For the haters: yes, we know this is not Lars Von Trier

Rating: 8/10 (16 November 2009)

6 degrees of separation won't be enough to find a connection between Roland Emmerich and, say, Lars Von Trier. 12 degrees of separation couldn't establish a connection with their works. And about 50 degrees of separation, could not connect their fans. So, why this paradox? Why do cinephiles come here in flocks to rate 2012 with one star, one star,one star, half a star, zero star, one star? What were they expecting from a disaster movie?
Having said that, a few thoughts about 2012. Yes, the science is laughable, and the plot holes are big enough for an Antonov to pass through. But you know, if you want your science hard, really hard, there is always NASA TV, where you can watch space shuttles getting launch delays for weeks. And regarding plot holes: they can be insulting when something pretends to be something that is not (anyone remember the horrible Flightplan?). When there is an unspoken convention between filmmaker and audience that plot holes are exchanged for sheer indulgence, there is nothing really serious to complain about. It's a win win situation. Wait. Unless it's Lars Von Trier weekend.
8 stars for 2012, the disaster movie to beat from now on.