2012

[Bourne101]

http://l.yimg.com/k/omg/us/img/c9/b1/3836_10735974101.jpg?y=660&x=616&q=75&n=0&sig=0mZYC4ph76Zbm1fXoGSJtg--

Directed by Roland Emmerich

Written by Roland Emmerich and Harald Kloser

Genre: Action/Adventure

Plot Outline: Never before has a date in history been so significant to so many cultures, so many religions, scientists, and governments. A global cataclysm brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors.

Starring: John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Amanda Peet, Oliver Platt, Thandie Newton, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson

Rated PG-13 for intense disaster sequences and some language.

Runtime: 158 minutes

For some odd reason I am looking forward to this. The most important thing here is that there are likable characters and that the story sticks to the basics. Some people say, "Oh, it will be entertaining,", but I don't consider mass destruction for 3 hours to be entertaining. Transformers has nearly 3 hours of mass destruction and it was far from entertaining. Why did it suck? Because the characters were unlikeable and the story was completely convoluted and didn't go anywhere. As long as Emmerich can stick to the basics and provide us with some likeable characters, on top of all the effects of course, then it should be alright. If I have to spend 158 minutes with a bunch of unlikeable characters and a story that tries to be more than it is then it could be a very painful experience.

[Monotreme]

Your standards are far higher than mine, Bourne: As far as I'm concerned, two-and-a-half hours of total global carnage and mass destruction on such a scale as has never been seen before, not to mention effects that look to be at the top of their game, is MORE than enough to keep a smile on my face, even if brain cells are oozing out of my ear at the same time. I'm going to wait and see what the pundits have to say about the characters, but in general, this seems to be like a really big, loud, dumb but totally satisfying entertainment that must be seen on the big screen no matter how bad a movie it actually turns out to be. I agree with you that compelling characters will be what makes this movie as good as, say, the first half of Independence Day (before it got REALLY dumb), but I'm sold on the effects/destruction alone. Bring it on!

[Jig Saw 123]

Aside from Roland Emmerich ruining the entire ending for me with his MTV interview, the movie looks like a popcorn film. I won't go in expecting much, but will enjoy the beautiful special effects.

[razgriz21]

This seems a rental at best. Roland Emmerich has not really produced a good movie since The Patriot in my opinion. I did like Stargate (for it's chessiness) and some of Independence Day (mainly for Jeff Goldblum), but everything else he has directed has been lacking or just pretentious.

I'll rent it but to me, this movie seems like a waste of money like the Poseidon remake a few years back (that one sucked).

[ilovemovies]

2 hours and 38 minutes is WAAAAY too long for this kind of movie! The special effects look pretty effin' spectacular but the movie looks hilariously awful!

[drc5145]

2 hours and 38 minutes is WAAAAY too long for this kind of movie! The special effects look pretty effin' spectacular but the movie looks hilariously awful!

This. Could be more painful to sit through than Transformers 2.

also remembered this great video which helps highlight the movie :D : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX6cfzDpd_o

[Frank the Tank]

Wow, 158 minutes is unbearably long for a film like this but I really shouldn't be surprised with the super long lengths of most Bay/Roland Emmerich (They are the same to me) films. Shit, even the horrid Godzilla remake was 139 minutes. Aside from Universal Soldier and The Patriot (Which is a 5/10 or so but I wouldn't call it hate), I've hated all of Roland's films. It has a great cast, but it looks so stupid and terrible.

I don't understand why all of these disaster/spectacle movies have to come close to being two and a half hours to three hours long. They just don't have the story and writing to stay interesting for that long. 90 to 110 minutes would be fine for these movies.

[PreySlayDisplay]

After seeing The Day After Tomorrow and the especially horrible 10,000 BC, I'm not sure I have the heart to sit through another Emmerich movie in the theater, especially one that's 158 minutes long. His movies tend to feel longer than their actual run time. If this is any where near as terrible as most of his movies are, this could easily feel like 3 1/2 or 4 hours long. Everybody talks about the special effects and the action sequences, but that's all his movies ever have. They do look pretty impressive in this one though, I'd have to admit.

[anakinsrise]

158 minutes !?! Wasnt expecting that,but the flick will be pure eye candy with some great sound effects.I wonder what trailers will be attached to this flick

[PreySlayDisplay]

I wonder what trailers will be attached to this flick

Hopefully a Clash of the Titans teaser or something. That'd be sweet.

[franky4fingerz]

looks depressing. I don't really care to think too much about the end of our world, much less be entertained by it. I'll catch it all the dollar theater.

[athf1980]

it look like an entertaing stupid movie. i will see. i have nothing else to do in SD

[Johnni G]

I will be pleased with the flashy effects, but not expecting much from the storyline. Can't wait to see it :)

[DorkisFig]

I agree with what most of the people have said, the special effects look pretty amazing and that is the main reason I will see it. 2.5 hours is quite a long time though, so ...

[TeeRay]

It looks like The Day After Tomorrow but funnier. Can't say i'm interested.

[echo_bravo]

I really really hope this shit bombs.

[Samfilms]

Movie will Rock The audience BEST COMEDY OF THE YEAR..

[razgriz21]

I really really hope this shit bombs.

Hopefully it will end Emmerich's career as a big budget movie director.

I liked The Patriot and to an extent, Independence Day (despite it's stupidity).

[Strider]

Runtime: 158 minutes

What the fuck?!

Roland Emmerich is out of his damn mind. A film like 2012 should be no longer than 95-100 minutes.

Personally, I'm tired of Emmerich's "epics." I didn't like The Day After Tomorrow, and 10,000 B.C. was pure horseshit. I actually enjoyed The Patriot and especially Independence Day, though. But those films were released a long time ago. 2012 looks slightly better than Emmerich's last two films, but I'm sure it's a turkey. I'd totally skip it, but I know someone who wants to see it with me, so I guess it'll get my $10.

And what is Chiwetel Ejiofor doing in this flick?

Strider

[APzombie]

ROGER EBERT GAVE THIS THING 3 1/2 STARS

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091111/REVIEWS/911119994

holy fucking shit.

this doesn't convince me in the slightest that it's any good, but it does make me wonder if dear old Roger is entering senility.

[drc5145]

ROGER EBERT GAVE THIS THING 3 1/2 STARS

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091111/REVIEWS/911119994

holy fucking shit.

this doesn't convince me in the slightest that it's any good, but it does make me wonder if dear old Roger is entering senility.

Talk about a surprise...

This made me laugh:

Roland Emmerich, the director and co-writer, has been vandalizing monuments for years, as in "Independence Day," "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Godzilla." I still hold a grudge against him for that one because he provided New York with a Mayor Ebert and didn't have Godzilla step on me and then squish me.

He sums it up with this final paragraph...

The bottom line is: The movie gives you your money's worth. Is it a masterpiece? No. Is it one of the year's best? No. Does Emmerich hammer it together with his elbows from parts obtained from the Used Disaster Movie Store? Yes. But is it about as good as a movie in this genre can be? Yes. No doubt it will inflame fears about our demise on Dec. 21, 2012. I'm worried, too. I expect that to be even worse than Y2K.


I'm still not gonna bother to see it. Maybe a rental when it hits DVD.

[ilovemovies]

LOL at the Y2k comment! That's what I've been saying all along. That 2012 is basically Y2k all over again!

God, people can be so stupid!

And I don't believe the spiritual/religous people either who say the world won't come to an end on 2012 but will be the start of great change and other hocus pocus mumbo jumbo crap either!

NOTHING will happen on December 21, 2012. Nothing at all. Certainly not the end of the world and the world won't go through some great change either.

End of my 2012 rant!

[optimus1]

Tomato meter reading of 35 percent says rental to me..

[kobe8byrant]

I just came back from the cineplex and I loved it. I think if you liked The Day After Tomorrow, you'll love this and if you disliked that, chances are you won't like this as well because it's basically the same movie with just much bigger effects.

In a flowchart, the story goes like this:

Man in India discovers Sun's activity is going way up 2009 -> man goes back to USA and report it to the White House -> limosine driver takes kids to Yellowstone -> discovers strange stuff, meets conspiracy theorist and finds out that the world is ending -> goes through hell to be in the ark ->saves the world -> military officials cheer -> cues new Earth -> END.

The special effects and sound is amazing. I for one cannot wait for the Blu-ray release to test out my sound system.

8/10 - only behind Star Trek this year as the best popcorn flick.

[BankaiZaraki]

Kobe that was a dick move on your part giving away the movie like that. You shouldve tagged it.


Anyways.. I just got back from a midnight showing and personally I highly enjoyed Earth getting utterly destroyed by Roland Emmerich.This was truly epic. However I do wish there were more scenes of other countries and continents getting wiped out and not just the United States.

Seriously don't even make an attempt to pay attention to the story. Just google 2012 if you want to know anything lol.

[mick621]

I give 2012 a 7/10. It delivers everything as advertised, it is no masterpiece of cinema, but the acting is decent and the special effects/cgi during the California quake and Yellowstone supervolcanoe exploding are worth seeing at the theater. There was far more drama than action, but Emmerich blends it all well together. I enjoyed every minute of 2012.

[SkyNet]

it is every Disaster Movie rolled up into one...

and THAT IS AWESOME!!

This is a big screen movie through and through... go see it

I have always been a fan of Long Action flicks (as well as long comedy flicks)

and this flick clocks in at 158 minutes, and it is balls out straight up destruction!

My type of flick... suspend some plausibility, and if you can do that, you will enjoy the hell out of this flick. If you can't, then dont go, cuz you wont like it and you will inevitably bitch about how stupid it was! It's Roland Emmerich, you know what you are in for,

I wonder why Dean Devlin didnt return to produce this flick, as he has produced most of Emmerichs previous flicks!

Plus anything with John Cusack is going to be good!

[Johnni G]

Damn! 9/10 from me. Great movie. Just a bit too happy, wish more headactors died ;)

[athf1980]

3.5/5

an entertaing ride of destruction. great f/x.

[Bourne101]

2012 - 5/10

Bleh. It has its moments, but for the most part it is just an overlong and stupid film. There are very few likable characters, and the ones that are likable (like the Russian PM) end up turning into a bunch of idiotic douche bags. I knew going in that it was going to be convoluted and cheesy as hell, but never to the degree that it actually is. There are dozens of subplots, most of which are just boring and pointless. The film is quite funny, and for the most part it is intentional comedy, but because of this there never seems to be any indication of doom. You know all the protagonists will survive and you know all of the antagonists will die. You know the world will not come to an end and that at the end of the day things will be alright. So why the fuck should I watch the film? And I was actually surprised by the lack of action. Besides a few extended scenes of destruction, there isn't a lot. For the most part the film is a bunch of generic conversations between really generic scientists and politicians, on top of a shitload of cheesy family moments where shitty child actors cry and scream "Daddy help," over and over and over again. And everything about this film is the same as every other disaster film released in the last 10-15 years. There's the divorced, struggling writer that gets involved in the disaster, his family tags along, and eventually he and his wife get back together after her idiotic boyfriend (who just happens to be a master of flying planes after only two lessons) gets killed in the disaster. There's the black president. There's the greedy politician. There's the crazy guy that lives in the woods and ends up not being crazy because all of his theories are actually correct. And I could go on all day about the parallels between this film and every other disaster film released in the last dozen years. And anything original added to the film is just mindbogglingly stupid. Like flying giraffes and elephants to the arcs via planes and helicopters. Who the fuck came up with that idea? Ugh, I could just go on and on all day about how unbelievably stupid this movie is. It costs $200 million to produce this crap when something like The Road gets made for $30 million and is (based on reviews and well... common sense) a much better film. And I even usually like Emmerich's films. I thoroughly enjoyed Independence Day, The Patriot and The Day After Tomorrow. Those movies stuck to the basics, had likable characters and plots that were actually coherent. 2012 is just a mess, and if it weren't for some pretty funny comedic moments involving the Russian PM, and a few awesome destruction scenes, it could easily have been one of the worst films of the year.

[ElderPredator]

I'm sorry everybody but I'm going to have to be the first person on this forum to say that 2012 was a FUCKING ROLLER COASTER!

I just got back from it and all I can think of is why wasn't this movie released in IMAX theatres? I've been a lover of disaster films since before I could walk and 2012 stands out as the ballsiest and most epic of them all. I thought the story was great even if it went a bit too far sometimes, the characters were fine, the special effects were out of this fucking world and it was just overall a great piece of film-making.

I was one of those people who hated 10,000 B.C. but in my eyes, Roland has officially redeemed himself with an incredible popcorn flick like no other. I can't believe the hate this movie is getting. I couldn't agree more with Ebert's review that this movie is an absolute spectacle.

Final Rank: 9/10

The only thing I would have changed was the ending. My vision is that the ships are destroyed and no one lives. That would be an incredible impact for the ending.

BTW, the 158 minutes just flew by for me, no problem with it at all.

[ilovemovies]

The first half of the movie plays like a really bad parody. Holy hell, the first half of the movie was awful with a capital A-W-F-U-L! Fortunately, the movie does get a little better in the second half. Though I wouldn't quite call it good.

All in all I'd give it a 6/10. That's kind of being generous though.

[jbar1026]

7.5/10

not a bad movie. it keeps you interested from start to finsh so turn your brain off and enjoy!

[overwatch]

probably would give it a 5/10. Didn't enjoy it, the action was kinda intersesting at times. I cant believe how bad the sound was mixed. everytime there was music and dialogue you couldn't actually hear the dialogue. and that only happened in the "suspenseful" bits.

[ElderPredator]

probably would give it a 5/10. Didn't enjoy it, the action was kinda intersesting at times. I cant believe how bad the sound was mixed. everytime there was music and dialogue you couldn't actually hear the dialogue. and that only happened in the "suspenseful" bits.

That was most likely your theatre cause the sound mix was great for my show.

[Cronos]

SOME SPOILERS
I was one of those people who hated 10,000 B.C. but in my eyes, Roland has officially redeemed himself.
I felt the same after seeing it, found it difficult to finish 10,000 B.C. but this was a lot of fun. While I did feel the long running time at a few points I thoroughly enjoyed 2012, the effects scenes alone made it worth seeing on the big screen.
8/10

Like flying giraffes and elephants to the arcs via planes and helicopters.
I didn't think it was stupid really (even if it did make me chuckle seeing a giraffe hanging under a helicopter), I doubt they would have transported them like that if their original time frame was correct, as it wasn't they had to rush the evacuation.

[AmunRaTRON]

this movie was awful for a number of reasons, but since my post didn't come through I'll just say this; when its on DVD I'll buy it simply because of the drinking game i'm going to make for it because of all the bad dialogue.

4/10

[jz68]

5/10

Why do disaster movies always have to be so cheesy? I'd like to see a director like Spielberg take on a project like this and use the same kind of effects, scenarios and dialogue he used in War of the Worlds. Not that WotW was a great movie but it had awesome special effects, and realistic scenarios considering the absurdity of the plot.

[Common Sense Man]

I know some people do not like it when others start reviews or just in general say, well you know this is a popcorn movie or a guilty pleasure movie, etc. Like that is supposed to excuse the movie for its failings.

BUT!

This is one hell of a popcorn movie!

Sure you have to like disaster movies to really get into this but the effects are top notch and the acting ranges from good to great.

Watch any SyFy (O God I can't believe I even typed that) movie if you want to see a craptastical disaster movie.

This film has to be seen in the theaters to even be enjoyed. There is no way your home theater will do it justice unless you literally have a full sized theater in your home.

This should have been IMAX all the way.

And as far as run time, it flew by for me no problems at all.

I actually loved the cheese because it was like a parody/homage to other disaster movies of the past, plus it made me laugh.

I will not even attempt to give this movie a rating as on many levels it is completely beyond suspension of disbelief. But if you can just sit back and enjoy the spectacle its a great time.

This was on of the most enjoyable movies I have seen this year, and for me that's one of the main reasons I go to movies....to have fun!

Out....................................

[rocknblues81]

Roland is a barrel of monkey s____.

[madmatt2146]

Forget the haters this was a great movie and the acting was really good too imo
9/10

[JohnIan]

After so much crap that Roland Emmerich has made, he finally got it right; the balance of story and effects - an awesome popcorn flick. It's been a long time since we've gotten a long feature. I'm tired of all these releases which are ninety or so minutes and hearing/reading complaints that it's too long. You got to be kidding me. I remember when movies were usually two hours.

What amazed me was the kids in the movie. Ninety-nine percent of the time you get children characters who are annoying. This didn't happen here; granted you get a hint of that in the beginning, but it soon disappers. Very refreshing. I liked that.

I would like to clear something I've read in various other web locales. The character Tamara, played by Beatrice Rosen. She is not a Paris Hilton clone. They say that since she has a little dog she carrys around; it's a fashion accessory that's all. Tamara isn't a media whore. She's just a regular whore.

I'm hoping that when it comes to DVD we may get treated to a longer cut. The 158 minutes just rushes by. *nods*

[Monotreme]

Well, what did I expect? Going in, I knew this would be a stupid and ridiculous but fun and hilarious movie, and I pretty much got exactly what I expected - no more, but gladly, no less. Many people have been complaining about the length, but I didn't really notice it. I thought that it built up very well for the first half hour and then delivered two really FANTASTIC set pieces, but unfortunately the film does kind of lose steam in its second half after that. Luckily, it still provides us with enough cheesy one-liners and ridiculous situations to laugh at, so that's a plus. Also, I'm sorry, but I just don't see how this film could have a happy ending. I mean, all of mankind was DESTROYED, all of your family members and shit DIED, what the fuck do you have to be happy about?

RATING: 4/10 for the movie - I mean, it's pretty dumb - but I had fun anyways.

[anakinsrise]

I knew the special effects would be amazing,and i knew it would be full of all the big disaster flick cliches.Scientists who see disaster coming before any of the governments top scientists ✔,uncaring politician ✔,family with strained relationships ✔,one liners ✔,
someone gives a big sermon on humanity vs inhumanity ✔,characters introduced just so we can watch them perish in spectacular ways ✔.
Despite all of this John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Oliver Platt manage to be watchable and 2012 is quite fun
Scale of 1-10 a 7

[Satans Puppet]

Someone said I was too harsh...

http://dogatemywookie.com/2009/11/16/2012-the-end-is-nigh-although-not-soon-enough/

[razgriz21]

^^^You wern't harsh.

I have no desire to see it cause of Emmerich. I see him as pretentious yet childish.

[FireCaptain4]

I still haven't seen 2012... and I don't really care to. The Schmoe reviews have convinced me that I'm better off keeping my $10 in my wallet. I'll wait until I can Redbox this for $1. Emmerich destroying the world just sounds... boring now.

[bigred760]

I enjoyed it. It was a lot of fun watching everything that was going on. If you don't take the movie too seriously, I think most people will enjoy this. The acting was pretty good, I got caught up in the several tearjerker moments, and thought the action/special effects scenes were spectacular. I was surprised at some of the deaths that occurred and I thought the ending was fitting. Don't know what it is . . . maybe it's because he's done it before, but Emmerich delivers a fun, exciting, and tense disaster film.

Oh . . . and Woody Harrelson once again steals every scene he's in.

7/10

[Cosimo]

stupido, big time

3/10

[razgriz21]

Maybe I'll catch a matinee for this despite me not agreeing with Emmerich on some things.

[Mr.HyDe807]

Roland Emmerich's movies, minus his pretty solid flick "The Patriot", are the movies where you see the world get destroyed. Whether it's by aliens, Godzilla, or global warming, Emmerich tries to find new ways to see some of our favorite landmarks around the wrold get destroyed. So, since the Mayan's have an idea that the world will end by 2012, Emmerich decides to use this as his next grand disaster flick. So, it injects his usual norms: An estranged couple, the one character that is there for you to hate, and a collection of side chracters who will probably meet tragic ends to get some sort of emotion out fo you. Yep, it's all here.....oh, and the world getting torn apart by tsunamis, earthquakes, and rising volcanoes.

Yet, despite that it's all completely out of whack and insane, we all just say "screw it" and go along for a ride. Yet, while there are a few high points, most of it just seems stale. There are well known actors that try to keep us in the game, and they do a good job at it. John Cusack makes the best of his estranged father character, throwing a bit of that Cusack charm that most of us love. Chiwetel Ejiofor is solid as the geologist that makes the discovery that the apocalypse is near, and Danny Glover is fine as the president, though I wish he said at a certain scene "I'm getting too old for this s**t!". To be honest, their really is no one that bothers the hell out of you. Everyone is fine, even the characters that play the "bad guys". Hell, even Woody Harrelson's conspiracy nut job character is a hoot to watch, no matter how over the top he gets.

Which is also what I want to go through as one of the high points....how over the top certain things get. There are times when the movie realizes this and just decides "screw it! Lets have fun with this!" Case in point: the earthquake driving sequence that is seen in most of the trailers. There's a part in that scene that made me burst out in laughter, and made me really hope that this would continue throughout the movie, Unfortunately, it kind of stopped, and while there were one or two parts where it looked like it would start up again, it never really went all out like that scene.

SO, all an all, 2012 was just a middle of the road disaster flick. It's never really boring, has fine acting, but nothing really comes alive apart from a couple scenes that cracked me up a bit. It's just the "same old, same old" disaster flick for Emmerich, albeit a bit more over the top than his previous efforts.

5/10

[Corndizl]

This was the most ridiculous movie I have seen all year. I really tried to find something I could like about it, but I just couldn't stand watching it. Terrible.

[Johnni G]

this movie rocks

[Chris0410]

I liked it for what it was: a fun, spectacular, over-the-top popcorn flick. They don't get much better than this.

[JoeChar4321]

I seriously worry about the people labeling this thing as "fun".

Frankly, this disaster movie took the disaster too far. The massive and unsettling deaths are simply too hard to overcome. Nothing about this film felt like entertainment. The CGI is remarkable but it loses all impact because it's so massive and absurd. The first two acts are completely awful in every way. Absurdity mixed with chaos mixed with a sense that you're watching one bizarre cartoon. Cussack and his crew are cartoon indestructible while the rest of the world literally explodes. The third act gives you the flavor of hope that other successful disaster flicks deliver but too little too late for me. Gordon, the hot Russian babe and the viewing audience in general deserved a better fate than this chaotic waste of a CG budget.

5/10

[iamredemption]

1st post .... 2012 was an extraordinary amount of ridiculousness, with so many little things i can rant about ... but i view it just how i view the show "Jackass" which is "Awww man, these guys are doin a whole lot of bullshit on this screen, but i'm still watchin"
had it moments, kept me interested for the most part taha so i give it a 6/10

[Mr.HyDe807]

Anybody catch some Dark Knight alumni like the Russian ballet girl that Bruce brings to Harvey/Rachel's dinner, as well as Lau.

She (the ballet girl) was bugging the hell out of me throughout that entire movie because I didn't know where she was from.:p

[Puck Bond]

2012(2009)-8/10...spectacular and entertaining disaster flick from director Roland Emmerich is a fun and harrowing ride from beginning to end. Destroying cities like New York in Emmerich's Godzilla(1998) and The Day After Tomorrow(2004) just doesn't cut it anymore...so now he's going after the entire world. The apocalyptic story is based on December 21st, 2012...a date that has seen much scrutiny and speculation from science, history, religion and prophecy. Most notably it is the end date of the Mayan long count calender...they were masters of time and astrology, predicting celestial events 100s of years before modern science. This particular date coincides with the Winter Solstice and a rare galactic alignment. Because the Mayans provided no future data regarding time and future events it has been known as "the end of the world". The science of the movie uses the sun as the catalyst for this global cataclysm...2012 will be the Solar Maximum for this cycle, which means the most violent and dangerous solar storms will happen during this time. In the movie this causes the Earth's core to melt, the crust to change...and ultimately lead to a pole shift. Enough science...we just wanna see shit get destoyed all to hell! So we get massive superquakes that literally swallow Los Angeles whole, Yellowstone park becomes a super-volcano...spewing massive fiery chunks of rock across the land and blanketing most of the U.S. in ash...and finally Mega-Tsunamis sweep the globe washing over places even as high as the Himalayas. All during the chaos and mayhem John Cusack plays a science fiction writer trying to save his estranged family and get to Tibetan China, where the governments of the world have secretly built ships or arcs to ensure the survival of mankind. Along the way some people make it, some don't, speeches about humanity and the fight for survival are made...and in the end, well its still a movie. I'm a sucker for disaster flicks in general and I'm fascinated by the whole 2012 subject as a whole, so I ate up. If you're not into either of those its still a fun, exciting and thrilling ride that makes for an entertaining popcorn blockbuster. "The End Is Near!" Cast also includes Chiwetel Ejiofor, Amanda Peet, Oliver Platt, Thandie Newton, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson.