What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Missed out on the best electronic deals last Black Friday? view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com's Cyber Monday Promotion has you covered. No Lines, No Crowds; Just Click and Save.
78 Comments
- untitlednet, on 11/06/2009, -0/+35Wait, 2013? Well thanks for the spoiler.
- daveward, on 11/06/2009, -0/+21I don't know if Emmerich is cut out for Movies.
- inactive, on 11/06/2009, -0/+19I don't know if Emmerich is cut out for TV.
- ftx437, on 11/06/2009, -0/+18So how would this be a tv series in 2013 when the worlds gonna end in 2012?
- yosafbridge, on 11/06/2009, -0/+15So, you mean that the show's going to be canned day 2 after the film is released?
Oh, never mind...even I know that's not going to happen. Transformers 2 already proved that people will pay to see anything. - iammikecohen, on 11/06/2009, -0/+11better start production now. Nobody wants to watch a show about our doomed planet "post 2012" in the year 2014
- inactive, on 11/05/2009, -1/+12The success of the series will solely depend on how good the movie will be.
- CaliforniaEagle, on 11/06/2009, -1/+11This movie looks somewhat "dramatic"
- Fleagleman, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8Ironically, the show will be cancelled by 2010.
- Falldog, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8"not the bright happy future everyone was imagining"
People must have some horrible misconceptions about what's going to happen when every city in the world gets utterly destroyed in one way or another. - Azdak, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8Ok, so he won't attack some crazies because they have a habit of being crazy and going all shootie-stabbie on people who offend them. Seems like solid logic to me. It's just a damn disaster movie, not some epic truth that needs to be spoken for the good of mankind.
- opticwind, on 11/06/2009, -0/+7Frankly, just a 2013 series would have been interesting.
- appleseed1234, on 11/06/2009, -0/+6I look forward to not watching this.
- FormerBabby, on 11/06/2009, -0/+5The future looks like goatse.
- tnvwboy, on 11/06/2009, -0/+5A true Buddhist would never make a death threat. Duh.
- EvilJelloMan, on 11/06/2009, -1/+6This first transformers sucked ***** balls.
The second transformers actually had a gigantic robotic pair of ***** balls. And it sucked them. After a robot humped a chick's leg.
God damn you, Michael Bay. God damn you to hell. - ldsan, on 11/06/2009, -0/+5does anyone else welcome massive global change in any form they can get it, or is it just me?
- Coffeedemon, on 11/06/2009, -0/+4Meaning they'll probably schedule it oddly and it will get cancelled 6 weeks in.
- gerrylazlo, on 11/06/2009, -0/+4I already saw the day after tomorrow. Why should I watch it again?
- Paranor01, on 11/06/2009, -1/+5actually, a true anything would never make a death threat.
- Azdak, on 11/06/2009, -1/+5You're one of those angry little men who spends his day just WAITING to be outraged by something aren't you?
- pLuhhmm, on 11/06/2009, -0/+4No, people will pay to see things blown up that are shiny. Just stop and smell the roses, not the ***** next to it.
- RegalBegal, on 11/06/2009, -0/+4Hey we ran out of rock should we start a new one?
- pikpikcarrotmon, on 11/06/2009, -1/+5I don't know if pLuhhmm is cut out for Digg.
- jakereilly, on 11/06/2009, -0/+4This certainly won't end well.
- ldsan, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3the first episode airs in 2013, it's actually an instructional video
- phogasmic, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3Now that sounds much more interesting.
- diggduggDOOM, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3Emmerich's TV series, 2013, will be a disaster
genre show, and one that is sure to blow
your mind. - Coffeedemon, on 11/06/2009, -1/+4It also seems that all of the other listed landmarks would be more fragile than a cube.... and look a lot more spectacular when they come tumbling down.
- Coffeedemon, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3Maybe he means it won't have some stupidly contrived ending ala Independence Day where everyone unites at the end and miraculously comes out happy, healthy and smelling of roses.
Actually that would be box office suicide so I imagine humanity will 'win' in the end somehow. If not through avoidance of extinction then through "perseverence of the human spirit" (TM) - AndrewMoyer, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3WAY TO RUIN THE END!!!
- yosafbridge, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Yeah, that whole "they liked the first one so they watched the second one without knowing" flies out the window when you realise how many DVDs they're selling.
Also, usually when a movie sucks word of mouth spreads and it stops making money the second week...Transformers CONTINUED to make money. - darkphenox, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Ya no the movie is pretty much done at this point so threating him to destroy a Mosque would be really stupid at this point.
- pLuhhmm, on 11/06/2009, -3/+5I don't know if Emmerich is cut out for Broadway.
- directedition, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Of course it's "not the bright happy future everyone was imagining". That wouldn't make for a very exciting pitch for the pilot.
- ldsan, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2i have no idea what ur talking about, so i dugg u up
- Culyt, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Compared to Transformers2 GIJOE was ***** awesome.
Actually I rather liked it anyway, considering what it was they did ok. Not fantastic but ok. - acidwire90, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Call me crazy, but wouldn't it be a good idea to make sure the movie isn't a complete bomb before making a TV spin-off?
I must be off my rocker. - Andrwmorph, on 11/06/2009, -1/+3Trailer without special effects:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX6cfzDpd_o - inactive, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Don't you like pseudo-scientific BS?.
- bjs3171, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2i don't particularily want to see it, but i see no reason to boycott it. it's just going to be a typical Armageddon/War of the Worlds-type disaster flick.
- seanmx, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2it had better be a nature show. I want no survivors.
- imkidred, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2Won't we all be dead in 2013?
- goomba323, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1I completely disagree. The show wouldn't be a special effects extravaganza (at least it doesn't sound like it). The world will already be destroyed. It may be the case that 2012 is a two-hour special effects set-up to the 2013 character story.
- DDRSkata, on 11/06/2009, -1/+2I think it's sound logic to not want to be murdered or to start riots in the Middle East or raise more animosity toward the West for a popcorn movie. Maybe if it was an art film, and even then, it still wouldn't really be worth it. You have to pick your battles. Would you really want people to die for a quick shot of a mosque being destroyed in a ***** Roland Emmerich movie?
- PowderedToasty, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1I think you might be taking things way too seriously. 2012 is just some innocent fun, I don't think anyone (particularly the makers of this movie) think it's for real.
- inactive, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1Having an ***** and an opinion though, Emmerich is definitely cut out for digg.
- Rwshilling, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1Just in case you guys forgot, the last time one of Roland Emmerich's movies got adapted for television, it spawned a show that produced over 200 episodes and 2 spin-off series... anyone remember what it was called? Well it was Stargate!
His movies may be pretty average, but they always have this huge scope filled with potential. I can a potential in a TV series if they remove all the ***** cliches that tend to crap up his movies :P - bjs3171, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1how do i know there's no special effects, when the camera is zoomed in on the faces the entire time?
also, there's a cat at the end. - jogleby, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1A post-apocalypse TV series?!? Finally Kevin Costner can get some work!
-
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is