Film Review: ‘San Andreas’

San Andreas Movie
Courtesy of Warner Bros.

California crumbles spectacularly in an action movie that quickly degenerates from blissfully stupid to fatally stupid.

Of the many charges that can be levied against Brad Peyton’s “San Andreas,” false advertising is not one of them. The disaster pic promises nothing more than the complete CGI destruction of California as foregrounded by Dwayne Johnson’s jackfruit-sized biceps, and it delivers exactly that. After providing some blissfully stupid B-movie thrills for its first hour, the film suffers from spectacle overkill (you know what’s cooler than an apocalyptic earthquake? Two apocalyptic earthquakes … and a tsunami) and a fatal lack of invention in its second, more concerned with toppling buildings one by one than ever drumming up a lick of suspense about the fates of those inside them. Still, “San Andreas” boasts an undeniable sort of pre-verbal lizard-brain appeal that should make it a strong earner, especially in territories far removed from the titular fault line.

Hewing much closer to Roland Emmerich’s teenage symphonies to Shiva than to the more conscientious disaster-pic approach of Juan Antonio Bayona’s “The Impossible,” “San Andreas” is the kind of film that can imply the violent deaths of millions of innocent people without batting an eye, just so long as the five or six Californians who matter make it out with only cuts and bruises. The recent earthquake in Nepal might make that proposition a bit dicier, offering a reminder that catastrophic natural disasters aren’t exactly, well, fun. (The film was forced to retool some of its marketing materials as a result.) But as thoroughly cheesy and mindless as it is, “San Andreas” certainly isn’t glib about its central calamity, and no one is lining up expecting documentary realism anyway.

In any case, the five or six characters whose lives matter are as follows. Ray (Johnson) is a hulking, heroic helicopter pilot who segued from flying missions in Afghanistan to performing search-and-rescue operations in Los Angeles. His soon-to-be-ex-wife, Emma (Carla Gugino), has shacked up with uber-rich building developer Daniel (Ioan Gruffudd), who is busy constructing the tallest, sturdiest skyscraper in San Francisco (this bit of information may be useful later). Ray and Emma have a college-aged daughter named Blake (Alexandra Daddario), who thumbs a ride up to the Bay Area on Daniel’s private jet, where she meets cute with fumbling, flustering British twentysomething Ben (Hugo Johnstone-Burt) and his obnoxious, wisecracking younger brother, Ollie (Art Parkinson).

Meanwhile, a Cal Tech seismologist (Paul Giamatti), prone to muttering science-y gibberish under his breath while drawing lots of diagrams, heads off to Nevada to study a recent flurry of “mini-quakes.” These jolts give him the data he needs to predict future earthquakes — “something-something magnetic pulses mumble-mumble” — moments before a sudden trembler takes out the Hoover Dam. He’s just arrived back in Pasadena to put his theories into practice when the entire San Andreas fault lights up with warning signs, indicating the Big One is imminent.

Well aware that it isn’t the science that’s bringing butts into the seats, director Peyton makes the most of this first cataclysm. As the assembled characters dodge debris and do lots of screaming — the quake demolishes L.A. and San Francisco simultaneously — Peyton shows us both the computer-scaled chaos (well rendered, if indistinguishable from the similar destruction present in every disaster pic and comicbook film of the past half-decade) as well as some glimpses at more immediate epicenters. It’s the little details that are more memorable, such as the unaware, airborne Ray glancing down to see a freeway interchange silently crumble, or a long tracking shot through a luxury rooftop lounge as Emma pushes past frantic waitresses and flaming kitchen staff in search of safety.

(Shot partially in Australia, the film carves out a strange cameo role here for Aussie pop star Kylie Minogue: After “Holy Motors,” “San Andreas” is Minogue’s second consecutive film in which she appears for a single scene, then promptly falls off a roof.)

Ray plucks Emma from the top of a crumbling building in his chopper, while Ben and Ollie pull Blake from a crumbling parking garage. (For all the screenplay’s attempts to make Blake the resourceful survivalist of her little band, she’s still invariably the one getting saved.) After learning that Blake is temporarily safe, Ray and Emma resolve to head up to San Francisco to rescue her themselves.

With the earthquake having passed, it’s here that the film ought to stir up some novel perils to test and develop its characters, and the aftermath of an earthquake should provide plenty of dangers — gas leaks, explosions, fires, riots, slightly worse traffic, etc. Instead, the film simply doubles down on its initial gambit, as Giamatti’s scientist discovers that the biggest, most devastating quake in American history is merely a precursor for a bigger, more most-devastating quake that could turn California into Arizona Bay at any moment.

Thanks to this lack of tension — when two major world cities lie in ruins, it’s hard to get too worked up over the danger of the rubble re-collapsing — the film drifts off in its last hour. Ray and Emma have a few quiet moments together, though they’re largely wasted dealing with the recriminations of a needless backstory. Meanwhile, Blake and Ben develop a nervous sort of romance as they trudge through the streets, with Blake losing a new article of clothing at every aftershock. Bay Area natives will surely chuckle at some of the geographic oddities here, as the trio consult a map to find their way from Chinatown to Coit Tower, a landmark that ought to be easily visible simply by looking up.

Daddario maintains a bright screen presence, and she manages to keep her half of the narrative afloat well enough, yet Johnson is the main attraction. Best utilized when he’s allowed to arch his famous right eyebrow at the tumult unfolding around him, Johnson affects a more solemn, Stallonian presence here, and he’s as solid an action hero as ever. Still, one can almost sense the actor breathing a sigh of relief when, after parachuting into the infield of AT&T Park with Emma, he gets to quip, “It’s been a while since I got you to second base.” The line is dumb, forehead-slapping, and totally out of sync with the rest of “San Andreas.” It’s also the best thing in it.

Film Review: 'San Andreas'

Reviewed at Warner Bros. Studios, Burbank, May 21, 2015. MPAA Rating: PG-13. Running time: 114 MIN.


A Warner Bros. release of a New Line Cinema presentation in association with Village Roadshow Pictures, Ratpac-Dune Entertainment of an FPS production. Produced by Beau Flynn. Executive producers, Richard Brener, Samuel J. Brown, Michael Disco, Toby Emmerich, Steven Mnuchin, Rob Cowan, Tripp Vinson, Bruce Berman.


Directed by Brad Peyton. Screenplay, Carlton Cuse, from a story by Andre Fabrizio, Jeremy Passmore. Camera (color), Steve Yedlin; editor, Bob Ducsay; music, Andrew Lockington; production designer, Barry Chusid; costume designer, Wendy Chuck; art directors, Jacinta Leong, Matt Putland, Tom Nursey; set decorator, Lisa Thompson; sound (Dolby Digital), Guntis Sics; supervising sound editor, Per Hallberg; re-recording mixers, Tim LeBlanc, Gregg Landaker; visual effects supervisor, Colin Strause; visual effects, Scanline, Hydraulix, Method, Cinesite, Atomic Fiction, Image Engine, Soho, MPC; special effects supervisor, Brian Cox; assistant director, Simon Warnock; casting, Deborah Aquila, Tricia Wood.


Dwayne Johnson, Carla Gugino, Alexandra Daddario, Ioan Gruffudd, Archie Panjabi, Paul Giamatti, Hugo Johnstone-Burt, Art Parkinson, Will Yun Lee, Kylie Minogue.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 80

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

  1. Doug Thomson says:

    Chuckle … this is a disaster movie in the fine tradition of all disaster movies. Of course it is ridiculous, of course it is stupid, but that is the whole point. We don’t watch these things for fun and they are fun!

  2. Raylene Seiner says:

    I cannot believe all the negative comments about this movie. It is a wonderful movie. You people wouldn’t know a good movie if it jumped off the screen at you!! You need your eyes fixed and take the plugs out of your ears and watch the movie!! I think it is one of the best movies I have ever seen. And you all probably think Jurrasic World was bad too!! It is a good, clean movie without bad language and lame sex, which is probably what you people like!!

  3. This movie stinks something awful! Even the CGI effects becoming monotonous to watch after the initial LA destruction, the best effect being the volcano destroying the Hollywood sign. Beyond that, don’t waste another minute of your time with this literal horror movie! I watched it for the first time earlier this year, forgot just how bad it was and just wasted two hours of my time this evening watching it a second time. Never again! With the exception of Dwayne Johnson, the actors are so annoying with their ridiculous lines and acting, especially the actresses, I was wishing that either the earth would open beneath them or they’d all get sucked up by a lava flow ASAP and that would be the end of their torturous performance! You want to care about these characters, but you simply don’t! If you are going to make a diaster movie, do it 2012 style and not have to watch over an hour of boring characters just trying to escape from convicts and watching lousy earthquake effects! If I could give this movie no stars, I would!

  4. Sandra Sean says:

    Ahh…just finished watching this oh so predictable movie. The expressions on ‘The Rock’s’ face simply cracked me up (‘scuse the pun) Best laugh I’ve had for ages. I imagine him getting into character by thinking to himself, “what am I doing in this crummy film?” Well we all know the answer to that one; money of course. But here’s the strangest thing: this movie made a fortune at the box office! If B.S. like ‘San Andreas’ can be successful then ‘ol Donald will be a shoe-in for Pres. Someone get me a rocket-I need to get off this dumb planet. ‘San Andreas? Distracting pabulum at best.

  5. Jack says:

    I just can’t care that much for a leading character, a rescue pilot who basically steals the LAFD helicopter his is supposed to be using to help Angelinos during the worst catastrophe in the city’s history. After pulling his wife (and no one else) from the roof of a collapsing building in downtown LA the couple heads to San Francisco, a 5 or 6 hour flight, for the sole purpose of rescuing their daughter and not giving a fig about anyone else.

  6. Debbie Henry says:

    This was by far the BEST edge of your seat film I have ever watched. Unreal, yes, cg generated, yes. But all through the entire movie my hands were ringing and could not sit still to watch each action scene, every rescue, and the fast paced non-stop action throughout the movie. It left me wanting more.

  7. Abbey Scheer says:

    Your basic disaster movie…It focused in on 1 particular family to keep the story line going. If it branched out to a million other people saving others it wouldn’t have worked. And you have to remember, it was just a movie! It didn’t have to be detail accurate. Pretty good, I only took 2 cigarette breaks.

    • Phil says:

      Fortunately, my Netflix DVD copy stalled during two (unimportant) scenes…at which time, I managed to get in two extended back-porch cigar sessions.

  8. Lighten up folks, its a movie! The SFX are incredible. Truly an awesome production, highly recommended.

  9. Can a fireman steal a rescue chopper, and fly around saving just the people he wants? And then, abandon his duty and go to another city just because he wants to?

  10. Joe says:

    I’m glad that i didn’t see it in the theater, the worst movie ever, It doesn’t even have a story, the special effects are crapy specially in the beginning of the movie when the car falls off.

  11. mm says:

    i hated this movie. hated the characters in the movie. I was hoping for a twist at the end where they all die
    Watched it for dwane johnson. He was alright, the rest of the cast had no personality. I also expected this movie to be about his character saving people’s lives, he was too busy saving his own gang.

    Also, the two ladies were self absorbed as fuck, bitching about that guy who ran away when everyone else were dying outside. I felt that i ended up rooting for the guy instead. And what’s the point of the lady leaving him the nasty message when he didn’t even receive it?

    Story was really predictable too. they should have killed that lady in the end. It would at least have been satisfying. Kill her instead of the asian guy and the old couple.

    I don’t understand the hate for 2012, i enjoyed it.

  12. This film ends the genre started in the mid 70’s by Irwin Allen with “Earthquake” complete with “Sensurround,” big boom boxes strategically placed around the theater to rumble audiences with low frequency noise. Speaking of noise, so is this soundtrack. It’s the same as everything else. Marching computerized drumbeats and big brass sounds as in Capt. America, every crime TV show, TV ads. Is that all there is, this same predictable noise that says absolutely nothing? For this alone I give the rather startling CGI fest as minus infinity — oh, and all the emotional sap between actors supposed to tug at heartstrings. It fails and looks contrived.

  13. OMG i laughed so much, thanks for a great review! excellent, great writing, sorry people i loved it!

  14. Alex Greys says:

    I think that this over-view of the concept of the movie ‘San Andreas’ is wrong. Firstly, okay this film is not as realistic as some but it is not supposed to be. Films that are realistic are normally based on a true story, where as ‘San Andreas’ was made up purely from a story. Secondly, it teaches young and old people that you can do everything when you put your mind to it and get people to help you out. Finally, it altogether is just a brilliant film and is a definite must-see!

  15. Sarah Goodwich says:

    I checked out this movie despite cringing at the thought of Dwayne Johnson’s egregious over-acting on screen being worse than in the ring (if possible), only to have my fears confirmed in the first minute, where a blond bimbo is an obviously-distracted driver who goes on a one-minute thrill-ride over a cliff… and somehow survives (I guess because IT’S A SUBURU!)— all as a set-up for the introduction the crew of a rescue-helicopter that’s not only being sent to assist the mishap, but somehow finds time to schedule a lenghty exposition-scene/interview to go along for the ride…. and that was all as a build-up for Dwayne Johson to be some sort of serious “hero.” That’s when I stopped watching, since I just got the plot– i.e. there should be a law against wrestlers acting in movies.
    “Can you smell what the Rock is cookin'” Yep, he’s got some bad gas– which explains his one facial expression.

  16. Kyle says:

    Lmao this is beyond the pinnacle of stupidity and pure insanity XD

  17. brian says:

    i turned this off my laptop because of the unbelievably annoying ugly irritating english kid

  18. alana says:

    Was very very disappointed in the movie. Way to over the top! And I have never known a firefighter to not have a glass breaker on their belt or in their pocket (I am a retired paramedic, I still carry one) so for him to not have a glass breaker when his daughter was drowning… really????

    I wasted my money…

  19. Human Cobras says:

    Awful film. Just awful. Dwayne Johnson is an awful actor. Probably one of the worst ever. Pass on it. You’ll save yourself.

  20. amanda says:

    san andreas……. wow wow wow whar a film , just been to see it dwayne johnson is just spectacular was his co actors ( NOT KYLIE MINOGUE) killed of after 5 mins thank god.
    ultimate disaster movie ever ever made, go & see it its a must , any one ready to put it down , me to you ….. your not in our era & get a life .
    loved it , well done all involved xxxx amanada from hull

    • Sarah Goodwich says:

      If you look like you sound, the future is doomed.

    • Debi says:

      We also loved it! This wasn’t suppose to be a reality movie. Its for entertainment only!! It was action packed and the special effects were incredible!! That’s why we go! Nicely done!!! Now on to Jurrasic World!!! :)

  21. dan castor says:

    Same disaster movie plot; Estranged father must go into ground zero of disaster zone and rescue family. Reminds me of Volcano, ID4, Day After Tomorrow and 2012.

  22. karthik says:


  23. Steve UK says:

    They should have got Kylie to start singing “We May Never Love Like This Again” before falling off the roof, it would have been a classic moment. I’ll wait for the Blu-ray.

    • Brad King says:

      They should have never made the movie because earthquakes are a thing of the past in California. Remember, Proposition 69 (formally titled “Never, ever, any Earthquakes in California and Enforcement Act of 2011″) the California law passed by direct voter initiative in 2010 by a 98%-2% vote. In the words of Governor Brown ” This law will prevent and hold mother nature accountable for any earthquakes in California” and “…..we will be the envy of the rest of the world as all good things start in the great state of California”

  24. Eyeorr says:

    Sorry, you do need a map to get to Coit Tower. Though you can see it, the staircase is nealy impossible to find unless you know that that particular staircase is the one that will take you to the Tower. It is an awesome climb and everyone should experience it once in their lifetime…or before the San Andreas Fault erupts and San Francisco is destroyed. :0-)

  25. CC says:

    Andrew Barker’s “rant” review for San Andreas was absolutely perfect for the core!!
    I needed that big belly laugh !!!
    Thank U AB!
    CC. (Not a lizard-brain) I hope😁

  26. Jimmie says:

    Skip the movie. If you want to see a real disaster, just look at what’s going on with the massive flooding in Texas and Oklahoma. That’s enough to terrify anyone! No SFX needed.

  27. I want to watch the zany screwball comedy that this highly entertaining review suggests is possible.

  28. Mantle Head says:

    Sounds great… and there will be a big quake; too bad about Kylie Minogue, but don’t forget: she did start out as an actor (as did her sister in ‘Neighbors’, one of the biggest soaps of all time), before she became a pop-tart. Sadly, has never been the same since she had cancer, but who ever is…

    SF is pushing it with all the development going on up there… they’re building on what at one time was a seabed. It’s going to be ugly when it goes down…

  29. WizKid says:

    Methinks Julienne is Dwayne Johnson’s PR rep trying to disguise as a troll. Why else would anyone come on this blog to fight so hard to defend a negative critique of this movie?

  30. Julienne says:

    You know what bad reviews by critics mean?! It’s going to be a smash hit, financially.

    Most critics are stupid peeps that never achieved their own goals, so they bash others for a living.

    Twitter has over a hundred million critics on their site, that makes movie critics obsolete.

    • Sarah Goodwich says:

      That’s like saying you’d only bash a Ford Pinto because you can’t build a car.. i.e. stupid.
      A sign of a bad film is where the director expects the audience to like the “hero” just because he’s stuck in their face for the entire film, showing off how great he is.
      Hint: WRONG! That only works in wrestling. Film requires to an actor to WIN the audience over– and here, Andrews had no business comparing Johnson (well-named since he’s such a ____) to Stallone, who won audiences by being sympathetic and vulnerable in his original roles… the only resemblance is that they both playes a fictional character named “Rocky….” but Johnson is more like Bullwinkle.

    • Moon says:

      like you are doing? ahhaha such a daft comment but your lack of knowledge of critics’ work made me laugh…seriously. By the way, what are you doing on Variety, apart from trolling of course ;-), if you don’t respect film critics?

  31. Marquiz says:

    I’ve seen enough disaster movies to last a lifetime. I’ll wait for this when it comes out on dvd and then give my review.

    • Julienne says:

      Okay. So you have a BIG Screen to see the SFX?

      • Mantle Head says:

        All do respect, but I go to movies for a story; a film about an earthquake is not a story, it’s the inciting incident that sets the story in motion. Will I go to see this movie..? I don’t know, if I can sneak in after a film with an actual story, perhaps… like I did with Furious 7, which I view as one of the worst films of all time: no story. It was so stupid, but it made zillions, but it’s the worst film of all time and it got good reviews. I think to do with Paul Walkers (sp?) death… Vin Diesel; yeah he’s a success and has muscles, but the man is so stupid (he’s a finger painter), with his dumbass line: ‘…Duh, me no friends… me family…’ It was like watching an ape choke on a banana skin.

      • Marquiz says:

        Well, if I’m willing to wait for the dvd then I guess that means I don’t care about the SFX.

  32. commonsense says:

    So the protagonist uses a public asset (helicopter) to selfishly rescue his own family instead of doing his job.

    Yeah, that’s CA culture.

    • Sarah Goodwich says:

      Didn’t you read the review: ONLY THE MAIN CHARACTER’S MATTER!
      That’s the tone of the entire movie: i.e. ego-driven, as we’re somehow only supposed to care about these five or six people just because they were shoved in our face from the beginning of the movie with corny one-liners and Johnson’s stone-faced comical implication that he’s their “boss.”
      Yep- they are the NATION– of DOMINATION!
      Too bad movies don’t work that way– he was better when he was being hung upside-down, raped by monkeys.

    • Julienne says:

      Or….it could be just a movie? Yeah, that’s the ticket.

  33. Carlo says:

    Oh great, another review from a sour grapes reviewer. He is one of those idiots that feels he has to destroy you to make himself look better. That’s why I don’t like most reviewers; they are only out to make themselves look clever which they fail at most of the time. And besides, it’s their opinion not fact and they are wrong most of the time. About the only intelligent reviewer I know is Leonard Maltin. Most these so-called critics have never even been on a set and have no idea what it takes to make a movie. They couldn’t find a decent job so they have to bad mouth people who actually work for a living. If you don’t like these kind of movies, don’t go. If enough people stopped going, they will stop making them.

    • Moon says:

      The story that film critics are only good at snobbishly bad-mouth filmmakers and that the reason they do this job is because deep down are frustrated because they were unable to actually make films is an old one. It is you that doesn’t understand the role of critics in cinema and in other fields. Every critic writes about cinema for different reasons and purpose. I like to do it as a hobby and never in my life I have desired to be a filmmaker. It is the passion and knowledge for the subject that motivates them. In simple terms, think about critics as people that are debating (do you allow that?) and commenting about a film with the difference that they KNOW what they are talking about and have a broad KNOWLEDGE of the subject (unlike most people that comment and share their opinions on different things without knowing anything about it). Just find one that you agree with or respect or like the way he/she approaches the film, don’t read other critics’ reviews.

      • Sarah Goodwich says:

        ” Being opinionated and fancying yourself smart is not the same thing as actually being smart and knowledgeable.”
        God knows you’re living proof of that.

      • Moon says:

        Richard, I am sorry to say this and I am simply basing it on your comment, but you do not seem to know much about the value of archival articles (in literature, art, cinema etc) nor about the tradition and value behind criticism (literary criticism, criticism of cinema and so an).
        Secondly, I am not saying that the tastes of critics are the only ‘right’ one but the way someone looks at a piece of work (again, a book, a film, an art work..) is different if such person has experienced a variety of this kind of work and more so if he/she has done it for a long time because they place that particular piece of work not only evaluating it on an aesthetic point of you but they are also placing it within an historical context. That is what we call knowledge.
        The internet is great because it opens up the opportunity to everyone to ‘comment’ on a number of topics but that does not make criticism from people that have studied and seen films for a long time.
        The fact that there are some critics whose opinion or ways of looking at cinema do not match with yours is irrelevant. What will pass are the ideas and ‘analysis’ that people that have proven to know what the heck they are talking about, and that includes among the others critics, bloggers, amateurs reviewers etc, NOT everyone that any Tom, Dick and Harry writes on the internet. Think about it, we do the same for political commenters but somehow many people get upset only towards film critics. Go figure.

        One last thing, thank God for critics that like (or are forced because of their job) to go watch lots of different films otherwise all the small ones that don’t have the funds for a strong marketing campaign would fall under the radar unless a critic vouches for it.

      • richard says:

        Knowledge? What knowledge is exactly that? Being opinionated and fancying yourself smart is not the same thing as actually being smart and knowledgeable. Usually quite the opposite. A critic is somebody who expresses an opinion in a public forum. it used to be in the media, but now the web has blurred the line of what is a public forum and yes, almost everybody is a critic, since anybody can make their opinion public. Critics have all the right in the world to express their opinions, and if somebody is willing to pay attention to them because they’re unable to think for themselves, that is their business. But do not delude yourself into thinking you have some kind of special, superior knowledge or ability just because you talk about what other people do. And yes, many critics are failures and snobs who try to conceal their lack of accomplishment behind their pretension and condescending attitude toward “the masses” who need to be “guided” by this few, select individuals who “know”. Find something better to do with your life. It is quite sad to be somebody who just opines and does not contribute to society more than hot air.

    • sammyglick says:

      What? Did you write the screenplay for this sure to be AWFUL summer movie?! How can this be a ‘sour grapes’ review, or did you seriously think San Andreas would be an early Oscar contender?

  34. calibabe712 says:

    There are three things that I want when I go to see a movie. The first is to have action. I don’t do chick flicks or any of that garbage. Secondly, I want to have a reasonable story line that I can follow without having to do some type of retrospective insight to figure out what the movie is about. Just tell me a story and go from there. Third and finally, I want to be entertained for the 90 to 120 minutes that I am sitting by backside in a movie theater seat. If I am going to a documentary then I expect accuracy. Otherwise, I’m not looking absolutely every scene to be accurate down to the building paint. I don’t need overarching themes. I just want action, an easy story line and some entertainment. I liked Twister so I will probably like this as well.

    • When the reviewer deride an earthquake as not being “fun”…neither is the notion of shooting and killing people, but that hasn’t stopped movie makers from showing just that. Most diaster flicks are disasters so you watch for escapism — like watching people getting killed. Good or bad, it’s hard work making a film and, at the end of the day, it’s only a movie. Until violence is no longer fun…then it is.

  35. J.E. Vizzusi says:

    “Its unbelievable that the name Mario Puzo for scribing “Earthquake” (1974) is forgotten or the Epic Film “San Francisco” that had Clark Gable ducking under tables. How many times can Hollywood destroy itself should be the question here? Or another question should be “Who will fall into the hole first? Disaster Pics on the most part have become Disaster Pics at the B.O.

  36. OodlesOfDoodles says:

    I wonder how it compares to “10.0 Earthquake” (2014), made for a fraction of the budget, I believe it was mentioned in another Variety article a while ago, starring Henry Ian Cusick and Jeffrey Jones.

  37. charlesamiller says:

    I knew that “San Andreas” was going to suck a hyena’s ass as soon as I saw that Dwayne Johnson was the star. Pardon, but Dwayne Johnson doesn’t star in “good” films.

    • RobA1963 says:

      Taste is relative. I’ve liked him in quite a few movies. If I leave the theater feeling better than I did when I walked in, then that’s a good movie to me. I’m not always looking for Daniel Day-Lewis and Meryl Streep.

  38. maxwell says:

    Do u people even have a good word for any film.. Its not like u invest hundreds and millions for making a film, but just sit down and criticise.

    • sammyglick says:

      Don’t worry Maxwell, your buddy The Rock will be okay if his latest movie is a turkey. He can use his millions to cry himself to sleep!

      • Sarah Goodwich says:

        “The Rock will be okay if his latest movie is a turkey. He can use his millions to cry himself to sleep!”
        Along with Hulk Hogan, after HIS many bad films. Who ever told wrestlers they can act? It takes more to have talent than a steroid-inflated ego (and face/body); Arnold and Stallone know HOW to play to a film-audience, not a wrestling-arena.

    • charlesamiller says:

      Maxwell, WHY do investors sink hundreds of millions of dollars into Hollywood films? They don’t do it for warm feelings and compliments, okay? They do it for a significant monetary return on their investment — and that monetary return comes from US, the viewers. The viewers, more than anyone, have the ultimate right to criticize bad films.

  39. Andy says:

    Kylie Minogue famously played another character, Astrid Peth, who also fell to her death (heroically) in the 2007 Dr. Who Xmas special “Voyage of the Damned”

    • Josh says:

      If there’s ever a “Jack & Jill Went Up The Hill” movie they should cast her. Although to be fair her scene in Holly Motors (which is more of a segment than a scene) was far more significant that it seems to be in this film.

More Film News from Variety