Terminator Salvation

[KrymynalChylde]

So I now hear the ending of the movie has been changed because of the leak on the internet and I was wondering if anyone could PM me some spoiler action so I can decide whether or not to spend my money...thanks!!

[DeadXMan]

here I'll save ya the time

AVOID IT LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!!!!!!

[Legato]

here I'll save ya the time

AVOID IT LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!!!!!!

Yeah keep spreading that Bale hate that you do. I believe he want a unbiased opinion

[DeadXMan]

From what I heard it makes Wolverine look like star trek.

and Night at the Museum is beating it,.

yeah no bais there

[kalorama]

Yeah keep spreading that Bale hate that you do. I believe he want a unbiased opinion

Or at least an opinion from someone who's actually seen the movie.

[Legato]

Got any proof to support that? Cant say it isn't true but since you were negative about the movie to begin with I cant just take your word for it.

Any poster that isn't biased against the movie could comment on this as I am curious on seeing Salvation myself. I know about the Arnold cameo but still I want a unbiased opinion on if the movie is worth seeing

[Legato]

Or at least an opinion from someone who's actually seen the movie.

I never gave my opinion concerning the movie. Im curious about it myself so back off

[Murrocko]

It's worth seeing I suppose, I just didn't find it to be to good though. The focus of the film was spread between two sets of characters when I felt this was finally going to be John Connor's story. Really disliked the forced characterization of how Sam Worthington was this bad ass and how the surprise of what he is was kinda blown from the very first trailer. I do feel Anton Yelchin played an awesome Kyle Reese though.

Anyways what ending are you talking about that was spoiled online?

[DeadXMan]

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2589&p=.htm
RT gives T4 35%

[KrymynalChylde]

hmm don't remember how to do spoiler styles so i'll just use a yellow font

The ending I was talking about was the one where John Conner dies and they graft his skin/image to the Marcus terminator

[Legato]

It's worth seeing I suppose, I just didn't find it to be to good though. The focus of the film was spread between two sets of characters when I felt this was finally going to be John Connor's story. Really disliked the forced characterization of how Sam Worthington was this bad ass and how the surprise of what he is was kinda blown from the very first trailer. I do feel Anton Yelchin played an awesome Kyle Reese though.

Anyways what ending are you talking about that was spoiled online?

So the movie kinda focused little on John Connor? The trailers made it look like John Connor would play a huge part in the film

I hate how trailers give away important plot points in a movie.

So was the movie trying to make Worthington seem like Arnold when it comes to being a bad ass? Which could be understandable as to why some were turned off towards him

[DeadXMan]

hmm don't remember how to do spoiler styles so i'll just use a yellow font

The ending I was talking about was the one where John Conner dies and they graft his skin/image to the Marcus terminator



.......The Hell?

[Legato]

hmm don't remember how to do spoiler styles so i'll just use a yellow font

The ending I was talking about was the one where John Conner dies and they graft his skin/image to the Marcus terminator

For that Im gald they changed the ending.

[Hoss]

Well - yes, they changed the ending. Connor lives because the new Terminator sacrifices himself and gives him his enhanced human heart. Which makes it very easy for them to bring back the new Terminator with either a mechanical heart or a human heart.

I enjoyed the movie - much better than T3 and nowhere nearly as good as T1 and T2. But seriously, the first 2 Terminator films are among the best action films ever made. If you go in with those expectations I think you'll be sorely disappointed and if you want to dislike the movie you'll find plenty of reason to do so.

But I went in expecting to be entertained for 2 hours and the movie did not disappoint. Bale gave you Bale - you either like him or not. The supporting actors were all very good, the action was intense, and the look and pacing of the film were quite good.

[Murrocko]

So the movie kinda focused little on John Connor? The trailers made it look like John Connor would play a huge part in the film

I hate how trailers give away important plot points in a movie.

So was the movie trying to make Worthington seem like Arnold when it comes to being a bad ass? Which could be understandable as to why some were turned off towards him

He was in it a fair share, I just didn't enjoy that it was a split story. Worthington was like. I did bad things in the past, I'm not a good guy, I'll do what I want. Just annoyed me, felt no sympathy or anything for him.

hmm don't remember how to do spoiler styles so i'll just use a yellow font

The ending I was talking about was the one where John Conner dies and they graft his skin/image to the Marcus terminator

Woah, that would have need a horrible ending.

[Murrocko]

I agree with Hoss that overall action in the film was great, it was the story and a few of the characters that fell flat with me.

[Legato]

Well - yes, they changed the ending. Connor lives because the new Terminator sacrifices himself and gives him his enhanced human heart. Which makes it very easy for them to bring back the new Terminator with either a mechanical heart or a human heart.

I enjoyed the movie - much better than T3 and nowhere nearly as good as T1 and T2. But seriously, the first 2 Terminator films are among the best action films ever made. If you go in with those expectations I think you'll be sorely disappointed and if you want to dislike the movie you'll find plenty of reason to do so.

But I went in expecting to be entertained for 2 hours and the movie did not disappoint. Bale gave you Bale - you either like him or not. The supporting actors were all very good, the action was intense, and the look and pacing of the film were quite good.

Thank you for letting me know that Salvation succeeded whare Rise of The Machines failed horribly because to be honest if Salvation turned out to be better than Rise of The Machines then I would be happy with that. Did the movie gave any hint on a possible sequel or could this actually be the final Terminator movie?

[Murrocko]

Nah, this is supposed to be a new trilogy. McG plans to do the origin of the T-1000 next and then some other funky shit. The war looks like its still going to be going on for a while if not forever in an infinite loop.

[Legato]

He was in it a fair share, I just didn't enjoy that it was a split story. Worthington was like. I did bad things in the past, I'm not a good guy, I'll do what I want. Just annoyed me, felt no sympathy or anything for him.


Guess that is what I liked about Arnold's character. He got no angsty past but yet you can feel some sympathy concerning him, in Judgement Day atleast.

Was Worthington's character flat? Could that be the reason why it was difficult for some people to sympathise with him?

[Legato]

Nah, this is supposed to be a new trilogy. McG plans to do the origin of the T-1000 next and then some other funky shit. The war looks like its still going to be going on for a while if not forever in an infinite loop.

Would all depend on how it does at the box office though. I think by memorial day it would make some decent cash, then you have the DVD sales ontop of it

[Murrocko]

Guess that is what I liked about Arnold's character. He got no angsty past but yet you can feel some sympathy concerning him, in Judgement Day atleast.

Was Worthington's character flat? Could that be the reason why it was difficult for some people to sympathise with him?

Might have been. I can't really pin point what it was for me that made me dislike him. He did at some points lose his accent and sounded like he was from Brooklyn. I just didn't care for his story I guess. Didn't add to the Terminator mythos or anything for me. Would have preferred a John Connor's leading the Resistance story or him getting to that messiah level that we've been told of in the past films. All in all, wasn't horrible or crippling to the franchise like a Batman & Robin, -B, +C rating.

[Legato]

Might have been. I can't really pin point what it was for me that made me dislike him. He did at some points lose his accent and sounded like he was from Brooklyn. I just didn't care for his story I guess. Didn't add to the Terminator mythos or anything for me. Would have preferred a John Connor's leading the Resistance story or him getting to that messiah level that we've been told of in the past films. All in all, wasn't horrible or crippling to the franchise like a Batman & Robin, -B, +C rating.

Like you said this is the beginning of a new trilogy. Perhaps by the ending of the third film we would see John Connor becoming that Messiah figure that T1 & T2 mentioned

How was Arnold's cameo handled? Was thare any enemy Terminators that was as memorable as the T-1000?

[Murrocko]

The cameo for lack of better words was fucking neat. I have no idea how they did it, but it was Arnold on steroids with cool 80's haircut. John didn't seemed fazed by the sights of him though which bothered me a tad, but overall I liked it.

[Legato]

The cameo for lack of better words was fucking neat. I have no idea how they did it, but it was Arnold on steroids with cool 80's haircut. John didn't seemed fazed by the sights of him though which bothered me a tad, but overall I liked it.

The only theory I could guess concerning how you described John's reaction was that he is a soldier and in intense situations he had no time to freak out.

If I had seen the movie I would probably say that cameo, while cool, wasn't a holy sh*t kind of cameo that the Original Spock made in Abrams Star Trek. Yet Im glad that Arnold's cameo got a positive reaction.

[Murrocko]

Haven't seen Trek yet so I don't know about all that.

[Legato]

Haven't seen Trek yet so I don't know about all that.

My bad.:redface:

[Legato]

I do wonder if the Sarah Connor Chronicles is going to be connected with the new Trilogy in any way? I doubt it but given the show's popularity I wouldn't be surprised

[Murrocko]

I do wonder if the Sarah Connor Chronicles is going to be connected with the new Trilogy in any way? I doubt it but given the show's popularity I wouldn't be surprised

Didn't it get canceled?

[Legato]

Didn't it get canceled?

I heard it's at risk but dont know if it's officially canceled.

[kalorama]

I never gave my opinion concerning the movie. Im curious about it myself so back off

No, actually, you back off. I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about DeadXMan who was basing his opinion on "what he heard." I quoted your post because it made a nice lead in to the point. BIG HINT: I was agreeing with you.

In the future, it might help if you read all the words before responding. Or, y'know, you can skip the reading part and go straight to unprovoked outrage and indignation, if it makes things easier for you.

[kalorama]

Woah, that would have need a horrible ending.

No shit. If they changed it because of an Internet leak then hooray Internet leaks.

[kalorama]

Well - yes, they changed the ending. Connor lives because the new Terminator sacrifices himself and gives him his enhanced human heart. Which makes it very easy for them to bring back the new Terminator with either a mechanical heart or a human heart.

I enjoyed the movie - much better than T3 and nowhere nearly as good as T1 and T2. But seriously, the first 2 Terminator films are among the best action films ever made. If you go in with those expectations I think you'll be sorely disappointed and if you want to dislike the movie you'll find plenty of reason to do so.

But I went in expecting to be entertained for 2 hours and the movie did not disappoint. Bale gave you Bale - you either like him or not. The supporting actors were all very good, the action was intense, and the look and pacing of the film were quite good.

Yeah, it worked pretty well on its own terms. The fact that the look and feel of it was so radically different than the others was a bit jarring at first and made it a bit hard to reconcile with the rest of the franchise, but overall I actually think the shift in time and focus worked to its advantage.

[Legato]

No, actually, you back off. I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about DeadXMan who was basing his opinion on "what he heard." I quoted your post because it made a nice lead in to the point. BIG HINT (since you clearly missed it): I was agreeing with you.

In the future, it might help if you read all the words before responding. Or, y'know, you can skip the reading part and go straight to unprovoked outrage and indignation, if it makes things easier for you.

Well that post looked like you was attacking me so how was I supposed to know it was adressed to someone else? If you used DeadXMan's quote along with mine I would have gotten it.

But since that comment wasn't adressed as an attack to me then I apologise for that

[Dave Bennett]

I heard it's at risk but dont know if it's officially canceled.

It is. :frown: :frown:

[kalorama]

Well that post looked like you was attacking me

No, actually, it really didn't. It looked like exactly what it was, me agreeing with you about DeadXMan's lack of credibility on judging the film.

so how was I supposed to know it was adressed to someone else?

Like I said, read all of the words. It really wasn't that tricky.

[Legato]

It is. :frown: :frown:

Why do I sense the irony in that. It could be that the show involved someone who was co-starring on the SCC who used to be on another show that got cancelled by Fox.

Sucks to be Summer Glau since she got screwed by the network again.

[Legato]

No, actually, it really didn't. It looked like exactly what it was, me agreeing with you about DeadXMan's lack of credibility on judging the film.



Like I said, read all of the words. It really wasn't that tricky.

I apologised for that so could we just drop the subject?


Also it is nice that you agreed with my view concerning the posters comment

[Hoss]

I do wonder if the Sarah Connor Chronicles is going to be connected with the new Trilogy in any way? I doubt it but given the show's popularity I wouldn't be surprised

There is no little brother character for Kyle so I doubt it. It does seem to tie into T3 in that John's wife is named Kate.

As far as Arnold's cameo, they CGId his face onto someone else's body.

[DonC]

The cameo for lack of better words was fucking neat. I have no idea how they did it, but it was Arnold on steroids with cool 80's haircut. John didn't seemed fazed by the sights of him though which bothered me a tad, but overall I liked it.


My understanding was that they pasted Arnold's face onto Roland Kickinger's body.

http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/roland-kickinger-walking-tall-world-premiere-in-los-angeles-rqaRE8.jpg

[suttercain]

I went and watched it yesterday. Hadn't heard anything about the ending. I was in the minority and actually enjoyed Rise of the Machines, but I have to say, Salvation sucked. The action was cool, but there is NO STORY whatsoever. I went with a friend who is a huge Terminator fan and we both agree, it's not good.

[suttercain]

My understanding was that they pasted Arnold's face onto Roland Kickinger's body.

http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/roland-kickinger-walking-tall-world-premiere-in-los-angeles-rqaRE8.jpg

And you can tell. While some of the special effect were cool looking, some looked really bad. Like it was so obvious a green screen was used.

[lonewolf23k]

If it's good enough for Chester A. Bum, it's good enough for me. (http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/bum-reviews/7348-bumterm)

[IronStarks]

Ive seen it twice now (won a early screening off the radio and went with a friend and then my girlfriend wanted to see it) I though it was good better then T3 but as others are saying, not as good as the others. The Special Effects were some of the best ive seen.

Now i have only one big complaint on a pretty big plot hole. Now if anyone can help me out or explain it, would be really helpful. But how the heck did the machines now about Kyle Reese? Or even John Conner for that matter? I could see them explaining that Conner is a threat and needs to be eliminated, but how would skynet now about Kyle. Its not like Conner is going around telling everyone Kyle is his father.

[DeadXMan]

Ive seen it twice now (won a early screening off the radio and went with a friend and then my girlfriend wanted to see it) I though it was good better then T3 but as others are saying, not as good as the others. The Special Effects were some of the best ive seen.

Now i have only one big complaint on a pretty big plot hole. Now if anyone can help me out or explain it, would be really helpful. But how the heck did the machines now about Kyle Reese? Or even John Conner for that matter? I could see them explaining that Conner is a threat and needs to be eliminated, but how would skynet now about Kyle. Its not like Conner is going around telling everyone Kyle is his father.

I'm going with the T-X giving skynet the info for the no prize

[suttercain]

But how the heck did the machines now about Kyle Reese? Or even John Conner for that matter? I could see them explaining that Conner is a threat and needs to be eliminated, but how would skynet now about Kyle. Its not like Conner is going around telling everyone Kyle is his father.

I didn't even think about that. DNA maybe? You've asked an excellent question though.

[IronStarks]

I'm going with the T-X giving skynet the info for the no prize

See thats what my girlfriend said, but i dont know. I feel they atleast should have said a line of dialog in the movie relating to this.

[Murrocko]

Now i have only one big complaint on a pretty big plot hole. Now if anyone can help me out or explain it, would be really helpful. But how the heck did the machines now about Kyle Reese? Or even John Conner for that matter? I could see them explaining that Conner is a threat and needs to be eliminated, but how would skynet now about Kyle. Its not like Conner is going around telling everyone Kyle is his father.

Bigger plot hole is why didn't they just kill him when they captured him instead of turning him into bait for JC?

[kalorama]

I apologised for that so could we just drop the subject?

Well, strictly speaking, it's not really an apology when you preface it by saying it was the fault of the person you're apologizing to. But other than that, sure, consider it dropped.

[kalorama]

Bigger plot hole is why didn't they just kill him when they captured him instead of turning him into bait for JC?

On a related note, why did they send the Terminators after Connor one at a time? Since he was inside a facility literally full of them, why not overwhelm his position with them? And, once the one they did send found him, what was with the WWE slap fight? Why not just snap his neck or put a fist through his chest right off and be done with it. Better yet, why not give the Terminator a gun and just shoot him?

(Of course these are all the kind rhetorical questions whose answers are only important in inverse proportion to how much you actually enjoyed the film.)

[kalorama]

Now i have only one big complaint on a pretty big plot hole. Now if anyone can help me out or explain it, would be really helpful. But how the heck did the machines now about Kyle Reese? Or even John Conner for that matter? I could see them explaining that Conner is a threat and needs to be eliminated, but how would skynet now about Kyle. Its not like Conner is going around telling everyone Kyle is his father.

It's one of those inevitable time-travel paradox thingies. You could look at it as a byproduct of all the mucking with the time stream. In the timeline in which the movie takes place, Skynet has already sent back 3 Terminators to kill Connor. They all failed, but the effects of their attempts are part of the timeline's "permanent record" so Skynet already knows that John is the Messiah and that Kyle is his father, even though it hasn't happened yet. (Yeah, I know; but it makes about as much sense as Connor sending his own father back in time to impregnate his mother.)

If you want a more practical foundation for it, you could say that the knowledge of Connor and Kyle's destinies was encoded on the damaged chip from the T-800 in the original movie and was downloaded into the computer databases that ended up becoming Skynet when Cyberdyne was experimenting on it.

[Crowforge]

If it's good enough for Chester A. Bum, it's good enough for me. (http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/bum-reviews/7348-bumterm)

That was so bad I didn't make it to what I assume would be a trashing of terminator: giant mecha war.

[suttercain]

Did anyone else think it was the cheesiest thing ever when Conner's wife asked "What should I tell them." and then he pauses and says "Tell them. I'll be back." That was soooo fuckin' stupid.

Most of the people in the audience seemed to think so too. I live in California and having had heard that line used over 10,000 times during the political campaigns it makes me want to get violent.

[tjarvis]

Did anyone else think it was the cheesiest thing ever when Conner's wife asked "What should I tell them." and then he pauses and says "Tell them. I'll be back." That was soooo fuckin' stupid.

Most of the people in the audience seemed to think so too. I live in California and having had heard that line used over 10,000 times during the political campaigns it makes me want to get violent.

I don't know, I saw it at Universal Citywalk in North Hollywood, and the theatre cheered. Of course following that up with G & R got an even bigger pop out of everyone.

[Murrocko]

Did anyone else think it was the cheesiest thing ever when Conner's wife asked "What should I tell them." and then he pauses and says "Tell them. I'll be back." That was soooo fuckin' stupid.

Most of the people in the audience seemed to think so too. I live in California and having had heard that line used over 10,000 times during the political campaigns it makes me want to get violent.

I hate whenever they re-use lines. "Come with me if you want to live". How many different characters in this universe has said that?

[IronStarks]

I hate whenever they re-use lines. "Come with me if you want to live". How many different characters in this universe has said that?

In all 4 movies? 2

[Murrocko]

And in the tv show. lol really, it was when I saw the chick robot say it in a commercial is when it bugged me.

[Red Lotus]

Why do I sense the irony in that. It could be that the show involved someone who was co-starring on the SCC who used to be on another show that got cancelled by Fox.

Sucks to be Summer Glau since she got screwed by the network again.

It was more of a money and bad rating thing. The show had bad ratings and even if the movie would have giving it a bump it wouldn't be a enough. Since they wouldn't make that much money off the DVD sales of the show there was no reason for fox to keep it.

[Hoss]

Of course following that up with G & R got an even bigger pop out of everyone.

Excellent use of nostalgia there - I really dug it.

[Nate Grey]

So this is the official Terminator Salvation thread? Okay...well it didn't make it to #1 at the box office (but it had a strong Thursday opening) over the weekend. That went to Night at the Museum II (and I still haven't seen the first one. Might need to change that). BoxOfficeMojo.com is saying T:S is #2, with a take of over 50 mil so far (the movie has a production budget of $200 mil). Does this equel flop? Maybe it'll recoup a lot of it Memorial Day.

[KiFF86]

The only thing that bugged me was the Alice in Chains part. I thought we might get a Marcus flashback to explain why "Rooster" meant something to him, or who the f is running a radio station during the robot Armageddon.

[Nate Grey]

Oh right, as to what I thought of the movie itself...better than T3, not as good as 1 and 2. Basically. I liked that Marcus Wright was in a way the audience surrogate to this new "tone shift" that will make up the rest of the two movies (assuming they still get green lit now). He was actually chosen first to play Duke in the G.I. Joe movie but either this movie or another movie caused a schedule conflict. So the whole time I was thinking, "Yeah, I can see him playing Flint if G.I. Joe makes enough money for a sequel."

Loved the kind-of love story with him and Blair...and how neat was it that Helena Bonam Carter showed up as, well, Skynet? I gotta admit, I didn't expect that at all.

Complaints? Not many. I just didn't like the way John was distrustful of Marcus at first given his experiences with Terminators, reprogramed and otherwise.

I don't know, it was cool, but doesn't have the replay value of T1 and T2. I can see myself seeing it again just not so soon.

[Hoss]

The only thing that bugged me was the Alice in Chains part. I thought we might get a Marcus flashback to explain why "Rooster" meant something to him, or who the f is running a radio station during the robot Armageddon.

I'm pretty sure that was a CD... But I definitely think there was alot of Marcus backstory that somehow didn't make it into the movie.

[kalorama]

Complaints? Not many. I just didn't like the way John was distrustful of Marcus at first given his experiences with Terminators, reprogramed and otherwise.

I had just the opposite reaction. His distrust of Marcus made perfect sense to me, given his past experience with Terminators. Every Terminator he trusted in the past was one who had been reprogrammed by some version of himself (or someone he cared about) to do his bidding. He had no reason to think that of Marcus. But given the level of his distrust (up to and including carpet bombing a couple of square miles of terrain trying to kill him), I found Connor's sudden decision to trust Marcus a bit too quick of an about face. I really didn't think Marcus had done much of anything up to that point to earn Connor's trust, given his initial stance towards Marcus.

[Nate Grey]

I had just the opposite reaction. His distrust of Marcus made perfect sense to me, given his past experience with Terminators. Every Terminator he trusted in the past was one who had been reprogrammed by some version of himself (or someone he cared about) to do his bidding.

Good point.

He had no reason to think that of Marcus. But given the level of his distrust (up to and including carpet bombing a couple of square miles of terrain trying to kill him), I found Connor's sudden decision to trust Marcus a bit too quick of an about face. I really didn't think Marcus had done much of anything up to that point to earn Connor's trust, given his initial stance towards Marcus.

Well, maybe it was Marcus not aggressively trying to kill him (or trying to kill him at all) plus Marcus saving him from that sea worm Terminator thing that made John think "Okay, maybe he is one of the good guys." The sea worm sequence was in the middle of Marcus's escape attempt, something a normal Termintor wouldn't do (they'd regroup to get a better shot but not try to flee altogether). Marcus taking the time to save John instead of saving himself, knowing he could have been re-captured in the process, might have been the final proof John needed to trust him.

I guess what I'm confused about is how this was all a ploy by Helena Bonam Skynet. How did she know Marcus would become friends with Kyle and develop an emotional bond with him so he'd want to rescue Kyle, that he'd meet John, all that stuff? Or was she just blowing hot air? And why take the time to repair him? Or continue to give him free will AFTER his "mission" was accomplished?

[Crowforge]

If every terminator has two mini nukes in their chest why not detonate when they're about to lose or just when they see john?

[TROUBLEZ]

If every terminator has two mini nukes in their chest why not detonate when they're about to lose or just when they see john?


I think that was the worst addition to the Terminator mythos. Couldn't the nukes go off if damaged by the resistance? Or if that's the case, just make them all robot kamikazes to just go off once they step foot in a camp. Why even carry weapons?

[kalorama]

Good point.

Well, maybe it was Marcus not aggressively trying to kill him (or trying to kill him at all) plus Marcus saving him from that sea worm Terminator thing that made John think "Okay, maybe he is one of the good guys." The sea worm sequence was in the middle of Marcus's escape attempt, something a normal Termintor wouldn't do (they'd regroup to get a better shot but not try to flee altogether). Marcus taking the time to save John instead of saving himself, knowing he could have been re-captured in the process, might have been the final proof John needed to trust him.

Yeah, I could see John having that response if they were starting out on an equal playing field, so to speak. But given his initial mistrust/cynicism and what he knows about human-form Terminators being infiltration agents, I could just as easily see him taking Marcus' actions as part of a calculated plan to win his trust and lower his guard. I don't really have a problem with him deciding to trust Marcus per se (it was a plot device that had to happen), but I just thought they could have given a couple more minutes to smoothing out the transition. But not really a big complaint in the grand scheme of things.

I guess what I'm confused about is how this was all a ploy by Helena Bonam Skynet. How did she know Marcus would become friends with Kyle and develop an emotional bond with him so he'd want to rescue Kyle, that he'd meet John, all that stuff? Or was she just blowing hot air? And why take the time to repair him? Or continue to give him free will AFTER his "mission" was accomplished?

Well, it wasn't so much a case of Skynet knowing as Skynet calculating and playing the odds. Even though they weren't physically controlling his movements, Skynet was still yanking Marcus' leash, putting him on a collision course with Kyle. They were also orchestrating the action on the other side, by giving the Resistance the "secret weapon" that would allow them to end the war. Then they used the perfectly time attacks as catalysts to spark everything off. They were manipulating players on both sides and counting on human nature to make them perform as necessary. Basically they put everyone in a situation where the larger threat around them created the need for alliances to form in pursuit of basic self-preservation. They couldn't have been certain it would work, but people are predictable enough that their odds of success were pretty good.

The fact that a mechanical intelligence seemed to have such a keen understanding of human emotional behavior was one of the more interesting subtexts of the story, I thought.

[Trey]

I thought it was a very good movie. Extremely well done action scenes. It felt like a cross of Fallout 3 and The Road Warrior, visually and the obstacles out there in the wasteland. I thought the special effects were excellent, except for the CGI Arnold.

The Resistance and thier war operations were well done. The pacing was fast and there were a number of unexpected actions during the combat scenes.

Its a survival story. It is what it is. That then gets turned into a rescue mission. I wouldn't say that there is no story here. We have the Reese/Conner connection that ties the films together. The Marcus/Blair story and the personal struggle of man/machine, what makes us different, free will, fate etc.

As an experience, its a top 10 action/scifi movie of all-time.

[Mia]

Yes there is plot, granted a thin one. I liked the film alot. But mostly for the cast and the cinematography.

[Decepticons_Rule]

I'm a Terminator fanboy.

The movie sucked. The director sucked.

Bale did a fine job, as did Worthington, it wasn't their fault the plot sucked.

Where was the Terminator theme music?

The Arnold CGI looked cool.

The action was nice.

Overall the movie sucked because it lacked the heart and story that the 3 others prior to this had.

I'm glad it got beat by Ben Stiller.

[Legato]

I'm a Terminator fanboy.

The movie sucked. The director sucked.

Bale did a fine job, as did Worthington, it wasn't their fault the plot sucked.

Where was the Terminator theme music?

The Arnold CGI looked cool.

The action was nice.

Overall the movie sucked because it lacked the heart and story that the 3 others prior to this had.

I'm glad it got beat by Ben Stiller.

The theme music happened at the beginning.

I have seen the movie and the problem that this movie had going is that it wasn't about John Connor.

The first and the third movie focused on John Connor but Salvation looked like it was following the story of Marcus more than John. They used the Kyle Reese story as a way to incorporate John Connor into the film in some way but to be honest I felt that John was mostly a supporting character instead of the actual star in this movie. If looking at the movie closely Marcus was the actual hero of the film as if it wasn't for him John Connor wouldn't have taken down Skynet or save his father.

Im mostly disappointed that you hardly ever have any scenes concerning John and Kyle while Marcus and Kyle had more interaction time.

[Decepticons_Rule]

As an experience, its a top 10 action/scifi movie of all-time.

Yeah, right up there with Charlie's Angels 3, Blade 3, Matrix 3, Spider-Man 3, X-Men Origins:Wolverine, Elektra, Daredevil, and all the other horrible action flicks that preceded this horrible action flick.

[Legato]

Yeah, right up there with Charlie's Angels 3, Blade 3, Matrix 3, Spider-Man 3, X-Men Origins:Wolverine, Elektra, Daredevil, and all the other horrible action flicks that preceded this horrible action flick.

Uh I would have to disagree with that. Not sure what spawn the harsh review but IMO I say Salvation was a vast improvement against T3 and it isn't as bad as you make it turn out to be.

Also I liked X-Men Origins: Wolverine a hell of alot more than Last Stand.

But I understand that you cant please everyone

[Legato]

My review of Salvation.

Despite the fact that I felt that this isn't a actual John Connor movie I felt that this movie was a pretty good action flick. The war battles was good, the special effects were great, I liked the CGI Arnold at the end.

If I had to rank this compared to the other Terminator movies then it would be like this.

1. Terminator

2. Judgement Day

3. Salvation

4. Rise of the Machines

What helped for me is that I didn't come into the film expecting a great epic movie so my expectations, thanks to Rise of The Machines, wasn't too high. I can honestly say that this movie made me look forward to seeing another Terminator film again.

The movie has it's share of flaws but I still find it enjoyable

[Legato]

I had just the opposite reaction. His distrust of Marcus made perfect sense to me, given his past experience with Terminators. Every Terminator he trusted in the past was one who had been reprogrammed by some version of himself (or someone he cared about) to do his bidding. He had no reason to think that of Marcus. But given the level of his distrust (up to and including carpet bombing a couple of square miles of terrain trying to kill him), I found Connor's sudden decision to trust Marcus a bit too quick of an about face. I really didn't think Marcus had done much of anything up to that point to earn Connor's trust, given his initial stance towards Marcus.

IMO I think Connor was in a situation whare if he dont trust Marcus then his father will die. So Connor had to put his trust in Marcus to make sure that he dont be erased from existance should something happen to Kyle.

[Decepticons_Rule]

I don't even consider this a Terminator movie.

There's only been two true Terminator movies, both were directed by James Cameron.

The past two have been abominations made for a quick buck.

[Captain Trips]

The only thing that bugged me was the Alice in Chains part. I thought we might get a Marcus flashback to explain why "Rooster" meant something to him, or who the f is running a radio station during the robot Armageddon.

I took the significance of that being the lyrics of the song: "Ain't found a way to kill me yet." He was executed and brought back to life and didn't know how. And in doing so, he has somehow survived an apocalypse that has wiped out almost all of humanity.

I also just assumed that was a CD playing and not being broadcast.

[Legato]

I took the significance of that being the lyrics of the song: "Ain't found a way to kill me yet." He was executed and brought back to life and didn't know how. And in doing so, he has somehow survived an apocalypse that has wiped out almost all of humanity.

I also just assumed that was a CD playing and not being broadcast.

Thats the only logic I could get out of that scene. If thare is a gripe I could have concerning Marcus is how vague his backstory is

[Decepticons_Rule]

I also just assumed that was a CD playing and not being broadcast.

Yeah, I though most people would understand that it was a CD.

I'm pretty sure that even McG would know better than have some random resistance fighters broadcast a music signal that would lead the machines to them.

:rolleyes:

[the_coldest_sun]

I really, really liked this movie. My only gripe is Skynet knowing about John Conner and Kyle Reese so early into the war. The only reason Skynet originally knows is because John Conner leads the human resistance to VICTORY, which makes Skynet go "Oh crap, THIS GUY needs to die before the war starts."

As far as Marcus Wright taking up most of the story/screentime, I didn't mind. We've had John Conner for quite some time now (and even though the whole Terminator mythology revolves around his character), it was a nice change of pace to introduce a new character and his story in this world they've created (which, given the ending, is just only for one movie so relax :tongue: ).

The story/plot was pretty straight-forward, but there was only so much they could work with without completely altering or fucking up the timeline or mythology (which honestly could've easily happened considering this wasn't done by James Cameron). I'm pretty grateful we got a story that didn't do that...unlike the series SCC, which introduced being able to jump FORWARD through time, UGH!!

If this is indeed the start of a new trilogy, for a movie that didn't have a lot of plot, it did a great job of setting up what needed to be done:
-getting Kyle Reese and John Conner together
-John Conner becoming leader of the resistance
-the creation of the T-800 models

Regarding the ending: I'm so glad they didn't kill off John Conner just after meeting Kyle Reese, because in the first movie Kyle had known John for a long time and were best friends. For a guy whose previous work I hate, I think McG did a good job respecting the history of the previous Terminator movies.

As far as John's reaction to seeing the T-800, I thought it was appropriate. He looked ready to shit himself. What did everyone expect him to do, try to reason with it and say "We used to be friends! Hasta la vista, remember?" :rolleyes:

[Chiasm]

I thought this was a good movie and I enjoyed it as much as Star Trek. I didn't go into Salvation expecting it to be as good as T1 or T2, I merely wanted to enjoy it and be entertained and on that level it fully succeeded. Sure certain things don't make a lot of continuity sense but if this is a trilogy perhaps those things will be explained next film.

My biggest nitpick is was Worthington's accent as the Australian seemed to come out at random. Is it so hard to get him to reread a line now and then?

Of the big fanboy Sci Fi blockbusters of the past few years I'd put this just slightly below Star Trek and way way WAY above Transformers.

[Chiasm]

If every terminator has two mini nukes in their chest why not detonate when they're about to lose or just when they see john?

At the end of T2, Arnold states that Terminators cannot self terminate. I don't know that its ever been explained why this is but there you go.

[Legato]

I don't even consider this a Terminator movie.

There's only been two true Terminator movies, both were directed by James Cameron.

The past two have been abominations made for a quick buck.

Sorry but I dont see this as a good reason to not like Salvation. If you hate both movies that much why bother spending money on watching them then? Not being snarky just saying that if I hate the Post-Cameron movies as much as you do then I wouldn't wast money seeing them

[the_coldest_sun]

Sorry but I dont see this as a good reason to not like Salvation. If you hate both movies that much why bother spending money on watching them then? Not being snarky just saying that if I hate the Post-Cameron movies as much as you do then I wouldn't wast money seeing them

I agree. Whats the situation like?

Guy 1: Hey they're making a new Terminator movie.
Guy 2: Is James Cameron doing it?
Guy 1: No.
Guy 2: Then it automatically sucks.
Guy 1: Are you still going to see it?
Guy 2: ... yes.

[Legato]

I agree. Whats the situation like?

Guy 1: Hey they're making a new Terminator movie.
Guy 2: Is James Cameron doing it?
Guy 1: No.
Guy 2: Then it automatically sucks.
Guy 1: Are you still going to see it?
Guy 2: ... yes.

You see. That is why it doesn't make sense to me. That and blindly judging that the movie will be bad despite the fact that Salvation had some good qualities.

Now I admit Salvation isn't in the same league as T1 & T2 but I say that atleast the director is trying to improve whare Rise of The Machine's failed.

[Decepticons_Rule]

Sorry guys, I still think TS sucked.

[Legato]

Sorry guys, I still think TS sucked.

I respect that honestly. Eventhough I still find the reason not a very good one

[Decepticons_Rule]

You see. That is why it doesn't make sense to me. That and blindly judging that the movie will be bad despite the fact that Salvation had some good qualities.

Now I admit Salvation isn't in the same league as T1 & T2 but I say that atleast the director is trying to improve whare Rise of The Machine's failed.


I was excited to see Salvation, the trailer was quite good. Like I said earlier, I am a Terminator fanboy.

It just seems like McG took a shit on everything that Cameron, and even the director of T3, established.

The bleak, dark future was ignored and replaced by a rainy or fighting in daylight future.

I think McG's inspiration was a mix of random videogames and the T2 Universal Studios ride when he shot this movie.

I wanted Salvation to be another iconic movie, and it was empty, heartless, and Bale wasn't even the star of the film.

I hate this movie, and I hope to God that if there is a T5, that McG is nowhere near it, nor anyone else who wrote the script.

[kalorama]

IMO I think Connor was in a situation whare if he dont trust Marcus then his father will die. So Connor had to put his trust in Marcus to make sure that he dont be erased from existance should something happen to Kyle.

I agree that that's what eventually spurred his decision. I just thought it was a bit too quick a turnaround from Connor trying to torpedo him into scrap to trusting him with literally everything that's important to him in the world. But, like I said, not a major enjoyment spoiler.

It was kind of like an old issue of Marvel Team-Up where two heroes spend most of the issue fighting because of a convenient misunderstanding or mistaken identity before inevitably realizing they're on the same side and working together to take down the bad guy.

[Legato]

I was excited to see Salvation, the trailer was quite good. Like I said earlier, I am a Terminator fanboy.

It just seems like McG took a shit on everything that Cameron, and even the director of T3, established.

The bleak, dark future was ignored and replaced by a rainy or fighting in daylight future.

I think McG's inspiration was a mix of random videogames and the T2 Universal Studios ride when he shot this movie.

I wanted Salvation to be another iconic movie, and it was empty, heartless, and Bale wasn't even the star of the film.

I hate this movie, and I hope to God that if there is a T5, that McG is nowhere near it, nor anyone else who wrote the script.


Reading this I understand your reasoning for not liking it. Personally if McG does make another one I hope he learns from his mistake and would try to improve from this.

Also I hope he wont plan on killing off John Connor. That is one part of T3 I would like to see not happening

[kalorama]

I was excited to see Salvation, the trailer was quite good. Like I said earlier, I am a Terminator fanboy.

It just seems like McG took a shit on everything that Cameron, and even the director of T3, established.

The bleak, dark future was ignored and replaced by a rainy or fighting in daylight future.

I think McG's inspiration was a mix of random videogames and the T2 Universal Studios ride when he shot this movie.

I wanted Salvation to be another iconic movie, and it was empty, heartless, and Bale wasn't even the star of the film.

I hate this movie, and I hope to God that if there is a T5, that McG is nowhere near it, nor anyone else who wrote the script.

Just because the sun comes out doesn't make the future in this film any less bleak (or any less dark for that matter.) Yes it departed from the earlier movies, but that's an inevitable consequence of setting it in the future rather than the present day. In Cameron's Terminator the future was really never more than an idea or a concept. This is the first time we've really experienced it full on on film. The director couldn't really adhere to Cameron's "vision" of the future because we never really saw it as anything more than quick glimpses. He had to bring his own interpretation to it to fully flesh it out.

[Decepticons_Rule]

Reading this I understand your reasoning for not liking it. Personally if McG does make another one I hope he learns from his mistake and would try to improve from this.

Also I hope he wont plan on killing off John Connor. That is one part of T3 I would like to see not happening


Connor, according to established Terminator chronology, doesn't die until 2032, I believe. T3 says that Connor was assassinated by a T-800, which was then caught and reprogrammed, then sent back in the future by Connor's wife to save the both of them on Judgement Day.

That should be Terminator 6 when that happens, but I doubt we'll ever see a T6, especially if Ben Stiller keeps beating Terminator at the box office.

[Legato]

Connor, according to established Terminator chronology, doesn't die until 2032, I believe. T3 says that Connor was assassinated by a T-800, which was then caught and reprogrammed, then sent back in the future by Connor's wife to save the both of them on Judgement Day.

That should be Terminator 6 when that happens, but I doubt we'll ever see a T6, especially if Ben Stiller keeps beating Terminator at the box office.

Um Im pretty sure Ben Stiller wont have anything to do with it even if we dont see it.

[Decepticons_Rule]

Um Im pretty sure Ben Stiller wont have anything to do with it even if we dont see it.

Ok, then in layman's terms:

If a movie with a $150+ million dollar budget winds up in second place, with horrible reviews, to a family movie with almost equally bad reviews, then a franchise will most likely not get a sequel.

[Legato]

Ok, then in layman's terms:

If a movie with a $150+ million dollar budget winds up in second place, with horrible reviews, to a family movie with almost equally bad reviews, then a franchise will most likely not get a sequel.

Thare are other factors to Salvation not doing well besides going up against a family movie

[Decepticons_Rule]

Thare are other factors to Salvation not doing well besides going up against a family movie

Yeah, yeah, I know, like the NBA and NHL playoffs.

But that didn't stop Star Trek, Night at the Museum, and whatever came out last week from making good money, and coming in at NUMBER ONE.:evilangry:

[Legato]

Yeah, yeah, I know, like the NBA and NHL playoffs.

But that didn't stop Star Trek, Night at the Museum, and whatever came out last week from making good money, and coming in at NUMBER ONE.:evilangry:

Ok now this is just being ridiculous. I know you hate Salvation but come on

[Decepticons_Rule]

Ok now this is just being ridiculous. I know you hate Salvation but come on

Reasons it got beat:

-NBA playoffs
-NHL playoffs
-Families doing family things together on Holiday weekend
-PG-13 Rating against a PG rated movie
-It sucked
-Critics agreed with me that it sucked
-Long running time
-McG
-It sucked

[Legato]

Reasons it got beat:

-NBA playoffs
-NHL playoffs
-Families doing family things together on Holiday weekend
-PG-13 Rating against a PG rated movie
-It sucked
-Critics agreed with me that it sucked
-Long running time
-McG
-It sucked

Yet you decide to squander your money on it anyway. This is one if the things I find annoying concerning people who hate the Terminator films because Cameron isn't on them.

Im sure a critics would have made a more reasonable and unbiased review as to why they dont like the movie instead of saying it just sucks. This outright screams biasism.

Believe what you want Im done

[Decepticons_Rule]

Yet you decide to squander your money on it anyway. This is one if the things I find annoying concerning people who hate the Terminator films because Cameron isn't on them.

Im sure a critics would have made a more reasonable and unbiased review as to why they dont like the movie instead of saying it just sucks. This outright screams biasism.

Believe what you want Im done


I saw the movie on Sunday despite the reviews and badtalk on the internet.

Then I plunked down my money regardless, I wish I hadn't.

I snuck into Night at the Museum afterwards, so I left the theatre after at least getting to laugh.

[TROUBLEZ]

@Kalorama,

Agree with your last part, but it doesn't change that the imagery seen in flashbacks may be superior to what we saw in Salvation.

Seeing the action take place does seem less bleak. My whole reason for wanting to see Salvation was because I thought the majority of the movie would be like the T1/T2 future sequences. It looked more like Transformers.


I don't think people hate the non-Cameron movies because of that fact alone. I think it's because they turned out to pale in comparison. I love The Sarah Connor Chronicles but disliked T3 and T:S.

[DeadXMan]

At the end of T2, Arnold states that Terminators cannot self terminate. I don't know that its ever been explained why this is but there you go.

yet in T3 he cracks one on purpose to take out The T-X....

[Crowforge]

Well I guess they fixed it....
What was this, a safeguard against depressed machines?

[DeadXMan]

Reasons it got beat:

-NBA playoffs
-NHL playoffs
-Families doing family things together on Holiday weekend
-PG-13 Rating when all the others were R
-It sucked
-Critics agreed with me that it sucked
-Long running time
-McG
-It sucked
I'm going with those reasons
what is up with making every fourth film of an R action series a PG-13?
Lethal weapon, Die hard and now Terminator! Thank God Stallone had the balls to kept Rambo R

[Chiasm]

I agree that that's what eventually spurred his decision. I just thought it was a bit too quick a turnaround from Connor trying to torpedo him into scrap to trusting him with literally everything that's important to him in the world. But, like I said, not a major enjoyment spoiler.

It was kind of like an old issue of Marvel Team-Up where two heroes spend most of the issue fighting because of a convenient misunderstanding or mistaken identity before inevitably realizing they're on the same side and working together to take down the bad guy.

I didn't have any trouble buying Connor deciding to trust Marcus. Remember Connor has had experience with two completely different Terminators being on his side in his past. So its really not that big a leap for him to suddenly meet up with a new Terminator and come to the realization it might be on his side.

[Crowforge]

Maybe they couldn't come up with R-rated ideas?
Also I haven't seen the movie but if they can make terminators that act completly human and some that are composed of liquid metal how are they able to detect them and two how are they able to beat them. Feel free with the spoilers.

[DeadXMan]

I didn't have any trouble buying Connor deciding to trust Marcus. Remember Connor has had experience with two completely different Terminators being on his side in his past. So its really not that big a leap for him to suddenly meet up with a new Terminator and come to the realization it might be on his side.

except those terminators were reprogrammed by him or his wife to protect his younger self.

[WyldCard4]

Hm...

From the sound of it making Marcus into John Connor was what they actually wanted to do, what the movie was set up to be, and what turned out they could not possibly do and have a marketable movie.

In that context the movie makes a lot more sense to me, they had a vision, they couldn't do it, so they made a movie half about John Connor and half about Marcus, it became good enough for me to see it as a part of the saga and not good enough to equal Terminator.

Grafting John Connor's skin onto Marcus is the worst possible thing they could have done, they were right to revise the movie.

[TROUBLEZ]

I think it's because they want to attract an even larger audience and make sure they recoup the budget faster.

Plus, I think The Dark Knight influenced their decision, because it was a dark film yet got a PG-13 rating and did extremely well.

Also Watchmen did poorly and had an R rating.

The difference though is that The Dark Knight had an amazing peformance by Ledger, and the added hype surrounding his unfortunate death.

Watchmen did bad, but I think it had less to do with rating and more to do with movie length minus and standout performances, recognizable characters, style etc.

To me, a war movie about robots that terminate humans has to be rated R.

[Crowforge]

Hm...

From the sound of it making Marcus into John Connor was what they actually wanted to do, what the movie was set up to be, and what turned out they could not possibly do and have a marketable movie.

In that context the movie makes a lot more sense to me, they had a vision, they couldn't do it, so they made a movie half about John Connor and half about Marcus, it became good enough for me to see it as a part of the saga and not good enough to equal Terminator.

Grafting John Connor's skin onto Marcus is the worst possible thing they could have done, they were right to revise the movie.
where'd you get this info?

[DeadXMan]

Maybe they couldn't come up with R-rated ideas?
Also I haven't seen the movie but if they can make terminators that act completely human and some that are composed of liquid metal how are they able to detect them and two how are they able to beat them. Feel free with the spoilers.

The T-3000 was a prototype, and the T-X was designed to be an anti-terminator cause the resistance started reprogramming T-100s
but neither should be here during this stage of the war.

[TROUBLEZ]

What about the original draft of the script where Skynet is the bad guy? Where can I find more out about this?

[Chiasm]

except those terminators were reprogrammed by him or his wife to protect his younger self.

But he didn't know that at the time when those Terminators showed up and saved him. Instead he judged the Terminator by its actions which is what he ended up doing here as well. In T2 for instance the Arnold Terminator saved his life after which 13 year old John fully accepted he was on his side even before Arnold gave his explanation.

[DeadXMan]

But he didn't know that at the time when those Terminators showed up and saved him. Instead he judged the Terminator by its actions which is what he ended up doing here as well. In T2 for instance the Arnold Terminator saved his life after which 13 year old John fully accepted he was on his side even before Arnold gave his explanation.

He said he figured the terminator was not sent back to kill him, since arnnie had him dead to rights five times over.

out o couriousity didn't they keep who the bad guy in T2 a secrect until it was released?
just wondering cause the way the first half of the movie was shot.

[Chiasm]

I hadn't seen the original Terminator in at least 10 years, maybe even 15 so I decided tonight to watch it again. I remembered it being awesome but now that I'm 40 minutes in but I'm kind of aghast at how bad some of it is. I can forgive the special effects since they were state of the art for the time but other things like the cheesy 80's soundtrack, the horrible musical score that interrupts the action, and the bad acting really are making Salvation look better and better. I'm only at the point that Kyle first rescues Sara and I think it should get better from here but I think some in this thread have a case of overhypeded nostalgia for this movie. I watched T2 just last week and it was very good but T1 is a case of a great concept movie some serious flaws.

[Chiasm]

He said he figured the terminator was not sent back to kill him, since arnnie had him dead to rights five times over.


And my point is that Marcus had him dead to rights as well after the helicopter crash but instead saved him. As such it wouldn't be that big of a leap of faith for him to believe this Terminator was on his side.

As to your other question - I don't remember.

[the_coldest_sun]

out o couriousity didn't they keep who the bad guy in T2 a secrect until it was released?
just wondering cause the way the first half of the movie was shot.

I wasn't sure about this so I did some Youtube searches.

Teaser Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TctwLOSY4M0&feature=related
Theatrical Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWutJqsk0IE

[Crowforge]

I hadn't seen the original Terminator in at least 10 years, maybe even 15 so I decided tonight to watch it again. I remembered it being awesome but now that I'm 40 minutes in but I'm kind of aghast at how bad some of it is. I can forgive the special effects since they were state of the art for the time but other things like the cheesy 80's soundtrack, the horrible musical score that interrupts the action, and the bad acting really are making Salvation look better and better. I'm only at the point that Kyle first rescues Sara and I think it should get better from here but I think some in this thread have a case of overhypeded nostalgia for this movie. I watched T2 just last week and it was very good but T1 is a case of a great concept movie some serious flaws.
What Year!
Look, cool stuff happens in that one, he steals a bums pants, breaks into a store gets new shoes and coat, keeps the pants. There was a sense of grimyness the later movies lack, the later movies turn the events of the first movie into a formula. I only stopped watching the first movie when I began to hate arnold.

[IronStarks]

I find it funny that people are talking all doom and gloom saying that T4 didnt make enought money for a sequal. It had a solid opening weekend with over 50 million. Sure its not a massive blockbuster like Iron Man or Dark Knight, but It still has along time going in the movie theater.

And i think the next big action blockbuster to come out (correct me if im wrong) is Transformers that dosent come out till next month. Plenty of time for T4 to make some money.

Im not a T4 fanboy. I hated the plotholes. But i like the vison and idea. I hope they get a chance at T5

[Hoss]

out o couriousity didn't they keep who the bad guy in T2 a secrect until it was released?
just wondering cause the way the first half of the movie was shot.

As I recall, they tried really hard and with out the internet it was much easier - I doubt you could get away with that twist nowadays - aren't people talking about an early version of the script being released online?

[Hoss]

I hadn't seen the original Terminator in at least 10 years, maybe even 15 so I decided tonight to watch it again. I remembered it being awesome but now that I'm 40 minutes in but I'm kind of aghast at how bad some of it is. I can forgive the special effects since they were state of the art for the time but other things like the cheesy 80's soundtrack, the horrible musical score that interrupts the action, and the bad acting really are making Salvation look better and better. I'm only at the point that Kyle first rescues Sara and I think it should get better from here but I think some in this thread have a case of overhypeded nostalgia for this movie. I watched T2 just last week and it was very good but T1 is a case of a great concept movie some serious flaws.

It was also made for 6 million dollars. Even back then, it was a pretty thin budget. But I agree, the concept in many ways was better than the film. Aliens is way superior as a movie.

[David Walton]

IMO T1 was a better concept movie, but T2 was a better action movie with a philosophical subtext (the future isn't set in stone).

I think it's interesting because from what I can gather, the Terminator movies were never built to be a franchise. It seems to me that while T2 was well done, it was designed more as a vehicle for Arnold rather than as the "natural" continuation of the storyline.

I haven't seen T3 because I just didn't care at that point. I thought T2 closed off the series nicely--after that it kind of lost any legitimacy for me.

Salvation looks like it could be good. Certainly examining John's future and how it matches with our preconceptions is an intriguing premise.

The problem I see it coming up against (in my mind) is that the actualization of the bleak, apocalyptic future kind of loses the hook of the original two films--disaster on the horizon. T2 did a great job of picking up on the idea of a woman burdened with the knowledge of total disaster in an endless landscape of video arcades, clubs, and shopping malls.

T1 and 2 had that classic horror vibe. What makes it so frightening is not so much that a monster is coming but that no one believes you.

[Legato]

I find it funny that people are talking all doom and gloom saying that T4 didnt make enought money for a sequal. It had a solid opening weekend with over 50 million. Sure its not a massive blockbuster like Iron Man or Dark Knight, but It still has along time going in the movie theater.

And i think the next big action blockbuster to come out (correct me if im wrong) is Transformers that dosent come out till next month. Plenty of time for T4 to make some money.

Im not a T4 fanboy. I hated the plotholes. But i like the vison and idea. I hope they get a chance at T5

You also have the DVD sales to consider. So the chances of another T5 could be good

[David Walton]

You also have the DVD sales to consider. So the chances of another T5 could be good

Yeah, Without the strength of Arnold at his peak to carry the film, I've got to think T4 doesn't look to be a failure.

I also think there will be a lot of movement on the DVD front. It's new, it's experimental, and it's a risk. Could be good, could be horrible. I'm probably going to wait for DVD but it looks to be worth a shot there.

[DeadXMan]

I wasn't sure about this so I did some Youtube searches.

Teaser Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TctwLOSY4M0&feature=related
Theatrical Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWutJqsk0IE

it's sad that the cg from 91 looks better then the ones in 09

[Legato]

it's sad that the cg from 91 looks better then the ones in 09

Whats sadder is that your still trashing a movie that you haven't even watched.

[TROUBLEZ]

But the cg does look better.

[passer-by]

I also think there will be a lot of movement on the DVD front. It's new, it's experimental, and it's a risk. Could be good, could be horrible. I'm probably going to wait for DVD but it looks to be worth a shot there.What exactly is new and experimental about T4?

[DeadXMan]

Whats sadder is that your still trashing a movie that you haven't even watched.

Oh I watched it but I didn't pay for it.

and no I didn't DL it.:rolleyes:

I did it the old fashion way. :tongue:

[TROUBLEZ]

Nothing. It's Terminator, Transformers and Matrix combined.

[Legato]

Oh I watched it but I didn't pay for it.

and no I didn't DL it.:rolleyes:

I did it the old fashion way. :tongue:

So your one of those people who hate but still watch it regardless. Good for you

[User Name]

So something else I noticed about the movie and it was obviously set up because they're planning a sequel, but I found it interesting nonetheless. When we first see Kate, we see that she's pregnant. She even does the pregnant woman belly rub just to bring the point home. Yet the pregnancy is not mentioned anywhere and has absolutely no relevance at all to the plot. I just found that interesting. Is the rumored original ending the real original ending or is it just an internet rumor? If it's real, maybe there's a connection that got canned.

[DeadXMan]

So your one of those people who hate but still watch it regardless. Good for you

Sorry, it was my freind's turn to pick the film and was paying me back for covering her and her nepthew when we saw Wolverine.:rolleyes:

[TROUBLEZ]

According to McG, T6 will showcase the importance of John and Kates child.

[DeadXMan]

this is of course if they green light T5 with McG at the helm

this was a vary poor opening for a holiday weekend

[TROUBLEZ]

I can't say that I'm looking foward to T5 or the origin of the T-1000.

[Mac Danny]

hmm don't remember how to do spoiler styles so i'll just use a yellow font

The ending I was talking about was the one where John Conner dies and they graft his skin/image to the Marcus terminator

I actually might have preferred that ending. That the idea of Conner is more important that Conner himself.

Plus it ties in with a plotline in the TV Show.

[User Name]

this was a vary poor opening for a holiday weekend

Really? You hadn't mentioned that, so I had no idea.

[David Walton]

What exactly is new and experimental about T4?

It's experimental for a Terminator film to look at it solely from the future perspective.

As far as movies go, it doesn't strike me as experimental or innovative.

But for a Terminator film it's a departure from the original premise, the future meeting the present.

[Legato]

Really? You hadn't mentioned that, so I had no idea.

The guy is a pure Bale hater so I wouldn't take his word seriously if I were you

[kalorama]

@Kalorama,

Agree with your last part, but it doesn't change that the imagery seen in flashbacks may be superior to what we saw in Salvation.

Or, conversely, it may not be superior. It's purely a matter of opinion. My point was that the simple fact that it's different doesn't inherently make it worse, which is what Decepticons_Rule seemed to be saying. Certainly, to look at the world depicted in this film and complain that it wasn't "bleak" or "dark" seems to be way off key.

[kalorama]

But he didn't know that at the time when those Terminators showed up and saved him. Instead he judged the Terminator by its actions which is what he ended up doing here as well. In T2 for instance the Arnold Terminator saved his life after which 13 year old John fully accepted he was on his side even before Arnold gave his explanation.

Of course, the fact that he was 13 may have had something to do with it, too.

[DeadXMan]

The guy is a pure Bale hater so I wouldn't take his word seriously if I were you

aaaaaaah, go eat a billy goat.

[TROUBLEZ]

Certainly, to look at the world depicted in this film and complain that it wasn't "bleak" or "dark" seems to be way off key.

It's not off key if you've seen the first two. If this were your first Terminator movie, then yeah, it fits the bleak and dark bill perfectly.
But after seeing rated R future sequences in the first two, the world McG brought to the table seems alot less scary.

[DeadXMan]

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/md.htm

the list of the top 12 memorial day weekend list

Updated monday

It's not Bale hate it's facts.

[kalorama]

It's not off key if you've seen the first two. If this were your first Terminator movie, then yeah, it fits the bleak and dark bill perfectly.
But after seeing rated R future sequences in the first two, the world McG brought to the table seems alot less scary.

Perhaps, but "less scary" was never part of the discussion.

The future shown in this film is, in and of itself, certainly dark and bleak. That was my only point (in contrast to Decepticon claiming that it wasn't). It's a post-apocalyptic world in which humans are hunted by killer robots to the brink of extinction. Now, if you want to debate whether this version is less bleak and dark than the others or bleak and dark in a different way that's a different issue. But in and of itself, it is certainly both. Much of Mad Max took place in the day time. Was that future not bleak or dark?

[DeadXMan]

expect in T1 it is said they couldn't move around in the daytime and that is why the fought at night

and here T2 war scene
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcisPdJVNl8

[TROUBLEZ]

You can't compare Max Max because it wasn't a post apocalyptic future where a sentiant AI drops nuclear bombs all over the Earth.

The PG-13 content didn't really push the threat of humant terminating machines.

Even with the small TV show budget, The Sarah Connor Chronicles portrayed a better vision of the future war.

[Legato]

aaaaaaah, go eat a billy goat.

Wow what a mature response to a debate. Try not to troll the Terminator or any threads concerning Bale next time

[Legato]

You can't compare Max Max because it wasn't a post apocalyptic future where a sentiant AI drops nuclear bombs all over the Earth.

The PG-13 content didn't really push the threat of humant terminating machines.

Even with the small TV show budget, The Sarah Connor Chronicles portrayed a better vision of the future war.

Haven't really followed the show so how was the Sarah Connor Chronicles version of the future different compared to the other versions?

[kalorama]

expect in T1 it is said they couldn't move around in the daytime and that is why the fought at night

You can't compare Max Max because it wasn't a post apocalyptic future where a sentiant AI drops nuclear bombs all over the Earth.

The PG-13 content didn't really push the threat of humant terminating machines.

Even with the small TV show budget, The Sarah Connor Chronicles portrayed a better vision of the future war.

Again, nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Whether this one is "better" is purely a judgment call (and I certainly don't think this is a better movie than the first). Same with whether it's different than what's shown or talked in the original (although if you wanna go that route, Connor himself makes the point that the future he's in is not, in fact, the same one his mother warned him about; clearly their previous attempts to change the future worked, just not the way they anticipated).

[DeadXMan]

Wow what a mature response to a debate. Try not to troll the Terminator or any threads concerning Bale next time

what have I said tha is trolling?

I don't care for hs acting ability since I saw him in American psycho.
I think his temper is hurting his career.
I made fun of his batman voice, but really, who hasn't?
and I've shown facts that have backed up my staments on the weak showing of T4 over the hoiliday

If anyone been trollish is been you constinly berating me when ever I post in the these threads

seriouly How can saying the CG effects in T2( which one a freaking acadmey award for) is better then in the new one is proof I'm a hater troll?

[TROUBLEZ]

Visually, it's similar to the first two movies with the landscape and fighting-at-night.
But it actually advances the future storyline past Kyle going back in time. That goes against the storyline in T1, but it makes for a more progressive story.

Here's some spoilers if you don't mind:


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
At this point in time John Connor is beginning to heavily rely on reprogrammed Terminators to fight Skynet.
His own men question his actions because of this.
Skynet at one point employs chemical warfare.
Reprogrammed T-800s navigate the submarines to eliminate human error in what's presumed to be Skynet infested waters.
The resistance is in such dire straights that Connor actually tries to convice rogue T-1000s to join him. Sounds cheesy but it was an element that I'm guessing was going to be explained in depth more had the show been given a second season.

[Legato]

what have I said tha is trolling?

I don't care for hs acting ability since I saw him in American psycho.
I think his temper is hurting his career.
I made fun of his batman voice, but really, who hasn't?
and I've shown facts that have backed up my staments on the weak showing of T4 over the hoiliday

If anyone been trollish is been you constinly berating me when ever I post in the these threads

seriouly How can saying the CG effects in T2( which one a freaking acadmey award for) is better then in the new one is proof I'm a hater troll?


No. I have made some statements concerning T4 and statements that support that Bale is a good actor when he isn't playing the brood or the badass. Also discussing with some of the other posters on the pros and flaws of the movie.

[Legato]

Visually, it's similar to the first two movies with the landscape and fighting-at-night.
But it actually advances the future storyline past Kyle going back in time. That goes against the storyline in T1, but it makes for a more progressive story.

Here's some spoilers if you don't mind:


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
At this point in time John Connor is beginning to heavily rely on reprogrammed Terminators to fight Skynet.
His own men question his actions because of this.
Skynet at one point employs chemical warfare.
Reprogrammed T-800s navigate the submarines to eliminate human error in what's presumed to be Skynet infested waters.
The resistance is in such dire straights that Connor actually tries to convice rogue T-1000s to join him. Sounds cheesy but it was an element that I'm guessing was going to be explained in depth more had the show been given a second season.

I suppose given his relationship with Cameron I can understand how Future Connor would want the rogue Terminators to join him. Given his past history with the T-800 in Terminator 2 that is even more understandable.

That is if Sarah Connor Chronicles is following T2 aswell

[TROUBLEZ]

Again, nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Whether this one is "better" is purely a judgment call (and I certainly don't think this is a better movie than the first). Same with whether it's different than what's shown or talked in the original (although if you wanna go that route, Connor himself makes the point that the future he's in is not, in fact, the same one his mother warned him about; clearly their previous attempts to change the future worked, just not the way they anticipated).

Judgement calls are what determine if a movie does well though. I'm sure people can make arguments that Catwoman was a good movie too.

You brought up that Cameron hadn't established much in his movies. Then when showed that he in fact did establish much, with less time and budget you say it's because "It's not the same future." Why bother trying to argue that Cameron didn't establish enough only to come back and say it doesn't matter because it's a different future?

You can't have you're cake and eat it too.

T:Salvation fails on a number of levels for a variety of reasons:

*An altered future storyline, which attempting on it's own isn't a bad thing, but the result is inferior to the established one.
*It's a war movie that takes place after nuclear bombardment of the planet with machines that exterminate humans and yet it has a PG-13 which causes the the future to be less darker, both visually and content-wise, in order for kids to be able to see it.
*Effects wise, we've already seen the same thing in 3 Matrix movies and in Transformers, as well as seeing Terminators enough.
*The focus of the film was comprised in order for it to be a launching pad for a new tilogy franchise
*Big plot holes, which normally can be overlooked except when the villain is a sentient, military AI. In the movie it's pretty stupid.

[Hoss]

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/md.htm

the list of the top 12 memorial day weekend list

Updated monday

It's not Bale hate it's facts.


Wow, there are alot of really, really bad movies on that list...
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
X-Men: The Last Stand
The Day After Tomorrow
Pearl Harbor
The Longest Yard (Sandler version)

[DeadXMan]

Judgement calls are what determine if a movie does well though. I'm sure people can make arguments that Catwoman was a good movie too.
You brought up that Cameron hadn't established much in his movies. Then when showed that he in fact did establish much, with less time and budget you say it's because "It's not the same future." Why bother trying to argue that Cameron didn't establish enough only to come back and say it doesn't matter because it's a different future?

You can't have you're cake and eat it too.

T:Salvation fails on a number of levels for a variety of reasons:

*An altered future storyline, which attempting on it's own isn't a bad thing, but the result is inferior to the established one.
*It's a war movie that takes place after nuclear bombardment of the planet with machines that exterminate humans and yet it has a PG-13 which causes the the future to be less darker, both visually and content-wise, in order for kids to be able to see it.
*Effects wise, we've already seen the same thing in 3 Matrix movies and in Transformers, as well as seeing Terminators enough.
*The focus of the film was comprised in order for it to be a launching pad for a new tilogy franchise
*Big plot holes, which normally can be overlooked except when the villain is a sentient, military AI. In the movie it's pretty stupid.

The Irony of that,is that the writers of T4 also wrote catwoman.

[Chiasm]

Much of Mad Max took place in the day time. Was that future not bleak or dark?

When someone first made the criticism of Salvation that it sucked because they fought in the daytime I laughed because of how stupid the comment was. Because if you think about it the reason all the battle scenes in the first two movies were done in the dark is because the special effects were easier to do when it was dark. You can blur the background and pass it off as night so that you only have to focus on on a few little things. CGI has now improved to the point that they can do realistic daytime battle scenes. It was never dark before because it was supposed to be representative of a bleak future, it was dark because the robots would have looked even more fake in the daylight. Thats whats changed and thats why. .

[TROUBLEZ]

Probably. It doesn't change the fact that some people find the night scenes work better. Also, I'd imagine that either the effects of a nuclear war would darken the day time, or the destruction of the ozone layer would prevent the surviving humans from venturing in the sun. Then again, they'd be in a radiocative landscape so that itself is a problem. The daytime in Salvation just compounds the already existing believability problems.
Back to the day time, even had they been fighting in the day, wouldn't matter like dust and smoke be in the atmosphere, like the effects of a nuclear winter?


About the CGI question: Since CGI has improved they should have opted to make more advanced looking robots.
In '84 it was cool, now it's starting to look dated. Since it's an alternate future, where humans reverse engineered future technology, the structure of the infiltrators would probably be more advanced.

[Jared H.]

So is this also the thread to post opinions in general?

Well, in case it is...

Did this movie feel like fanfiction to anyone else? Seriously. The new guy, to me, seems the very definition of Gary Stu. He has double the screen time of Bale, is super-powered, saves Conner multiple times, and in the end dies to save the main character of the regular series while everyone cries.

Seriously. Gary Stu.

[DeadXMan]

Wow, there are alot of really, really bad movies on that list...
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
X-Men: The Last Stand
The Day After Tomorrow
Pearl Harbor
The Longest Yard (Sandler version)

and they all beat T4

[Legato]

and they all beat T4

If this dont have Bale would you trash T4 as often as you have?

[kalorama]

You brought up that Cameron hadn't established much in his movies. Then when showed that he in fact did establish much, with less time and budget you say it's because "It's not the same future." Why bother trying to argue that Cameron didn't establish enough only to come back and say it doesn't matter because it's a different future?

I dunno. Maybe you should ask someone who did that, because I didn't.

(A) It has not (at least to me) been shown that he "did, in fact, establish much with less time and budget." My original stand remains unchanged: all we saw in the first film were glimpses of what the future looked like. Most of what we did learn about the future came from Reese talking about it to Sarah. In other words, it was precisely because of time and budget constraints that he established so little (in concrete visual terms) about what the future looked like. (B) My observation that it was a different future (and it was) was a direct response to the observation that, according to T1, they Resistance only traveled at night because of the Terminators. A simple statement of fact to address a perceived inconsistency. Pointing out that one element hardly stands as Cameron "in fact, establishing much." It's one thing he established, by telling us.

[Crowforge]

If this dont have Bale would you trash T4 as often as you have?
No, but he helps make it easier.

[kalorama]

Probably. It doesn't change the fact that some people find the night scenes work better. Also, I'd imagine that either the effects of a nuclear war would darken the day time, or the destruction of the ozone layer would prevent the surviving humans from venturing in the sun. Then again, they'd be in a radiocative landscape so that itself is a problem. The daytime in Salvation just compounds the already existing believability problems.
Back to the day time, even had they been fighting in the day, wouldn't matter like dust and smoke be in the atmosphere, like the effects of a nuclear winter?

If you want believability, these really aren't the movies you should be watching.

[Legato]

No, but he helps make it easier.

Of course. Which is why I expect him to do the same routine the minute the third Batman movie comes out

[Legato]

If you want believability, these really aren't the movies you should be watching.

Yeah since Terminator's concept alone defines unbelievability

[DeadXMan]

If this dont have Bale would you trash T4 as often as you have?

YES!!!!!

The mere fact that McG and the idiots that wrote the Catwoman movie are connected to Terminator is enough to make sane person trash it.
:evilmad:

for Christ's sake what with the obsession with Bale?


If you don't like what I'm saying put me on Ignore:rolleyes:

[Crowforge]

Of course. Which is why I expect him to do the same routine the minute the third Batman movie comes out
I also(?) don't like the current crop of batman movies I don't think I'm being unfair in my critiques (because of my dislike of bale) though.

[DeadXMan]

I also(?) don't like the current crop of batman movies I don't think I'm being unfair in my critiques (because of my dislike of bale) though.

I think if Heath didn't die many of the flaws in DK would been brought to light.
( none were from his performance)

[Crowforge]

I really didn't like that take on the joker (a character I already don't like). this is getting off topic.

[Legato]

YES!!!!!

The mere fact that McG and the idiots that wrote the Catwoman movie are connected to Terminator is enough to make sane person trash it.
:evilmad:

for Christ's sake what with the obsession with Bale?

If you don't like what I'm saying put me on Ignore:rolleyes:

You seem obsessed to the point that you would trash anything he is in.

[DeadXMan]

all I said I didn't care for American Psycho, and reign regin of fire.
I wouldn't of liked them with or without him

and DK has flaws in it
and not from Bale expect for the chain smoking voice.

the major flaw with DK was with Two Face being wrapped up too quickly

now I liked swing Kids and empire in the sun

[TROUBLEZ]

If you want believability, these really aren't the movies you should be watching.

It's the director's job to make a film believable whether it be drama or SF.

I can overlook plot holes or accuracy when the story is good but when the problems keep pilling on as the movie progresses, it's hard to enjoy.

And I enjoyed T1, T2 and the TV show just fine.

[the_coldest_sun]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the opening sequence in T2 takes place in 2029, while T4 takes place in 2018 during the creation of the T-800s. Its been a while since I've seen T1 but doesn't Kyle mention that things started getting worse when the T-800s started infiltrating the resistance bases because they looked human? Eleven years is a long time. Plenty of time for the world to go from how it looks in T4 to how it looks in T2, where they ARE forced to fight at night in full-on war battles. The human resistance just won a major victory blowing up one of Skynet's main bases in San Francisco using their own nuclear devices. Who's to say how Skynet will retaliate? Maybe they will drop more nukes, blotting out the sun, etc. Of course this is all just wishful reaching, but my point is there's an 11 year difference...and thats a lot of time for changes. With the internet and fanbase feedback being able to directly reach the filmmakers, I wouldn't be surprised if they correct this in future movies.

[IronStarks]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the opening sequence in T2 takes place in 2029, while T4 takes place in 2018 during the creation of the T-800s. .

The whole timeline is all diffrent now thanks to Judgment Day being pushed back.

[the_coldest_sun]

The whole timeline is all diffrent now thanks to Judgment Day being pushed back.

Oh thats right. DUH! That was the main point of 2 & 3.

But then, wait. There's still some several years difference anyway right? I'm so confused now. :confused:

[Nate Grey]

The_coldest_sun has a point about the date, not to mention the date getting pushed even FURTHER back thanks to T2 (and I guess T3). Kyle was grown when he mentioned the only fight at night part, here in T4 he's a teenager. The biggest thing, though, is that in T1 AND T2 Cameron didn't have a lot of time to divest into showing the future, since it was one part of a bigger whole, the opposite of T4 it seems. He wanted to give you an idea of it and then move on. The easiest way to do that was to show it at night, especially with budget contraints. For T2, it made a cool visceral opening, but he couldn't devote more time to it cause it wasn't the meat of the story. It was supposed to be a glimpse and an idea of what the future is like, nothing more. T4, we can see what's going on day AND night, mostly cause its the beginnings of the war.

As for the effects of nuclear radiation...point, but, kinda where fiction comes in. Nuclear radiation would keep them from fighting at all since fallout lasts, what, 4 years? More? And it would be around day and night. They'd definately lose then, cause all Skynet would have to do is scour the planet for fallout shelters. Not like Skynet has anything else to do.

[jessecuster3]

I really disliked this movie. The action was simply boring.

It should have ended with Reese going back in time to the beginning of the first Terminator.

[kalorama]

And I enjoyed T1, T2 and the TV show just fine.


Yet they were no more "believable" than anything in Salvation, casting a skeptical light on your claim regarding Salvation's lack of "believability" as the source of your ire.

[kalorama]

As for the effects of nuclear radiation...point, but, kinda where fiction comes in. Nuclear radiation would keep them from fighting at all since fallout lasts, what, 4 years? More? And it would be around day and night. They'd definately lose then, cause all Skynet would have to do is scour the planet for fallout shelters. Not like Skynet has anything else to do.

To further that point, since Skynet has control of all of the automated national defense capabilities, why not just re-task the government surveillance satellites to locate the Resistance HQs by the heat signatures of their occupants using infrared tracking and just drop more bombs (or gas or biological weapons) on them and wipe them out in big chunks, rather than wasting time and resources building Terminators and HKs to hunt them down on the ground?

See, that's the problem when you seize on the supposed lack of believability of one element in a film like this. Once you knock over that first one, the dominoes start falling.

[TROUBLEZ]

Probably because they were better in just about every aspect.

See, that's the problem when you seize on the supposed lack of believability of one element in a film like this.

But it's not just one element, it's many elements throughout the film as I mentioned earlier which detracts from the movie. I don't think it's a problem with the movie goers not being able to suspend their disbelief, I think it's a problem with the script and direction.

[User Name]

I personally didn't have any problem suspending disbelief. As far as I was concerned, the world that this movie takes place in was established and it was consistent with what they established, unless you want to get into nitpicky stuff. Personally, I think of this movie the same way I thought of Wolverine. It was no great cinematic accomplishment, but it was a fun popcorn flick that is being maligned because of comparisons to the first two films in the series which were excellent.

[kalorama]

Probably because they were better in just about every aspect.



But it's not just one element, it's many elements throughout the film as I mentioned earlier which detracts from the movie. I don't think it's a problem with the movie goers not being able to suspend their disbelief, I think it's a problem with the script and direction.

If that's true, then why did you make such a point about the lack of "believability" of certain elements in the film?

You brought up that certain elements in this film weren't believable. Then when showed that they, in fact, were no less believable than any of the elements in the previous films you say it's not about beleivability but about the script and direction. Why bother trying to argue that McG didn't establish a believable environment only to come back and say it doesn't matter because believability isn't an issue?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Mikey]

My problem with the movie was the movie lost the pursuit aspect of the first 3 films which was really the appeal of the series. The terminator was close to unstoppable. In this movie a few bullets to the head and the things died. Every time you thought a character was going to have the fight of their life on the run it was over in 5 mins.

And the terminator seemed to take the backseat for most of the film. The harvesters and motorbike bots and automated hoverjets dominated the film.

I thought Bale's performance was lame. He yelled far too much. Or giving a nairy fairy motivational speech on a radio.

John Connor was trying to assert that human existence rested on his existence despite the fact he was always going back to his mom's tapes rather than proving himself in the field and in fact managing to lose a helicopter and nearly his own life to what seemed to be suggested earlier in the film the fish in the barrel of terminators, the serpent bots.

And the big twist in the plot just seemed too thin. (Referring to using Marcus Wright as an unknowing and incredibly vulnerable pawn) And I was lost on how the woman getting chemo treatment figured into the computer reciting the villain monologue.

In the end the whole story was throwaway. John Connor survives yet another assassination attempt directly taken at himself and indirectly at his future father. Skynet goes on with one factory in the whole. And another terminator model bites the dust. The war goes on.

[Nate Grey]

And the big twist in the plot just seemed too thin. (Referring to using Marcus Wright as an unknowing and incredibly vulnerable pawn) And I was lost on how the woman getting chemo treatment figured into the computer reciting the villain monologue.

I figured either Skynet wanted to give Marcus an image he's most familiar with (supported by Skynet asking if she/it should change its image to Kyle or John), or Helana Bonam imprinted her personality on Skynet. Probably the former, though.

[kalorama]

I figured either Skynet wanted to give Marcus an image he's most familiar with (supported by Skynet asking if she/it should change its image to Kyle or John), or Helana Bonam imprinted her personality on Skynet. Probably the former, though.

Yep. When the computer projection started changing faces, it told Marcus it chose her because it thought it would be easier for Marcus to accept the truth from a familiar face.

[moebius]

Pretty to look at (esp. the opening helicopter scene), but God, that was an awful movie. Worse than Transformers, which was the ultimate mediocre popcorn flick.

This was just a lazy, incoherent mess.

-How do the Terminators know what Kyle Reese looks like, or why he's even important?
-I am an implacable, logical machine. Once I have my archenemy in my clutches, rather than fill the room with poison gas I send a single Terminator to kill him. And that Terminator, also an implacable, logical killing machine, doesn't walk over and snap the weak human neck. No...he throws him across the room. And then it walks across the room...and throws him across the room again!
-Kate the vet turned doctor is now capable of doing a heart transplant...in the field?!?

What was so good about the first two movies was 1) they were fantastic, but logically consistent within the rules they established (it was "naturalistic sci-fi") and 2) the humans won because they were a little lucky, but mostly because they were so resourceful (or had a Terminator's help).

This was just a big dumb movie, where the heroes won because the villains were stupid and flawed. But the whole point of a machine intelligence is that it doesn't make mistakes. I don't think the filmmakers were able to accurately portray how big a menace the Terminators would be when they were actually in a position of power.

[kalorama]

This was just a big dumb movie, where the heroes won because the villains were stupid and flawed. But the whole point of a machine intelligence is that it doesn't make mistakes. I don't think the filmmakers were able to accurately portray how big a menace the Terminators would be when they were actually in a position of power.

That's hardly the whole point of a machine intelligence. Machines aren't perfect. In fact, in many portrayals of sentient machines as sci-fi villains, they're ultimately undone by the fact that, despite being supposedly "perfect" creations, they're still creations and as such reflect many of the flaws inherent in their creators. The fact that Skynet's first independent act upon achieving sentience was one of massive violence indicates how much of its personality is a reflection of the humans who built it.

[felix77]

Just read the novelization and it answers a few questions.

1) Why Skynet Central seems so lightly defended?

Firstly its a Machine City. With only a handful of human prisoners, there isn't that many humans to protect it from. The Perimeter defenses (Walls, HKs and Guns) can easily repel any Reisistance assault. Thus it would be an inefficent allocation of resources for SkyNet to keep a legion there.

It's not unguarded of course. But there's little need to keep a Terminator for every hall or doorway in the City.

2) Why the elaborate scene to lure Connor in?

Marcus is a living transmitter of SkyNet. So the AI already knows where Connor's base's is and its layout and defenses. So why doesn't it just drop a nuke or order a Machine assault on it?

In the novelization, Marcus guesses that after so many failed attempts, SkyNet wants to personally terminate Connor. It wants to conclusively ID his death, DNA verify the remains. This is a job too important to leave to chance or a minion anymore.

[titanfan]

I'm really glad that the stupid frequency blocking thing turned out to be a Skynet trap. If that had actually worked, I was thinking that might be the worst deus ex machina since the alien computer virus in Independence Day.

One thing I never got was why EMP's aren't being used all over the place by the resistance. We have the technology today, you'd think that every single resistance member would be carrying a couple of portable EMP generators to deal with any Terminators they cam across. They were at least smart enough to use them in the Matrix movies. Oh well, just another plot hole that I guess you can explain away if you think hard enough.

[ultramandingo]

What Year!
Look, cool stuff happens in that one, he steals a bums pants, breaks into a store gets new shoes and coat, keeps the pants. .

...............and swiped enuff hair gel to keep that 80s style going - gotta look good even when your fighting robots

[Jared]

I gave it 3 1/2 stars out of 5 on facebook. Perhaps the best thing about the movie is that it actually justifies the making of T3.

This sequel (or is it a prequel?) is a worthwhile continuation of the series. There are some stunning special effects and action sequences, anchored by strong performances by Christian Bale and the unaware cyborg played by Sam Worthington. Unfortuantely his backstory was never fleshed out (no pun intended) as much as it probably should have been. The young Kyle Reese also does an excellent job. Bryce Dallas Howard is fine as Connor's wife, but she doesn't get to do much. Moon Bloodgood plays the tough hot chick,a and plays it well. . On the downside, there's a guy in a movie say "don't point a gun at someone unless you're prepared to use it." Michael Ironside appears as exactly the kind of character he always plays, and you'll know exactly what is going to happen to him from his first scene. Even the narration is rather hackneyed, with Connor (surely it's not a spoiler that he lives) all-but saying "the struggle will continue in Terminator 5: Give Us Your Money!"

I was discussing with a friend the possibility that the facility y in which the climax takes place is actually built around the same factor from the end of T1. Parts of it look, along with some of the camera shots, look remarkably similar. That's a cool nod, if it's meant to be the case.

[Ninth Hispana]

I have read all the comments on this thread with interest. Now to be honest I haven't seen T 4, but surely the point of seeing a film is to be entertained [even if it is only fractionaly].For my part the more films, the more questions/ideas that are raised create new possibilities to be explored.....:smile:

[Jared]

The bleak, dark future was ignored and replaced by a rainy or fighting in daylight future.

This is a serious complaint? Yes, a lot of of the movie takes place during the day, but it's hardly a happy, shiny day. It's a post-apocalyptic landscape of ruin. It wouldn't make much sense for all the events of the film to happen at night. And please don't suggest that the sun should be blocked out because of the nukes. For one thing, that would everybody is already dead anyway.

[Ontir]

I think the previous four films involving time-travel have, intentionally, altered the "present" of this film, and besides, the initial scene of the future was, in my estimation, always a night scene, not an indication that the sun had been extinguished.

Further, that scene is a few years in their future, when Kyle is a bit older. Remember what Sarah told John:
He'll be a teen when you meet him...

[Jared]

To further that point, since Skynet has control of all of the automated national defense capabilities, why not just re-task the government surveillance satellites to locate the Resistance HQs by the heat signatures of their occupants using infrared tracking and just drop more bombs (or gas or biological weapons) on them and wipe them out in big chunks, rather than wasting time and resources building Terminators and HKs to hunt them down on the ground?


Bear in mind that Skynet doesn't actually control all the world's militaries. On Judgement Day, there are probably whole countries that don't even get nuked, because it would likely need to focus on Russia, and perhaps the other nuclear powers.

What I really liked about the movie is that we see the Resistance is much more than guys hiding in tunnels and mounting guns on the back of pickup trucks. It's like a real army. It's globally coordinated. It has an air power and it even (nominally) controls territory.

[Ontir]

I think on Judgement Day, the US bore the immediate brunt, with our own armaments used against us. Other nuclear countries like the Russian Federation, the UK, France, N Korea, etc. were probably hacked as well and probably got an exchange of caches. New Zealand would require Terminators, because unless something's changed, they have no nukes.

The military personnel who survived the initial attack would most likely pull as many plugs as they could, once they realized what was going on. Skynet is still extremely deadly, but cut off from some access points. It would be neccessary for the Terminators to go in and re-establish the physical contacts required for Skynet's over-mind to then resume its initial plan.

[Jared]

Skynet only controlled America's nukes. At least, that's how it sounded in T2. Arnold said it launched at targets in Russian, knowing they would retalitate.

Not sure how much T3 might have changed that. I do recall that Skynet wasn't actually given full control of the U.S. defense system until the virus from the T-X was screwing everything up.


Incidentally, I'd generally assumed that Sentinels could never really work in an X-Men movie, because they're just too comic booky. I believe Brian Singer might have even said as much. But the Harvester bot made a believer out of me.

[DeadXMan]

it controlled most the weapons
in T2 it used remote controlled steathbomers and nuked Russia and then Russia fire their missiles at the US then the US fired their missiles
Sky net let MAD softened us up and pick off the survivors

[kalorama]

Bear in mind that Skynet doesn't actually control all the world's militaries. On Judgement Day, there are probably whole countries that don't even get nuked, because it would likely need to focus on Russia, and perhaps the other nuclear powers.

It doesn't have to control all the world's military forces, because the core of the Resistance is obviously stationed in the U.S., so using the military assets it does control to find them would still be a viable option. Certainly a more viable one than roaming the countryside trying to hunt them down at ground level.

What I really liked about the movie is that we see the Resistance is much more than guys hiding in tunnels and mounting guns on the back of pickup trucks. It's like a real army. It's globally coordinated. It has an air power and it even (nominally) controls territory.

Agreed. it definitely gave the entire thing a more believable feel than the the glimpses we got in the first two movies, where the Resistance looked like refugees from a futuristic Dickens novel.

[DeadXMan]

Funny it look liked a future version of the revolution as a group of rag tags beat the evil empire that out gun/man/class them at every front. and after the battle of Lexington they sent Benedict Arnold to kill George Washington's Mother before he was born.

[the_coldest_sun]

Funny it look liked a future version of the revolution as a group of rag tags beat the evil empire that out gun/man/class them at every front. and after the battle of Lexington they sent Benedict Arnold to kill George Washington's Mother before he was born.

ok. we get it. you don't like the movie. do you have to continue posting some sarcastic comment after a person who liked the movie in attempt to make us feel stupid about it?

not trying to pick a fight about it with you or anything. I just don't understand why you would continue reading updated posts on this thread after you had already said your piece about the movie. And obviously you already made your mind up about it, so reading other people's posts aren't going to sway you over about it, so why linger?

[Jared]

BTW, was this the first hollywood action movie in, like, ever, where shooting a gas tank didn't blow it up?

[Nate Grey]

Posted May 24th on Chud.com (http://chud.com/articles/articles/19577/1/EXCLUSIVE-WHAT-WENT-WRONG-WITH-TERMINATOR-SALVATION/Page1.html)

Wow. I'm not sure how I would have felt if they left everything in. Though all things considered I think the face grafting would have been a total downer. Even with a reduced role for Connor. I gotta admit, though, judging by what that article says, the expanded role for Serena would have been interesting. Project ANGEL would have put a whole new spin on the mythos.

[DeadXMan]

ok. we get it. you don't like the movie. do you have to continue posting some sarcastic comment after a person who liked the movie in attempt to make us feel stupid about it?



your just jealous that you didn't come up with the idea of a Time traveling Benedict Arnold set out to kill Washington.

it well even better then Abe Lincoln and his time machine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AATDhGrhyjU

[Tobias March]

ok. we get it. you don't like the movie. do you have to continue posting some sarcastic comment after a person who liked the movie in attempt to make us feel stupid about it?

not trying to pick a fight about it with you or anything. I just don't understand why you would continue reading updated posts on this thread after you had already said your piece about the movie. And obviously you already made your mind up about it, so reading other people's posts aren't going to sway you over about it, so why linger?

I haven't been reading this thread much, but the post you quoted seemed fair enough.

After all the Western World has been crapping its pan-global pants over a bunch of terrorist cells with no central authority for the past eight years....then again certain commentators were uncomfortable by the connotations of The Invisibles/The Matrix (ie the heroes are terrorists).

[Jared]

Posted May 24th on Chud.com (http://chud.com/articles/articles/19577/1/EXCLUSIVE-WHAT-WENT-WRONG-WITH-TERMINATOR-SALVATION/Page1.html)

Wow. I'm not sure how I would have felt if they left everything in. Though all things considered I think the face grafting would have been a total downer. Even with a reduced role for Connor. I gotta admit, though, judging by what that article says, the expanded role for Serena would have been interesting. Project ANGEL would have put a whole new spin on the mythos.

I highly doubt even James Cameron could have made those ideas work.

For three movies we heard about John Connor, savior of mankind. To finally show the Future War and have him be a bit player who then gets face-offed to a cyborg...no....just no.

I do think Reese needed a heroic beat in the third act, and that STAF suggestion by Blair might have been interesting as well.

Also, the Skynet really just wants to preserve the human race. Again, no.

I'm not sure that doing a movie that was half Marcus Wright Saga, half John Connor Begins was the ideal alternative to that script, but it's still a better one. It sounds the original version was entirely the result of ill-advised riffing on the Matrix sequels and Battlestar Galactica. The version we have is parrallel story threads: Macus in Futureland and John Connor Begins. It might not be the ideal alternative to that script, but I'm pretty sure it's a better one.

I haven't read it myself, but allegedly there's a scene at the end of the novelization which hints that Star might be a Terminator. Not sure how that'd work, since whatever her mission is, she'd have to carry it out pretty damn quickly before people notice she isn't growing.

[Tobias March]

I highly doubt even James Cameron could have made those ideas work.

For three movies we heard about John Connor, savior of mankind. To finally show the Future War and have him be a bit player who then gets face-offed to a cyborg...no....just no.

I do think Reese needed a heroic beat in the third act, and that STAF suggestion by Blair might have been interesting as well.

Also, the Skynet really just wants to preserve the human race. Again, no.

I'm not sure that doing a movie that was half Marcus Wright Saga, half John Connor Begins was the ideal alternative to that script, but it's still a better one. It sounds the original version was entirely the result of ill-advised riffing on the Matrix sequels and Battlestar Galactica. The version we have is parrallel story threads: Macus in Futureland and John Connor Begins. It might not be the ideal alternative to that script, but I'm pretty sure it's a better one.

I haven't read it myself, but allegedly there's a scene at the end of the novelization which hints that Star might be a Terminator. Not sure how that'd work, since whatever her mission is, she'd have to carry it out pretty damn quickly before people notice she isn't growing.

It sounds as if rather than Nolan rewriting the whole script, as McG has asserted, Salvation is some misbegotten merger of two scripts, compounding the problems of the original.

I'm sure there are all sorts of reasons for this. While Nolan's work is commonly known, and Bale's role in getting him the gig, the original screenwriters must receive credit. The script that was altered for the version we have seen could not simply be thrown out.

There's something in the idea of Marcus becoming John Connor, but what we were left with is empty of any poignancy.

[kalorama]

Turning Connor into a Terminator would have been a terrible move.

[Legato]

To respond to Kalorama's comment not only Connor being a Terminator would have been a stupid move it would destroy everything that John Connor was suppose to be. Im glad that they went with the alternative route with that ending.

Marcus played his role. He gave his life so that Connor can live, he is no Arnold but atleast he is known as the second Terminator that isn't the bad guy

Should we get two more Terminator movies what I dont want to see happen is John Connor being killed due to a assassination attempt by a Terminator like mentioned in T3

[Tobias March]

I have a perverse attraction to the idea. The idea of John Connor becomes more important to the fleshbag born with the name (and is a beautiful slap in the face to Skynet's repeated attempts to kill John as an infant).

He'd be the Osama Bin Ladin of the resistance, existing entirely on recordings shared amongst cells.

However, from chud's report it would seem the 'inspiration', for the idea was the severe scaring of the actor playing John in the original Terminator movies....which is weak.

[Arvandor]

Just seen it. Disappointed and a let down.

It's not terrible, but it's just a bog-standard action film with a weak story and no heart. I'd rate it about the same as T3.

I went in hoping to finally see John Connor come into his own, but he was barely competent. I want to learn more about John, and to see John Connor kicking Terminator ass. Instead he once more relies on others to save him.

I had no interest In Marcus. Dull character. I didn't care about him. I wanted to know about John, but they ignored the main character for the effing sidekick.

And I am now flat out convinced that Christian Bale is the most overrated actor in Hollywood. I'm finished with him, and it will take a lot to make me see another Christian Bale (and that includes the next Batman film).

To be fair, it had some great action sequences. But that was all.

[Legato]

Just seen it. Disappointed and a let down.

It's not terrible, but it's just a bog-standard action film with a weak story and no heart. I'd rate it about the same as T3.

I went in hoping to finally see John Connor come into his own, but he was barely competent. I want to learn more about John, and to see John Connor kicking Terminator ass. Instead he once more relies on others to save him.

I had no interest In Marcus. Dull character. I didn't care about him. I wanted to know about John, but they ignored the main character for the effing sidekick.

And I am now flat out convinced that Christian Bale is the most overrated actor in Hollywood. I'm finished with him, and it will take a lot to make me see another Christian Bale (and that includes the next Batman film).

To be fair, it had some great action sequences. But that was all.

So just because Bale was in one bad movie makes him a terrible actor? I dont get this instant hate concerning him

[David Walton]

I have a perverse attraction to the idea. The idea of John Connor becomes more important to the fleshbag born with the name (and is a beautiful slap in the face to Skynet's repeated attempts to kill John as an infant).

I think it's a great twist that would have worked, personally. And seeing as how John Connor's encounter with the T-800 in T2 is indirectly responsible for Skynet in the altered Judgment Day timeline, if you follow the idea to its logical conclusion Skynet could finally succeed in killing Connor as an infant...and negate its own existence in the process!

[Jared]

Kind of along those lines, I thought there could actually be a valid explanation for why Skynet doesn't kill Kyle once it recognized him. Maybe Skynet doesn't know what effects will happen if it drastically alters the timeline, so it only tries sending the Terminators back as a last resort once it's defeat is inevitable. But killing John Connor in the present would seem a safer course of action.

Alternately, Skynet may well have already been aware that its development is based on the T-800 wreckage found by Cyberdyne.I don't recall if Arnold in T2 already knew that. So it might be keeping Kyle around so that similar events can still occur. At the very least, from Marcus's conversation with John, Skynet now knows that the Terminators it sends back to eliminate John will fail.

[Arvandor]

So just because Bale was in one bad movie makes him a terrible actor? I dont get this instant hate concerning him

Its not instant. I hated him in the Batman films, and in American Psycho.

[Legato]

Its not instant. I hated him in the Batman films, and in American Psycho.

Yet you still watch his movies? Why do you hate him? Dont say he is a terrible actor because that is kinda ridiculous

DiCaprio is a good actor but I dont really care much for most of his movies

[Arvandor]

Yet you still watch his movies? Why do you hate him? Dont say he is a terrible actor because that is kinda ridiculous

Because I was fooled by the trailers. T4 looked like it might be good (though I should've known better, with McG's previous). And Dark Knight was rescued by Heath Ledger.

[Legato]

Because I was fooled by the trailers. T4 looked like it might be good (though I should've known better, with McG's previous). And Dark Knight was rescued by Heath Ledger.

So how could that be seen as a good reason to hate Bale exactly?

[Arvandor]

So how could that be seen as a good reason to hate Bale exactly?

I told you already. Because I think he's a shit actor. I've hated his performance in every film I've seen so far. I only saw this because the trailers made it look good, and I had nothing better to do.

[Legato]

I told you already. Because I think he's a shit actor. I've hated his performance in every film I've seen so far. I only saw this because the trailers made it look good, and I had nothing better to do.

I mostly think you probably went to see Terminator to look for an excuse to bash Bale

[Legato]

Also one bad movie doesn't support your statement that he is a horrible actor. If you read the post from some of the other posters thare is clear evidence that supports he is far from a shit actor

[Arvandor]

I mostly think you probably went to see Terminator to look for an excuse to bash Bale

What?

Are you serious? Why would I do that? Why would anyone do that? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in, well, since the last time I heard something completely moronic and stupid.

Why would you say something like that? It's idiotic.

[Legato]

What?

Are you serious? Why would I do that? Why would anyone do that? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in, well, since the last time I heard something completely moronic and stupid.

Why would you say something like that? It's idiotic.

No it's not. Believe it or not people have done it. Hell people even watch tv shows they hate just to bash it or pole fun of it.

Whats ridiculous is saying a actor is a terrible actor without giving anything to support it while the previous comments from other people have given proof that he is far from a terrible actor.

Hey whatever floats your boat man

[kalorama]

Whats ridiculous is saying a actor is a terrible actor without giving anything to support it while the previous comments from other people have given proof that he is far from a terrible actor.

The fact that other people say he's a good actor is hardly inherent "proof" that he is. We get it, you're a fan. But you might want to think about pulling back some. You're entering into obsession territory.

[Legato]

The fact that other people say he's a good actor is hardly inherent "proof" that he is. We get it, you're a fan. But you might want to think about pulling back some. You're entering into obsession territory.

Ok. For the sake of the thread I'll back off. Just to make one thing clear just because I dont agree with the majority concerning Christian Bale doesn't mean Im a fan. Im just one of the few that has enough common sense to know that he is a talented actor when he needs to be.

[Kiriyama]

In the scene where the machines picked out Kyle from the line, did anyone else notice in the top right a lighted blue room, with human shadows appearing from it?

[David Walton]

Alternately, Skynet may well have already been aware that its development is based on the T-800 wreckage found by Cyberdyne.

That's a valid point that could go either way. Has the reaction of an AI to alternate timelines ever been explored in depth? That would be fascinating. Skynet would be playing chess with itself, knowing that its alternate had already screwed up the timeline once.

I don't recall if Arnold in T2 already knew that.

The T-800 in was from the original timeline, and seemed to be acting on the same presumption as John Connor--that his presence had liberated the future from the necessity of his future existence. That said, he did see the need to destroy himself to prevent the rise of the machines from coming about again.

So it might be keeping Kyle around so that similar events can still occur. At the very least, from Marcus's conversation with John, Skynet now knows that the Terminators it sends back to eliminate John will fail.

I'd really like to see that explored in depth. In order to justify the new franchise I think they need a bigger hook than just Connor fighting for the future. All three original films had a twist at the end with varying success.

[the_coldest_sun]

In the scene where the machines picked out Kyle from the line, did anyone else notice in the top right a lighted blue room, with human shadows appearing from it?

I noticed it the first time, and honestly it was one of creepiest moments for me. The "humanoids" in the red window looking down at their captives was creepy for me because throughout that entire facility you know there aren't any humans around or in charge to reason with. They're just machines and they're going to do with you whatever it is they've planned to do. I also find it creepy that Skynet would put itself or its officers in humanoid Terminator forms. I don't know why but I just do.

[Jared]

I'd really like to see that explored in depth. In order to justify the new franchise I think they need a bigger hook than just Connor fighting for the future. All three original films had a twist at the end with varying success.

What was the twist in T2?

[DeadXMan]

What was the twist in T2?

that the Terminitor from T1 was the reason why cybordine stated working on Skynet.

[jackolover]

So "Terminator" is just a perpetual future loop started by a Terminator that jumped to 1986? Skynet was never going to be developed? So where did that original Arny come from? You'd have to have some kind of anomoly for Skynet to occur in the future. You can't start a loop unless Skynet originally was there.

As to the movie? I am so over hollywood movies. They can't resist filling the dialogue with cliques, that it made it anoying. I hollywood persists with this style of writing, they will lose fans.

John Connors gets hit in the chest by a Terminator and he gets up with a bruise. The rescue helicopter arrives at Skynet central, and no drones attack it. The HK destroys a human base, and instead of executing the humans, it places them in a cage? Skynet allows Marcus to interface with it, and wonders why Marcus turns against it, when the AI describes it as a machine. I could go on. The action was rediculous.

I went in longing for a pre-Judgement day beggining, and the nuclear attack that follows and the reaction by the humans, and we got nothing. The was a scene from 2003, which meant nothing except introducing Marcus and the AI, then it jumped to 2018 and the war was well in swing. When are going to get the movie about Judgement day? And I'll say it again. How can Hunter Killers make a factory of Terminators if they don't have hands? They can't. Humans had to make the Terminators.

[DeadXMan]

So "Terminator" is just a perpetual future loop started by a Terminator that jumped to 1986? Skynet was never going to be developed? So where did that original Arny come from? You'd have to have some kind of anomoly for Skynet to occur in the future. You can't start a loop unless Skynet originally was there.

.


it's a paradox (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLIVbm0lm80).
Like the chicken and the egg

[jackolover]

it's a paradox (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLIVbm0lm80).
Like the chicken and the egg

Yes paradox. But to argue that the Terminators are destroying themselves if they kill John Connors dislocates that the Terminators had to get to the future somehow in the first place. That you can't paradox your way out of.

[DeadXMan]

well this is what Basil has to say about it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8w95xIdH4o

[jackolover]

well this is what Basil has to say about it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8w95xIdH4o

Sorry, DeadXMan, I don't have speakers on my computer. I know. It's silly. Any chance you could summarise?

[the_coldest_sun]

Sorry, DeadXMan, I don't have speakers on my computer. I know. It's silly. Any chance you could summarise?

Basil tells Austin about the time machine. Austin then goes crosseyed talking about the paradoxes that could result in him being in the past. Basil tells Austin not to worry about it and just enjoy himself, then turns to the audience and says "that goes for you all, too."

Basically, don't worry about the complications of time travel and just enjoy the damn story.

[jackolover]

Basil tells Austin about the time machine. Austin then goes crosseyed talking about the paradoxes that could result in him being in the past. Basil tells Austin not to worry about it and just enjoy himself, then turns to the audience and says "that goes for you all, too."

Basically, don't worry about the complications of time travel and just enjoy the damn story.

(Thanks for that). I know I should! But it drives me crazy!

[DeadXMan]

(Thanks for that). I know I should! But it drives me crazy!

Tim travel will do that.

just remember
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.


and above all else: DON'T PANIC.

[marshal99]

They should go find the guy from Butterfly effect 3 and go back in time. :wink:

[DeadXMan]

they made two more of those?

why in all that is Kirby, would they do that?

[Redseed]

You know what ruined this movie?
Christian Bale.
It's a shame cause he was excellent in pocahontas....
oh how the mighty have fallen

[Legato]

They should go find the guy from Butterfly effect 3 and go back in time. :wink:

Or better yet take the Quantum Leap approach

[Libaax]

You know what ruined this movie?
Christian Bale.
It's a shame cause he was excellent in pocahontas....
oh how the mighty have fallen

How did he do that ?


I thought they overplayed the Marcus cyborg,what is human,what is machine thing in the end.

[Bakasama]

Tim travel will do that.

just remember
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.


I don't about that, it's been said time exists to keep everything from happening at the same time. I mean EVERYTHING!

[DeadXMan]

With thinking like that, it's no wonder you never miss the ground when you fall.

http://i443.photobucket.com/albums/qq158/Talostd/DontPanic-Hitchhikersguidetothegala.jpg

[Libaax]

I saw it last night, i thought action wise it was very good but the story lacked. John Conner didnt get many calm scenes that did anything for the story. Marcus story started well but ended up very clichè. With take my heart thing that they overplayed in the end,Skynet AI being stupid enough to let Marcus do everything he did with their computers in the stronghold.

The writing must be much better next film otherwise there is no point. You need to write near as well as T2. Make it more thrilling the story like T2 and not just focus on the action imo.

Bale acting saved the John Conner side of the story for me.
If there is a sequal the story must be better written and focus more on the threat of the Terminators. In T2 there was Robert Patrick Terminator being the villain,the danger. Marcus was too much human to the hole film even when he was suppose to the uber machine.

Its all about Conner and the Terminators are after to kill him. You cant make a good Terminator movie without the terminators being the danger. I mean Skynet AI was stupid in the end with what they let Marcus do. The killing machines was faceless machines.

Still way way better than T3. I hope the next film focus more on John Conner and the evil killing machines that worked for the first two films. Not a good machine helping them only.

[Pro]

With take my heart thing that they overplayed in the end

It'd be funny if the other characters reacted with:"What? No way man. John Connor is a dick, always going on about his mommy saying he was special, Screw him, keep your heart".