The second trailer for Roland “disaster film” Emmerich’s apocalyptic 2012 has premiered online today, and we have it for you here. Now I’ll be honest and say that the grand vistas of destruction shown in this new trailer are very impressive, but the problem is that Roland’s films seem to rely on 80% “cool shots” and 20% plot and character.
Before I go on, check out the trailer below…
|
|
You can head over to Yahoo! Movies for the super-duper HD version.
This trailer amps up the disaster action about 1000% compared to the first one, and no doubt that destruction will be the main thing that puts butts in seats when the film opens. But if it’s anything like The Day After Tomorrow, those cool CGI shots won’t be enough to make you leave the theater feeling like you’ve seen something worthwhile.
Then again, what do I know? That eco-disaster/global-warming-will-be-the-death-of-us film made over $186MM in the U.S. and over half a billion dollars worldwide. Of course that could have been the impeccable timing of the release at the height of the climate change hysteria. I tend to wonder what, if any “message” 2012 will carry with it.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d LOVE for this to turn out to be a kick-ass film, and yes, I’m clear on the concept of a “popcorn movie,” but it needs to make viewers care about the main characters being affected by the disaster, otherwise it’s just watching earthquake and flood footage on the evening news. Seeing John Cusack and Chiwetel Ejiofor (the assassin from Serenity) does give me some hope that perhaps the film will indeed deliver some of that needed character connection – we’ll just have to wait and see.
2012 has been pushed back from its July release date to November 13, 2009.
Loading ...
122 Comments
I don’t want excuses 790er, lol.
No Ken it just means they percieve things in this plane differently than we do and maybe more fully if we are talking from a senses point of view..just as my perception of this reality is not the same as yours(that’s at least one point I think we can agree on
)
or were you being rhetorical?
Gheeessshh Ken,,,
I look past all your spelling mistakes. Lol,,,,
Just fyi,,,,
You really don’t need to follow up all your mis-spelled words with corrections. Gets really mundane, trust me.
Keep in mind, in my case typo’s are sometimes caused because I type very fast and don’t re-read before I send…
Its true that we as humans only see a limited amount of the visual spectrum. This has been proven by science if you want back up,,,
Think of visually tuning into a FM radio between frequencies 94.7 to 95.5. There’s alot of frequencies that we cannot access.
That doesn’t mean they are not there.
I misspell things all the time. I intentionally openly correct others because I think it’s funny to be considered a grammar nazi, lol. It’s all just joking around.
Tell me where this is from:
“You ended a sentence with a preposition! Bastard!”
Sheet I have no idea,,,, where I did that,,, lol.
Why do I have this niggling feeling in the back of my mind that I’m partially responsible for this… “discussion”?
Your seriously comparing dogs being able to hear certain sounds and taste certain things that we can as proof that there are other reals or planes of existence? A frequency is not a plane of existence. It’s not some new realm that some how I can shift in to. It’s not an alternate reality or Earth 617 or something. It’s just a sound.
I don’t “not” believe in other universes or other dimensions, but dogs being sensitive enough to hear frequencies we are not sensitive enough to hear isn’t at all the proof of it.
I think the majority of physicists believe that there is more than one dimension. I am no expert on it so I won’t discount their theories. But I don’t really believe for or against it. Like I am with everything else, I’ll believe it when I see it, but before then, I won’t choose sides since I know you can’t really prove a negative.
Guys, GUYS – come on, let’s keep it civil. Believe me, I know discussions can get heated on certain topics and it’s a challenge to stay polite – but TRY.
We’ve had some major OT threads lately… I’m starting to wonder about the forum idea again – but I have ZERO time to moderate a forum. Can barely keep up with comments as it is.
Vic
Vic
you could put me in charge of moderating the kids around here. I would love to keep them in line, lol.
Oh and happy fathers day to all!
i still can’t believe they’re actually making a movie about this. the myans died a looooong time ago. i’m sure whoever was plotting out the calendar was just just tired of writing numbers and thought 12-21-12 would be fun to stop on.
am i allowed to say… i actually like like the look of this film… dont hate on me lol.
No one hates here Red Skull,,,
Red Skull I don’t think anyone is really gonna disagree with you much. The trailer it’s self doesn’t look bad and the effects look great. Right now there is just a certain level of worry given the director and his history with this type of film.
I still think it’s going to be a fun movie. With that level of destruction, how could it not be fun?
The one thing that could cause so much massive, planet wide upheaval is a near miss of another planet. Did anyone see it in the scene from space at the start of the trailer?
On the subject of the end of the Mayan calendar: They just need to go out and get a new one! May I suggest “Star Trek: Ships Of The Line” for 2013?
Lol,JustDavid, I love those calendars…
Anyone know the Ancient Mayans mailing address, I want to send them a page a day Far Side calendar for 2013.
Wow, all this conversation from this little clip; this tells me this movie will make tons of money. Oh, that and the effects
I have read people talk about there being a planet coming towards the earth in the trailer; I didn’t see that, or I just interpreted the beginning of the trailer differently. What I saw was an alignment of planets, something that prophecies use a lot as well as the eclipse. I could be wrong because they also talk about building ships to preserve our species, which happened in When Worlds Collide (a remake I am defanitely looking forward to). In any event, seeing this trailer again just makes me want to see the movie more.
@Joshi
Yeah. 1600 Pennsylania Ave., Washington, DC. It’s the big white house on the left.
i couldn’t agree more with u john..
this trailer makes me want to see the movie. I always wonder how doomsday looks like. the same reason that made me watch apocalypse, knowing, etc.
I really want to see this movie…
Personally im not looking for a love story to develop here with any of the characters. By the previews we all know what its gonna be about. People love to see disaster movies, with cool shots and all. Dont look for much more than that, its still gonna bring in big $$$$$.
When I saw the original trailer for the first release date I thought this would be an entertaining movie. But when that first date was missed and they started with the current clips – I was like what? Not another typical “Disaster Movie” And I don’t think the graphics look so great – at least on the Boob. Hopefully its better on the big screen. But I’m not as eager to see the movie now. It really does look like all Graphics, pitiful acting and no real plot just “Destroy almost everything and everyone – and have a few lucky survivors to carry on. Uh -Been There………
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!