Comments on: Review: ‘2012’ Is the Laughable ‘Love Actually’ Of Disaster Movies

By: hanum

hanum — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:14:22 +0000

very great film, great technology making. Four thumbs up ^_^

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:34:25 +0000

I can't believe the budget was 260 Million. It was such an ugly film that was for sure shot digitally.

By: Monty

Monty — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:37:24 +0000

I thought "The Patriot" was a well paced film…
Butttt… That´´s a compliment for the Film editor not the director, so…
yeah, Emmerich fucking sucks.
I fell asleep at least free times during the day after tomorrow.

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:07:26 +0000

Why did Sony give Emmerich a final cut?

Also, this should be a 82 minute IMAX 3D film purely consisting of stuff getting destroyed.

By: gabetoro

gabetoro — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:49:10 +0000

Who cares? Both of them suck.

By: Actionman

Actionman — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:44:41 +0000

"Instead of taking the Michael Bay approach of quick, bite-sized cuts rapidly assembled in the editing room, Emmerich lets his camera glide along with the characters for extended periods of time in long, unbroken takes."

Um...did you see TF2? Bay did the gliding camera/unbroken shot about 1,000 times in that film.

Emmerich is the poor man's Bay.

By: gabetoro

gabetoro — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:58:32 +0000

The porno of Michael Bay's movies are long, dull gonzo scenes with surgically-enhanced sexual organs. The porno of Roland Emmerich's movies are boring, credibility-seeking story beats followed by demeaning avant-guarde cruelty masquerading as sex. Both are still pornos.