Such a frustrating disappointment

Let's be realistic.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Sometime in the 1970s, I think with Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, people discovered really, really bad movies could be fun. Maybe it was with camp in the 1960s, with the televised Batman. College kids would hold bad movie nights on campus. Lord knows there were so many bad movies available from Hammer Films and American International that it could be fun, but maybe it was the Special Movie Enhancers that people smoked at the time. Whatever. Supernova is not in that category. It is not inadvertently bad, as in people trying to make a good or at least passable movie with a high school film project budget. Supernova is just bad: as if people hired the worst actors, the worst scriptwriters, the worst set designers and said, okay, now make a good movie. This is just cheesy from the get go. There's no science. Obviously, people have no idea what a supernova is. There's no plausibility. Apparently, NASA and every other major scientific endeavour involve no more than four people in what looks like abandoned warehouses with a few dials from a 1900s power station. There's no logic. People are getting chased by Hezbollah wannabes, find a truck, get in and drive it 20 feet, abandon it and continue on foot for some inexplicable reason. There's no continuity. The bad guys are driving black SUVs, which they ditch to follow the scientist and his family. In a later scene, mom and daughter are driving what look like the same black SUVs. And BTW, mom and daughter look and act like they're the same age, physically (about 27) and emotionally (about 12). In the end, the rogue scientist saves the earth by – surprise! – blowing up nuclear bombs in the path of a supernova "pulse", whatever that is. Luckily, in this universe, space stations come equipped with dozens of atomic missiles. Back on earth, mother and daughter spend their time driving, if only to allow worried closeups while saving money on sets. Scientists blast off in the space shuttle while wearing 1950s fighter pilot helmets to reach what looks like a space station recycled from a 1970s movie set. Sexy Asian fellow scientist (is there any other kind?) turns out to be a traitor or completely crazy (the script is too bad to help us understand which). Russian scientist turns out to be a drunk hero. The real mystery here is how a movie cliché – a drunk Russian – managed to sneak enough vodka off the set to some viewers so they would give this turkey more than the minimum one star.

After the, no pun intended, disaster flick 2012 Ice Age (2011) I was afraid to watch this flick here made 2 years earlier. But what a big relieve. It was much better then Ice Age but still it's The Asylum so it's full of bad CGI and stupid stories. Supernova isn't full of CGI and that's a good thing but it's also the acting this time, especially from mother and daughter that tears it down. It's also full of typecasting, just look at the Russian guy, if that isn't a cliché!The effects are of course laughable, just see the lightning coming down on earth. All so silly. And when they are almost crashing with the car the mother just keep on driving until they almost crash. For a Asylum flick it isn't that bad after all but still only watchable for the geeks of bad flicks.Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 2/5 Comedy 0/5

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

I'd love to pick holes in the science in this movie, but it's pretty difficult to pick holes in a vacuum. They use quite a few scientific sounding words and phrases, but the sound is pretty much as close as it gets to actual content. That wouldn't be so bad - there are many movies out there whose writers knew little about science and yet still managed to create an entertaining movie. Sadly, this is not one of them. As vacuous as the science is, it still beats both the rest of the plot as well as the acting ability exhibited in this movie.You see, we can excuse the writers for failing to know elementary physics - it's not their primary job skill. But when the story fails in pretty much every other area as well, the writers have no such excuse. It's obviously not because they're using the story as a device for showing off pretty special effects, as special effects movies require a budget which is orders of magnitude larger than we see spent on this one. Nope, the story just plain sucks. It fails to be dramatic, thrilling, or even interesting.And then we get to the actors. Now, I know they can do better - they have in the past. Here, however, they fail. Were the lines truly as excruciatingly painful as their expressions suggest? Are they overacting in every scene, or is the disaster they are reacting to actually the effect on their careers from being in this film? Hmmm, possibly so. I would like to rate this movie as the worst movie this century, but with 90 years to go, I'm sure there will be bigger turkeys that this one. In the previous 10 years, however, there are few that can challenge this movie for its position near the bottom.