Terminator Salvation: Review Central

[david icke]

Here's the source: http://www.collider.com/entertainment/interviews/article.asp?aid=11845&tcid=1

Cheers, that's interesting that there are cut scenes of John Conner giving speeches. I was trying to figure out which scene Bale had his rant over when that guy was playing with his bulbs, it would be kind of funny if it was all over a deleted scene, none of the scenes in the movie made me think that it was far more intense and needed more concentration than any of the others.

 

[BestGirl]

Cheers, that's interesting that there are cut scenes of John Conner giving speeches. I was trying to figure out which scene Bale had his rant over when that guy was playing with his bulbs, it would be kind of funny if it was all over a deleted scene, none of the scenes in the movie made me think that it was far more intense and needed more concentration than any of the others.

There was some scene in the trailers when he touched Kate's pregnant belly. I always assumed this was the rant scene because it seemed like they'd be talking about their future baby and the risks he was taking and that would be emotional.

 

[[A]]

I gave it a solid 6.

 

[Rishi]

As goofy as T3 was the writing was much tighter. Not to mention the critics and the box office agrees.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/terminator_3_rise_of_the_machines/'

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)

70 % Tomatometer


Reviews Counted: 190

Fresh: 133
Rotten:57
Average Rating: 6.6/10


http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/terminator_salvation/

Terminator Salvation (2009)

34 % Tomatometer


Reviews Counted: 189

Fresh: 64
Rotten:125
Average Rating: 5.1/10
Consensus: With storytelling as robotic as the film's iconic villains, Terminator Salvation offers plenty of great effects but lacks the heart of the original films.



TERMINATOR SALVATION

Domestic Total as of Jun. 1, 2009: $92,657,197
Distributor: Warner Bros. Release Date: May 21, 2009
Genre: Sci-Fi Action Running Time: 1 hrs. 54 min.
MPAA Rating: PG-13 Production Budget: $200 million

Domestic: $92,657,197 78.4%
+ Foreign: $25,456,671 21.6%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $118,113,868


TERMINATOR 3:
RISE OF THE MACHINES

Domestic Total Gross: $150,371,112
Distributor: Warner Bros. Release Date: July 2, 2003
Genre: Sci-Fi Action Running Time: 1 hrs. 49 min.
MPAA Rating: R Production Budget: $200 million

Domestic: $150,371,112 34.7%
+ Foreign: $283,000,000 65.3%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $433,371,112




So any way you look at it you're wrong. People hated TS because most people know when they see bad writing. It was a bad movie. T3 was at least entertaining and well put together. The story made sense. TS was just a mesh of scripts thrown together that had the most plot holes in any movie I've ever seen. I'm glad it's doing poorly. I'm probably the biggest Terminator fan here. I've met Arnold and all we talked about was Terminator, he signed a Terminator dvd for me, and the first has been my favorite movie since I was a kid.

All that said, TS was terrible and I'm glad it's doing bad. And if you can't see that it was a poorly made film with more plot holes in it than most films, maybe we shouldn't be wasting our time on you.

XFD I'm wrong cause people went to go see T3 after the great T2 and didn't see T4 after the terrible T3.

oh yeah, T3 and its great writing. "so shes an ANTI TERMINATOR TERMINATOR?" "WHY ARE THEY KILLING EVERYONE?!" "are you here the kill me?" "no... you must live" "you are terminated"

T3 was written by toddlers for toddlers

 

[Rishi]

And FYI, look at the user tomatometer

T3: 70%, 6.1
T4: 71%, 6.7

CRITICS ARE DUMB. These are the same people who gave Twilight and Spider-man 3 fresh ratings. imdb has 6.7 for t3 and 7.3 for T4. this is from thousands of users, not just 100 or so critics that don't even know what they're talking about.

and attn: internets. please stop trying to use RT and box office grosses to prove why a movie is better. Use logic and back up your reasoning with examples from the films

T3 = boring action and a terrible ripoff of T2. corny humor in every scene, and writing that completely devalues T1 and T2, and doesn't even understand them. It treats the T-850 like its the T-800 from the second one. And you're calling it better written?

T4 = some of the best action in years and a fresh take on the terminator franchise. It's not without its problems but its shot beautifully and written much better than the juvenile T3. It doesn't insult your intelligence, it just doesn't bother it.

 

[DACMAN]

XFD I'm wrong cause people went to go see T3 after the great T2 and didn't see T4 after the terrible T3.

oh yeah, T3 and its great writing. "so shes an ANTI TERMINATOR TERMINATOR?" "WHY ARE THEY KILLING EVERYONE?!" "are you here the kill me?" "no... you must live" "you are terminated"

T3 was written by toddlers for toddlers

HAHAHA!!!! IT WAS WRITTEN BY THE SAME PEOPLE! And you really think "So that's what death tastes like" was better? At least T3 knew it was having fun. TS wanted so bad to be the first Terminator but just ended up being a mess with plot holes and bad dialogue. Given T3 had some bad dialogue, but at least it didn't have the massive plot holes that ruined the entire franchise.

And gotta disagree. People didn't go see TS because it sucks. I've been asked by at least 20 people should they go see it and I tell them not to, and they haven't. Word of mouth killed this film. Star Trek is doing great even though the last one sucked. Look at Batman Begins. And why? Because they're good films. Do be naive.

And even if that was true (which obviously is isn't) it doesn't explain the bad reviews when T3 got mostly good reviews.

 

[DACMAN]

T3 was written by toddlers for toddlers

Which is why it was rated "R".

TS was obviously written for people who can't look past the special effects.

 

[bullets]

Which is why it was rated "R".

Was it really.. It seemed like a pg-13 . I think other than the father being killed it didn't really strike me as R.

 

[-Arya-]

I saw the film a few days ago. I enjoyed the final act at Skynet however everything else felt mediocre. There was virtually zero character development and this is unfortunate since Marcus was a very interesting character.

 

[Darthphere]

Based on what?

 

[chaseter]

I saw the film a few days ago. I enjoyed the final act at Skynet however everything else felt mediocre. There was virtually zero character development and this is unfortunate since Marcus was a very interesting character.

How did Marcus have no development He had the most development out of everyone. Second was Reese and third was John.

 

[Episode29]

How did Marcus have no development He had the most development out of everyone. Second was Reese and third was John.

That is saying very, very little.

 

[Bim]

To each their own, but i saw this last night and i found myself entertained. I dont get where all the hate comes from.

8.5/10

 

[DACMAN]

Was it really.. It seemed like a pg-13 . I think other than the father being killed it didn't really strike me as R.

Yeah, I did feel like a PG-13 for the most part. Remember the scene when the TX puts her arm through a cops chest?

 

[-Arya-]

How did Marcus have no development He had the most development out of everyone. Second was Reese and third was John.

His so called "development" was so little and so quickly done that I toss it aside as an excuse to keep the film from being a complete action filled mess.

 

[Cain]

To each their own, but i saw this last night and i found myself entertained. I dont get where all the hate comes from.

8.5/10

Just like some of us don't get where all the praise comes from. To each their own, indeed.

 

[chaseter]

His so called "development" was so little and so quickly done that I toss it aside as an excuse to keep the film from being a complete action filled mess.

I think Marcus was done fine and so was Reese. John and Kate's roles were lacking and so was Moonblood's. The problem with this film is the plot and the third act. That is what hurt it the most. The Marcus story was good imo and would have been better had they not given away the twist in the damn trailer.

 

[chaseter]

Just like some of us don't get where all the praise comes from. To each their own, indeed.

There is more hate than praise I just don't see how anyone can defend the third act and skynet's inability to see its plans through. Then, you add in a convoluted mess of a plot that involves time travel and you have a messy film. It looked pretty and the action was good and that along with the Marcus character was the only thing saving this from utter disaster. This is a dumb popcorn flick so I give props to the fx and action.

 

[BestGirl]

I think Marcus was done fine and so was Reese. John and Kate's roles were lacking and so was Moonblood's. The problem with this film is the plot and the third act. That is what hurt it the most. The Marcus story was good imo and would have been better had they not given away the twist in the damn trailer.

That was how the novel handled Marcus. He'd walk for a long time without getting tired, would feel cold but not shiver, take on four men at one time, etc. It was a fairly clever build-up to his reveal as a Terminator, and his personality was sufficiently rough that it wasn't clear he was a good guy. Too bad the trailers not only revealed he was part machine but also he was the key to victory.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

That was how the prequel novel handled Marcus. He'd walk for a long time without getting tired, would feel cold but not shiver, take on four men at one time, etc. It was a fairly clever build-up to his reveal as a Terminator, and his personality was sufficiently rough that it wasn't clear he was a good guy. Too bad the trailers not only revealed he was part machine but also he was the key to victory.

Which prequel novel are you referring to?

The one by Timothy Zahn didn't feature or reference Marcus at all.

 

[BestGirl]

^You're right. I meant the movie novel. I have no idea why I said prequel novel. I edited my post to fix the mistake.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

^ Ah, okay.

 

[DACMAN]

There is more hate than praise I just don't see how anyone can defend the third act and skynet's inability to see its plans through. Then, you add in a convoluted mess of a plot that involves time travel and you have a messy film. It looked pretty and the action was good and that along with the Marcus character was the only thing saving this from utter disaster. This is a dumb popcorn flick so I give props to the fx and action.

Exactly. They turned one of the smartest and most cerebral sci-fi movies of all time and made it "a dumb popcorn flick". That, is why is sucked. Although, the same case could be made of T3.

 

[chaseter]

Exactly what I said to a friend. T1 and T2 were good movies because they had action and made you think. T3 was just mindless action and so was T4. This is why I was dissapointed by this and Wolverine. Two franchises that once made good movies with many undertones and great characters and they drove both franchises into the ground. T4 only was a bit better because it looked way better and had better action. But, they both are dumb popcorn flicks. Transformers 2, which is meant to be a popcorn flick, will blow both of these out of the water.

 

[WeaponXProject]

Exactly what I said to a friend. T1 and T2 were good movies because they had action and made you think. T3 was just mindless action and so was T4. This is why I was dissapointed by this and Wolverine. Two franchises that once made good movies with many undertones and great characters and they drove both franchises into the ground. T4 only was a bit better because it looked way better and had better action. But, they both are dumb popcorn flicks. Transformers 2, which is meant to be a popcorn flick, will blow both of these out of the water.

So so true...