cultjunky I like a good bad movie, honest I do! Chase (I use the term very loosely here, but 'jog scenes' don't quite do it) scenes around and around the same set like a Benny Hill skit usually make me chuckle. Cheesy lines have been known to make me howl with laughter. Even on a bad day, fantastically misinformed science can at least raise a smile. This film does none of that. Don't make the mistake I did of thinking, cool, a bad movie chuckle-fest. Think of it as an end of relationship film. In that anyone you introduce this film to will end their relationship with you and possibly have you committed. Nor is your endurance rewarded, the final scene and talk over is less Morgan Freeman/Shawshank and more what a womble might say.Has to be a tax scam, can't think of any reason why else this would have been made, or any of the actors not taken an injunction out to stop it's release.

MarplotRedux I disagree with many of the other reviewers ... though, as I've explained elsewhere, I'm a fan of bad movies ... da badda da bettuh! This, though, had fine special effects for a low-budget movie, the action sequences were exciting (though the fight scenes got terribly repetitive) and, except for the actor who portrayed the Russian, the acting was actually rather good. The stunt men/women who performed the driving sequences did excellent jobs. Like, wow! Plot holes? Close-on Tommy-gun fire is considerably more effective than portrayed. People who have tall stacks of crates toppled upon them rarely are nimble afterwards. People who have been repeatedly hit in fights end up bruised: these didn't. The underlying "science": yuk, yuk, yuk !!! And the identity of the Head Bad Person was a bit obvious. It's always enjoyable to see "2012" computer equipment in earlier films. The readout for when the full effects of the supernova were expected to strike Earth was delightfully retro. I look forward to a 2013, 2014, or 2015 movie who's starting point is that the world really was destroyed on 12/21/12, and which will then go on to explain why we didn't notice.

snehakar Yes i did watch this movie! It was so much fun to just read all other peoples comments! Priceless!!! Had lot of fun reading. Yes i did watch this movie! It was so much fun to just read all other peoples comments! Priceless!!! Had lot of fun reading. Yes i did watch this movie! It was so much fun to just read all other peoples comments! Priceless!!! Had lot of fun reading. Yes i did watch this movie! It was so much fun to just read all other peoples comments! Priceless!!! Had lot of fun reading. Yes i did watch this movie! It was so much fun to just read all other peoples comments! Priceless!!! Had lot of fun reading. Ya ya 10 lines, i can give another 50 may be................

TheLittleSongbird I will give some credit where it is due, I have seen much worse movies, but that is not saying much. 2012:Supernova is my definition of a terrible movie, with pretty much nothing to recommend or redeem it other than an intriguing concept.However, this concept is squandered, because the story structure is so disjointed and predictable and the pace is so sluggish. Even worse is the script, which is questionable in scientific logic and laughably bad in one too many parts, and the direction which is so sloppy I questioned whether there actually was any direction. The production values are not much better, the special effects do look really cheap, and the photography and such indicate that this film was made on a low-budget.I was indifferent to every single one of the characters, that is including the lead character who is too bland to sympathise with his predicament. The Russian was the worst, the character verged on stereotypical and the accent was as fake as the effects. The acting is terrible and none of the actors connected to their characters which is probably a major reason why I didn't care for any of them.In conclusion, a very, very, very poor movie. 1/10 Bethany Cox