Terminator Salvation: Review Central

[livrule]

40% now on RT. 10 Fresh, 15 Rotten. Avg Rating 5.4/10
Top Critics 38% RT Community 65%

Thats getting better.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

I think something similar happened with Watchmen....
Half the negative reviews were, "OMG PENIS!!", "THERE ARE NOT SUPERHEROS! THEY ARE LAME!" and "IT'S TOO Dark!! IT SHOULD BE FUNNY!!!"

Considering Ebert was confused with Terminator 2's time line, I'm not sure how seriously I can take his review. I also agree there seems to be a hidden agenda here. NY reviewers hold no credibility with me since they HATED The Dark Knight and the others seem to be upset about McG rising as a director and Bale's rant which apparently sours the movie for them...

Imagine if this sort of thing happens with Avatar. Negative review just because someone didn't get paid or someone doesn't like Cameron. It's a sad world we live in...

I'm only waiting for the www.spill.com review. All these so called Top Critics can go screw themselves...

I also think that after Star Trek, some might me put of by the doom and gloom of Terminator Salvation. Star Trek is optimistic and full of positivity while Terminator is quite the opposite

 

[FlawlessVictory]

NY reviewers hold no credibility with me since they HATED The Dark Knight and the others seem to be upset about McG rising as a director and Bale's rant which apparently sours the movie for them...

The NY Daily News gave TS one of the better reviews out there. 4/5 stars.

 

[Charlie The Red]

You know, I really think the poll needs reset. It looks like there are more than enough fraudulent votes on there to constitute a reboot.

Yeah totally. Opera went fuzzy on me and hit "submit" right after I'd clicked on 1. I haven't even seen the movie yet.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

NY guys liked it? Oh Brother....

One more thing...
Did James Cameron like it? I mean if the damn creator of the thing who is held in high regard by the industry likes this film. That should speak volumes in and of it's self....

 

[Nivek]

I doubt Cameron has even left the Avatar editing booth yet.

BTW Jim- trailer?

 

[Symbiotic]

One more thing...
Did James Cameron like it? I mean if the damn creator of the thing who is held in high regard by the industry likes this film. That should speak volumes in and of it's self....

Even if he doesn't, I can picture him saying publicly that he did.

 

[Paradoxium]

I still might give this film a shot, after reading the Berardinelli review, he is one of the few I hold high regards for.

 

[Darthkush]

Massawyrm at aintitcool dug it. I just read his review. He kinda labels it as something of a brainless action movie though.

I tried to click on Harry's review but got kicked off the site doing so and now I can't get back on. I think aicn may have crashed or something cause I can't access it all of a sudden.

CAn anyone post Harry's review here?

 

[Darthkush]

Nevermind. Reading it now.

 

[Nivek]

I still might give this film a shot, after reading the Berardinelli review, he is one of the few I hold high regards for.

That was a pretty decent review.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

Even the positive reviews kind of suck... "Brainless action"?
Hey guys... remember Star Trek? What was it then? A tear-jerker docu-drama?

I'm also surprised everyone is calling this movie superfluous. It's like everyone but me have seen a secret 3 hour long Terminator film in which Cameron shows EVERYTHING that happened during the war

Everything in this movie is fresh. We have never seen this stuff in any of the previous movies. Except the land and flying HK's everything is relatively new....

 

[Anita18]

From time to time I read reviews out of curiosity and for comic value. A large number of movie reviews I read prove to me that many critics *do not* understand film, nor do all of them love film.

Maybe the Vancouver critics circle accurately matches your description, I wouldn't know.

What I do know is that you cannot honestly tell me your description matches most film critics out there. Many of these film critics have never seen a Star Trek movie or a Terminator movie before, so they are reviewing movies out of context, or with no context to any mythology. I'm not even a critic, and I've seen more films than some of these purported "film critics".

If a person truly loves and understands film, then they must possess some level of respect for certain mythologies and franchises that some movies belong and adhere to.

Most critics aren't very helpful when it comes to the quality of a movie - they're people paid to write whether they LIKED a film or not. Very few of them delve into the real strengths and weaknesses of a movie. Like, actors have actually very little to do with that, unless they overact and call attention to themselves. It's all about the writing, editing, and pacing.

And I think that movies should better be able to stand on their own. That's why it's a separate movie and not an episode of a TV series. Heck, even a single TV episode should be able to stand on its own, story-wise. I shouldn't have to be familiar with all of the details of a film's mythology to comprehend one of them. This aspect was a definite weakness of Watchmen, although some newbies got on board regardless.

Although I do agree that having extensive knowledge of film would sweeten your enjoyment of a movie if it references many others. I read Emanuel Levy's review of Coppola's Tetro and I wondered if I'd be able to enjoy the film as much since I'm not well-versed in film and opera to understand the references.

Something must've happened in post production for this movie to fall apart.

From details Harry wrote, it seems like there were screenplay weaknesses. Not to say that the story itself was weak, but that the movie wasn't compelling enough for people to overlook certain plot and logic holes.

 

[Lando81]

I'm kinda worried about this now. The trailers made it seem so awesome and near TDK quality, but as i keep reading these reviews and such I get more and more worried.

 

[Paradoxium]

Even the positive reviews kind of suck... "Brainless action"?
Hey guys... remember Star Trek? What was it then? A tear-jerker docu-drama?

I'm also surprised everyone is calling this movie superfluous. It's like everyone but me have seen a secret 3 hour long Terminator film in which Cameron shows EVERYTHING that happened during the war

Everything in this movie is fresh. We have never seen this stuff in any of the previous movies. Except the land and flying HK's everything is relatively new....

Hey I was pretty consistent with Trek being a pretty dumb and entertaining film. It wasn't bad, but I don't think it is the whole orgasmic epiphany that some make it out to be, or how it is the best thing since TDK. While TDK is not without some problems, at least it is a very layered story, one for the average audience to grasp on to, another layer for metatextual discussion. Trek, was "dude I blows up Vulcan cause I is pissed", and "dude we needs some Bromance"

 

[AnorexicBatman]

My prediction is that it ends up like Watchmen. Neither loved nor hated.
At the tomato meter sticks to the high 60's.... wonderful...

 

[AnorexicBatman]

double post

 

[Darthkush]

hmmmm, officially worried. But if it really is "only as good as x-men 3", I think i'll still probably like it seeing as how i'm not as passionate about terminator as i am about x-men.

 

[Nivek]

The trailers made it seem so awesome and near TDK quality, ...

Um, no... aside from Bale cast as the lead, no one has ever made that assumption.

 

[Paradoxium]

I think people got the impression the Marcus storyline was going to be a "Ghost in the Shell"ish type of depth and not yet another Michael Bay film.

 

[AnorexicBatman]

There is NO WAY this movie can be worse than T3.
Where was all this "heart and soul" the critics keep babbling about when that atrocious piece of cinema came out?

I also love how the critics are like, "Oh noez! Ah Nold is not there! it sucks!"

EDIT: The hell Paradoxium? You think this is a Bay film?
My worst nightmare would be Transformers 2 regardless of being a decent film being rated higher then Terminator Salvation

 

[Anita18]

1. Ebert never saw T1? That's very surprising.

2. He clearly is lost when it comes to T2 seeing as how he believes it takes place post-judgment day...

Seriously, WTH?

Can't attest to the first point, but he's made an edit about the second. The article now says, ""Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (1991) was a fairly terrific movie, set in the (then) future, to prevent the nuclear holocaust of 1997."

That's true, since T1 took place in 1984, and T2 took place in 1995. Which is certainly further along in the future than 1991.

 

[Paradoxium]

There is NO WAY this movie can be worse than T3.
Where was all this "heart and soul" the critics keep babbling about when that atrocious piece of cinema came out?

I also love how the critics are like, "Oh noez! Ah Nold is not there! it sucks!"

EDIT: The hell Paradoxium? You think this is a Bay film?
My worst nightmare would be Transformers 2 regardless of being a decent film being rated higher then Terminator Salvation

No I didn't watch it, I was being figurative

 

[spideyo]

Ebert hates it too?

The hell is going on?
How can Terminator Salvation be so bad?

Ebert really didn't like Star Trek as well. He liked movies such X-Men: The Last Stand , Mummy 3, Transformers and and gave a glowing review to Angels & Demons which has around the same score as TS at the moment. I'm always left confused by Ebert's reviews.

 

[Caped Crusader]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41137