Terminator Salvation: Review Central

[WVsax27]

James Rolfe(AVGN) seemed to like it okay enough

http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?p=1237#comments

 

[AnorexicBatman]

I think I know what Cameron would say:
James: Better than than T3 young padawan (McG). But you have much to learn...

Another positive review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2bHHcx_sFc&feature=channel_page

McG is an old school action director (read: very good thing. No shaky cam or quick cuts).
It's intelligent but flawed.
Better script required.

Basically what I said....

 

[Spade]

This film was not that great. The visuals? Well-done. The story? Very flawed, yet it had its moments. But everything else felt dead on arrival. There was no reason to care about John's story and Marcus was the closest I came to caring about anyone's plight, but even then they ruined that with the ending. Elfman's score works only when it sounds like a lift of Fiedel's work; other than that, it's awkward. This didn't move smoothly enough to be a straight action movie and it didn't let the dramatic scenes play out to their fullest, so...I'm not really sure what it was trying to be, exactly. It's not John or Marcus sans heart at the end, it's the whole movie.

I'd say this was better than Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, but not by a whole lot. This had one good sequence in its two hour runtime and it's worth a YouTube upload upon the DVD's release at most. The inevitable sequel will have to do a lot more in ways of impressing me than this did.

 

[topdog1]

Sad to say that Terminator Salvation failed to resurrect the franchise with the same quality that Batman Begins resuscitated the Batman or Star Trek resurrected that franchise. TS is the huge misfire that it appeared to be from reading all the critics bash it. It may not be the exact unsatisfying continuation of the T3 dud but it's a new type of unsatisfying mess. Just like Poseidon and Pink Panther, it's clear Hollywood just wanted to cash in on nostalgia instead of creating quality, original concepts. Bad film on nearly every level.

 

[FCEEVIPER]

I agree it wasn't great, but good enough.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

They are halfway there...
We don't have to worry about the visuals at least...

The reviewer also stated that McG doesn't seem to demand much from his actors.
He's right. He sounded rather mousy on the Bale rant audio...
I hope this film gives him a huge boost to his confidence.... he will definitely need it...

Nice to see newbie directors trying to make their mark...

This movie is a classic case of "Too Many Cooks Spoil The Broth"
Keep the movie gritty but the production clean...

 

[Darthphere]

Yeah, you know, I have a lot of problems with this movie but I still give it a 7/10, and plan on buying the DVD. I don't undertsand the abundance of negative reviews for this movie. T3 was like 70% on the tomatometer, and this movie is a lot better.

 

[Darthphere]

They are halfway there...
We don't have to worry about the visuals at least...

The reviewer also stated that McG doesn't seem to demand much from his actors.
He's right. He sounded rather mousy on the Bale rant audio...
I hope this film gives him a huge boost to his confidence.... he will definitely need it...

Nice to see newbie directors trying to make their mark...

McG is not a newbie director.

 

[batmop]

You could have stuck any schmo in Bale's place and gotten the same performance. He didn't have to emote at all. All he had to do was be stoned face and shout the whole movie. His character in Reign of Fire (who's pretty much in the same circumstances) sh**s all over his portrayal as John Connor.

Please, tell me what other actor could have played the role being stout, stone-faced, and full of anger and intensity better than Bale did. Thing is, that was the role and character he was supposed to play and Bale did it very well.

I don't want to hear anymore talk that "John should have been more compassionate, John should have been this, John should have been that, etc"

People who were expecting John to be some ***** in the movie, I really don't know what you were thinking.

John DID actually show some compassion while being in-character during parts of the movie. He wasn't all lovey-dovey about it, but some compassion was certainly involved.

SPOILERS

John disobeyed Ashdown because he wanted to save the humans instead of going ahead with the bombing.
In several scenes in the movie John went out of his way to save humans.
John revived Marcus.
He let Marcus go to Skynet instead of killing him.
He let Blair go even after she helped Marcus escape.

END SPOILERS

this film was a mess. not as horrible as wolverine but you get the picture. where was the brutality that the first 2 films had? terminator films just like die hard films should be mandatory rated-R flicks. mandatory. i agree with most critics at RT and harry over at aicn that sam's acting was horrible as was that horrendous scene with the helena bonham-carter chick. where were the lasers that cameron showed us? why were terminators throwing people instead of terminating them? how does mcG find work. one more thing......bale is not A-list anything. he was just here collecting a paycheck. no effort. he should get his lights trashed. be funny if the lighting guy got an oscar nod for this film. this summer is disappointing so far. "Up" might be the best movie this summer.

Oh no, the movie was missing lasers. Maybe you should watch Star Trek or Transformers, that will probably have more lasers .

Cameron's shots of the future war were in 2029. Salvation takes place in 2018. Laser weapons have not been fully developed yet in Salvation. How hard is that to understand?

quint said it best over at aicn. terminator salvation trying to be a terminator film is like "a high school band trying to cover led zeppelin". that and they couldn't figure out who the main character should be. when they try to focus all the attention on sam....john just stands and stares through squinted eyes.

A movie with more than one main character? It must be total trash .

 

[FCEEVIPER]

Yeah, you know, I have a lot of problems with this movie but I still give it a 7/10, and plan on buying the DVD. I don't undertsand the abundance of negative reviews for this movie. T3 was like 70% on the tomatometer, and this movie is a lot better.

Agreed, I give it 7/10 also.

I can't wait for the uncut BluRay to come out.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

Well it is his first serious action film...
Charlie's Angels were stupid popcorn movies

 

[Darthphere]

Well it is his first serious action film...
Charlie's Angels were stupid popcorn movies

They were action movies nonetheless. McG is not a noob to directing, so let's not make any excuses for him by making things up.

 

[Darthphere]

Agreed, I give it 7/10 also.

I can't wait for the uncut BluRay to come out.

Word.

 

[Frodo]

I gotta say I'm pretty iffy about seeing this film and I have a couple reasons why:

* I don't wanna spend up to 20 bucks(meaning admission, drinks) to see a mediocre to bad film. When films were cheaper it wasn't so bad, but now I'm alot more picky
* I spent most of the season watching a mediocre Terminator show and I don't feel like speding 2 hours watching a mediocre Terminator movie even if there are a couple bright spots .

So I guess I'm asking to those who've seen it : Is it worth admission, rental, or wait for cable?

Normally i'd go and make my own view , but like I said I don't feel like spending that much cash even for a matinee which is $9.00 at least where I live.

I'll watch it. It's just a question of when and how.

 

[batmop]

I gotta say I'm pretty iffy about seeing this film and I have a couple reasons why:

* I don't wanna spend up to 20 bucks(meaning admission, drinks) to see a mediocre to bad film. When films were cheaper it wasn't so bad, but now I'm alot more picky
* I spent most of the season watching a mediocre Terminator show and I don't feel like speding 2 hours watching a mediocre Terminator movie even if there are a couple bright spots .

So I guess I'm asking to those who've seen it : Is it worth admission, rental, or wait for cable?

Normally i'd go and make my own view , but like I said I don't feel like spending that much cash even for a matinee which is $9.00 at least where I live.

I'll watch it. It's just a question of when and how.

For the action and visceral experience alone, I would say it's worth it. As a Terminator fan, I enjoyed the movie overall. Others did not like it as much as me, but it's definitely worth it either way to see in theaters.

 

[UltimateJustin]

Also, when prisoners were in Skynet, it felt like you were there with them

Yeah, it really did.

In some ways, it feels like I'm still there..

On the T3/TS thing, I'd have to say that TS is worse in every way, and for every minute of its run time.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

T3 >> TS

Christian Bale: THE **** ARE YOU DOING? THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU?

Actually you are right. I LOVED Rise of the Silver Surfer and absolutely adored the Shakespearean story telling style of Tim Story. Absolute masterpiece
Cloud Galactus was better than stupid Nolan's Joker....

 

[Darthphere]

Yeah, it really did.

In some ways, it feels like I'm still there..

On the T3/TS thing, I'd have to say that TS is worse in every way, and for every minute of its run time.

I would take you more seriously if it wasn't for that ridiculous sig.

 

[hitmanyr2k]

He's suppose to be the savior of mankind.....leader to all humans...a solider commanding them to risk their lives. You have to be stoned face and shout the whole time. He's not gonna act like Jesus....

WTF? Are you seeing things that aren't there?

When did I call for him to act like Jesus? In Reign of Fire he acted nothing like Jesus or any kind of messiah. He was simply holding down the fort and helping a large group of people survive in an apocalyptic world and was way more of a leader than his Mr. Shout character I saw in Salvation.

 

[Sarge 2.0]

For the action and visceral experience alone, I would say it's worth it. As a Terminator fan, I enjoyed the movie overall. Others did not like it as much as me, but it's definitely worth it either way to see in theaters.

But you made it abundantly clear that you had made up your mind about the film long before you had even seen it. That kind of invalidates your opinion.

 

[Darthphere]

WTF? Are you seeing things that aren't there?

When did I call for him to act like Jesus? In Reign of Fire he acted nothing like Jesus or any kind of messiah. He was simply holding down the fort and helping a large group of people survive in an apocalyptic world and was way more of a leader than his Mr. Shout character I saw in Salvation.

They're different situations altogether though. Reign of Fire was about survival. Avoiding danger and death. Leading a resistance is about heading straight into danger, being more proactive.

 

[Sarge 2.0]

I would take you more seriously if it wasn't for that ridiculous sig.

He's 15. That pretty much explains his sig as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Gracen1]

Please, tell me what other actor could have played the role being stout, stone-faced, and full of anger and intensity better than Bale did. Thing is, that was the role and character he was supposed to play and Bale did it very well.

I don't want to hear anymore talk that "John should have been more compassionate, John should have been this, John should have been that, etc"

People who were expecting John to be some ***** in the movie, I really don't know what you were thinking.

John DID actually show some compassion while being in-character during parts of the movie. He wasn't all lovey-dovey about it, but some compassion was certainly involved.

SPOILERS

John disobeyed Ashdown because he wanted to save the humans instead of going ahead with the bombing.
In several scenes in the movie John went out of his way to save humans.
John revived Marcus.
He let Marcus go to Skynet instead of killing him.
He let Blair go even after she helped Marcus escape.

END SPOILERS



Oh no, the movie was missing lasers. Maybe you should watch Star Trek or Transformers, that will probably have more lasers .

Cameron's shots of the future war were in 2029. Salvation takes place in 2018. Laser weapons have not been fully developed yet in Salvation. How hard is that to understand?




A movie with more than one main character? It must be total trash .

so the check from warner finally cleared?
seriously, the film has been trashed by ALL reputable critics. the only good reviews i've seen online are from youtube. it's a failure. i thought i was watching the phantom menace with the wooden acting. where was jake lloyd at? as for mcG, he should stick to music videos. the best sequence was the harvestor part........and even bay would've done that it better.

 

[Darthphere]

He's 15. That pretty much explains his sig as far as I'm concerned.

Still man, come on.

 

[hitmanyr2k]

Of course they were...Rishi's just saying that aside from the language and nudity, those films aren't hard R's, and do play more like PG-13...especially the lenient PG-13 that we have nowadays where they can very nearly get away with anything ("Cloverfield" is a very hard PG-13, IMO).

T1 and T2 aren't graphic in their depiction of violence really (aside from Sarah's nightmare I guess). The violence isn't gratuituous in quality (i.e. gore) though...there's blood, but it's natural and done with taste, as opposed to the first "Robocop" or other countless gore-fests.

Well Rishi would be wrong. T1 and T2 didn't have gore and guts being thrown all over the place but those movies certainly earned their rated "R" status. Stuff like the T-800 sticking his arm through a guy and having it covered in blood isn't going to make it into a PG-13 movie. The T-1000 sticking his butcher-knife arm through a guy's mouth and a carton of milk isn't going to make it into a PG-13 movie. Same goes for The T-1000 sticking his needle-like finger through a cop's eye.