Movie Discussion: Terminator: Salvation

The latest Terminator film has neither Ahrnold nor Summer Glau, but it does boast mind-warping time-travel, eye-catching effects, and costly explosions.

What’s your review?

12 replies on “Movie Discussion: Terminator: Salvation”

  1. babasyzygy says:

    I actually really liked the Ahrnold cameo. I assume that it was done digitally – he looked as young as he was in T1.

    Overall it was a fun movie, if not terribly profound for the overall Terminator story. And hey, I have to at least mildly like anything with Michael Ironside.

  2. Chad Cloman says:

    I give it a 5/10. And I really liked the CGI Schwarzenegger.

    At first I thought they were doing a reboot, ala Star Trek, but toward the end of the movie I realized that wasn’t the case. The events in this movie take place shortly after Judgment Day, and the events that Kyle Reese told to Sarah Connor come at a later date.

  3. octa says:

    After a great Star Trek movie my hopes were up for this, but it turned out terribly.

    The script was a joke and full of plot holes. The whole thing was full of cheese actually. From the cinematography to the lighting, it looked really amateurish. The CG was very pretty but it was not worth the price of admission.

    This Terminator was missing something vital that the series has offered in every incarnation: The Chase. It was sorely missing. Instead they had a branching plot line that barely made any sense and was even proven pointless on more than one occasion. Honestly, they tried to throw in every one liner from the previous movies but didn’t seem to grasp what made those movies great.

    I don’t want to see another one from this team. The series needs to go back to its roots of time traveling body builders and incredible chases. Let’s pretend this one was never made (kind of like part 3).

    PS: The biggest plot hole has to be why Skynet has Kyle Reese as #1 on its hit list. How does it know he is John Connor’s father and why does it care?

    • y42 says:

      why Skynet has Kyle Reese as #1 on its hit list. How does it know he is John Connor’s father

      It sent itself a memo backwards in time?

    • Chad Cloman says:

      PS: The biggest plot hole has to be why Skynet has Kyle Reese as #1 on its hit list. How does it know he is John Connor’s father and why does it care?

      There’s a place in the movie where John Connor himself says that Reese and Sarah Connor are important, and a Skynet agent hears him. Although the big event at the end of the movie may have caused Skynet to lose some of its data.

      Not sure why Skynet cares at this early point, other than the fact that Connor is more or less the public voice of the resistance. Or maybe it was alerted by terminators from the past/future.

      • octa says:

        A friend reminded me that the Terminator in T3 did synch up with Skynet, so I’m willing to allow for the possibility it was communicated that way. That does not explain why it didn’t kill Kyle Reese right away instead of penning him up to draw John Connor in. I mean if it knew Kyle was John’s father killing him would make John disappear or something, wouldn’t it?

        Argh, I think the more obvious truth of the matter is the writers didn’t think everything through. Such a shame.

        • Tekzel says:

          No, killing Reese would not have made John Connor disappear. It has been shown in previous movies that the present can’t be changed by the time travel thing, it only changes alternate branch universes. It makes perfect sense to me that Skynet would know about Reese, the knowledge that he was John’s father wasn’t any secret by the second movie. Lots of people knew that Sarah claimed that, from the asylum she was in, for one. Plus the many other ways people have pointed out. Since it can be reasonably assumed that Skynet would realize that the time travel thing doesn’t seem to work, grabbing dear old dad and holding him hostage for a chance to kill John would make perfect sense.

          Makes sense to me. Anyway, I enjoyed the movie. Sure, it could have been better, but it could also have been way, way worse. I would probably give it a 7-8, with the digital Arnold cameo pushing it to the 8. Very well done, in my opinion. Just wish they had kept him Arnoldy longer, though I know that had to be expensive to do. I didn’t bother spoilering that because it is a waste of time. Anyone who hasn’t seen it yet and wants to be surprised by it shouldn’t be reading a thread like this.

    • zonk3r says:

      So the amateurish lighting must have been why Bale was so upset at the cinematographer messing with the lights. It all makes sense!

  4. octa says:

    I grabbed this from another forum, and wow does it explain a lot:

    http://chud.com/articles/articles/19577/1/EXCLUSIVE-WHAT-WENT-WRONG-WITH-TERMINATOR-SALVATION/Page1.html

    It basically does a side by side comparison of the original script which was leaked on the net with the final product. If true, it explains why massive re-writes occured and muddied the whole thing.

  5. vanyel says:

    The chud article was interesting and explains a lot, but disheartening in that this movie never had a chance. It pushed suspension of disbelief over the cliff and then followed. Roger Ebert apparently said it pretty well in calling it video game you just watched. It was better than T3, but that’s not saying much. It’s disappointing if true that Bale is behind the problems, as he really is a good actor, but I’m definitely looking forward to more of Yelchin in the future…

    • zonk3r says:

      It was definitely better than T3 (which along with the TV show I refuse to acknowledge happened) which was pretty terrible.

Comments are closed.