I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Too much of everything

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

2012: SUPERNOVA is another mindless disaster flick from The Asylum. I'm always mildly amused that this studio's films have big plots which the primitive CGI effects have no ability to do justice to, rendering them very silly looking and useless. This one has Brian Krause as the usual crusading scientist who must figure out a way to prevent Earth being destroyed by an interstellar shockwave. Along the way he tangles with a doomsday cult and some really, really bad FX. There are few redeeming qualities here; the whole thing's a boring mess of a movie.

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.

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

Being trapped and afraid for my life would be the only reason I would ever watch a flick like this piece of stank. And as a matter of fact, a bus trip in Thailand recently provided the perfect opportunity. Even though it was dubbed in Thai, with no subtitles, I could quickly tell that this was going to be a very special kind of torture. I tried to stare out the window at the rather dull landscape between Bangkok and Rayong, but my eyes kept wandering back to the travesty playing out on the screen a few seats ahead.One thing that really impressed me was the filmmaker's (ahem) efficient use of "action" shots that basically involved driving back and forth over the same stretch of road and randomly driving black SUVs off the shoulder for no apparent reason. Intercut this with the "mother" and "daughter" (who couldn't be more than 5 years apart in age) sighing and looking somewhat worried. Then splice in stock footage of NASA building. Then a close up on the lead "actor" who honestly really only could afford one single expression (it must have been written into his contract): intensely trying to remember something. Repeat. Oh, and spice things up now and then with some CGI that would have looked great in the '80s. There you have it.