MOVIE: 2012: Supernova (2009)

2012supernovaOkay, so, I was down in Oregon this weekend visiting my parents, which means, of course, that I’ve got about five movie reviews in the works, at least one of which is going to be for a totally terrible disaster movie.  You know how this goes.  You’ve been here before.

THIS movie?  Is that one.   And while we were in the video store looking for our magical totally terrible disaster movie, it occurred to me that we actually have developed, over the years, an extremely detailed set of criteria for our selection process, believe it or not (and I suspect you do not, but listen up anyway).  Since you guys have been loyal readers for so long, I figured it was about time I let you in on the secret.  The secret to picking really entertaining terrible disaster movies.

First of all, you have to know, and know well, the disaster genre.  There are four primary categories of disaster movie, each of which has numerous subcategories.  All four primary categories are worth checking out, but, and this is key, not all of their SUBcategories are worth checking out.  Listen up:

Monsters — Good choices: snakes, gators, komodo dragons, zombies (see also: virus), dinosaurs, cave monsters, sea creatures (esp. sharks, squids), The Thing, The Blob, The Abominable Snowman (esp. incl. Lance Henriksen).

Bad choices:  bugs, rodents, bats.  Well, sometimes bats can be okay, but only if they are accessories for more interesting cave monsters.  Also, Bigfoot can occasionally be substituted for The Abominable Snowman (see: Abominable, which is actually about Bigfoot even though it doesn’t seem to know it — all the better to love you with, Matt McCoy).

Mother Nature — The best Mother Nature disasters are volcanoes, fires,  tornadoes, and other storms (including ice-age-inducing weather phenomena), as they tend to involve the greatest duration of actual disaster.  Earthquakes are over far too fast, as are tsunamis, and movies about either of those two things tend to focus more on the depressing aftermath than the build-up and actual disaster itself.  (Tornadoes work for this, by the way, because they frequently come in multi-packs.)  Stuff being destroyed = good.  People cleaning up debris = bad.

Space — Space disaster movies often bring as part of the package a ton of hilariously bad science (for example, gravity in places where it does not belong), as well as a healthy affection for nuclear weapons, computers and other gadgets, meteors, and exploding space debris.   Sometimes there are even aliens, though not nearly as often as we’d like.   These are all good things.   The key to a successful space disaster movie, though, is that it has to FOCUS ON THE SPACE DISASTER.  Not to go into too much detail, because it’s really not worth talking about (trust me), but that is where 2012: Supernova fell down on the job.   It may be worth noting, incidentally, that space disaster movies are 6.3 times more likely to feature naked women.  Do with this information what you will.

Diseases – Virus and other disease movies, as with storm or fire movies, are good because they tend to involve long-term actual disaster.  We like to problem-solve when we’re watching disaster movies — a good virus story leaves a lot of room for that sort of thing.  Also, some of the best zombie movies of late have technically been virus movies, and this is a combination I think can work extremely well (examples:  28 Days Later, Zombieland).  Overall, I have to say the Disease Disaster category tends to produce the most consistently watchable films, even though those films tend to be exactly the same in most regards.  If it works once, it’ll probably work forever, right?  Just ask the people who keep cranking out Saw movies.

Okay, now, knowing the genre can obviously help narrow down the selection:  put the rat movie back on the shelf, pick up the one about the komodo dragons.  But this still leaves hundreds and hundreds of potentially unwatchable movies.    How do you know which one you should rent when faced with several equally-acceptable-looking options?    Well, I am happy to report that after years and years of experimentation, my mother and I have finally discovered the secret.   We call it the 90 Minute Rule.  And it goes like this:

Any movie that is less than 90 minutes long is approximately 9.8 times more likely to be unwatchably bad (note: we did not actually do the math, but I am 87.68% positive that number is accurate).  Movies that are longer than 90 minutes, on the other hand, are far more likely to be the kind of bad you watch with giddy joy.  It’s so simple, it’s almost embarrassing it took us this long to figure it out.

There’s only one problem — what about a movie that is EXACTLY 90 minutes long.  Say, for example, 2012: Supernova?   This is where you can still run into trouble.  Because  a movie that is exactly 90 minutes long is a risk.  A MAJOR risk.  It could so easily go either way — there’s simply no predicting it.  And that’s where it helps to know someone who is willing to rent that movie and watch it for you and then tell you how it is.  For example, ME.

This is how it is:  Absolutely terrible.  (Note:  Not in a good way.  If it were absolutely terrible in a good way, I would’ve said, “Absolutely terrible (in a good way).”)  May it never be the case that the survival of our planet is ever riding on the brains of three “scientists” who are anything like the big wheels who drove the storyline in this wreck.  Because if it is, we’re DOOMED.

Anyway, try this technique out next time you’re looking for a good-bad disaster movie to rent and let me know how you do!  Just make sure you leave 2012: Supernova on the shelf.  WHERE IT BELONGS.

[Netflix me | Buy me]

Genre:  Sci-fi, Space Disaster, Crap
Cast:  Brian Krause, Heather McComb, Najarra Townsend


Tags: , ,

9 Responses to “MOVIE: 2012: Supernova (2009)”

  1. alisaj29 Says:

    You mean Brian Krause has made a bad movie, I mean he was such great actor in Charmed (she says sarcastically).

  2. Liz Says:

    Hey! Watch it with Brian Krause; I thought he was cute in “Charmed.” Of course, the show got steadily worse and worse, but it had a certain pull on me (kind of like “ER?”), so I kept watching it. Brian was even in a STEPHEN KING movie! I think it was called “Sleep Walkers” or something. And it had cats in it – and they caught the bad guys! Yay for kitties who are heroes, and not victims!

  3. megwood Says:

    Sleepwalkers! I cannot believe you just pulled that out!

    I will now pull out Return to Cabin By the Lake to show off my own obscure Brian Krause knowledge. He’s actually pretty cute, if you ask me, but absolutely stunningly hopeless in this!

  4. megwood Says:

    p.s. Alisa, who was he in Charmed? I only saw a couple of episodes and it was forever ago. Was he one of the main characters??

  5. alisaj29 Says:

    He played Leo. He was an angel that was assigned to keep an eye out and be a mentor for the sisters. I don’t remember what season he was brought in though. He ends up falling and love w/Piper, and she him and eventually the got rutabagaed (for all you charmed fanitics you know what I mean).

  6. Liz Says:

    He was a “white-lighter” – guardian to the 3 sisters! In life, he was a medic in WWII. He married Piper, which was supposed to not be allowed. But I don’t remember what “rutabagaed” means! Does that mean I’m not actually a “Charmed” fanatic? That suits me! I followed Holly Marie Combs (Piper) from “Picket Fences” to “Charmed,” and then Julian MacMahon from “Charmed” to “Nip/Tuck.” Okay, so my taste is … questionable! Also, I saw “Cabin by the Lake” (Judd Nelson, he of “The Breakfast Club!”), but I don’t think I saw “RETURN TO CbtL,” so I don’t remember Brian.

  7. alisaj29 Says:

    liz – Rutabagaed = Marraige. Since the wedding between Piper and Leo was forbidden, they had to come up w/a word to replace Marraige or married and for some reason that I can’t remember they came up w/the the word rutabaga. And with that usless knowledge I’m now officially a Charmed fanatic, which is really quite depressing.

  8. Liz Says:

    Alisaj29 – Thank you, and no, it’s not so depressing! I watched the show faithfully for its entire run (!) – I just forgot about “rutabaga.” When I first started watching the show, I couldn’t believe Alyssa Milano was the little kid from “Who’s the Boss.” I had to watch some reruns of that show (which I never even liked) to convince myself she was the same person!! I had liked H.M. Combs from “Picket Fences,” and I knew who Shannen Doherty was, even though I NEVER watched “90210.” And I liked Rose MacGowan pretty well, when she came on. I liked the guys on the show, but they kept screwing up. And although Julian McMahon was never my favorite, I think the show went quickly downhill after he left. So, I don’t know – if you think you’re a fanatic, I guess I could be one with you!

  9. wolfteam hacks Says:

    Very efficiently written article. It will be supportive to everyone who usess it, as well as yours
    truly :). Keep doing what you are doing – for sure i will check out more posts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: