40 Days and Nights (2012)

It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

A Masterpiece!

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

The only reason this movie got a 2 is I've actually seen worse. I love disaster movies. I really do. But if you can't figure out this movie is truly bad in the the first 5 minutes there's no hope for you. If you want high art stick to dramas. That's been my complaint for decades when it comes to reviews on action, sci-fi and even comedies from some reviewers. If you want to be entertained you need to be able to suspend disbelief. What will make those movies is story, acting, dialogue, and, in the case of sci-fi, special effects. In the first 5 minutes you know you won't be getting any of those factors in this movie.Despite there being actors in this movie I've truly enjoyed in other movies, you can tell immediately everybody is in this one is only there for a paycheck. I've sat through many a bad movie but only managed 20 minutes on this one before moving on. It speaks volumes when I pack it in 20 minutes in.

I watched this movie because of my science background and also there is so little good TV to watch these nights...and kept hoping it would get better. it did not, it only got worse, which i was saddened by because i had always enjoyed Alex Carter in CSI and other things he had done. Monica Keene was the standout worst actress in the show...and when looking her up i was surprised to see a considerable body of work behind this movie?! I am not sure what happened to her training and skill sets in this movie - she looked hung over most of the movie. The science was bad - supposedly she had enough DNA samples of moths, molds, bees, etc, for the replenishment of the entire earth contained in several tubes she slung over her shoulder. the writing was bad, the special effects were bad - it was just a BAD movie. Sudden tidal waves in the desert, women on a helicopter not strapped in while navigating through a major storm front, then jumping onto a train and then off of it, all the while not stumbling around People aboard the arc while navigating storm fronts had a perfectly calm and stable interior while doing those scenes. Woke me up instead of putting me to sleep it was so bad...not sure why they made it!!

truly a bad movie. After tuning in for a few minutes I just wanted to know how bad it could be. No one gets wet. The CG was bad as well as the acting. The story is way out there. So they build an ark and one of the engines last 5 minutes. Great engineering. And of course the sails. Perhaps they should have had replacement engines instead of putting the design into sails that are pretty useless in tsunamis which appeared to happen continually. When the writers aren't interested in accuracy, why bother. What resulted was a boring disaster movie. Reviews are right on.I wonder why actors do these movies. Must be because a boat payment is due. But it can't be good for their careers.

I was looking through my friend's movie collection and I thought that I had chosen 40 Days and 40 Nights, not 40 Days and Nights. The only reason I watched this as long as I did was because I was convinced this had to be an overly exaggerated dream sequence the characters were having, then when THAT didn't appear to be the case, I thought that maybe at some point the camera would pan away and reveal that this was all on a movie set and one of the real characters was a movie director or an actor or something and then the actual movie would start. Once I figured out that wasn't the case either, I googled 40 days to see if there were any similar titles, and lo and behold, I found this. Now I'm just watching out of morbid curiosity.