TERMINATOR SALVATION Thread

[John Johnson]

Variety, the New York Times, the LA Times, Ebert and a few other reputable places liked it (though Ebert didn't like TREK -- go figure), but it's definitely on the mixed side.

I'm still going to check it out for myself.

I'll go, but I can wait for this one.

[AndyDursin]

My review is up --
http://www.andyfilm.com/5-26-09.html

I liked it -- quite a bit in fact.

If you are somehow expecting this movie to approach the greatness of the original film, stay away. If you're looking for an effective piece of big budget, summer-time popcorn-munching fun, it works...lots of action and effects, with enough of a story (especially if you are a Terminator fan) to keep you interested.

No classic -- but I wasn't expecting one, at least, and I didn't come away disappointed. It delivered more than I anticipated, in fact, and I loved Arnold's "participation" too!

Bottom line -- the snobbish, heavily negative reviews are, IMO, way off base. So are the "fanboy" rants from AICN that trashed McG's involvement without even having seen it -- obviously they don't want to eat crow and admit he, at least, did a MUCH better job than they anticipated, but I'm not surprised.

And if you're predisposed to trashing action movies in general, I can see how you wouldn't like it. For me, I thoroughly enjoyed it -- for what it was...

[JSWalsh]

So are the "fanboy" rants from AICN

I can't take reviewers who use "iconic" so much. It's a replacement for serious thought about a movie. Reading more than two talkback comments there will make you (well, me) click off in embarrassment.

[AndyDursin]

I can't take reviewers who use "iconic" so much. It's a replacement for serious thought about a movie. Reading more than two talkback comments there will make you (well, me) click off in embarrassment.

I happened to look at Harry's review -- which is absolute garbage IMO. I usually respect dissenting points of view, but in this case, this is absolutely a case of him clinging to his studio politics and/or simple "fanboy hatred" that this project ended up with someone like McG and not one of his "friends" that it totally colored his judgment. The film isn't flawless but it is nowhere -- not even close -- to being as awful as he describes. (Remember this is the same guy who gushed about SUPERMAN RETURNS and the 1998 GODZILLA until he "went back to see it" and changed his opinion after the opening weekend! And I admit I kind of liked the latter, but at least I didn't change my opinion based on what others thought).

If you look through the talkback of Harry's review, especially since yesterday, you'll see a number of posters on that site saying "I liked it, it's not nearly as bad as you say, were you having a bad day when you saw this?" etc. etc. Not that it's any kind of indication of anything in the big picture -- because the "fanboy hatred" of WOLVERINE and X-MEN THE LAST STAND did nothing to curtail their box-office grosses -- but I find it amusing even some of his "flock" have turned on him in this case.

Sure the movie has some drawbacks, and Bale is clearly cashing the check, but for goodness sakes, it's a piece of escapist entertainment, not Shakespeare, so I even forgive him for that. This movie is a solid sci-fi summer action movie. It's silly but there is a plot, there's not enough character development but there's loads of well-executed action and effects. Compared to the likes of, say, TRANSFORMERS or INDIANA JONES IV or Spielberg's WAR OF THE WORLDS, this movie is far superior to them. It's not STAR TREK but it works for what it was trying to do, and I wouldn't even mind seeing it again on video.

[AndyDursin]

I should also mention that ILM's work on this movie is superb, and their rendering of a certain terminator we all know and love at the end is some of the best rendering of that kind I've ever seen. It's so lifelike I would've thought the Governator was actually there and not just a digital likeness of him.

[Eric W.]

Good. Your review pretty much covers more or less what I expected out of this film.

I'm not really sure why anyone bothers with AICN.

[The Pessimist]

Sure the movie has some drawbacks, and Bale is clearly cashing the check, but for goodness sakes, it's a piece of escapist entertainment, not Shakespeare, so I even forgive him for that. This movie is a solid sci-fi summer action movie. It's silly but there is a plot, there's not enough character development but there's loads of well-executed action and effects.

I have real problems with your POV. It's the same thing I get into with people over FSM. They go on about how the film's pretty cool even though you 'leave your brain at home' cause it's an action film, and bizzarelly see no reason to justify the absence of plot or reason to invest in the emotions of the characters. I seriously think the reason T3 is outliving T2 for some people is because of the intensity and goal-oriented action between Daines and Stahl. They bring the necessary character believability and substance where otherwise the pic could've fallen to typical conventions.

These are action films. I'm not asking for character depth of Woody Allen pics, but for people to just say that Transformers is a great film even though there's hardly a reason to care about plot or characters is at best a faulty premise. I think if you look at what would be considered the greatest in the genre, what they all have in common is some level of both.

[AndyDursin]

I have real problems with your POV. It's the same thing I get into with people over FSM. They go on about how the film's pretty cool even though you 'leave your brain at home' cause it's an action film, and bizzarelly see no reason to justify the absence of plot or reason to invest in the emotions of the characters.

I never said the movie didn't have a plot. What I wrote in my review was that it needed more breathing room for the actors and, indeed, some additional character development would've helped. At the same time, the Sam Worthington character provided enough on that end to keep me interested beyond its (superb) action sequences.

Furthermore, you have a problem with my POV because you've actually seen this movie and disagree with it, or you're just applying it in general as if I review every action film that way? If you were a regular reader of my 12 years of columns, you would know the latter is not the case, and that I take every film on a case-by-case basis.

Of course the best action movies work because they have established characters you care about. And I've certainly never compared DIE HARD with TRANSFORMERS. On the other hand, there are times when snobs sit in one of these films and bemoan the lack of character development and how much more they'd get out of watching BBC imports on PBS. That kind of POV is as brainless as going in not expecting any character development at all because of the genre.

This particular movie worked for me for reasons I outlined. While I do wish there was more character development, there was enough to satisfy me given the parameters of this particular film. Remember this is also the 4th film in a series that has already established its main characters and the scenario they're involved with. While it would've been more effective if the other supporting players were fleshed out and developed further, the movie worked sufficiently enough to engage me -- and it throws plenty at fans of the earlier films as well. And I also felt, again, that the Worthington part was developed enough for me to care about him as well and the quest he undertakes.

It's not a great movie, but it was an effective, slam-bang summer action movie.

[JSWalsh]

While I agree there are movies, and motion pictures, and films, and one shouldn't go to one expecting another, it really is kind of pathetic how certain folks will accept anything because it's "dumb fun" or whatever. These same people would dismiss the exact same movies if their effects were as lame as their scripts.

[AndyDursin]

While I agree there are movies, and motion pictures, and films, and one shouldn't go to one expecting another, it really is kind of pathetic how certain folks will accept anything because it's "dumb fun" or whatever. These same people would dismiss the exact same movies if their effects were as lame as their scripts.

It's a growing problem because so much of what we see now aims to be "dumb fun" and not much more than that.

As far as TERMINATOR SALVATION goes, I didn't think this movie was strictly "dumb fun". It did have a plot and some interesting angles if you had seen the three prior movies. It should have developed its supporting players more, but there was a core story there. Should have been developed more, but it sufficed enough -- for me -- for the action sequences to play off. In some ways it was like THE ROAD WARRIOR, which certainly had a simplistic plot, crossed with a TERMINATOR movie. On that level I enjoyed it.

[JSWalsh]

I'm actually looking forward to Terminator 4. I find I can enjoy movies like this while many others who also like SF and action don't because I don't read up too much about them, and don't expect them to be art.

At the same time, this doesn't mean I like some of the utter garbage out there which has NOTHING going on but a budget. I liked The Descent (some didn't) quite a bit, and was looking forward to Doomsday, but holy cow was that wretched. So it doesn't mean one has no standards--one just deals in reality.

I really enjoyed T1. I found T2 excellent in terms of action and scale, but overblown and pretentious. T3 was enjoyable as an action movie, and I loved the ending. I will see T4 expecting a good entertainment, but I certainly don't think it's going to be in the ballpark with the first--haven't people been burned enough to know this NEVER EVER happens?

Meanwhile, I will avoid utter crap like Transformers. The first was a soul-deadening experience.

So, one can like popcorn movies, as Andy does, without being a turncoat for not expecting them to be The Wild Bunch.

The problem, I think, is with people whose cinematic diet consists ONLY of junk movies. Someone who thinks Wrath of Khan is the height of cinema really has no place to complain about popcorn movies (and I really liked Khan).

[Paul MacLean]

I have always found T2 to be one of the least of Cameron's movies -- it's F/X driven but it's bloated, and it's not really suspenseful either. A good movie, but not a classic IMO.

I'm with completely with you on that Andy. The action sequences (particularly the bike/truck chase) were brilliant -- unassailable really. And I did like how Schwarzzenegger's character became more "human", (particularly the "I know now why you cry" line). But overall I found it an lacking in the characterizations and, as you say, suspense.

I also felt one of the problems with T2 (well, both T1 and T2 really) was the score, which was noisy, emotionally sterile and often more irritating than dramatically effective.

I remember the TV trailers for T2 which started appearing later that summer, which were tracked with "The Mutant" from Goldsmith's Total Recall. I was struck by how Goldsmith's music really brought the images to life and and how it added a whole other dimension to them. Its too bad he didn't do the score because it was the kind of picture he did best. Oh well...

[Monterey Jack]

I also felt one of the problems with T2 (well, both T1 and T2 really) was the score, which was noisy, emotionally sterile and often more irritating than dramatically effective.

I find Fiedel's scores to the first two Terminator movies effective in context (I like that growling "Whaaaaaaa......whaaaaaaa...." motif for the T-1000, which kinda sounds like a synthy precursor to Jerry Goldsmith's "Bart The Bear" theme from The Edge! ), but they're totally unlistenable outside of the films (I used to have the T2 soundtrack on cassette, but found it pretty rank by itself). Then again, Cameron has always had a tin ear for film music. My God, what Shirley Walker could have done with True Lies, if she weren't forced to just arrange Fiedel's synth music for an orchestra...

[mkaroly]

Well, just got back from it. Here are my two cents...

I was very disappointed. I'll try to explain why.

1). I saw nothing new in this film that I haven't already seen in T2 and T3, except we don't go backwards in time. Terminator pursues humans, humans run, humans overcome, war goes on. Nothing new. It added nothing exciting or enthralling to what the other films already did. So I guess I'm saying I'm not really interested in seeing the war. It plays out like the chasing did in the first three films.

2). One of the reasons why I liked ALIEN 3 was because it was the end of Ripley's story. I cared about her and she died in sacrifical fashion. I came to realize at the end of this film that I could care less about anyone in the film- John Connor, Sarah Connor (I agree that Linda Hamilton's absence was a plus), Kyle Reese or that kid...I mean, so what? I know Skynet is evil, and since the film takes place in 2018 (11 years before Ah-nuld was sent back to kill Reese), there were no surprises, and I have not bonded with any of the characters since T1. This film failed to make me want humanity to survive.

3). The visuals were cool at times but at other times (like at the Hollywood sign, for example), you could totally tell that the computer stuff was inserted in and Worthington was acting against a green or blue screen. I understand that backgrounds are done that way, but at least make it look a little more believeable.

4). SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Worthington's performance was the "heart" of the film (pun intended)- he did well. Bale's overacting was humorous. I suppose that the Resistance couldn't carry out their sound wavelength thing because the machines blew up the submarine, but does that mean it takes them at least another 10+ years to come up with something that will destroy the machines? Or do they still use the sound wave thing at a later date? When does it end? The whole arc of the TERMINATOR series is a bit confusing to me anyway.

4). I would have preferred to see a "final" Terminator film in which humanity beats out the machines (or machines beat out humanity); maybe a film that showed how the Resistance stole or developed the technology to send Reese and the protector Terminator back to the past. I don't know- I was just unentertained by the whole thing.

5). Elfman's score is so-so. Sounded like PLANET OF THE APES mixed with a bit of SPIDER-MAN and any number of other things he's already done. It did not impress me.

I wanted to like the movie and be entertained, but ultimately I just wasn't. I ended up giving it 2 or 3/10. Very disappointing. I plan on seeing WOLVERINE tomorrow or later this weekend...hopefully it's not as bad as this one.

[JSWalsh]

I think they should end the series with Connor's knowledge of how he came to be leading to the destruction of the Terminators by a seemingly significant action that results in his blinking out of existence. At first everyone thinks he's been blown up, but the last scene shows that within months, the war ends and humanity survives, and Connor's sacrifice and ultimate purpose are not even all that significant, except to the audience.