Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

RayneSaltair1 I laughed so hard during this movie that I had an asthma attack. That's when it hit me the beginning scene of the Mother and Daughter watching The Ring must have ended up on the cutting room floor. Before the reason for the movie even gets near earth Mom and daughter almost die no less than 7 times. Mother nature hits them with everything from lightening storms that cause rock slides and fire to a tornado they hide out from in a house with no windows. How 2 people could have this much bad luck is beyond me but I can see why Dad left to go into space and try to take out the supernova it was prolly safer out there than anywhere near his calamity prone kin. Don't even get me started on the acting, special effects, and lighting. I should have known it was going to be bad when I saw the white lighter guy from charmed as the lead. Bad bad and worse. Only good for a laugh.

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.

jimdclements Attempting to find a starting place for this review is like showing up at a massive train wreck to help clean up the remains. There's not really a good starting point, so you just have to dive in with your shovel.Brian Krause is the illustrious Dr. Kelvin, one of three scientists on a mission to save the world from a deadly, planet-obliterating supernova. His allies? Two other scientists who have come straight out of page 9 of "Stereotypes Weekly" - A vodka-swilling Russian with a terrible accent, and a cute petite Chinese scientist who you secretly suspect to turn traitor at any moment.Amidst saving the earth, Kelvin is distracted by threats ranging from Iranian terrorists (see page 13 of "Stereotypes Weekly"), to his hot 33 year old wife and hot 23 year old daughter who can't travel 30 miles in three days, to a ninja attempting to kill him (who looks and sounds like a petite Chinese woman...). Even his Vulcan-esque ally Henreaux eventually starts questioning whether Doc Kelvin should try to subvert the hand of God.So can the good doctor save the earth? He sure hopes to, and he has a fire-proof plan to do it: detonating a bazillion nuclear warheads right smack dab above the Earth's atmosphere. What could possibly go wrong? I have tried everything imaginable to come up with something positive enough to give this film two stars, but I simply can't. The only redeeming factor in this whole film is that the camera operators had enough skill to somehow manage to keep the cameras steady and in focus. This is quite the feat, as simply being on this set should reduce most mortals to a quivering, nauseated wreck. I suspect that they have worked as crime scene photographers, as the only way to build up the fortitude to capture a piece of work like this, as well as they have, would be to spend your days finding the best angle to really capture a mutilated decaying body left to rot in a swamp somewhere.To help understand the horror that is this atrocious waste of film, I've broke my rating into the following categories: Originality: 0 out of 10 stars. There's nothing original about this film, down to the mockbuster title. The plot is terrible, and feels like they pulled bits and pieces from a number of places. The film relied heavily on stereotypes, from Iranian terrorists that didn't really have anything to do with the film, to the inbred country hillbilly that wants to have his way with the daughter (I guess his threshold for hotness is somewhere in the 10ish years that these two actresses are apart from one another). It left you feeling like you've seen parts of this film somewhere, but you can't imagine ever voluntarily looking upon a sight so wretched.Artistic & Technical execution: 1 out of 10 stars. NASA is apparently launching shuttles from a power plant where everyone drives golf carts. The base that Kelvin & Co. work from is shot in a warehouse. The computer technology is on par with ENIAC. The graphics in the film were terrible, even for a no-budget film, and I was appalled that they chose to use stock footage from both the Challenger and Colombia disasters to represent their shuttle being blown up. Further, the cockpits of these shuttles were ridiculous, and looked more like a set one might build for their little kids. The space station is even worse, not to mention the very convenient fact that there is apparently gravity in space now, as the crew can just walk around from place to place. The only reason I give this category a single star is because somehow, amidst the sea full of awful, the camera crew managed to get their stuff right for the most part.Content: 0 out of 10 stars. Everything about this film is wrong. Why do a mid-30's looking couple have a biological child in her mid 20's who looks nothing like them? Why do the special agents allow the girls to go back home while the entire planet is apparently falling apart around them? The film has plot holes big enough to drive a truck through. They sort of allude to some people thinking that stopping Earth's demise is playing against the hand of God, but then why does the stereotypical Chinese girl (who doesn't ascribe to western religion) try to kill everyone off? Why does Kelvin seem suspicious of the drunk Russian, and not the fit Chinese girl when he just had his butt kicked by a masked assailant who was very clearly a fit Chinese girl? Seriously, there is nothing in this film that makes any sense. The science portrayed in this film is laughable at best, and they seem to ignore crucial facts, like the fact that the edge of Earth's magnetosphere is some 125 times farther from earth than any space shuttle has ever flown. We're talking tens of thousands of miles here.Overall experience: 0 out of 10 stars. Nothing in this film felt right. At some points I wondered if the scenes with the girls were going to break out into some sort of adult film. It was awkward, and nobody in the film seemed comfortable in their roles. Being an aspiring filmmaker, I love low budget indie flicks, and even by those standards, this is bad. Some films are so bad that they're funny. This film is so much worse that it goes all the way past funny, back around to being horrid. Save your money and/or time.

Neil Welch I read lots of comments on this film along the lines of Worst Film Ever, and I say this to you:The camera rests steadily on a tripod except when being hand-held is necessary in an action sequence; The film is in focus and correctly exposed; There is some nifty stunt driving; Many of the effects are passable.With these qualities in mind, I refer naysayers to "Aquanoids". I don't recommend watching it, oh no: I am not a cruel man and I couldn't, in all conscience, make that recommendation to anyone, entirely on humanitarian grounds. But I have watched Aquanoids so that you don't have to, and I am here to tell you that if you had watched it, there is no way you could accuse poor old 2012: Supernova of being the Worst Film Ever - it doesn't approach Aquanoids' lamentable standards on a technical or artistic level.Having said that, 2012: Supernova ain't very good.Which tells you something about Aquanoids.