2012 - Page 2

wrigley · #1 11-11-2009, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leslie Anne

I'll probably wait until it comes out on video. The only reason I'd see it at all is for John Cusack.

That's the reason I'm going is to see it. The sun and planets can be in a chorus line in the film for all I care.

PeppyGPhiB · #2 11-11-2009, 10:13 PM

I have THIS question for the characters as they take off in a plane JUST in time to make it out of LA: Where are you going to land?

Hahahaha...that's why I can't see movies like this.

cheerfulgreek · #3 11-11-2009, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

I have THIS question for the characters as they take off in a plane JUST in time to make it out of LA: Where are you going to land?

Hahahaha...that's why I can't see movies like this.

That part is what kinda makes me think it's gonna be kinda cheesy.

ASUADPi · #4 11-12-2009, 01:04 AM

I'll probably go see it on Saturday or Sunday morning (where movies at AMC are super cheap, 5 bucks baby!).

I'm not seeing it because the acting is going to be supberb (did I spell that right?) or because it is so "realistic", but because of the special effects.

Hey this movie is by the dudes who did ID4 and Day After Tomorrow, so you know crap is going to get destroyed.

My question though, why is NYC always destroyed?

Psi U MC Vito · #5 11-12-2009, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

I'll probably go see it on Saturday or Sunday morning (where movies at AMC are super cheap, 5 bucks baby!).

I'm not seeing it because the acting is going to be supberb (did I spell that right?) or because it is so "realistic", but because of the special effects.

Hey this movie is by the dudes who did ID4 and Day After Tomorrow, so you know crap is going to get destroyed.

My question though, why is NYC always destroyed?

NYC is one of the most recognizable cities in the world. But it looked like a lot of well known landmarks were destroyed in 2012.

unicorn · #6 11-14-2009, 11:55 AM

My boyfriend and I went to see another movie in the theater when the preview for 2012 came on... near the end of the preview, some guy shouted out "Well, damn, at least we've got three more years!" The whole theater cracked up. That said, I think that's about all I'm gonna get out of the movie.

ASUADPi · #7 11-15-2009, 09:37 PM

It was okay. Great special effects though!

NinjaPoodle · #8 11-16-2009, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTW

What she said. Special effects were EXCELLENT.

I couldn't help get a little frustrated while watching the movie because the whole time I was thinking that this movie's just fueling the mass hysteria that'll take place as 12/21/12 gets closer. I don't know if anyone saw the History Channel special about 2012 last week...I just don't buy it.

I saw it. ehh.

cheerfulgreek · #9 11-17-2009, 09:05 AM

I'm seeing it this Saturday. I'm SO excited about it because a lot of people at school have been saying how good it was.

The world ending as we know it in the year 2012? I don't buy that at all. I don't buy it because the Earth is forever changing and based on its history, the major changes took place in million year cycles. It's all based on time periods, like the Permian, Triassic, Jurassic, Cretacious, Early and Late Tertiary, etc etc etc. The last major change took place during the Tertiary period which was about 25 million years ago, and still, now, everything looks similar with very little change. I mean, I know a million years isn't much on a geological time scale, it's just that picking the year 2012 for all of this to take place doesn't add up to me, ya know? However, I do expect some things to change because change is always happening...a few rivers and seas change, and continents only move maybe about 60 miles or so. I mean, the difference is hardly noticable. I honestly think the Earth will look about the same (with minor changes) even when we reach the calender year million. And I'm leaving out a polar icecap or two, and I'm also discounting human macro-intervention. Other than that, I think Earth will look the same IMHO. The year 2012 doesn't even come close.

Oh, but if the numbers or time periods don't add up, then I know I'm going to hate it. I hope it's realistic as in believable based on history, and not all "Hollywood" made up Disney stuff.

Psi U MC Vito · #10 11-15-2009, 09:40 PM

Yeah that's about what I would expect.

srmom · #11 11-16-2009, 12:51 PM

Now that football is over for us (son's team got CRUSHED by the defending state champion

), my husband and I are going to see it one night this week at Studio Movie Grill - 5.00 tickets and alcoholic beverages served at your seat. I think the combination of cheap seats, booze and beautiful graphics (did I mention Chardoney?) will make for a wonderful date night

ASUADPi · #12 11-17-2009, 11:14 AM

I know this is about the movie, but since this is the "reason" behind the disasters in the movie, my question is why would all the planets aligning (lets face it would only be temporary, just like an eclipse) "destroy the earth"? Why would nothing happen to the other planets?

cheerfulgreek · #13 11-17-2009, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Why would nothing happen to the other planets?

The gravity effects would have some effect on the other planets too. The bigger the planet the stronger its gravitational pull. It's actually worse on the other planets. Much worse, and I'm just speaking of climate changes, the weather, temperature, etc. alone.

MysticCat · #14 11-17-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

They have, but they're all "supposedly" lining up with the center of the Milky Way. According to various New Age reinterpretations and speculation about the Mayans, as well as those looking to make a quick buck, that's going to cause a disaster. We shall see.

Fixed it for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by epchick

I still think the reason the Mayan Calendar ended in 2012 was cause they were lazy! lmao. Or it was one of those where they thought 2012 was a good number, cause shoot that was a loooong time away for them.

The Mayans weren't aware of the Gregorian Calendar when they developed their own calendars, so they didn't know the year 2012 from Columbus.

FWIW, the Mayans traditionally used two calendars -- the Calendar Round (which is still used by some) and the Long Count Calendar (which hasn't been used in a long time). The Long Count calendar divided time into a variety of units -- 20 days made a uinal, 18 uinals made a tun, 20 tuns made a k'atun, and 20 k'atuns made up a b'ak'tun. Counting from the supposed date of creation, we are now in the 13th b'ak'tun, which will end in December 2012.

It is not at all clear what significance, if any, the Mayans attached to the end of the 13th b'ak'tun. Only a few old Mayan writings seem to associate it with major change of some sort.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Here's a pretty cool history channel documentary about it. It's kinda silly and I don't agree with it, but it's still pretty cool to watch, even though it's just man wanting to be God.

I love the History Channel and this was the same documentary I watched.

The History Channel can be entertaining, but it's definitely not a source I'd rely on when it comes to something like this. The sensationalism and science fiction angles are going to win out over actual history and scholarship every time, I'm afraid.

cheerfulgreek · #15 11-17-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Fixed it for you.

The History Channel can be entertaining, but it's definitely not a source I'd rely on when it comes to something like this. The sensationalism and science fiction angles are going to win out over actual history and scholarship every time, I'm afraid.

lol
Thanks "Mr. Fix it guy."

And yes, these are all great points. I agree.