We're tired of the apocolypse, you know?

The world is going to end again, and unfortunately its existence rests in the fumbling hands of Nicolas Cage.

This 2009 sci-fi thriller begins in Massachusetts in 1959 when a creepy little girl with wide, dark eyes (Lara Robinson), buries a paper filled with a cryptic numerical sequence in her class’s time capsule. Fifty years later it is unearthed and the paper falls into the hands of the intelligent and logical son (Chandler Canterbury) of widowed and alcoholic MIT astrophysics professor John Koestler (Nicolas Cage). John miraculously discovers the numbers predict devastating tragedies in the past and in the future and now must single-handedly save himself and his family.

Cage couldn’t handle the Apocalypse if it was canned like EZ Cheez and equipped with instructions. His nervous and spastic acting method would have certainly caused it to combust. His performance here isn’t another “Ghost Rider,” (thank God), but it’s as if he is required to be weird and over-the-top in all of his films.

One has to ask if Cage skimmed this script while eating cereal in the morning and signed immediately, knowing it would only be mediocre at best. Cage should receive credit for trying, though – his intense presence does reflect the mood well, and enhances a shaky plot.

Despite poor casting for its leading man, the film is ambitious and director Alex Proyas does the best he can with the jumbled and over-used, but exciting plot. Proyas has some good shots, but nothing inspiring, and the age-old science versus religion theme over powers too quickly in the movie during a sappy bedtime conversation between father and son.

Redemption for its flaws is scattered throughout the 121 minutes in well-edited suspenseful scenes and a solid performance by the big-eyed girl’s grown daughter, Diana (Rose Byrne) and Canterbury, who has potential for being the next child star.

For an apocalyptic movie, the scenes of destruction are full of terrifying special effects that would make even Bruce Willis dodge the asteroid. One in particular is a graphic plane crash, which almost tips the PG-13 rating to an R. The absurdity of a couple flaming moose however, knock the scale right back into place.

The plot of “Knowing” is overused, unoriginal and scattered with loose ends such as strange shiny black rocks and silent, stalking, beautiful white males dressed in black trench coats that morph into aliens? It’s too shallow to be a cult hit, yet too entertaining to be a box-office bomb so it simply hovers in the middle leaving it’s fate to be determined by the futile interests of teens and young adults.

If you’re having trouble deciding if you would spend your money on “Knowing,” know this: If you have read the book of Ezekiel from the Bible, seen “Armageddon,” any of the “National Treasure” movies, or “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” save your money for some ice cream. You already know what you need to know.