Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
| Originally posted by Moltisanti Having watched my "T3" DVD over the weekend I'm still puzzled why so many can't appreciate it as a fun installment of one of the best series of films ever. It serves as both a nice end to the trilogy, or a jumping off point to a whole new series. I do have one gripe that I didn't notice when I saw the film in the theater. We don't see how the Terminator gets the shotgun he uses on the TX during their first encounter. In "The Terminator" we see him in the gun shop, then in "T2" he swipes the shotgun from the bartender, but in "T3" he just gets out of the truck and has a shotgun in his hand. It's not a huge deal, but it's too big a leap to believe that he would have been lucky to find the shotgun in the truck he hot wired. That Sgt. Candy scene should have been in the movie. I also would have had Sgt. Candy pop up towards the end when both the TX and the T-850 were at the lab. |
The Terminator is such a mean little action movie and a classic of its kind. It's funny how it feels soo small scale compared to the action extravaganza's of today where you have army's of people and whole cities being laid to waste. But unlike the usual Michael Bay Transformer explosion fests, The Terminator is not only one of the best Sci-fi action movies ever made, it's also one of cinema's greatest love stories. The LA of 1984 feels soo lurid and grungy while there's also a nice Horror feel to the scene's with the Terminator while the post apocalyptic visions are haunting. A great movie where it's lack of budget creates a more intense and intimate feeling than most of the 200 million dollar turds that they make today.
Terminator 2 was one of the greatest cinematic experiences of my life. It's fashionable for to talk shit about Cameron these days but T2 was thee movie of 1991. Anyone who says it lacks heart it fucking nuts. The movie is about Sarah regaining her humanity while the Terminator learns the value of human life. John reconnects with his mother and loses the only real father figure he's ever had. If you say you didn't choke up when the Terminator sacrificed himself, you are as inhuman as Skynet itself. The only dermit in the movie is that it is a repeat of the formula from the first flick. But everything is ramped up and so fucking epic and mindblowing that you'd have to be a real asshole to think that T3 was in any way better than T2.
Speaking of which, T3 (Directed by Jonathan Mostow) is a terrible movie and more of a parody of T2. One of the only things it's got going for it are the action scene's which were classically Directed which is to be admired considering that it came out in 2003 at the height of the wire-fu/slow-motion/speed ramping craze that came in the wake of John Woo and The Matrix. It also helps that the FX were state of the art. Nick Stahl gave a good performance and I admired the ending but, let's face it, they only did that because they were looking to move into the future war for....
Terminator Salvation which was a fucking trainwreck. The bleak, desolate Horror of the future war has been replaced with something that you'd see on the Syfi Channel. Rather than focus on John Conner and Kyle Reece, they throw in this fucking non-sensical character "Marcus" and put him into the mix for who knows what fucking reason. Never mind that they bring in all of this stupid military bullshit that you've see in a million other movies. The multitude of retarded fucking shit in this movie defies belief; The mute black child. The tough chick. The terminators that don't do any actual, you know, TERMINATING as they seem content with throwing people around rather than, say, tearing peoples fucking hearts out. Oh and it's amazing that people still have the ability to perform heart transplants in field hospitals in a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Fuck this movie and anyone who likes it. But most of all, FUCK McG as he is a fucking fratboy douchebag cocksucker of the highest order.
So why did Cameron's movie's work soo well? I think it's because that no matter the scale and scope of the action scene's, James Cameron always focuses on the humanity of his characters and that is true of all of his movies. Sure, Avatar and Titanic are cliched as fuck but make me care about the people in the story and you can sell me anything. This is why I loved Thor and Captain America soo much this year. Neither movie was revolutionary or innovative but they told their story well and made me empathize with the protagonists while the actors gave such earnest performances that they had me eating out of their fucking hands.
This is why Michael Bay will never make anything as good as The Terminator because he knows nothing of the human condition.
I'm actually a fan of T3. Stahl, Schwarzenegger and Danes are great, a few of the action scenes are pretty remarkable and ends just as it should've. I think the reason it's not held in higher regard is the weakass villain. Trying to outdo the T1000 which was an awful mistake. Also whoever's idea it was to make the villain a sexy female should be punched in the face.
T3 gets shit on too much. It's not great, and I wouldn't even go as far as saying it does the first two justice. But it's not embarrassing. The big truck chase is a lot of fun and the tone feels right. Fuck Salvation.
I'm actually a fan of T3. Stahl, Schwarzenegger and Danes are great, a few of the action scenes are pretty remarkable and ends just as it should've. I think the reason it's not held in higher regard is the weakass villain. Trying to outdo the T1000 which was an awful mistake. Also whoever's idea it was to make the villain a sexy female should be punched in the face.
"I like your gun" is one of the worst lines in movie history.
Hah. Cute scene but good thing it was cut, the accent gag is really weird.
Yeah, apocalypic ending or not, that deleted scene would have sunk the film for me. If Terminator 3 didn't have the several "cutesy" bullshit moments like the star-shaped glasses, I think it would be held in higher regard.
I think the Sgt Candy scene was made for the video game. It was just included as an extra on the dvd.
Yeah, apocalypic ending or not, that deleted scene would have sunk the film for me. If Terminator 3 didn't have the several "cutesy" bullshit moments like the star-shaped glasses, I think it would be held in higher regard.
What about the cutesy bullshit moments of T2? Raise your leg, Chill out dickwad, Hasta luego, I need a vacation, Smile.
Those at least were all kid-motivated. Not random silly from left field.
What about the cutesy bullshit moments of T2? Raise your leg, Chill out dickwad, Hasta luego, I need a vacation, Smile.
What Jefelee said. Most of those were ordered or taught by John Conner, who was an annoying twat of a kid. The only line that really came out of nowhere was the whole "I need a vacation" bit, which, admittedly, eggs me a little. It's a bit much for a machine to be cracking jokes about how damaged it is, even if it was programmed to observe and adapt to human behavior.
The original is still the only James Cameron film I genuinely like without any caveats and whilst I've warmed up to T2 a little this year, watching it again on Blu-Ray made me realise how great an action film it really is, I still don't think it's anywhere near as great as the original. I kind of love how brutal and uncompromising the original is, and I get the suspicion that the reason it works is because Cameron was limited by his budget and wasn't able to indulge all of his whims like he could with films in the 90s and 00s.
The original is still the only James Cameron film I genuinely like without any caveats and whilst I've warmed up to T2 a little this year, watching it again on Blu-Ray made me realise how great an action film it really is, I still don't think it's anywhere near as great as the original. I kind of love how brutal and uncompromising the original is, and I get the suspicion that the reason it works is because Cameron was limited by his budget and wasn't able to indulge all of his whims like he could with films in the 90s and 00s.
T2 is a near perfect blockbuster movie and deserves all the praise it has, but I too think in tone it is not a rightful sequel to the original. The first Terminator was so dark, it became horror sci-fi. You were supposed to be afraid of this unstoppable killing machine and Cameron delivered. It was not just a threat, it was a haunting nightmare coming alive. Just imagine one of your daily passerbys being a hidden death machine out for a kill. That gives the creeps.
Now while being a fabulous action piece, T2 has absolutely no horror element. Instead, it has elements of a bright action movie. While Connor gets chased like Mommy, he's never feeling the intensity of dread she felt 14 years ago. For one, because he has better support with Rambo mommy and his personal Terminator at his side, and because of his childish attitude of simply not giving a fuck. He's never actually realizing that Robert Patrick will, if possible, cut him into pieces and end his life. It's a chase, an exciting one, but you never see him fearing for his life. He's only fearing for his mother's.
And then you have him spend time with the Terminator. It's a near castration of the character because suddenly the nightmarish death machine becomes a harmless, cool companion to goof around. That's the equivalent of making the shark jump through hoops in JAWS 2. Maybe to have it fight a big octopus later on, but that's the tone. And Terminator could still have learned enough of humans and be a proper role model for Connor without grinning like a retard.
That had a lot to do where Arnold was in his career as well though. In 1984, he was still starting out and was playing up the scary, no talking hulk that he was. By 1991, he was a huge blockbuster mega star. Kids loved him. I think there almost would be a disappointment had he NOT had any one liners. Cameron was playing to audience expectations at the time. I kind of like the fact that T1 and T2 feel different yet are from the same universe. It's the same as Aliens compared with Alien. One is a horror film, the other is an action film. This is why I have such high hopes for his Avatar sequels.
Old post in the thread, but this is a complete misunderstanding of the time travel of the first movie, which had a great, consistent use of time travel. It's not that Conner shouldn't exist yet in the future until Reese goes back in time, but that from John's point of view in the future, his mom had already been impregnated by a time traveling Reese, it had always/already happened that way. That's why John chose Reese to go back in time to begin with. The second and third movie contradicting the well executed time travel conceit of the first are part of the reason I kind of hate them.
Here's a question I've always had about T2: If nothing inorganic could travel through time, how was the T-1000 sent back?
Total cop-out, but the explaination is that the metal was covered by organic "skin".
I'm actually a fan of T3. Stahl, Schwarzenegger and Danes are great, a few of the action scenes are pretty remarkable and ends just as it should've.
I watched it for the first time recently (after checking out the first and second again) and I honestly felt like switching it off after about half an hour. T3 is pretty poor and certainly several rungs below either of the first two. The dialog is almost uniformly terrible (not to mention riddled with the worst kind of incessant "winks" to fans) and there's far too much reliance on action to distract from a very disappointing plot, even for an action film's standards. There isn't the same melding of plot and action there is in its predecessors, where genuine peril pushes people into exciting directions. T3 just guides two of the least engaging blockbuster leads ever through a series of glorified fan-fiction scenarios and generic emotional beats. Only neutered versions of set-pieces from earlier in the series occasionally elevate it, but even they lack the menace of what went before.
As a rule I like Claire Danes, but I remember her being an absolute void of charisma in this film. Then again Nick Stahl, who would go on to be fantastic in a really thankless role in Carnivale, comes across just as bad. The script just takes the legs out from everyone involved in the film, Schwarznegger is just able to coast on his natural charisma to not come across as badly as Danes and Stahl.
I watched it for the first time recently (after checking out the first and second again) and I honestly felt like switching it off after about half an hour. T3 is pretty poor and certainly several rungs below either of the first two. The dialog is almost uniformly terrible (not to mention riddled with the worst kind of incessant "winks" to fans) and there's far too much reliance on action to distract from a very disappointing plot, even for an action film's standards. There isn't the same melding of plot and action there is in its predecessors, where genuine peril pushes people into exciting directions. T3 just guides two of the least engaging blockbuster leads ever through a series of glorified fan-fiction scenarios and generic emotional beats. Only neutered versions of set-pieces from earlier in the series occasionally elevate it, but even they lack the menace of what went before.
I will cop to not having seen it since it first came out.
Here's a question I've always had about T2: If nothing inorganic could travel through time, how was the T-1000 sent back?
He took a shortcut through a plot-hole.
Ah, Terminator. One of my fondest memories as a kid was going to see T2 opening weekend when I was six years old. (Which may explain my love for it -- T2 really is an R-rated kids film, and I was the perfect age for it.)
What's really struck me is how much more I enjoy the original film as I get older. Growing up, I'd always argue the original was good, but T2 was excellent; I'll still defend T2, but the original is now right up there with it. It's tonally perfect and a hell of a chase flick. That ending is just wonderful, too.
T3 isn't up to the first two, but I still think it's a hell of a lot of fun.
The less said about Salvation the better, considering absolutely nothing of consequence happens in that film. Everybody's the same at the end as they were at the beginning.
Ah, Terminator. One of my fondest memories as a kid was going to see T2 opening weekend when I was six years old. (Which may explain my love for it -- T2 really is an R-rated kids film, and I was the perfect age for it.)
Bingo. You've just summed up the second film perfectly; from the child protagonist, to the catch-phrase spouting Terminator that doesn't terminate, to the optimistic ending. There's no telling how many times I re-watched T2 on VHS when I was a kid, but as I've grown older I continue to hold the first film in higher and higher esteem.
Speaking of T2, if you were not spoiled, the beginning really plays when you find out Arnie's mission.
I keep reading this at the top of the page and picturing future John Connor slowly starting to look like Michael Biehn and screaming 'goddammit Reese'.
What about the cutesy bullshit moments of T2? Raise your leg, Chill out dickwad, Hasta luego, I need a vacation, Smile.
I think those moments were earned. My biggest beef with T2 is the give away at the Motorcycle Bar. Playing "Bad to the Bone" was too corny, and gave away to first time viewers, that Arnold is a good guy. If they would have just subsituted that song, for the classic Terminator theme from the 1st film, and not show Arnold NOT killing the Bartender, the moment at the Mall when Arnold protects John would have been much better. IMO.
It really doesn't. I showed the films to a girlfriend who'd never seen any of them (and knew next to nothing), and the Arnold reveal in T2 stunned her.
Wasn't the whole "Arnold is a good Terminator" spoiled by the marketing material anyway?
Cameron addresses that in the Extreme Edition DVD commentary.
Marketing is fleeting. The movie lasts longer.
This is a little off topic, but it has always bothered me and I thought I'd mention it here. I have never understood the reason why Harlan Ellison was successful in his lawsuit against Cameron and this movie. It's not like he invented the plot device of time travel and the concept of going back in time and altering the future by sparing or taking the life of a certain individual. If that alone was the grounds for his suing then wouldn't the estate of H.G. Wells and Ray Bradbury have a reason to sue Harlan?
He was successful because Cameron not only openly name-dropped him in the press, but if you look at either the Soldier or Demon With A Glass Hand episodes of Outer Limits, it's practically impossible not to see the aesthetic and narrative influence they had on The Terminator.
Second Variety and Jon's World By Philip K. Dick, have as much of a claiim as any of Harlan's works ( I Have No Mouth But I Must Scream, the two Outer Limits episodes he wrote).
And even Harlan admitted Cameron synthesized it all brilliantly with his Jesus Christ savior/reverse abortion storyline. Harlan just wanted to get some kind of acknowledgment. It's bullshit. Cameron did what all great artists do. He stole. He combined. He brought new stuff to the table.
Old post in the thread, but this is a complete misunderstanding of the time travel of the first movie, which had a great, consistent use of time travel. It's not that Conner shouldn't exist yet in the future until Reese goes back in time, but that from John's point of view in the future, his mom had already been impregnated by a time traveling Reese, it had always/already happened that way. That's why John chose Reese to go back in time to begin with.
Exactly. Kyle Reese was always the father of John Connor because Judgment Day was always going to happen. It was inevitable. Now that I think about, both Kyle Reese and that original terminator are both the fathers of the future. The Terminator is really the father of SkyNet.
I disagree. Let's not forget that none of the three time traveling heroes (Reese and the Arnold Terminators) ever run around talking about preventing the future. Reese's plan basically involved he and Sarah staying in hiding and on the run until Judgment Day. T2 Arnold entertains Sarah's theory that Judgment Day could be prevented (or at least altered) by killing Dyson. It did indeed end up changing the future, but not in the way Sarah had hoped. Just as T3 Arnold stated, they only really succeeded in postponing the rise of SkyNet. The timeline was altered, but never prevented. The idea of stopping Judgment Day and the rise of the machines is a notion of Sarah's, not any of our heroes. The deleted scenes on the DVD/BR of the first film back this up as well. Sarah wants to go take out Cyberdyne while they are still some fledgling industrial company. Reese declares it a needlessly reckless plan and prefers to stay on the run. He knows that the terminator might anticipate such a move. T2 Arnold has the same reaction to Sarah's initial musings about killing Dyson. T3 Arnold's sole mission is to get Connor to safety before the main event.
Nothing in T2-T4 really contradicts what was said or shown in the original film. Reese was told only what he needed to know and sent through time. Nothing would be gained from telling him that he would father Connor and die...........or that two reprogrammed terminators would be sent to different places in time after he went through. John just told him that he had to protect Sarah and that they were going to destroy the equipment as soon as he went through. There's an entire unfilmed sequence from the T2 screenplay that pretty much showed that exact scene (minus the mention of the events of T3, naturally).
All things aside, the original film is still the best. T2 absolutely is a classic in its own right, but I'll take the first one over it any day. T3 is a decent sequel that is hamstrung by a script that seems content to merely recycles the best bits from the first two and usually gets a pass because they finally decided to follow through on Judgment Day. Salvation's core problems are also script related. The film was rushed into production with a half-baked screenplay and it definitely shows. It wastes a wonderful performance by Anton Yelchin, kills off the most interesting new character (Marcus), and obviously has no idea what to do with the character of John Connor. When it comes to rewatching them, I prefer Salvation over T3............mainly because it is at least different. Rise of the Machines plays like Terminator 2.5. The TV show, while quite entertaining, has too many time travel antics for its own good. Unless they come up with an amazing way to use it, I really think they need to keep time travel out of Terminator 5. The timeline works fine as is and doesn't need to be hamstrung for the sake of including dead characters. That and we really don't need another film where the protagonists are chased around by a terminator during present day.
Quote:
I'm actually a fan of T3. Stahl, Schwarzenegger and Danes are great, a few of the action scenes are pretty remarkable and ends just as it should've. I think the reason it's not held in higher regard is the weakass villain. Trying to outdo the T1000 which was an awful mistake. Also whoever's idea it was to make the villain a sexy female should be punched in the face.
Though, when you think about it, it was fairly inevitable -- after all, the series had just seen two iconic, nasty-as-hell "male" villains, and even Cameron himself once remarked (probably off-hand) in some post-T2 interview that the franchise would probably see an "evil female" Terminator if it continued further on down the road.
Second Variety and Jon's World By Philip K. Dick, have as much of a claiim as any of Harlan's works ( I Have No Mouth But I Must Scream, the two Outer Limits episodes he wrote).
And even Harlan admitted Cameron synthesized it all brilliantly with his Jesus Christ savior/reverse abortion storyline. Harlan just wanted to get some kind of acknowledgment. It's bullshit. Cameron did what all great artists do. He stole. He combined. He brought new stuff to the table.
Exactly. And bear in mind that most script-similarities *PERCEIVED* as plagiarism are merely reflections of ignorance on the part of the perceiver -- printed SF has been using these same plotlines for over a century. Even H.G. Wells' original version of The Time Machine had an evil, time-travelling villain, and so did Ray Cummings' The Shadow Girl.
Heck...Jack Williamson did a short novel about a time-traveller who'd been involved in destroying the artificially-created, mechanical master of the universe, and did it a long time back.
The thing that always amazed me was that Charles R. Pierce never mounted a HUGE lawsuit over The Terminator and his own Cyborg: 2087, which did some good stuff on a tight budget, and may have even owed a bit to Mr. Ellison, also...
