Terminator Salvation

[Jim]

Just got back.  Severely disappointed.  FYI, I stayed away from spoilers, etc.  My prediction came true, storytelling is not all about CGI like many directors of today believe.  They took the whole existing storyline from 1 and 2 and botched it. I love Bale, but he sucked as Connor. 

[EdSolo]

Wow, with that rant on the webpage quoted a few posts back.  Is he mad that this movie wasn't set like what we saw in T-1?  He has to remember that the events of T-2 and T-3 erased that future.

Overall, I didn't have a problem with the movie.  This movie was never going to be a favorite of the critics, but I don't think it should be trashed like it has been.  Ultimately, this movie was a set up for a 2nd and 3rd movie in a new trilogy and I think it did a good job of doing that.

[Jim]

Can someone answer this for me.  Why didnt the Terminators just go back to an earlier timeline and eliminate anyone who had a chance of changing the future?  I know on the Sarah Connor Chronicles that the machines went back to an incorrect timeline and waited for the future to eliminate their targets.  Why not just eliminate that persons parents, grandparents, etc.  Was this ever explained?

[Matt]

That's a good question.  I'd like to see a Terminator movie set during the Eisenhower administration.  It would be kind of like Back to the Future, but instead of the Enchantment Under the Sea dance, it would just be some endoskeleton ripping Sarah Connor's parents a new one.

Anyway, haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm curious as to where it falls in McG's pantheon.  Seems to me that it's better than Charlie's Angels 2, but not quite as good as Charlie's Angels 1.

[BillCable]

I think the explanation is that there's no good records in the future.  They know of a "Sarah Connor" but don't know anything about her other than what city she lived in.  They don't know who she is, who her parents are, or anything like that.

If it was possible to change history via time travel, they really wouldn't even have to bother killing Sarah's parents.  If they go back far enough, they'd prevent her ever being conceived.  There's only about a 1-in-100,000 chance that a particular sperm will fertilize the egg.  If they did anything to change the exact moment of conception, a whole other person would be born.  So all the Terminator would need to do is interact with the mother or father at any previous point in their lives, or anybody that might possibly interact with the mother or father at any point, and you'd have Joe instead of Sarah.  Of course when you play with that fire, you also prevent the people who build Skynet from being conceived, which would be bad news for the robots.

[DSJ™]

LOL! 

Transforminators

[knashdx]

Can someone answer this for me.  Why didnt the Terminators just go back to an earlier timeline and eliminate anyone who had a chance of changing the future?  I know on the Sarah Connor Chronicles that the machines went back to an incorrect timeline and waited for the future to eliminate their targets.  Why not just eliminate that persons parents, grandparents, etc.  Was this ever explained?

It all comes back to the "Grandfather Complex" - If they go too far back and make too many changes it is possible that they would undo their own creation. Thus neggating everything.

I think the explanation is that there's no good records in the future.  They know of a "Sarah Connor" but don't know anything about her other than what city she lived in.  They don't know who she is, who her parents are, or anything like that.

If it was possible to change history via time travel, they really wouldn't even have to bother killing Sarah's parents.  If they go back far enough, they'd prevent her ever being conceived.  There's only about a 1-in-100,000 chance that a particular sperm will fertilize the egg.  If they did anything to change the exact moment of conception, a whole other person would be born.  So all the Terminator would need to do is interact with the mother or father at any previous point in their lives, or anybody that might possibly interact with the mother or father at any point, and you'd have Joe instead of Sarah.  Of course when you play with that fire, you also prevent the people who build Skynet from being conceived, which would be bad news for the robots.

This answer works too.

[efranks]

Saw Terminator this morning.  Didn't love it, didn't hate it.  Had sort of the indifferent feeling about it like I did with Indiana Jones last year.  It lacked something and there were a lot of pieces that felt like they didn't fit and having read about the script re-writes, I figure that's why.

I didn't hate it as much as Harry Knowles did but I don't think I was expecting as much as he was.

   E...

[DSJ™]

Back from seeing the flick, I'm 60/40 on it. ****, can they make it any louder! 

Some nice nods to T1 & T2, really liked the GNR "You Could Be Mine" bit, the GGI Arnold was amazing, So amazing it was awesome. Bale talked like he was still Batman, Worthington's accent kept switching like Costner in Robin Hood. Michael Ironside dies again, poor guy. Skynet get nuked & the chopper just flies away kinda like Indy surviving a nuke blast in that fridge. The Terminators were cool tho & nice to see how Connor got those face scars. The ending was better than I read that leaked out on the net long ago.

It will be interesting to see where they take the next future installments.

Did I mention it was ******* loud! 

[David]

I just got back. I dunno, it was definitely the worst Terminator film yet. But it did have some cool stuff too, I'd give it a solid B.

POTENTIAL SPOILERS BELOW!


-I think they tried way too hard to throw in nods and references to the other films. Sometimes it worked ("I'll be back") and other times it was just plain stupid (I think the Arnold 'cameo' looked horrible).

-I didn't like Christian Bale as John Connor. I agree that he still sounds too much like Batman, and it really didn't look like he gave a **** through the whole movie, so that was disappointing.

-The Marcus character was cool, but I saw the heart transplant thing coming from a mile away.

-That actor who plays Kyle Reese (and Chekov in Star Trek) is great, but I think he was really underused in this movie.

-The battle stuff at the beginning kinda sucked, but the battle at Skynet at the end of the film was awesome!

-Here's my only question: So is the cancer lady that was talking to Marcus at the end a T-1000? I didn't really understand her role.


END SPOILERS

Overall I liked it for what it was, but it just didn't really feel right. Meh.

[EdSolo]

I just got back. I dunno, it was definitely the worst Terminator film yet. But it did have some cool stuff too, I'd give it a solid B.

POTENTIAL SPOILERS BELOW!


-I think they tried way too hard to throw in nods and references to the other films. Sometimes it worked ("I'll be back") and other times it was just plain stupid (I think the Arnold 'cameo' looked horrible).

-I didn't like Christian Bale as John Connor. I agree that he still sounds too much like Batman, and it really didn't look like he gave a **** through the whole movie, so that was disappointing.

-The Marcus character was cool, but I saw the heart transplant thing coming from a mile away.

-That actor who plays Kyle Reese (and Chekov in Star Trek) is great, but I think he was really underused in this movie.

-The battle stuff at the beginning kinda sucked, but the battle at Skynet at the end of the film was awesome!

-Here's my only question: So is the cancer lady that was talking to Marcus at the end a T-1000? I didn't really understand her role.


END SPOILERS

Overall I liked it for what it was, but it just didn't really feel right. Meh.

I believe the cancer lady was what she appeared to be...someone linked to the science organization working on using human parts to help people with terminal diseases...her company either purchased or was bought out by Cyberdyne.  Her appearance as Skynet, was just a way for Marcus's human half to identify with Skynet...I don't think it was the intention for her to be Skynet or a T-1000.

[Neal]

I believe the cancer lady was what she appeared to be...someone linked to the science organization working on using human parts to help people with terminal diseases...her company either purchased or was bought out by Cyberdyne.  Her appearance as Skynet, was just a way for Marcus's human half to identify with Skynet...I don't think it was the intention for her to be Skynet or a T-1000.

I agree.  I believe that Skynet (as Helena Bonham Carter) even says something to this effect while speaking to Marcus.

[Jim]

Helena Bonham Carter was a just a program that was implemented to run the system.  I am glad someone else thought the Arnold Cameo was a bit cheesy.  The FX are just not there yet to warrant something like this. My prediction is that by the end of the third movie (if they make it that far) that Connor willl somehow end up being a Terminator in some form. I also think that the beginning should have connected more to the other films.  There seems to be around 10+ years with no explanation of how the characters arrived to where they are in the movie. Maybe a flashback will be in the next movie explaining this.

Spoiler..............................




Not to address Kate's pregnancy was an ill attempt to leave an open door question for the sequel IMO.  It should have been addressed regardless. I just hope that the baby does not end up being someone who has shown up in some form in a previous movie.  

[JediMoses]

I am still debating whether or not to see this film.  Read this article - thought it might be of interest to those of you who saw it.  What would you have thought?

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2009/05/the-terminator.html

[efranks]

If that had been the ending I would have **** in an empty tub of popcorn and thrown it at the screen.

I'm 50/50 on this film as-is and actually if either of the other endings had been in the film instead of the one that was, I would have fallen into the hate it category. 

   E...