Terminator: Salvation - Your Thoughts [Archive]

Fospherous

05-14-2009, 02:37 AM

TERMINATOR SALVATION

Your Thoughts?

Well as you all obviously know, the fourth installment of the Terminator franchise will be coming out soon and I thought I'd just post a little thread about what you think of it...will it be rubbish?...earn some dignity? and when you do see it, post what you thought of it in this thread!

Ok...my views, I am going to give this movie a chance, to try and earn some dignity from what Terminator 3 destroyed.
The thing that interests me about this one is that we get to see the actual war between man and machine which is contantly talked about in past films but we merely see quick shots and nothing more, but having a whole film dedicated to the war between man and machine should be interesting and I hope that it will turn out OK, because I'm not expecting it to be fantastic, I'm just hoping it will earn some respect from what T3 destroyed, eugh...typing T3 makes me shiver!...
And another interesting thing is that supposedly Arnie's character will be in it, so that should be interesting to watch out for...but overall, it should be a fun little movie and if it isn't and finally does put the nail in the coffin...it's Bye bye Terminator forever!

Ok...Now what do you think?
Plus talk about anything else to do with the movie if you wish! :)

Uber

05-14-2009, 02:52 AM

should have stopped at T2. Game over, turn off the lights on your way out.... who's buying the pizza? i bought it last time it gotta be someone elses!

Marine101

05-14-2009, 04:09 AM

I'll shout!

This one should have been T3, but I guess they like making people wait. I personally think about time they do this big battle that's always been referenced to throughout the series. Its definitely going to be an enjoyable one with the action and all the special effects - but hey, if you don't like the movie...there is always the game...and lets hope they include the famous Terminator line!

Overall, it looks like an enjoyable action blockbuster.

EthanRunt

05-14-2009, 04:47 AM

and lets hope they include the famous Terminator line!

"It's not a Tumor!"

Orky

05-14-2009, 05:55 AM

So long as they keep it true to the original war scenes present in the first two films, it should be a pretty enjoyable ride. I don't want any silly over the top stunts; the grim, shadow-filled, skull-littered landscape set amongst the rubble of destroyed buildings with a chaotic orchestra of lights and intimdating sounds as seen in the opening of T2 is by far one of the best, most truly unsettling sequences I can think of.

- Orky

thebiz

05-14-2009, 08:42 AM

It looks freakin terrible. Cant distinguish between this trailer and the one for transformers (a huge waste of time and money). All special effects and cg sets and no heart, no story, no characters worth a damn. Still, mrsbiz will drag me to it and I wouldn't mind being wrong (but heavily doubt I will be).

Daninsky

05-14-2009, 09:21 AM

T3... yes, uhm, that was, something.

The fun thing about the Terminator franchise, once you get over the fact that Arnie got too big in Hollywood to play mean machine again, is that if you give it some more thought than any of the script writers did, the trilogy actually works with only so much jarring pieces left as are easy to forgive.

I have my doubts if we will be able to say the same about the second trilogy, eventhough this time they won't have to juggle time paradoxes.
Still, I'm looking forward to finally see the much anticipated War of the Machines, and have my hopes that it at least will not be as disappointing as the second Star Wars trilogy.

Fospherous

05-14-2009, 11:16 AM

"It might be a Tumor!"

"It's not a Tumor!"

Great Movie...Arnie, fighting crime and teaching kids about Crime...classic!...Ivan Reitman, you clever clogs!!

Jake

05-14-2009, 02:06 PM

The movie is going to be a bomb!:yawn:

Jake:pinch:

Fospherous

05-14-2009, 02:22 PM

Please explain...I mean, any fool can say something will suck and go along with the crowd, but why do you think it will be a bomb?...please don't think I'm forcing you to love this, just trying to get some more thoughts out of you or anyone else who will just say something like "THIS WILL BE RUBBISH, BLAH...ME GONNA PUKE NOW" unless you meant Bomb as in "WOAH, DUDE THIS MOVIE BLEW ME AWAY IN AWESOMENESS, LIKE A...(thinking)...BOMB!!! :yes:

Just give a movie a chance unless it's something you will obviously hate like Bonna Hontanna: The Movie Film :D

Mefune Akira

05-14-2009, 02:39 PM

Well I liked McG's style for the first Charlie Angels...well, the action sequences mostly. I had serious doubts about Star Trek 2009 and I was very surprised. (so surprised Ive seen it twice now). So, with McG at the helm, Bale starring and by the looks of the trailers, I may be surprised again. Think they'll have Bales rant as a blooper during the closing creds? lmao! I would definitely pay to see that.

I've always thought they should have stopped with T2. Here's hoping Im wrong.

DL Watson

05-14-2009, 03:02 PM

One of the most improved things from what I've seen in behind the scenes stuff is the fact they are doing as much practical effects as they can, and using CG for things to dangerous or not possible in real life.

Most of the Terminators in the film are real life animatronics much like the original.

And I like the idea of a Terminator not know he's a Terminator and the approach that something has changed and John Connor doesn't know whats going to happen, or if he can really win the war he was destined to.

And its was good news that Linda Hamilton will supply a voice over for the film like T2 and McG consulted with James Cameron for advice story wise.

I think this will be the beginning of a great Terminator trilogy, but some people here may be right, it may end up being crap. But I go by the saying of "innocent until proven guilty".

If anyone is interested, you can check out a 4 minute trailer here: http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/terminatorsalvation/exclusive/large.html

Fospherous

05-14-2009, 03:16 PM

Think they'll have Bales rant as a blooper during the closing creds? lmao! I would definitely pay to see that.

"THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING?...WE ARE DEAD, WE ARE ALL...DEAD!!!...YOU FUCKIN PRICK!!!"

That would be great Mef!...That would be another great rant for the press to lap up! :D

Mefune Akira

05-14-2009, 03:28 PM

"the fuck are you doing?...we are dead, we are all...dead!!!...you fuckin prick!!!"

that would be great mef!...that would be another great rant for the press to lap up! :d

"DO YOU SEE ME TRASHING YOUR FUCK'N T1000's? ANSWER..THE..FUCKIN..QUESTION!! DO..YOU...SEE...ME..TRASHING YOUR FUCKING T1000's?? You and me are done proffesionally you metal prick!!

thebiz

05-14-2009, 03:40 PM

Well I liked McG's style for the first Charlie Angels...well, the action sequences mostly.

Hmm, see I was more or less horrified that someone decided to call that a movie instead of what we used to call a music video (was it really that long ago?). Yea, Charlies Angles rubbed me the wrong way raw (I'd put it in the top 10 least enjoyable flicks Ive seen). He adds no good omens for me.

And now to top it off, I see he's slated to remake 2000 Leagues under the Sea just when Capn Nemo is quickly becoming my favorite literary character (Just finished the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen series). Alas matey. That sucks.

DL Watson

05-14-2009, 03:48 PM

Hmm, see I was more or less horrified that someone decided to call that a movie instead of what we used to call a music video (was it really that long ago?). Yea, Charlies Angles rubbed me the wrong way raw (I'd put it in the top 10 least enjoyable flicks Ive seen). He adds no good omens for me.

And now to top it off, I see he's slated to remake 2000 Leagues under the Sea just when Capn Nemo is quickly becoming my favorite literary character (Just finished the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen series). Alas matey. That sucks.

I have to agree that I did not like Charles Angels either, but I did like We Are Marshall (which I know is not an action film) but nevertheless, I still will give the movie a chance, but if the new Terminator is anything like T3 or worse, Ill never watch another McG film again.

The Maverick

05-14-2009, 07:29 PM

This will be good...enough. I never seen T3 yet, but, based on the other ones, and the fact that Christian Bale is in this one, what can go wrong?

Not that it hasn't happened before, but, I think that with all of this money that was spent making this movie, that it won't flounder. Films like Spider-Man 3 and King Kong may have been slightly mediocre, but with the attention to detail made (sans the script), it's hard to fault it. T4 has my blessing. It will the true start of the summer that that terrible anarchronistic Wolverine movie claimed it would be.

Orky

05-15-2009, 09:17 AM

Despite my previous comment, one thing that has been bugging me has been the PG-13 rating. A lot of movies can go about expressing violence in less than morbid ways while still achieving the effect (Such as The Dark Knight, which was quite a dark (No gee duh :P ) film despite the PG-13 rating), the terminator series is obviously deeply rooted in bloody, blow-your-brains out gore. And why shouldn't it be? It is all about organic meat bags fighting metal machines of doom, usually with shotguns, heavy weapons, and anything that can smash a metallic skull in. It cries out to have an R rating, as the previous three films have (even the dreaded third installment; remember that guy's chest? At least they kept the gore in).

I get it that it's a series revamp and that they certainly can find other means of expressing violence without brains and sinew flying everywhere, but I'd hope they don't make the series for kids (Such as Aliens Versus Predator - "Hey guys, let's take a film about an alien that bursts through people's chests and melts their skin with their acidic blood, and combine it with a film about an alien who skins humans and rips their skulls out of their heads....And make it PG-13!"). A few stabs in the eye with a screw driver or a couple of mangled bodies flying back from the explosions of gunship turrets are surely not out of place in the setting of the new Terminator.

- Orky

thebiz

05-15-2009, 09:51 AM

The hypocracy (is that the right word) of the ratings system bugged me a lot in Woverine where we got all the violence and none of the gore. You can shoot, gut, impale, tear ect a body as long as theres no blood and, hey hey its all good (as wolverine stands there with his bloodless claws gleaming after many a hack and slash). Im torn (hehe) between the issues of the desensitization of society and the nuetering of our action heros. And lets not get into the sex vs violence issue eh.

Fospherous

05-15-2009, 11:11 AM

I couldn't give a damn really about how gory or violent a movie is... because at the end of the day, it's all about how good the film is.

thebiz

05-15-2009, 11:17 AM

I couldn't give a damn really about how gory or violent a movie is... because at the end of the day, it's all about how good the film is.

Sorry, my point had nothing to do with the quality of the movie but more with the fact we deem violence ok as long as theres no blood when the exact same act gets deemed unfit for the consumption of minors when accompanied by red viscous fluid. As to the effect this has on the viewer and his/my experience with the cinema event, it tends to take me out of the story and forces my focus onto subjects such as this. Im just sayin..

Fospherous

05-15-2009, 11:27 AM

Sorry, my point had nothing to do with the quality of the movie but more with the fact we deem violence ok as long as theres no blood when the exact same act gets deemed unfit for the consumption of minors when accompanied by red viscous fluid. As to the effect this has on the viewer and his/my experience with the cinema event, it tends to take me out of the story and forces my focus onto subjects such as this. Im just sayin..

Neither was I saying that you were wrong about your comment, I was drawing away on a same point about film ratings, that some people do complain about a movie because it doesn't have any violence like it's predecessors, and that it should be judged on it's quality, not violence...I apologise if you thought my comment was going against your comment, yadayadaya, hugs and kisses...I sorry, you sorry...all the crap done...moving on.....jeeze! I need me some medication!

Killian

05-15-2009, 12:28 PM

My thruppence ha'penny...

T1: sublime film, nuff said...
T2: mindless action flick, good popcorn movie, please leave brain at door...
T3: Pants, plain and simple.

T4: ? Meh, I can take it or leave it.

Just cos something has had millions of dollars thrown at it doesn't make it a good film (Star Wars prequels, anyone?); without a good script, good actors and a competant director to helm it all, it's not worth a jot. Eye candy is all well and good, but it's never a replacement for a well crafted story with characters you can identify with and a decent portray on screen... unless it's SUPPOSED to be a mindless action flick, of course.

Orky

05-15-2009, 01:04 PM

some people do complain about a movie because it doesn't have any violence like it's predecessors

My name is Orky :P.

There is only so much you can make out of a plot that's about a ______ coming from _______ to kill _____ _______ who is the _____ of a particularly important person (fill in the blanks). If it were a more complex plot, than I would feel differently, but the very basic plot coveys an obvious desire for action (and this new revamped series is pretty much on the same level of complexity, which is why I'm making such a fuss over the gore). And it just so happens this particular action is between a man and machine that has the ability to crush the man's skull. So I'm just saying, why shouldn't it? In the previous films all of the terminators have acted accordingly; they've used very blunt and rough tactics and that's why they are terminators :P. I actually hate watching gory flicks if they are over the top. But if it's appropriate to the setting, than by all means I have no problem with it (imagine Saving Private Ryan without the dismemberment xD ).

It just takes me out of it if all the soldiers get are just nose bleeds and a cut lip from fighting these cybernetic killing machines; it's typical invincible action hero yuckiness. Again though, the directors have other ways of showing the horrors of what that kind of battle would do, so I'm hoping they don't just entirely glaze over the multiple times where people should be getting bits of them blown off and just show a few guys with a bruise here and there (figuratively speaking).

Just my opinion. Only time will tell though :).

- Orky

Kit06

05-15-2009, 01:13 PM

I mean, any fool can say something will suck.

Arn't you forgetting that we are the fools in this community? :huh:

I have never been a massive Terminator fan; I am into comedies more than anything else, but I am sure I will see it.

Fospherous

05-15-2009, 01:16 PM

My name is Orky :P.

There is only so much you can make out of a plot that's about a ______ coming from _______ to kill _____ _______ who is the _____ of a particularly important person (fill in the blanks). If it were a more complex plot, than I would feel differently, but the very basic plot coveys an obvious desire for action (and this new revamped series is pretty much on the same level of complexity, which is why I'm making such a fuss over the gore). And it just so happens this particular action is between a man and machine that has the ability to crush the man's skull. So I'm just saying, why shouldn't it? In the previous films all of the terminators have acted accordingly; they've used very blunt and rough tactics and that's why they are terminators :P. I actually hate watching gory flicks if they are over the top. But if it's appropriate to the setting, than by all means I have no problem with it (imagine Saving Private Ryan without the dismemberment xD ).

It just takes me out of it if all the soldiers get are just nose bleeds and a cut lip from fighting these cybernetic killing machines; it's typical invincible action hero yuckiness. Again though, the directors have other ways of showing the horrors of what that kind of battle would do, so I'm hoping they don't just entirely glaze over the multiple times where people should be getting bits of them blown off and just show a few guys with a bruise here and there (figuratively speaking).

Just my opinion. Only time will tell though :).

- Orky

You fecking...(thinks)...ORK!!!

or as Bale would say...YOU FUCKIN PRICK!!!

Kit06

05-15-2009, 01:18 PM

You fecking...(thinks)...ORK!!!

I disagree Foster, I think Orky's point is really very good.

I think your just defending this because your the gory, sadistic type... :54:

Fospherous

05-15-2009, 01:20 PM

I disagree Foster, I think Orky's point is really very good.

I think your just defending this because your the gory, sadistic type... :54:

What?...how was I disagreeing?...I was merely talking Baleish to Orky...or as Bale would say to you, "I WANT YOU OFF THE SET YOU FUCKIN PRICK!!!"

Orky

05-15-2009, 01:46 PM

What?...how was I disagreeing?...I was merely talking Baleish to Orky...or as Bale would say to you, "I WANT YOU OFF THE SET YOU FUCKIN PRICK!!!"

WHAT DON'T YOU FUCKIN UNDERSTAND? YOU ARE TRASHIN' MAH SCENE!

- Orky

db4321

05-15-2009, 05:16 PM

I'm probably going to upset the applecart here, but personally, I think they should have stopped after T1. To me it was an excellent Sci-Fi action movie.

If T4 can capture the essence of the original then I may be interested.... Then again, maybe not.

geoff-uk

05-15-2009, 05:22 PM

Why does everybody hate T3?

Fospherous

05-15-2009, 05:27 PM

Why does everybody hate T3?

Because T3 is a comedy and from what I know, The Terminator franchise isn't a comedy, serious stuff, robots taking over the world...serious situation

Mefune Akira

05-15-2009, 07:59 PM

T...meds....nuff said. ;)

timothy_richmond_3

05-15-2009, 10:28 PM

I watched the first Terminator when I was a young kid... I remembered that it scared me a lot. Maybe I should give it another chance someday. The second one was great. The third was okay, but it was too much action and not enough intelligence. My thoughts on the fourth? With Arnold out of the picture, I just don't know if I'd want to watch it or not. It could turn out to be good, but I think it'll turn into another mediocre action movie.

Fospherous

05-16-2009, 04:51 AM

T...meds....nuff said. ;)

The pink ones stop you from screaming! :)

Daninsky

05-16-2009, 08:06 AM

I'm probably going to upset the applecart here, but personally, I think they should have stopped after T1.

I actually tend to agree, Terminator ends on this perfect fold with the Machines last hurrah effort turning out to have been what led to their downfall.
And non of the sequels manged to recreate the atmosphere of the first or to come up with a intriguing new direction.
T2 unfortunately fails to be what Aliens was to Alien

T2 tries already too hard to recreate the Time Paradox joke, with this it was Skynet's sending back one of theirs that led to Skynet. But it is a great mindless action romp with some stunning FX.

T3, well, It does have Claire Danes and ends in an Atomic Explosion, so not all is bad.

thebiz

05-19-2009, 08:45 PM

Opinions are like assholes and such but I tend to like this guys..opinion I mean. Sounds like he found it a bit disjointed with a rather solid finale (http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=1642). Hmm....perhaps it will exceed my paltry expectations after all.

Skelch

05-20-2009, 05:11 PM

geoff-uk

05-20-2009, 05:13 PM

Bad news people. According to Wikipedia, Salvation's Reception was worse then the last with 35% on Rotten Tomatoes. :(

DL Watson

05-20-2009, 05:41 PM

Daninsky is right looking at Claire maybe why I liked T3. Then again from what I have seen of the comments here the fact that I liked T3 might just explain why my movies suck. :D I liked all the Terminator films, I only hope I like the new one.

My fear is the new one will be full of some tree hugging muck, or some political correct BS that does not fit into the world of Terminator where saving trees is not the current problem.

It seems hollywood will fit some green statement or some global warming crap into everything they make.

I liked T3 because it was a different take on the terminator series, but for T4 I want to see action and big battles with Terminator exskeletons every freakin' where. I am hoping to go with my wife and oldest daughter, and maybe my brother this Friday.

I don't mean to venture off on another path, but in regards to your "tree hugging muck" in hollywood productions. Is it not important to preserve the very thing that sustains life? I mean, without trees/plants etc, we wouldn't be able to breath on our own. Alot of people felt that WALL-E had to much "tree hugging muck" pushed in their face in regards to the environment and our consumerism.

But most people dont realize that it takes 1000 years for plastic bottles to decompose, and that stirofoam cups NEVER decompose.

And the most shocking piece of "tree hugging muck" is that today, there is what is called the Great Pacific Garbage Patch that si estimated to be twice the size of Texas floating in the middle of the pacific ocean. Nearly 80% of it is made of plastics.

So, me personally, I think there should be a message in films relating to today problems. And even in the Terminator franchise, it has always portrayed the message about the potentially destructive nature of Nuclear Weapons if in the hands of the wrong people and how we are creating technologies so advanced that we may take things too far. A film without some sort of message is just a pointless montage of moving images.

But thats just my opinion.

BricksFilms

05-21-2009, 01:00 AM

From what I've seen so far in the trailers it has all the elements to make a really incredible film, now, IMO, its all up to the execution. The plot, the characters, the visuals have all looked superb so far, I just hope they don't muck it up now. What really turns me on to it is the very Fallout 3 look to it. It very much reminds me of the capitol wasteland and then of course the whole survival element of it (and what looked like a nuke going off in the trailer, heh)

What makes it seem like it wont have the same effect as the original three was that in the originals it was all about trying to prevent the apocalypse and discovering what and how it is supposed to happen. With the new one... it's already happened :P

Still, can't wait to see it for my birthday!

(begins to sing happy birthday to himself in the corner :D )

josephkw

05-21-2009, 02:18 AM

I've always been a fan of T1, and loved T2 as well (if you can excuse the obvious deviations from the plot of T1's "no one goes back, no one else comes through" the rift premise). I was absolutely disappointed with T3--it was just too much of a Hollywood cliche with the predictable introduction of a pretty female terminator (and what's with the wimpification of John Connor's T2 character?).

I absolutely agree with Moonlight in appreciating the inclusion of a message in films. I like to have something more than just simple entertainment. T2 was a great example of this. Most people remember it for the liquid mercurial terminator, but it also had some memorable messages. I always liked that scene where John Connor and Arnie are watching two young boys playing with toy guns trying to shoot each other and John turns to ask Arnold "We're not gonna make it, as a species, are we?". And Arnold says something like "it is in your nature to be self-destructive". This scene is soon followed by the "No fate but what you make" motif which, coupled together, is the message of the film: we're on a downhill spiralling path, but if we do something about it, we can pull ourselves out of this rut.

Now there's a fine line between effectively presenting a message and being preachy. It's obvious from Skelch's post that audiences don't like to be preached to (they're here for entertainment--if they were into education, they'd be watching the discovery channel). However, if the audience doesn't notice the message, then the movie fails in that department and the message may have to be presented in a more obvious fashion. There will also be an overlap of viewers, so some will think the message was overly blatant, and some who still didn't get any inkling that there was a message to the film at all.

AS to "Terminator: Salvation", I'm going to watch it next week, and hope it'll be a good kickstart to breathe new life to this classic film series.

Skelch

05-21-2009, 10:46 AM

I don't mean to venture off on another path, but in regards to your "tree hugging muck" in hollywood productions. Is it not important to preserve the very thing that sustains life? I mean, without trees/plants etc, we wouldn't be able to breath on our own. Alot of people felt that WALL-E had to much "tree hugging muck" pushed in their face in regards to the environment and our consumerism.

But most people dont realize that it takes 1000 years for plastic bottles to decompose, and that stirofoam cups NEVER decompose.

And the most shocking piece of "tree hugging muck" is that today, there is what is called the Great Pacific Garbage Patch that si estimated to be twice the size of Texas floating in the middle of the pacific ocean. Nearly 80% of it is made of plastics.

So, me personally, I think there should be a message in films relating to today problems. And even in the Terminator franchise, it has always portrayed the message about the potentially destructive nature of Nuclear Weapons if in the hands of the wrong people and how we are creating technologies so advanced that we may take things too far. A film without some sort of message is just a pointless montage of moving images.

But thats just my opinion.

Well I guess you are right. When being chased by killer robots, trees are the most important thing. Besides they make good cover.

The problem with Hollywood is everything seems to come back to some ecological debate. I live here and I want a clean planet. I just want a movie that focuses on the story line, what I was saying is I hope it doesn't turn into a cliche tree hugging film.

Yes I am aware that plastic bottles take thousands of years to begin to decay, but none of that matters if you are being hunted by killer robots.

I am only stating that true or not, I don't want to be preached to I want to be entertained. What was so good about T1 was the total fear of this thing that looked human but had zero remorse, and one goal... to kill. The only message I remember from that film was "RUN RUN, the @$% wont die!!!!!" And therefore don't let robots control our weapons. I saw T1 in the theatre when it game out and I love the dang thing, besides Linda Hamilton looked oh so nice. :D

I don't want to be preached to about the evil of mankind, we know we suck. :lol: That's all I am saying I want to be entertained not preached too.

Some movies should have a message, this one I think just needs to be fun.

Carver

05-21-2009, 11:14 AM

Going to see TS today, hope its somewhat worthy.

DL Watson

05-21-2009, 04:15 PM

Well I guess you are right. When being chased by killer robots, trees are the most important thing. Besides they make good cover.

The problem with Hollywood is everything seems to come back to some ecological debate. I live here and I want a clean planet. I just want a movie that focuses on the story line, what I was saying is I hope it doesn't turn into a cliche tree hugging film.

Yes I am aware that plastic bottles take thousands of years to begin to decay, but none of that matters if you are being hunted by killer robots.

I am only stating that true or not, I don't want to be preached to I want to be entertained. What was so good about T1 was the total fear of this thing that looked human but had zero remorse, and one goal... to kill. The only message I remember from that film was "RUN RUN, the @$% wont die!!!!!" And therefore don't let robots control our weapons. I saw T1 in the theatre when it game out and I love the dang thing, besides Linda Hamilton looked oh so nice. :D

I don't want to be preached to about the evil of mankind, we know we suck. :lol: That's all I am saying I want to be entertained not preached too.

Some movies should have a message, this one I think just needs to be fun.

Ah, thanks for that clarification. Sorry I made myself to look like some environmentalist guy, but when I responded I myself had just be educated about all that stuff.

I agree with you, Terminator (the original) captured so many people because, as you said, 1. He was ruthless, emotionless, and total bad-ass. 2. Linda Hamilton was perfectly cast in her role (Its no wonder Cameron ended up being with her for two years) 3. It was an completely original idea that incorporated everyone's worst fears.

I thought Terminator 2 was really good compared to what it could have been. It could have been a complete and utter remake of the first one that didnt take the film anywhere but down. But Cameron was smart when he wrote the script, he knew that so many people enjoyed Arnolds Terminator that he played off that in the opening to make it seem like he was still the badguy, and for me at least, when it turns out that he's the good guy, I just went crazy. I loved it.

Terminator 3 seemed more or less a comedy. When I watched it, I couldnt wait for it to end. My version of T-3 would have been the Nukes going off in the first or second act to bridge the gap between unheroic John Connor and the Heroic John Connor.

As it is now, It goes from pussy John, to Super John. But yeah. I'm ranting again.

Everyone should go and see T-4, its a pretty good film. It have flaws, but its certainly better then T-3. I dont think McG has to worry about Charles Angels hanging over his head anymore.

Skelch

05-21-2009, 05:14 PM

Yep moonlight we agree, well sort of. I liked T3 over all, however you are right it. He was way too wimpy.

The weak guy in the movie all in all I was ok with at first because he had just wrecked the bike and was high on dog tranqulizers, but he should have come along and been more aggressive after those things wore off.

The little kid who played him in T2 was more aggressive than the character in T3. Yet besides this flaw I liked the movie.

I thought the ending was really where I did not like T3. It would have been better if there was a scene at the end from the future where it shows him leading folks and Clare (I forget the character’s name) by his side. He would be standing there with a nick furry look and big cigar hanging out of his mouth. Kinda’ like Christian Bales looks in the new movie.

Or maybe I just liked it because I am old enough to be carried away by hot killer robot chicks and Clare Danes LOL

Anyway I hope to see T4 tomorrow night.

geoff-uk

05-22-2009, 11:54 AM

So what if the critics didn't like it. Its still a brilliant looking film. :D

Killian

05-22-2009, 12:26 PM

Sadly, as I thought it would, every review I've yet seen of it seems to take a dim view of the movie (which isn't surprising, given the first two installments it has to look up to, and the distinctly lacklustre No. 3 that effectively killed the franchise off for some time).

Any road up, it really doesn't matter about reviews, let's be honest. If you're gonna go watch it, you're gonna go watch it and either enjoy it or not, as you will; ditto for those who aren't arsed about it (edit: I count myself amongst the latter group, by the way).

Just because people who aren't stoked about might be negative, I hope those who want to go see it do so and have a great time (which, frankly, is what it's all about, at the end of the day).

geoff-uk

05-22-2009, 12:35 PM

You're right. Critics don't care about enjoyment. All they care about is the story and quality of the film.

Carver

05-22-2009, 01:00 PM

You're right. Critics don't care about enjoyment. All they care about is the story and quality of the film.

A part of enjoyment is the story.

Daninsky

05-22-2009, 01:18 PM

You're right. Critics don't care about enjoyment. All they care about is the story and quality of the film.
Now the case could be made that a film, made for entertainment, I don't enjoy is lacking quality.

However, a reviewers duty is to a degree to give me as acurate and objective a picture of what to expect from a certain work as possible, and only then, when this is accomplished, should he inject his opinion.
Just because Terminator fans might enjoy the movie no less doesn't make it a 'good movie' by a long shot, nor does it necessarily have to be.

The Maverick

05-22-2009, 06:39 PM

After seeing the free clips on Yahoo Movies, I'm not impressed. But, I'm about to see it in about 30 minutes, now. I'm not sure if a Sci-Fi film ever won an academy award or an oscar for being the best picture, but, of assurety, this ain't the one to change that if there hasn't already.

EthanRunt

05-22-2009, 07:50 PM

No, that's Avatar for the award part.

The Maverick

05-22-2009, 10:09 PM

Here's my personal review: the movie wasn't anything spectacular. If you need a quick-fix of action, then this will do. Unlike other revivals and revamps of classic series, this was truly faithful to the franchise. However, some of the lines are the product of amateur hour; the movie actually goes downhill as it progresses, instead of the typical opposite. It's a rollercoaster ride, and like it in real life, there's ups and downs, and then at the end, it slowly down steadily. It's undeniably better than T3 and X-Men: Origins, but it lacks the spark that the new Star Trek (which in coincidence stared Anton Yelchin in both) had. I give it 3.5/5 stars. Nothing spectacular, but all good fun to be had by anyone, fan of the series or not. What do you guys think of it?

Daninsky

05-23-2009, 07:31 AM

Just been reading The Book Smugglers thoughts on Salvation and that made we think:

Traditionally the Terminator franchise started out being about emancipation, with a female character at it's core that learns to fight for herself and the world, a theme that T2 furthered and T3 barely touched on (although it did finally have the logic female Terminator).

Question:
Is that theme picked up again in T4?
Do we get to see another strong female character or women are, as so often the case in action movies, relegated to the side lines in this installment?

Killian

05-23-2009, 07:58 AM

Gratuitous Nudity Shot cut from theatrical release? (http://www.scificool.com/moon-bloodgood-on-her-missing-nudity-in-terminator-salvation-its-a-boob/)

...Nuff said, I think...

Daninsky

05-23-2009, 09:07 AM

Damn page doesn't load. *groawr*

But from the title it doesn't really seem to answer the question, there's no boob in T4, so what, there wasn't any in the others either.

Fospherous

05-23-2009, 09:39 AM

But from the title it doesn't really seem to answer the question, there's no boob in T4, so what, there wasn't any in the others either.

There was, in Terminator 1 when Linda Hamilton was making sexytime with Michael Biehn, in which John Connor was created to save humanity :hammer:

Daninsky

05-23-2009, 10:32 AM

I remember that scene but I don't recall it being much about nudity, guess I have to watch the movie again to check but it always stroke me as being one of the best done sex scene that is actually a lot more about erotic sensuality than showing bare skin.

BiggsTrek

05-23-2009, 12:46 PM

My opinion: Disappointing.

:nuke:

Carver

05-23-2009, 01:29 PM

My opinion: Disappointing.

:nuke:

My thoughts exactly, total letdown.
The trailer makes it look really good, in my eyes the film is garbage.

geoff-uk

05-23-2009, 01:54 PM

Well, so far this film has mixed reactions. But hey, at least its better then T3.

pookashells

05-23-2009, 05:33 PM

I thought it was waaaay better than T3, but not as good as the originals. It needed to ditch the text that gives the background of the future (C'mon, we already know).

Speaking of background, we get like 2 minutes of background on the character Marcus. woohoo. Definitely needed more, I also think they should've kept it a secret that he was part robot instead of giving it away in the trailer, because that's really the only surprise in the film...

In the end, I think it needed more of a story than a guy wandering around, John Connor hating robots, and needing to save his friend.