I just get back to see T4. I guess it was ok. Probably better than the average Sci-Fi movie (but let's tell the thruth they usually s***).
But my problem is different, It's like if saw that movie 100 times before.
"The Phantom Menace of The Matrix Reloaded full of Resident Evils" meets "Mad Max Beyond the War of the Worlds" with a touch of "Usual zombie-movies survivalist asking themselves questions about human nature. "
Anyone felt the same?
Or am I too old to watch action movies now?
I just came back as well, but found it quite pleasant, all things considered. Despite having a special knack for anything Terminator related, I am also prepared going into any cinema since about 1998 that they just don't make films like they used to. T2 is a very tough act to follow and I don't think any future Terminator film including this one will match. That film came out at the very beginning of awesome modern visual effects, so the studios were not accustomed to hiding behind mind-blowing visuals. Substance is nowhere near as important anymore :(
Still, it was nice to have back after the pain of losing Sarah Connor Chronicles not 100 hours before this film was released *cries*
One thing I never got my head around is how many terminators were sent back through time. Kyle Reese said that they blew the time machine up after him. Does this movie expain a bit about that?
Nope :D
(but they are planning aT5 and a T6...)
In fact, the two 1st movies can explain that paradox alone. After the resistance send Kyle, the time line got change (through tech shift via new ships because the 1st Terminator got scraped), so in order to keep the same new (and improved) time line, Skynet #2 need to do so *again* (and the loss of the "bad" #1 Terminator was an acceptable loss) so he sended him anyway then send a T-1000 to acheived a better result further in the future...
omg... so many precious hours I wasted as a college student trying to figure this out...
Salvation seems to lack the epic-scale odds that we're treated to in flashbacks in T-1 and T-2. Hell, in most parts of the movie you just see one T-600 walking about. They should've hired WETA with their orc creation program and switched them out for Terminators :D.
T4 is out? Can't say the cast line up (I originally heard) pleased me, but the setting, if it's really all just battle shit...sounds epic. Is it all just battle shit? Otherwise, **** that, I get Night Museum 2 DVD 1.50 yeah
Quote from: Mods on Sun 24/05/2009 01:58:06
if it's really all just battle shit...sounds epic. Is it all just battle shit?
It is rather action/battle oriented, but...
Spoiler
I would not describe it as "epic" in the least. There are not any Narnia-esque battles between armies of thousands, just small (sometimes very) groups or single.
Dan: The moment Sarah is told about the future, the course is already changed. So even if they blew up the time machine, that entire timeline is negated anyway. That just creates a new paradox, though, in which it can't be explained while Kyle just doesn't evaporate into nothingness.
Same goes for T2 an so on. It seems Judgement day is inevitable... But the details can change.
I, personally, passed on my chance to see T4 as I've been hearing nothing but lackluster reviews. Great visuals, tired execution. I'll wait until Netflix, thanks.
Don't start on the time travelling parodxes and timelines...it just gets so theoretical and complicated very fast. And it won't get sorted out in the end anyway.
It hasn't come to our cinemas yet, maybe I'll watch it cause Bale's in it and he seems to know how to choose a movie (and since he's more famous now, he probably didn't take the role just for the money). On that note, who thinks it's cool that Batman fights robots from the future? ;D
On the Terminator series, I think the simplest thing is not to think about it. They send a robot, then they send another one, ass-kicikg and lots of explosions and end it all with "the human race never changes" thought. :P
I just saw it...
I was pleased [enough], but underwhelmed on the whole.
I gotta agree with ProgZ here ... I was really hoping/expecting to see thousands of T-600s walking across a terribly devastated landscape. While the landscapes were bleak, they were far from the visuals of Terminator and Terminator 2 Judgment Day of the vast devastation. Given the time-line/paradox issues created in the first three I just wrote it off to anything is possible. As Connor said, "the future's not set ... there's no fate but what we make" so who's to say that the future should be what we'd already seen in the past movies? (though I'd still have preferred that!)
I have, since I was a kid watching Terminator's flash-back scenes, wanted to see
that world so on that level I was a bit disappointed but it was still entertaining enough.
I thought Anton Yelchin was really convincing as a young Kyle Reese (who is, has always been, my favorite character in all the films)
Spoiler Below:
Spoiler
The computer generated Arnold T-800 was really, really, cool! I wanted to see more of it and am hoping the next movie will feature it/them/him more!
As far as time-line inconsistencies blah blah blah ... In Terminator I've always said there's a huge plot-hole that exists (and this is based on the time-travel ideas expressed in the movie (which do not mesh with my personal feelings on time-travel but I'm basing what I'm about to say on the theory of time travel presented in the film)). If the Terminator (T-800) was sent back to kill Sarah Connor, the instant he was sent back the future would have altered and Kyle Reese would never have been able to travel back in time in the first place. It would have made more sense for them to have figured out that the machines were sending the T-800 back, and then preemptively sent Kyle back. Not a huge deal really ... and it actually then gives credence to my personal thoughts/theories on time travel.
On time travel, a popular thing to say is that if it existed, why aren't we surrounded by time travellers?
I presume it would be a device that sent people back in time, and I think it might have been Stephen fry where I picked this up. Surely there needs to be a device to send AND receive time travelers? So until that's invented and built, we won't see any time travelers?
I prefer this theory, as it still keeps the hope going that time travel might one day happen.
One little question, ok, maybe 2..
Despite a lot of people not liking T3, Rise of the Machines - I still quite like it. I'm interested to know a couple of things before I see T4.
Firstly, Kathryn Bruster - who it appears is "Kate Connor" in T4, what kind of role does she have? T3 sets out that she will be a major player in the timeline of what happens post judgement-day.
In T3 we also learn that J Connor will be killed by the Arnie robot, is that mentioned again or even happens in T4?
I realise these could be major spoilers, so if they are, tell me, and I'll just go see it. But if neitehr of these two things are touched on, well, I'll have to reconsider going to see it at the pictures.
I saw it yesterday and yeah, great effects, mediocre rest. It was still enjoyable as an action film and I didn't have too high expectations anyway given that it takes place after Judgment Day.
On the whole time travel business: my roommates and I watched the first three films again prior to seeing T4 and I believe Kyle Reese does mention at one point something about time lines. So if time's assumed as branching off into a "time tree", it does make sense on a certain level.
In 2029, the T-800 is sent back. When he arrives in 1984, time splits into two branches. The first one is the one where he arrives, leading to a future where he is sent back.
The second one doesn't see him arrive in 1984 and leads to a 2029 where he isn't sent back.
The first branch splits again when Kyle Reese arrives. Again, the first branch sees both arrive and both being sent back.
In the other branch, he doesn't arrive, and only the T-800 is sent back in 2029.
None of these branches is the "actual" one, the film simply shows us the one branch the filmmakers chose.
Yeah but if there are "time lines" then why would Skynet send a robot into the past since the timeline would only change for that robot (it has sense if a human does it cause then he can live in this changed reality, but for an android it doesn't have much use). Especially for an AI that is in that time line that's still the same (well I guess Skynet would look foward to there being another reality/time line where it's at a better position...)...now all you have to proove is that Skynet/AI has enough human emotions as to give it's resources so it can make another reality where somebody else has a better future - so compassion (which I think it doesn't have...cause of all the destroying and enslavement), common good (which it might have), self sacrifice (this one is questionable), self preservance.
On the other hand a machine might think that is a good think cause it has no moral issuse nor does it care if it dies cause it did it's job and sort of made a new and better generation of it in another timeline...
So my counclusion is - about 50:50 chances of that being the case. ;D
I still don't get why Skynet didn't send a couple of robots high grade cyborgs and some memory banks farther into the past and randomly killing some Connor (Sarah or John or Sarah's grandmother) in it's crib...but I guess then no movie. Please don't tell me if it's explained in T4, haven't watched it yet.
Well, if Skynet doesn't send anything back, there won't be a single branch without the Resistance. So of course every future version of Skynet must send back a T-800 if one arrived in the past to avoid the implosion of the universe.
But, assuming we're in a 2029 time line where John Connor exists, and he fails to send Reese back, what happens then? :)
The problem is that the whole cause->effect stuff we're used to gets screwed up by time travel into the past.
Maybe one can make sense of it by using a Donnie Darko approach where unstable, short-lived parallel universes are created.
Regardless, go watch the movie. It's not that bad.
Bit old I know, but I finally saw this movie - it was good! Very good in terms of action. It wasn't quite the robot filled future from the other movies though. The only thing that really let me down was the superb Terminator theme not being used, gah! It's just not right they didn't use it, just like Die Hard 4.0 they didn't use Kamen's style or themes, only ONCE in the intro, like in T4 they only used the knocks in a couple of places, bah!!! Not even the end music was the theme!! >:( oh well, only one way to make up for it lol..
http://www.screen7.co.uk/junc/terminator.mp3
da uzi 9mm!
ps LOL KhrisMUC! my silly quote :p
Still haven't watched the movie, but I don't go to cinemas anyway (unless there's a movie I'm really eager to see which usually doesn't happen - ever).
I would've considered watching it in case it would really be all about the terminator action seen in the flashbacks of the first two movies. Too bad that's not the case... really.
Well, I watch it when a DVD is out and see..
Quote from: anian on Sun 24/05/2009 11:39:29
maybe I'll watch it cause Bale's in it and he seems to know how to choose a movie (and since he's more famous now, he probably didn't take the role just for the money). On that note, who thinks it's cool that Batman fights robots from the future? ;D
The only film I truly enjoyed with Christian Bale in it was Equilibrium. Were talking about Christian Bale, the only actor that can play Batman and sound like wolverine, right?
And, to be honest, based on my experiences with T3, I reckon he probably DID take the role just for the money.
I'll watch the Sarah Conner chronicles first before I bother wasting 2hrs in a cinema.
Besides, I haven't seen Star Trek yet, or the new Harry Potter so its not top of the list.
Quote from: Stee on Wed 15/07/2009 21:08:42
The only film I truly enjoyed with Christian Bale in it was Equilibrium.
I did enjoy The Prestige though.