Terminator Salvation: Review Central

[kedrell]

I actually looked him up. His IM review was positive after all(sorry, my bad) and his Trek review, while a bit iffy, is classified as fresh as well.

 

[Matt]

John Connor, in my mind, is a mix of a George Washington type hero, a Leader who inspires men to follow him into battle, because he is almost supernaturally confident that eventually, he will win. the guy at the beginning of T2 was that guy. He wasn't sensitive little Nick Stahl asking the Terminator "...if it remembers him" (my most hated part of that film) or 'You remind me of my Mother" creepiness. I want a brooding 'I never could have an anonymous life" John "I kill things called Terminators" Connor. I don't want a wussy.

Brooding doesn't inspire followers. Washington was a very good public speaker and was very charasmatic. If we were at war with machines, I wouldn't follow the guy who acts like one.

I want Bale to play John Connor, not Batman.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Brooding doesn't inspire followers. Washington was a very good public speaker and was very charasmatic. If we were at war with machines, I wouldn't follow the guy who acts like one.

I want Bale to play John Connor, not Batman.

 

[craigdbfan]

Terminator Salvation RT score is at 14% with 6 Rotten and 1 Fresh

 

[WVsax27]

FYI- people over on the CHUD forums that have seen the film are talking about it....I normally hate that site(well Devin anyway) but I thought I'd stop over there and see if anyone was talking about it

http://chud.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2595963#post2595963

the two posts so far..

"Despite a disappointingly mawkish and cheesy final act, I mostly dug the hell out of this. McG can direct the hell out of some action setpieces, and both Anton Yelchin and Sam Worthington put in really nice efforts (there's occasionally some comically epic accent FAIL from the latter).

Also, Terry Crews shouldn't work so hard next time."

"The movie peaks way too early--when Marcus and Kyle are at the gas station (which, same station from the end of T1?), the movie starts firing on all cylinders and is great for about 10 or 15 minutes. After that, it's (mostly) good, but doesn't get back to those heights.

Also, despite that fact that it was utterly ridiculous, I liked the GnR bit."

 

[[A]]

^ there's nothing really to like over at CHUD

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Alot of the times Devin and my score for the blockbuster movies are the same, even if we got to that score by different roads. I'd say like 50% of the time we match up on blockbuster films.

I believe he gave Star Trek and 8 and so did I, he gave Watchmen a 9 and so did I. Again we get their going different paths but we reached the same destination. I actually agreed with his review of Batman Begins but I gave it a much better score because the first half is pretty darn good. I remember liking his review for TDK, except I gave it a 9 while he gave it a 8.5. The other 50% of the time I don't agree with him at all. I wonder if I'll agree with him when it comes to TS? We will see.

 

[FaT_tONle]

If these reviews hold up it appears we have another Transformers franchise at our mists. Except it won't make as much money because its a lot darker.

 

[Charlie The Red]

I don't buy into people saying that the first Terminator was a horror cash-in/rip-off. For its time it was an extremely original story idea. Hell, it just got inducted into the Library of Congress...how often does that happen with cheap horror rip-offs?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't buy into people saying that the first Terminator was a horror cash-in/rip-off. For its time it was an extremely original story idea. Hell, it just got inducted into the Library of Congress...how often does that happen with cheap horror rip-offs?

We are talking about Friday the 13th.

 

[The Lizard]

The Lizard's review

Terminator: Salvation review:
[no spoilers]
New Terminator movie doesn't quite match the classic James Cameron films, but still works well as a post-apocalyptic smack-down. Rating 7/10

When I first heard that the director of the latest installment of the Terminator film franchise was going to be none other than "McG" (former music video auteur and director of the ludicrous Charlies Angels movies), I cringed and prepared for the worst. However, I'm pleased to say that McG realizes the height of the action bar set by director James Cameron for the first two Terminator films and performs to the best of his ability, which is good enough for some explosive fun and melodrama.

One large element that changes the playing board for Terminator: Salvation is that the action takes place in the near future of 2017, in the blasted-out world scarred by Skynet at the end of Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. If you didn't like that particular Terminator sequel, you are free to ignore it in relation to this new film, although John Connor's romantic interest Kate Brewster (now Kate Connor) returns, played here by Bryce Dallas Howard. The devastated future landscape takes away some of the pressure to reproduce the crazy stunt-filled urban set pieces of the previous Terminator films, but there's still loud, explosive action a-plenty. Indeed, some of the robot vs human battle scenes approached Transformers territory in their slam-bang execution, but fortunately this film stops just short of the brain-numbing levels of blow-'em-up we get from Transformers director Michael Bay. The giant "Harvester" robot seen in Salvation is particularly impressive, and combines some attributes from Bay's Decepticons with the loudly droning menace of the Tripods seen in Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds. The enemy Terminators lack any sort of personality this time around, which is another variation from the earlier films, but again it works in this bleak future setting.

There are no apparent ties to the recently-canceled Sarah Connor Chronicles TV series, and that's OK by me. There are several nice nods to the earlier films, including that old photo of Linda Hamilton's Sarah Connor, and a brief CGI-aided appearance by a certain Governator himself. Christian Bale is believably intense as the besieged leader-of-humanity John Connor, lapsing into his Batman rasp every now and then. Sam Worthington provides some mystery as a convicted death-row criminal from 2003 who suddenly wakes up alive and kicking in 2017 without knowing why. I found the lack of time travel to be refreshing this time around, although there's still plenty of hand-wringing about it, particularly when John Connor has to launch a rescue attempt to save the teenage boy who will someday become his father.

Overall, this movie is definitely better than Terminator 3, but it still doesn't reach into the range of the first or second films. It's best to enjoy it as a respectable throwback to the post-apocalyptic shoot-em up's of the 1980s instead of trying to rank it with Cameron's first two Terminators. This franchise has indeed returned, and "it will be back".
Rating 7/10

 

[BestGirl]

The Prestige did. It went from a very low RT score to above 70% in one day. Of course, we're talking about a Chris Nolan movie. I think the TS RT score will hover somewhere between 35-45. This may be Bale's lowest RT scored movie since Equlibrium. I wonder if he'll be back even if the movie does well, financially. I know he has a 3 picture deal, but I'm sure he has an escape clause. Big stars usually do.

I don't know why he wouldn't. He agreed to do this movie after seeing the script, and if the sequel has a better writer and/or director there'd be no reason not to return.

 

[BestGirl]

IMO. This movie is for Terminator fans.

Not necessarily a good thing. We need the GA to show up to get a sequel.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Bale should opt out if this thing underperforms. I thought taking this role was a big mistake for his career. He works best when he is well directed.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

I hate that most of these reviewers are calling TS not as good as 1 & 2 just because it's not the same style of movie. This movie needs to be judged on it's acting, execution, style, writting in order to compare it to the other movies, not by just saying, "Yeah it's a good war movie but it's nothing like the other movies in style or tone so i'm gonna have to say it's not as good", BLEH!!. Weak reviewing IMO.





Steve

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I think comparisons to the orginals is inevitable.

I read a few critics say the same thing about T3. "It shouldn't be compared to T1 and T2!"

And i'm like, uh, yeah it should be because it's a sequel!

 

[The Lizard]

I hate that most of these reviewers are calling TS not as good as 1 & 2 just because it's not the same style of movie. This movie needs to be judged on it's acting, execution, style, writting in order to compare it to the other movies, not by just saying, "Yeah it's a good war movie but it's nothing like the other movies in style or tone so i'm gonna have to say it's not as good", BLEH!!. Weak reviewing IMO.

Even though Salvation is indeed a different type of film from T1 and T2, it's still part of the same franchise, and thus comparing its overall entertainment value to the previous films is only natural.

 

[WVsax27]

hum, reading around the audience reactions from the screenings tonight seem to be (mostly) better than those first few critical reviews.

 

[Solidus]

From here on out I think I will stop reading reviews. So I can make up my own mind with no bias either for good or bad.

 

[BestGirl]

hum, reading around the audience reactions from the screenings tonight seem to be (mostly) better than those first few critical reviews.

Supposedly TS is a nearly brainless movie with wall-to-wall action, the kind of film critics hate but fans and the public eat up. I think I'm going to like it but not completely love it.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Supposedly TS is a nearly brainless movie with wall-to-wall action, the kind of film critics hate but fans and the public eat up. I think I'm going to like it but not completely love it.

I think that I'm going to feel the same way.

 

[Carnotaur3]

More chud posters saying they really liked the film. 4 of them. 1 thought it was mediocre.

 

[batmop]

Problem is ..... this is all starting to feel VERY similar to the release of T3 .....

Lots of average reviews, some decent .... and all the Terminator fans saying as long as it was solid they were happy.

Now a few years later everybody hates T3 and claims it did serious damage to the Terminator series.

I don't know how many Terminator fans though that T3 was decent. but I sure didn't. The effects were lame, the story was weak AND it also went against much of the content and mythology that the first two movies established. As the years have passed I hate it only more.

This is guaranteed to be better than T3, regardless of what reviews say for the simple reason that McG respected the mythology and content of the first two movies. Jonathan Mostow with T3 did not.

Your being apprehensive by reacting in a defensive way toward my post that wasn't targeted at anyone but the facts regarding this film. McG isn't a good director. The script was written by John Brancato and Michael Ferris (they wrote T3 and are far from being talented writers).

Correction, get it right. The script was written by Brancato and Ferris, but RE-written by Jonah Nolan and Paul Haggis. Christian Bale wanted nothing to do with the movie when he read the original Brancato and Ferris script. Bale agreed to do the movie after reading the revised script that Nolan and Haggis worked on.

I'm a big Terminator fan, but I don't know if what you said is a good thing. Wasn't T2 for everyone ? Just like the new Star Trek which I really liked seems to appeal to everyone and not just the core base ?

Not everyone liked T2, that's a misconception. In fact, I know a lot of people that are afraid of watching T2, because the T-1000 in the movie scares them.

Star Trek appeals to everyone at the cost of the core base. Star Trek fans are not unanimous in loving this Abrams movie. It has alienated some Star Trek fans too.

Salvation seems to be more for the fans at the cost of the general audience.

It's a simple equation:

McG + writers of Catwoman + movie + stale Bale = BAD!!!

You know what else is simple? Getting the facts right.

Mcg + writers of Catwoman + rewritten by Jonah Nolan and Paul Haggis + Conrad Buff editing + Martin Laing doing production design + Bale, Worthington, Yelchin = GOOD movie.

I was just using it as an example that T3 wasn't all that poorly received. T4 will be lucky to do that well critically and WOM-wise from all indications.

Who cares about reviews? FYI word-of-mouth for T3 was horrible. It looks like T4 will have better word-of-mouth. The key is that T3 word-of-mouth among Terminator fans was really bad. Even if the general audience hates T4, it looks like Terminator fans will like it.

 

[craigdbfan]

Correction, get it right. The script was written by Brancato and Ferris, but RE-written by Jonah Nolan and Paul Haggis. Christian Bale wanted nothing to do with the movie when he read the original Brancato and Ferris script. Bale agreed to do the movie after reading the revised script that Nolan and Haggis worked on.

I'm actually right maybe you should do a little bit more research on the subject. Brancato and Ferris are credited for writing the script and I'm aware that Haggis,Nolan,Zuckier, and Ryan all worked on rewrites but the initial script was written by those two and they are the ones receiving credit for the writing. Obviously those re-writes didn't help much.

Plus the majority of the script still contains most of Brancato and Ferris original story thus them receiving credit and Nolan and Haggis receiving none.

 

[Rishi]

It's the same reviewer. It's David Edelstein.

Speaking of whom,

" Twilight the movie is cautious, a sort of Tiger Beat–ified Twin Peaks. In its undercooked way, though, it’s enjoyable." — New York Magazine
Posted Nov 24, 2008