and stuff like that gets to me more than most people. If I were a meteorologist or physicist or whatever the aforementioned movies would probably be unwatchable for similar reasons.

Quid

Pretty much. There were people in the Up! thread complaining about the number of balloons actually required to lift a house. When I saw Hangover yesterday I was annoyed by all fuck out that the guy playing a Chinese mobster was, most definitely not, Chinese.

Thing is, the vast, vast majority of people aren't going to know, and it sounds cooler that way.

LightRider

I used to be enthusiastic about this movie until I saw that godawful trailer. We're gonna escape the end of the world on big boats? Really?

I like how the Kennedy takes revenge on the White House though.

BloodySloth

Quid wrote: »

Pretty much. There were people in the Up! thread complaining about the number of balloons actually required to lift a house.

This is akin to arguing that the woman's wedding dress short have fallen off completely in Monsters vs. Aliens when she grows 50 feet tall. Of course, it's true, but it's also a damn cartoon and stop ruining our fun by being a pedantic dick. I think there's a big leap from stuff like that to this Mayan ridiculousness, especially since Up and Monsters vs. Aliens are very clearly cartoons not meant to be understood realistically or taken seriously.

override367

Duffel wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

You mean, as opposed to all the other complete exaggerations?

Well, there's exxagerations and then there's just being completely, historically wrong. I don't mind a bit of stupidity in my movies because they're, you know, movies - the absurd laws of physics in movies like The Core or Day After Tomorrow don't bother me because it's not really meant to be taken seriously. But saying the Mayans were "mankind's earliest civilization" when they actually weren't anywhere close to it by a few thousand years is as silly as saying that the United States was founded in 1000 AD and showing George Washington decked out as a knight in shining armor.

This is probably because of my field though and stuff like that gets to me more than most people. If I were a meteorologist or physicist or whatever the aforementioned movies would probably be unwatchable for similar reasons.

The thing is alot of people take the day after tomorrow seriously. It makes my brain hurt.

Quid

BloodySloth wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

Pretty much. There were people in the Up! thread complaining about the number of balloons actually required to lift a house.

This is akin to arguing that the woman's wedding dress short have fallen off completely in Monsters vs. Aliens when she grows 50 feet tall. Of course, it's true, but it's also a damn cartoon and stop ruining our fun by being a pedantic dick. I think there's a big leap from stuff like that to this Mayan ridiculousness, especially since Up and Monsters vs. Aliens are very clearly cartoons not meant to be understood realistically.

I'm sorry you and I must have watched different trailers as I just saw a giraffe air lifted on to a government subsidize ark after a dad drove himself and his kids off a flying plane in a family sedan.

Perhaps you could point me to the trailer for the movie meant to be taken seriously.

BloodySloth

Quid wrote: »

BloodySloth wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

Pretty much. There were people in the Up! thread complaining about the number of balloons actually required to lift a house.

This is akin to arguing that the woman's wedding dress short have fallen off completely in Monsters vs. Aliens when she grows 50 feet tall. Of course, it's true, but it's also a damn cartoon and stop ruining our fun by being a pedantic dick. I think there's a big leap from stuff like that to this Mayan ridiculousness, especially since Up and Monsters vs. Aliens are very clearly cartoons not meant to be understood realistically.

I'm sorry you and I must have watched different trailers as I just saw a giraffe air lifted on to a government subsidize ark after a dad drove himself and his kids off a flying plane in a family sedan.

Perhaps you could point me to the trailer for the movie meant to be taken seriously.

That's not really what I mean. I doubt this is going to be a lighthearted romp through a cartoon world.

I guess the big difference is that, keeping the Day After Tomorrow and these Mayan conspiracies in mind, people actually buy into this nonsense.

Quid

And if it wasn't this nonsense it'd be some other nonsense. At least this one will have some neat effects.

DragonPup

Handsome Costanza wrote: »

Aren't there people who say this every 5 years or so? Each time the world doesn't end they just switch to a new date.

Wasn't the world supposed to end in 2000 also? and like 1998 or something like that.

Eventually they'll get it right and be like, "I told you so" right before we all die.

BloodySloth

Quid wrote: »

And if it wasn't this nonsense it'd be some other nonsense. At least this one will have some neat effects.

I'm not sure what we're arguing about. I'm not saying the movie will be terrible because it appeals to stupid theories about the end of the world. I'm sure it'll be terrible for plenty of reasons having nothing to do with it's bare subject matter. All I was saying is that unrealistic stuff in cartoons is different from unrealistic stuff in movies that take themselves seriously, because they're cartoons.

Duffel

So looking at the trailer I guess this is going to be about a global flood. Kind of a disappointment, I thought the urban myth around 2012 was that technology would collapse and turn against us. That could have been really interesting for a dumb popcorn movie but I suppose that would have been too much like Terminator.

elkatas

BloodySloth wrote: »

The fact that it's so easily proven to be bullshit? Anyone who Wikipedias the Mayan calendar for more than 15 seconds would know that this "world ends in 2012" thing is a total fabrication. The Mayan calendar certainly doesn't end at December 12, 2012.

By my understanding, December 12, 2012 marks dawn of new cycle in Mayan calendar, nothing else.

deowolf

Duffel wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

You mean, as opposed to all the other complete exaggerations?

as silly as saying that the United States was founded in 1000 AD and showing George Washington decked out as a knight in shining armor.

Can we get that movie made?

Harrier

deowolf wrote: »

Duffel wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

You mean, as opposed to all the other complete exaggerations?

as silly as saying that the United States was founded in 1000 AD and showing George Washington decked out as a knight in shining armor.

Can we get that movie made?

Actually I want to see that now too.

Buster Blade

Quid wrote: »

BloodySloth wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

Pretty much. There were people in the Up! thread complaining about the number of balloons actually required to lift a house.

This is akin to arguing that the woman's wedding dress short have fallen off completely in Monsters vs. Aliens when she grows 50 feet tall. Of course, it's true, but it's also a damn cartoon and stop ruining our fun by being a pedantic dick. I think there's a big leap from stuff like that to this Mayan ridiculousness, especially since Up and Monsters vs. Aliens are very clearly cartoons not meant to be understood realistically.

I'm sorry you and I must have watched different trailers as I just saw a giraffe air lifted on to a government subsidize ark after a dad drove himself and his kids off a flying plane in a family sedan.

Perhaps you could point me to the trailer for the movie meant to be taken seriously.

I am sorry but i have to quote that in my sign.

I will probably watch this movie just like i did with day after tomorrow to watch cool effects happen to important landmarks across the world. Not in theaters mind you but when it comes on netflix.

evilintent

BloodySloth wrote: »

Quid wrote: »

Pretty much. There were people in the Up! thread complaining about the number of balloons actually required to lift a house.

This is akin to arguing that the woman's wedding dress short have fallen off completely in Monsters vs. Aliens when she grows 50 feet tall. Of course, it's true, but it's also a damn cartoon and stop ruining our fun by being a pedantic dick. I think there's a big leap from stuff like that to this Mayan ridiculousness, especially since Up and Monsters vs. Aliens are very clearly cartoons not meant to be understood realistically or taken seriously.

I wasn't aware this was a documentary. What's that, it's not?

Then whose fucking fault is it if someone takes the events of a fictional Hollywood movie as gospel?

Taramoor

The plot synopsis I read said there's some kind of major earthquake in California... which causes the Yellowstone Caldera to go kaboom, and then I guess the Moon falls down or something? I mean, that's the only thing I can think of that would cause oceans levels to rise that high that fast.

Smug Duckling

Why are there about 3 or 4 nearly identical shots of planes flying towards the camera away from ever-expanding craters?

evilintent

Taramoor wrote: »

The plot synopsis I read said there's some kind of major earthquake in California... which causes the Yellowstone Caldera to go kaboom, and then I guess the Moon falls down or something? I mean, that's the only thing I can think of that would cause oceans levels to rise that high that fast.

Or, you know, a mystical force that man can't understand?

Taramoor

evilintent wrote: »

Taramoor wrote: »

The plot synopsis I read said there's some kind of major earthquake in California... which causes the Yellowstone Caldera to go kaboom, and then I guess the Moon falls down or something? I mean, that's the only thing I can think of that would cause oceans levels to rise that high that fast.

Or, you know, a mystical force that man can't understand?

You mean a wizard did it?

Duffel

Smug Duckling wrote: »

Why are there about 3 or 4 nearly identical shots of planes flying towards the camera away from ever-expanding craters?

They're probably the best shots in the movie.

EDIT: As far as the flooding goes I don't see any even movie-like ways for it to happen (unless they're really exxagerating how much water is in the ice caps like Waterworld did and I don't think any big-budget movie is going to do anything consciously reminiscent of Waterworld...) so I guess we should conclude it's some kind of supernatural force. I mean the monks are way the hell up in the mountains somewhere and they just get swept completely over.

The older trailer looked silly enough to be enjoyable but the newest one with the people in it just looks way too over-the-top even for this genre. The thing with the white house also pulled off the dubiously interesting feat of looking like a model when it was almost certainly done entirely through CGI. I mean, if you're going to make your movie a blatant special-effects orgy then make sure it at least looks good.

deadonthestreet

Wasn't there just a Nic Cage movie with pretty much the same plot?

Taramoor

deadonthestreet wrote: »

Wasn't there just a Nic Cage movie with pretty much the same plot?

Knowing, or whatever, ended with:

The sun exploding and wiping out the planet, except for two little kids who got transported away by alien ghost pirates.

DragonPup

Taramoor wrote: »

deadonthestreet wrote: »

Wasn't there just a Nic Cage movie with pretty much the same plot?

Knowing, or whatever, ended with:

The sun exploding and wiping out the planet, except for two little kids who got transported away by alien ghost pirates.

Really? Seriously?

TheStig

DragonPup wrote: »

Taramoor wrote: »

deadonthestreet wrote: »

Wasn't there just a Nic Cage movie with pretty much the same plot?

Knowing, or whatever, ended with:

The sun exploding and wiping out the planet, except for two little kids who got transported away by alien ghost pirates.

Really? Seriously?

Wow are you for real? I'm so glad I stuck to my "no Nick Cage movies" policy with that one.

evilintent

Knowing spoiler (ending)

John and his family embrace as the solar flare strikes Earth. The radiation vaporizes the atmosphere and destroys all life on Earth. Elsewhere, Caleb and Abby are dropped off in an otherworldly field, as other ships are visible along the horizon, dropping off others. The film ends as the two make their way towards a prominent solitary tree in the distance.

AbsoluteZero

Didn't we already do the whole Y2K thing not too long ago? This shit is tedious.

AbsoluteZero

evilintent wrote: »

Knowing spoiler (ending)

John and his family embrace as the solar flare strikes Earth. The radiation vaporizes the atmosphere and destroys all life on Earth. Elsewhere, Caleb and Abby are dropped off in an otherworldly field, as other ships are visible along the horizon, dropping off others. The film ends as the two make their way towards a prominent solitary tree in the distance.

Vaporizes the atmosphere huh? Does it also liquefy the oceans?