Terminator Salvation: Review Central

[Anita18]

Warner should have not made Watchmen, because it was destined to commercially fail. No matter how faithful or unfaithful. The story is not conducive for film. Terminator is more conducive to film, and deserves the R unlike Watchmen. It's not like this is a matter of hindsight, a number of people have been saying this for years, hell even Moore pointed this out. Without Watchmen this film would have been R.

I never doubted McG has a visual flair, but I suspect his editing and pacing style will destroy this film. Whereas Abrams salvaged a bad script, McG will savage a good script, such as cutting lines out and making dialogue awkward (aka the preview clips). Especially when we are talking about 30-40 minutes of material.

In the end, it all boils back down to McG.

Eh, not really. Watchmen can be conducive for film, if they had actually adapted it for the medium. A comic can slow down and allow the reader to absorb the art, but a movie can't - you always need narrative pull throughout every single shot.

I do agree that it was never going to be a mainstream hit, though, no matter how good the actual movie was. (I liked the movie, but I forgave a lot of its weaknesses because the respect and love for the source material was so obvious.) It was just too out there.

I also agree that bad editing can easily ruin a good script, and great editing can save a bad script. Moviemaking is a team effort like that.

My critique has more to do with the business side. I think it is pretty safe to say, if it was R-Rated, there would be more creative freedom.

What do you mean? To tell a good war story, you don't have to show any violence or gore. It's just a story. Words on a page, shots cut together that entices the audience to ask, "What happens next?"

To make it seem realistic is another thing, but that doesn't really have anything to do with storytelling. We've already learned that the difference between PG-13 and R is what is directly shown on screen, or the language. Neither is necessary to tell the story.

I just finished reading a David Mamet book on film directing, can you tell?

 

[Carnotaur3]

You know I think the small press will be more generous with this film than the mainstream. Batman Begins whilst a 80+ on Rotten, did pretty poorly with the mainstream. The usual "critique" being "Batman was not fun" and "should not be that dark".

Actually, I see it the other way around. Won't be critically praised across the board like Star Trek but general audiences will like/love it. Like Star Trek.

I might be wrong. We still got a lot of reviews coming up.

The truth is, people have different expectations going into a film like this. There are the general movie going audiences that know this much about Terminator: Arnold was in the others. You have the Terminator die hards who expect a James Cameron owned film with Brad Fiedel music playing in the background: Basically T2's minute future war segment placed in a 2 hour film. And you have the casual fans: Those who liked the other Terminators and don't have any expectations going into this one.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

T1 = 100%. T2= 97%. Hell, even T3's fresh with 70%.

Exactly, which is why TS's current count of 3 fresh out of 13 reviews (there are more at the bottom than whats listed at the top) is EXTREMELY worrying.

 

[Carnotaur3]

What is the deal? There are now three reviews on Rotten tomatoes that gave the film 3 stars yet RT is counting them as negative?

 

[Paradoxium]

Eh, not really. Watchmen can be conducive for film, if they had actually adapted it for the medium. A comic can slow down and allow the reader to absorb the art, but a movie can't - you always need narrative pull throughout every single shot.

I do agree that bad editing can easily ruin a good script, and great editing can save a bad script. Moviemaking is a team effort like that.


What do you mean? To tell a good war story, you don't have to show any violence or gore. It's just a story. Words on a page, shots cut together that entices the audience to ask, "What happens next?"

To make it seem realistic is another thing, but that doesn't really have anything to do with storytelling. We've already learned that the difference between PG-13 and R is what is directly shown on screen, or the language. Neither is necessary to tell the story.

I just finished reading a David Mamet book on film directing, can you tell?

Wasn't Mamet's main story writing advice was to forget most of what you learn and read Aristotle's Poetics? I kind of agree actually

It is not that R is superior to PG-13 so much so as contextually, a post apocalyptic war story would benefit more from a R-rating. Let's face it, a story about robots are trying to commit genocide, is not exactly PG material. You lose out in showing the "cold inhumanity" of the robots, albeit Marcus tries to muddle this line.

While a R-rating provides more creative potential in this context, but it doesn't mean someone like McG knows how to take advantage of it.

 

[DACrowe]

Can I understand this right now...people are still pissed at Zack Snyder's Watchmen, but now because...it is what "made" Warners seek the PG-13 rating for T4, thereby, "ruining it."

Well first, Snyder's Watchmen is quite flawed but an enjoyably good movie, IMO. Moving on, it was rated R because the source material dictated it to be as such and Warners was not aiming for summer blockbuster numbers, but rather 300 numbers. It failed to reach that. Conversely, Terminator Salvation was obviously greenlit due to the success of Transformers so that is the ball park they're aiming for. That means $300 million. That means a PG-13 budget because Jesus nor Neo are in this film.

So we're going to blame another movie for being made for the PG-13 rating, hence all the bad reviews. Well, I enjoyed the Watchmen movie and will not blame it for other movies' problems. On top of that I hope to enjoy Terminator Salvation despite the ****** reviews. But the ****** reviews are not because the movie is not gory. From all accounts it is quite dark and dreary enough with no complaints of not seeing guts splatter across the screen. Rather the reviews say that it is wooden and laden with an unfocused narrative with actors doing nothing but shouting banalities at each other.

I hope these early reviews are wrong. But if they aren't, the PG-13 rating is the least of T4's problems. Not the Watchmen movie which is asinine to bring up now.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

I could careless what the critics think. I am going to see this film regardless of their opinion.

 

[Anita18]

Wasn't Mamet's main story writing advice was to forget most of what you learn and read Aristotle's Poetics? I kind of agree actually

It is not that R is superior to PG-13 so much so as contextually, a post apocalyptic war story would benefit more from a R-rating. Let's face it, a story about robots are trying to commit genocide, is not exactly PG material. You lose out in showing the "cold inhumanity" of the robots, albeit Marcus tries to muddle this line.

While a R-rating provides more creative potential in this context, but it doesn't mean someone like McG knows how to take advantage of it.

Mamet also considers Dumbo to be the perfect movie. Quite a character, that guy. But he does make a lot of sense. I watched Star Trek after finishing that book, and I was even starting to pick out redundant scenes at that stage.

A war story cannot be PG simply because of its mature ideas, I agree, but it can easily be PG-13 if you don't go into details about the gore or violence. IMO, the difference between PG-13 and R is middling when you're just telling a story. If you're gunning for an R, you just want some obscenity in there. And I guess you could be creatively obscene, as Bret Easton Ellis was in writing American Psycho. That could add to the story, but it certainly doesn't make a weak story any better.

 

[Dark Knight]

I wouldn't be surprised at all if that has to do with some of the bashing towards him. People are just that ignorant and love having a holier than thou attitude to boost their confidence/ego. It was none of our business anyways but then you get these tools who act like they're perfect and think Bale was the anticrist for being human and losing his temper.

I'll judge his performance on his acting ability alone. Not to mention I hear that a lot of the actors didn't have much to work with anyways due to the script.

Yep!

The thing that I find funny and interesting is that those who make it a point to say that Bales' performance wasn't good, are probably the same yahoos who were waiting at the chance to rip him because of the much publicized outburst to a crew member. That's what I think is going on......

 

[TheVileOne]

We'll see. I'm seeing the movie later tonight and writing a review as well.

But generally it sounds like McG made a movie of little substance.

 

[Dark Knight]

We'll see. I'm seeing the movie later tonight and writing a review as well.

But generally it sounds like McG made a movie of little substance.

yeah, the actors are solid for what they have to work with.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

yeah, the actors are solid for what they have to work with.

I take it they dont have much to work with ? Jeez, I have always been skeptical of McG during the production of this movie, but this is just looking worse than I ever expected.

 

[Paradoxium]

Can I understand this right now...people are still pissed at Zack Snyder's Watchmen, but now because...it is what "made" Warners seek the PG-13 rating for T4, thereby, "ruining it."

Well first, Snyder's Watchmen is quite flawed but an enjoyably good movie, IMO. Moving on, it was rated R because the source material dictated it to be as such and Warners was not aiming for summer blockbuster numbers, but rather 300 numbers. It failed to reach that. Conversely, Terminator Salvation was obviously greenlit due to the success of Transformers so that is the ball park they're aiming for. That means $300 million. That means a PG-13 budget because Jesus nor Neo are in this film.

So we're going to blame another movie for being made for the PG-13 rating, hence all the bad reviews. Well, I enjoyed the Watchmen movie and will not blame it for other movies' problems. On top of that I hope to enjoy Terminator Salvation despite the ****** reviews. But the ****** reviews are not because the movie is not gory. From all accounts it is quite dark and dreary enough with no complaints of not seeing guts splatter across the screen. Rather the reviews say that it is wooden and laden with an unfocused narrative with actors doing nothing but shouting banalities at each other.

I hope these early reviews are wrong. But if they aren't, the PG-13 rating is the least of T4's problems. Not the Watchmen movie which is asinine to bring up now.

I am not pissed at Snyder. I have a deep respect for him, to be able to get the amount of creative freedom and clout he had with Warner Brothers, takes a lot. He got what he wanted in the end.

I am not laying the blame on Watchmen, so much so as executives are willing to predicate the direction of another film that is totally unrelated to another, despite of the insanity of such a decision.

Big difference here.

But with all that said and done, I still think making a Watchmen film is a poor business decision (and still have problems with transferring of mediums). But as fanboy I don't mind it one bit. Hell despite the mix to bad reviews and insane of footage cut from it, I did watch it in the end.

A better way of putting it is, it probably didn't help but it would not have "made" the film. On some level Anita is right, a good story is a good story.

 

[Kane52630]

im saving up my final opinion on Watchmen when i buy the Directors Cut and watch the extra 30 mins that was missing from the theatrical version

 

[TheVileOne]

Honestly, I don't think Watchmen should've been made either. Alan Moore was right.

It does annoy me to no end that Terminator Salvation couldn't be R-rated. That it has to be under two hours. Its like we are dealing with 20th Century Fox here.

 

[WVsax27]

What the hell? "T2 was the story of a boy and his Pet Killer Robot"?

Dude, Cameron has even said this. It is pretty true.

 

[The Apatow Crew]

I could careless what the critics think. I am going to see this film regardless of their opinion.

I know exactly and I could careless about the rating also.

 

[Anita18]

A better way of putting it is, it probably didn't help but it would not have "made" the film. On some level Anita is right, a good story is a good story.

LOL, I'll take what I can get from you.

 

[nintendo nerd]

Love how some of you are bashing the critics when you haven't seen the damn film, but they did.

 

[TheVileOne]

You guys can say it doesn't matter, but critics liking Star Trek went a long way in making it successful.

You mean to say its not cool when a movie like Star Trek or Iron Man gets reviews that are as good or even better than a lot of the garbage that Hollywood gives the big awards to?

 

[Bim]

I could careless what the critics think. I am going to see this film regardless of their opinion.

QFT

 

[BestGirl]

I'm a pretty big Bale fan but I find it horse**** now about how he told McG that he would only do the film if the screenplay was good enough to read on an empty stage and keep the audiences attention.

From most of the reviews this sounds like a mindless action film.

I'm still excited to see it but I would have thought it would have been a bit deeper then just action.

I don't think Bale ever said that. I'm pretty sure I read an interview of his where he said that he never told McG that and the comment doesn't even make sense because an action movie would never look good staged. Something like that, I can't quite remember.

 

[Paradoxium]

I don't trust every critic. More Emanuel Levy than say Christy wtf Lemire. I pretty much set it as:

"I am probably seeing this film no matter what"

and

"I will weigh the pros and cons of this film with a few critics I trust"

Salvation and Star Trek for an example fall in the latter category. Dark Knight for the former since I am a Batman fanboy. One guy I will definitely check out is James Berardinelli http://www.reelviews.net for Salvation (not up yet).

In the end, I am just being economical

 

[BestGirl]

Honestly, I don't think Watchmen should've been made either. Alan Moore was right.

If it hadn't I wouldnt've gotten a movie I really enjoyed.

It does annoy me to no end that Terminator Salvation couldn't be R-rated. That it has to be under two hours. Its like we are dealing with 20th Century Fox here.

The PG-13 rating doesn't surprise me but the runtime does. What's wrong with a movie over 2 hours? Especially since it sounds like TS really needed the extra time to expand its narrative and characterization. I look forward to the Director's Cut.

 

[LostSon88]

You know I think the small press will be more generous with this film than the mainstream. Batman Begins whilst a 80+ on Rotten, did pretty poorly with the mainstream. The usual "critique" being "Batman was not fun" and "should not be that dark".

62% by the mainstream is by no means something to scoff at. Sure it wasn't that much in the long run but it was in no way poor. The important thing is that it did its job in getting the mainstream critics interested in Batman again.

And as evidenced by The Dark Knight, clearly they don't have any problems with their Batman being dark.