posted
I just got back from the midnight showing and I guess I'm not too surprised. It's nearly 3 AM and I don't have nearly enough energy to write a detailed rant but, to say the least, the plot was incredibly flimsy. It was the type of plot that I'd expect from a mindless action film, not a terminator film (it's a little hard to say that with a straight face after T3 but I think I can manage).
My summary of the plot: Skynet creates a human/terminator hybrid (Markus) that thinks it's human so it can infiltrate the resistance and unknowingly lure John Connor to Skynet so he can be killed (he does this by telling him that Kyle Reese has been captured, which is true). Unfortunately, John Connor is not in command of the human resistance. The real commanders decide that they will attack the Skynet base without regard for the human prisoners there (including Reese). Fortunately, John Connor still functions as a sort of spiritual leader. He tells everyone to not attack and they don't. He then proceeds to walk into the Skynet base on his own, hack the computers, and free the prisoners. At the same time, Skynet brags to Markus about how rather than helping John Connor, he has actually killed him. Skynet sends one terminator to kill Connor that then proceeds to throw him around the room rather than bash his skull in. Of course, by this time help arrives. First Markus, who gets killed. Then Kyle Reese. Then Markus again after John Connor defibrillates him with some wires that he conveniently disconnects from a factory machine. At the same time, human resistance fighters fly into the base with helicopters and rescue everybody. Connor is hurt so Markus saves him by giving him his heart. The end.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
this movie was pretty fail. I felt like I was just wasting my time waiting for a generic made-to-order sequel to end.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, I enjoyed it quite a bit. For my Terminator franchise reference, I've seen 1&2 repeatedly over the years, the 3rd film twice maybe, and a bit of the television show (not much, though). I'd rate myself as a fan of the franchise, but not a very serious fan, not to the point of (perhaps I flatter myself) of muddying my objectivity.
I rate it as substantially better than the third film, and about as good as either of the first two.
quote:It's nearly 3 AM and I don't have nearly enough energy to write a detailed rant but, to say the least, the plot was incredibly flimsy.
I definitely don't think the plot was any flimsier than either of the first two films. There's some time-traveling weirdness/silliness, but really, that's been part and parcel to the franchise ever since the first film, where instead of for example sending a single terminator back in time to kill Connor's mother, it could've just as easily sent a terminator back in time to plant a massive bomb in Connor's neighborhood that would've killed her, or gone back further and killed her great-grandparents on the Oregon trail or something.
There is some other silliness too, but nothing more striking than other films: for example, terminator fighting John Connor. Connor's weapon is struck away, or out of ammo, and the terminator proceeds to bi@#h-slapping him into walls and off high surfaces, as opposed to just punching a hole in his chest, or head, or simply picking up a chair and flinging it at incredible speeds killing Connor instantly.
However, I found the portrayals of Connor, Markus, and Reese all to be well-done, enjoyable, and plausible. There was enjoyable humor, the action I thought was good, etc. I'll likely see it again.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Reminds me of an exchange in the television show. (Minor vague spoilers) There's a moment in which John Connor asks Derek how long he would last against Cameron with only his fists. Without hesitation he bluntly answers that he would pretty much die instantly.
I really liked that conversation.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, that was my biggest problem. At the end of the film I said "If I was a terminator and I had a human being in my hands, I would not throw them across the room. I would throw them on the ground. And then step on their face. And evidently, this would make me the most effective terminator ever.
In general I thought it was on par with the second movie. My only real issue with the movie was that I just could not bring myself to care about this particular John Connor. He talked in the angry batman voice all the time. I could not see him as the sort of guy the entire army would disobey orders for.
I loved the mute girl. I hope she's in the next movie. If she hadn't been in the film I'm not sure I would have cared about anyone.
I had another issue with the movie that I'm still stewing over. One of the things that made Terminator 2 really good was being one of the few action movies with a strong female protagonist. This movie had a bad case of "the women only exist to further the plot which is all about the men" syndrome. It was implied that Connor's wife (whose name I can't even remember and I'm not sure was ever said aloud in the movie) and the Lovegood's character were kinda badassy, but that badassery never really included them acting on goals of their own.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I definitely don't think the plot was any flimsier than either of the first two films. There's some time-traveling weirdness/silliness, but really, that's been part and parcel to the franchise ever since the first film, where instead of for example sending a single terminator back in time to kill Connor's mother, it could've just as easily sent a terminator back in time to plant a massive bomb in Connor's neighborhood that would've killed her, or gone back further and killed her great-grandparents on the Oregon trail or something.
My beef was more with the portrayal of Skynet. In the first two movies, terminators (and Skynet by extension) were sort of an ultimate enemy. They weren't supposed to be defeatable and there wasn't much to do besides run away and struggle to stay alive. I felt that Skynet's portrayal in Salvation was incredibly weak. It had no control over the skies and its Los Angeles prisoner camp was horribly defended. I mean, the resistance basically just flew in at the end (and that was after Connor was able to sneak in). I would've expected a Skynet camp to be virtually impenetrable. Instead of being an almost undefeatable enemy, Skynet was like a stereotypical war-movie enemy. Hell, I don't see why the resistance even needed John Connor.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not only that, but the premise of every movie (and the television show) has as part of its core SkyNet struggling and repeatedly failing to kill John Connor, who it clearly fears a very great deal.
As for the film, I wouldn't say it had 'no control over the skies'-the one air battle we saw was a decisive victory for the machines-they got away with all their prisoners (including Reese), they destroyed the two Warthogs, and the Hunter-Killer and the giant human-grabber thing escaped as well as one of the other fliers.
And, remember, at this point in time, SkyNet isn't supposed to be unbeatable. The war is still on-tipping towards the machines, but still in the balance.
Oh, the other thing that was irritating: the Resistance didn't seem to think it strange that Skynet wouldn't notice such a staggering vulnerability in every single one of their units. Reminds me of the scene in Battlestar Galactica when Gaeta has come up with a plan to keep the Cylons from hacking into Galactica's systems long enough to plot a jump. One of the other officers whose name I forgot scoffs at the plan, saying something like, "Oh, you're going to beat the Cylons at electronic warfare now?"
This was like that: extremely implausible, to the point of a terminator smacking people around instead of killing them instantly.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmer's Glue: The first movie started with SkyNet being defeated.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Not only that, but the premise of every movie (and the television show) has as part of its core SkyNet struggling and repeatedly failing to kill John Connor, who it clearly fears a very great deal.
But Skynet was still a dominating enemy in the first two movies. Both Sarah Connor and John Connor were almost killed numerous times and they only managed to destroy the terminators through a set of very fortunate and unplanned circumstances. I would say that Skynet was an enormous favorite to win in T1 and T2 and certainly filled the role of an almost undefeatable enemy.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Not only that, but the premise of every movie (and the television show) has as part of its core SkyNet struggling and repeatedly failing to kill John Connor, who it clearly fears a very great deal.
But Skynet was still a dominating enemy in the first two movies. Both Sarah Connor and John Connor were almost killed numerous times and they only managed to destroy the terminators through a set of very fortunate and unplanned circumstances.
But...Skynet was almost unbeatable for most of this film, too. It was solidly winning throughout almost the entire film, and the ace up their sleeve the resistance thought they had just turned out to be a big 'gotcha' card from the Machines instead. Connor and Reese in this film are nearly killed multiple times throughout this film as well, and only through the unlikliest and unplanned-for events did they win.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those are all good points. I guess my orignal claim was hyperbolic since I only take issue with a certain aspect of Skynet. I thought that Skynet's Los Angeles base was inadequately defended. We saw that there was a terminator factory in the base but where were all the terminators when the resistance arrived? The prisoners basically got away without at fight.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:the T-800 from the first movie remains the greatest terminator. Kyle and Sarah do nothing but run from it. Every fight has only one goal: slow the thing down a bit so they can run some more. That's how you create tension. That's what a makes a terminator a scary thing. Not $10 million in CGI.
There was a good review of T4 that addressed that. The reviewer mentions the 40 foot terminators, and how they are just kind of there. Who knows how many millions of dollars and man hours went into creating that thing, and what's its impact? Zilch.
What happens when the T-800 gets close to Sarah in the first movie? Kyle shoots it point blank with a shotgun like 8 times and then grabs her and beats feet.
What happens when the T-1000 gets close to John in T2? The greatest chase scene in action history. And damn if it is not established that John Conner is dead as shit if that thing gets its hands on him.
Terminators catch up with John and after the third time being thrown around or punched by something that can put a hole in steel or simply crush his windpipe with the barest of motions, the tension is broken. It's like so what if the terminator catches up with him this time. He's just going to throw him around again.
Monsters that throw people around are the worst. It's one of the things that always bugged me about Buffy/Angel. Every single monster on that show just grabbed people and tossed them into walls.
See, this is me trying to be different than just saying that t4 was bad (it is). I'm trying to look into why t1 and t2 were good and this movie was generic and dumb.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They tried to add a redemption theme with the Marcus Wright character. He killed his brother and a policeman, we learn at the beginning, and he winds up saving John Connor by giving him his heart. Christians would point out this still just amounts to righteousness by works--no one can really atone for the evil they have done by doing good. But the attempt to do so as far as they are able can demonstrate genuine faith. No faith was really demonstrated in the movie, other than faith in the ability of mankind to prevail. For those who still believe in the utopian optimism that began the age of technology, maybe this is acceptable. But that utopianism would seem to be rather counterbalanced by the dystopianism inherent in Terminator.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Samp: I completely agree with your previous. I mean the only reason the T1000 didn't kill Sarah was because he thought he could use her to get John. Reading that in the latest terminator movie the robots play with him at all makes me not want to watch it.
Humans monologue and play with their prey, robots simply kill with grim efficiency.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry about double posting, also this is a weird thread to mention religion but,
Ron:
quote:no one can really atone for the evil they have done by doing good
What about James 5:19-20? Obviously people don't atone for their own sins, but repentant souls bring forth good works.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Samp: I completely agree with your previous. I mean the only reason the T1000 didn't kill Sarah was because he thought he could use her to get John. Reading that in the latest terminator movie the robots play with him at all makes me not want to watch it.
Humans monologue and play with their prey, robots simply kill with grim efficiency.
Yes. Yes. Have no fear, I am completely on board with the "The T-1000 was pure terrifyingly awesome badguy" and I agree that he was one hundred percent plausible and managed to evoke the terror of knowing Connor is dead if the thing gets close to him at all.
Additionally I credit him with being one of the most awesome movie monsters in the history of movie monsters because this is a movie monster that is also the floor and your mom.Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do agree that the throwing around stuff was seriously overdone, and a substantial detriment to the movie. It's just that I remember that stuff happening (though less) in the first two films, too.
Ron, it seemed to me that Markus certainly had faith (desperate faith) in the idea of second chances and atonement. That's not 'nothing'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:according to his reading of the christian faith it does actually count for squat.
Well, I meant that he does have faith in something-even if it was something Ron doesn't believe accomplishes anything.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really like your analysis Sam (second to last post). I found the T-800 and T-1000 to be extremely compelling monsters (for the reasons you list). I didn't get nearly the same feel from the T-X or T4's Skynet.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I do agree that the throwing around stuff was seriously overdone, and a substantial detriment to the movie. It's just that I remember that stuff happening (though less) in the first two films, too.
I don't but my memory of T2 is much better than 1.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'm thinking of T1 where they're in the factory that the T-800 gets killed-wasn't Reese smacking him with some sort of big piece of rebar or something? Certainly the T-800 was damaged, but its arms appeared to work perfectly well. A simple matter to just grab the metal stick, and then swing it so hard Reese's head just comes right off.
Similarly when the T-800 first shows up, and terrorizes Bill Paxton's little gang.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I watched the first movie recently, I thought they said it was a T-101, not a T-800. Did I just hear wrong or did they change it after the fact?
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually thought that Salvation was pretty dang good! I don't know why it's getting such negative reviews.
My only real problems are (as others have mentioned) Terminators throwing people around and backhanding them when they should simply grab them and snap their heads off, and Skynet knowing that Reese is John's father doesn't really make sense...
Also:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I mean the only reason the T1000 didn't kill Sarah was because he thought he could use her to get John.
Which didn't really make sense because instead of asking her to call to John it could have just killed and impersonated her... So it's not like even the originals are without their minor flaws.
posted
I was... moderately entertained by the movie.
It would have been a completely different plot, but I'd like for Kyl Reese to have been older in this movie. Prior to Skynet going kaboom at the end of the movie, it would have been good symmetry for Reese and the Arnie to have been sent back. And I'm guessing they learned how to hardened electronics from nuclear blasts, because damned if EMP disabled a single radio anytime in the movie, let alone a fair number of helicopters that were in flight.
And apparently Skynet, despite evolving from military hardware, stopped using / making satellites and is selectively blind and deaf. The machines can hear a car radio in a dead and abandoned city, but they completely missed a massive battle outside of a major Resistance base when they were trying to stop Marcus. Not counting Marcus, there were even Aquabots there to report it.
And the first two movies certainly had their flaws. Just seemingly a lot less than T3 and TS, in addition to... well, just being better movies.
Posts: 1368 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Architraz Warden: And the first two movies certainly had their flaws. Just seemingly a lot less than T3 and TS, in addition to... well, just being better movies.
It was pretty much what I expected. A sort of morally flat action film with some plot holes. But gosh darn did I enjoy the movie. It's certainly no classic, but I was really absorbed by the film. Special effects spectacle and all.
Maybe that just says something about me. But I was totally engulfed by the film. Someone sneezed in the theater, and I suddenly realized that I was still in the movie theater.
I thought the Marcus character was done fairly well (and I think Sam Worthington did a great job in the role). They could've really screwed that up a lot. And maybe the ending of the actual film was a little weak and more of a whimper (so far as story and mythology goes) in comparison to the original leaked ending. But I thought the ending (though somewhat cowardly) had a similarly powerful impact after all the talk of second chances.
***HUGE SPOILER***
Towards the end of the film when the T-800 stabbed John Connor, I screamed. Honestly. I yelled. I was shocked, awed, alarmed, and conflicted.
***END HUGE SPOILER***
I'm interested to see where they'll go in the inevitable sequels. They've got my vote of confidence for the time being.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Which didn't really make sense because instead of asking her to call to John it could have just killed and impersonated her... So it's not like even the originals are without their minor flaws.
Well it ended up employing both strategies. I'm having trouble remembering which it tried first.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It tried asking her to call first. And the impersonation would have worked if it had killed the real Sarah when it had the chance, since her showing up and blasting it with a shotgun is sort of what gave it away.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: It tried asking her to call first. And the impersonation would have worked if it had killed the real Sarah when it had the chance, since her showing up and blasting it with a shotgun is sort of what gave it away.
I'm trying to recall then why the T-1000 didn't then kill Sarah after she refused* to call John.
*refused is putting it kinda blandly. Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Which didn't really make sense because instead of asking her to call to John it could have just killed and impersonated her... So it's not like even the originals are without their minor flaws.
Well it ended up employing both strategies. I'm having trouble remembering which it tried first.
It's stated early in the movie that the T-1000 can only mimic objects it comes in direct contact with; he never touched her until he put his finger through her shoulder in the refinery.
Also, in the Director's Cut and in extra footage on the DVD, it shows the T-1000 is actually damaged and acting erratically as a result of the freezing. So there has been some speculation that hey may not have a usable print of her voice at that point either.
And, as soon as she responded with "Go to hell", he got rudely interrupted...
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good point, Nighthawk. Also at one point the T-1000 found its built-in weapon system was damaged. So some of its other built-in capabilities could have been compromised, as you noted. I long had the impression that with "molecular memory" in its liquid metal, it could always reassemble itself into its original form--but now I see that is not entirely true.
If terminators could be sent back through time because their mechanical innards were covered with "skin," why couldn't they also send back a bunch of weapons in a cowhide bag or something? And why couldn't they be clothed in leather, instead of being sent through time naked? (Well, we all know why.) Guess it really doesn't pay to overthink these things.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not simply organic material that does the trick. It's the bioelectric field created by "living" things. Terminator's flesh is actually living, with blood flow, the ability to heal, and everything. Not just some dead meat wrapped around a robot.
It's never explained how a T1000 can time travel though. It's polymemetic alloy or whatever it's called must be able to replicate the necessary energy.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:If terminators could be sent back through time because their mechanical innards were covered with "skin," why couldn't they also send back a bunch of weapons in a cowhide bag or something?
The T-X in T3 has SEVERAL weapons at her disposal; she runs off a massive list of weapons when her primary gets damaged.
posted
Nighthawk, yeah, I always wondered how she could contain so much weaponry, not to mention the ammunition (which included "caustic shells"). Wouldn't those caustic shells leak lye, or whatever? And what happened to those weapons when her arm elongated into a stabbing spear?
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The individual components of the nano-assembled mechanics that comprise the weapons and their ammunition are deconstructed into the general pile of nano-mechanical building blocks that can be used structurally in rigid components (spears, etc) before being re-assembled into complex machinery again at the behest of the central computer. All that matters is total quantities of building material. Actually I just made that all up, I have no idea which rationalization the canon uses, but basically hollywood/comic books/modern scific use nanotechnology as the latest Applied Phlebotinum that can make stuff happen like magic.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was fine with the film up until the last two minutes. Open heart surgery in a tent? Organ transplants require massive amounts of very specific drugs to work and even then a person isn't going to able to lead an army for quite some time. Plus, Markus was an incredibly valuable asset to the resistance- using him for his heart seemed like a complete waste. That bit killed it for me.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The individual components of the nano-assembled mechanics that comprise the weapons and their ammunition are deconstructed into the general pile of nano-mechanical building blocks that can be used structurally in rigid components (spears, etc) before being re-assembled into complex machinery again at the behest of the central computer. All that matters is total quantities of building material. Actually I just made that all up, I have no idea which rationalization the canon uses, but basically hollywood/comic books/modern scific use nanotechnology as the latest Applied Phlebotinum that can make stuff happen like magic.
Damn, you had me going there. Nicely put! Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Threads: Those are all good points. I guess my orignal claim was hyperbolic since I only take issue with a certain aspect of Skynet. I thought that Skynet's Los Angeles base was inadequately defended. We saw that there was a terminator factory in the base but where were all the terminators when the resistance arrived? The prisoners basically got away without at fight.
Sorry if this was already brought up, but Skynet purposely let Marcus dissarm Skynet's defenses so they could lure John Connor. They didnt want to defend it.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, but then they didn't have anyone left to kill John Connor with. They could have held a bunch in reserve.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I mean maybe given enough time the terminator could have carried John far enough so that there weren't a lot of walls around, you know, so that John might have gotten tossed into a pipe or something.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Finally got around to seeing this. Holy cow it was bad. Epically bad. For all the previously mentioned reasons and more. Can we just have the TV show back and let the movie franchise die a quiet death? Or have we now lost both cause T4 sucked so much.
Which, by the way, apparently McG (T4's director) in part blames TSCC for T4's box office failure. It "lessened the impact". By which, I'm sure he means it showed how much better than his movie the Terminator franchise is capable of being.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed. I don't actually think the movie was terrible per se, just a very very average and unremarkable action movie, especially compared to show.
What kinda bothers me lately (not a lot, but a little) is Joss Whedon's joking offer to buy the franchise for $1000 (subtext being that the franchise isn't actually worth anything any more), when I'm pretty sure that Joss is on record saying that if he had actually had the choice, he would have saved Terminator over Dollhouse, (I can't actually find the source for this, I might have imagined it). If that was the case, it seems to he thinks the franchise has some value, and ridiculing certainly isn't helping our chances at a DVD movie for some closure.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
