I had some reservations upon entering Galaxy Cinemas to see 2012. I had seen the trailer a good six months before the movie's release, and I remember feeling excited to see it, if only for the promising special effects.

I had taken a look at what critics were saying a couple of days before the movie came to theatres, and I couldn't help but feel a little let down. Most critics seemed to think the special effects were phenomenal, but several of the critics also heavily criticized the script and plot. I therefore went into the theatre with mixed expectations.

How glad I am that I was prepared beforehand. If I had gone into the theatre expecting a lot from every aspect of the movie, I probably would have left disappointed. However, because I was cautious upon entering, I ended up really enjoying the movie.

The plot of 2012 is very similar to that of The Day After Tomorrow. It's silly, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and it's fairly redundant, especially in terms of how much foreshadowing they put into it. “We were warned,” the movie's tagline read.

Jake Gyllenhaal — I mean, John Cusak, is with his kids on a camping trip at Yellowstone Park when he meets the crazy Woody Harrelson, whose character's purpose appears to be of foreshadowing mixed with comic relief. Harrelson has a small role but is as usual, a delight on the screen and adds to the movie's entertainment value. The rest of the movie comprises of made-up, fake sounding scientific analysis and continuous close escapes, as well as many, many, other action movie clichés.

The script, on the other hand, fluctuates in terms of quality. The movie did manage to pull off a couple of memorable quotes, but there was also more than one time that the script was blatantly weak. I found the script's weakest moments were those that focused on the scientific and sometimes the political aspects of the movie.

I did, however, find the movie's treatment of the United States' government very interesting, mostly because there were a few notable differences. The overall presentation of the government and of the president seemed a lot less critical than I had seen it portrayed in recent years. The president's speeches at points reminded me of current U.S. president Barack Obama. The president's mood seemed to be much more somber and lines were comparable to Obama's famous “change” motif, especially at the beginning of the movie, although the word was meant as negative in the context of the movie. Perhaps this was a coincidence, but I nonetheless found the similarities of interest.

The special effects were by far the best part of the movie. Extraordinarily realistic and visually compelling, the effects are what made the movie enjoyable for me. Between incredibly intricate shots of cities collapsing into the sea and a hill being converted in one huge explosion into a lava-spouting volcano in a matter of seconds, the computer generated effects were at once believable and kept the viewer's adrenaline pumping. The special effects were actually able to lessen the weakness of the movie's plot in areas. Cars flew over huge, deep cracks in the earth, and planes flew between collapsing buildings completely unscathed, but the sheer intricacy and attention to those cracks and shattering buildings was a distraction from the repetitive action sequences. The effects were, in two words, totally awesome.

See this movie — if only for the special effects. Cover your hands over your ears and sing “la la la” during the parts that you hate, and bear with it to watch the earth being ripped up from the ground in massive chunks. You won't regret it.