Terminator Salvation
- Thread starter Evan S
- Start date
Captain Pierce
Veteran
"Time travel gives me a headache." - Geordi LaForge, Star Trek: TNG
"Time travel gives me a headache." - Geordi LaForge, Star Trek: TNG
(The following was written last night, prior to me seeing Salvation this morning, but some Internet hiccups prevented its posting at that time.)
Slice's question cuts to the heart of what David said in the post before.
Speaking strictly from the terms of the first movie, it's a classic "circular" time paradox. Reese is around for the first session with Sarah, because the circle is closed. John has to send Reese back in time to become his father, and know that he's sentencing him to death in the past by doing so. (As Sarah says, it can drive a person crazy thinking about it.
) There's no thought of avoiding Judgement Day in T1, just making sure that John Connor is around to save things afterwards. The irony is, by developing the time travel technology in order to try and prevent John's birth, Skynet actually assures it--hell, it's only the time travel tech that makes it possible in the first place!
Of course, this goes totally against the whole "no fate but what we make ourselves" bit that Cameron latched onto for the sequel. The obvious problem is that, if only Skynet can create time travel, and only time travel can make John's birth possible, then eliminating Skynet means eliminating John, and then we, the movie-going public, are up to our butts in paradoxes. As good a movie as T2 is, I personally can't vote for it as the best sequel ever, because it goes so totally against the idea of the first one. (Besides, Wrath of Khan is clearly the best sequel ever.
rogar-Evil(DBG): )
There's a lot wrong with T3, but I love that, at the end, despite everything, John isn't able to stop Judgement Day, and he's forced to become the man he's destined to be. In a strange way, it's like the new creative team had to bring the series back to Cameron's original vision that he lost in the sequel. I also love the idea of John being dead in the future, and that he was killed by the very Ahnold-model Tehminatah that Kate sends back to save him.
All in all, I think the timeline holds up fairly well. The way I see it, Cyberdyne's discovery of the T-800 chip and arm makes it possible for them to design Skynet ahead of the original schedule, thus advancing Judgement Day from its original date (July 24, 2004 from T3 works about as well as anything) to 1997. All the destruction of the chip in T2 does is revert back to the original. As for the problem of Reese telling Sarah that Skynet had lost the war in the future, and that sending back the Terminator was its last chance to save itself... what if (and I just thought of this, so it's a little rough as theories go) that's just what John had to tell him to ge thim to go back? "Next battle? Not gonna be one, we totally just kicked Skynet's shiny metal ass. You go back to '84 and have some fun." Not sure I buy it myself yet, actually, but it could work...
"Time travel gives me a headache." - Geordi LaForge, Star Trek: TNG
(The following was written last night, prior to me seeing Salvation this morning, but some Internet hiccups prevented its posting at that time.)
Slice's question cuts to the heart of what David said in the post before.
Speaking strictly from the terms of the first movie, it's a classic "circular" time paradox. Reese is around for the first session with Sarah, because the circle is closed. John has to send Reese back in time to become his father, and know that he's sentencing him to death in the past by doing so. (As Sarah says, it can drive a person crazy thinking about it.
) There's no thought of avoiding Judgement Day in T1, just making sure that John Connor is around to save things afterwards. The irony is, by developing the time travel technology in order to try and prevent John's birth, Skynet actually assures it--hell, it's only the time travel tech that makes it possible in the first place!Of course, this goes totally against the whole "no fate but what we make ourselves" bit that Cameron latched onto for the sequel. The obvious problem is that, if only Skynet can create time travel, and only time travel can make John's birth possible, then eliminating Skynet means eliminating John, and then we, the movie-going public, are up to our butts in paradoxes. As good a movie as T2 is, I personally can't vote for it as the best sequel ever, because it goes so totally against the idea of the first one. (Besides, Wrath of Khan is clearly the best sequel ever.
rogar-Evil(DBG): ) There's a lot wrong with T3, but I love that, at the end, despite everything, John isn't able to stop Judgement Day, and he's forced to become the man he's destined to be. In a strange way, it's like the new creative team had to bring the series back to Cameron's original vision that he lost in the sequel. I also love the idea of John being dead in the future, and that he was killed by the very Ahnold-model Tehminatah that Kate sends back to save him.
All in all, I think the timeline holds up fairly well. The way I see it, Cyberdyne's discovery of the T-800 chip and arm makes it possible for them to design Skynet ahead of the original schedule, thus advancing Judgement Day from its original date (July 24, 2004 from T3 works about as well as anything) to 1997. All the destruction of the chip in T2 does is revert back to the original. As for the problem of Reese telling Sarah that Skynet had lost the war in the future, and that sending back the Terminator was its last chance to save itself... what if (and I just thought of this, so it's a little rough as theories go) that's just what John had to tell him to ge thim to go back? "Next battle? Not gonna be one, we totally just kicked Skynet's shiny metal ass. You go back to '84 and have some fun." Not sure I buy it myself yet, actually, but it could work...
REal joke about this part is that its written by the same guys who wrote third one and guys who wrote Catwoman :crybaby:
What is goin on out there and who let them do that ? This is some big misunderstanding , it seems like they check new films and include all stuff into this one messy fanboy film...
-previous terminator scenes and lines wannabes - CHECK
- transformers wannabes - CHECK
-star wars sky battles wannabes- CHECK
- high speed motor chase -CHECK
What i think those guys doing is they have some points like i made and they throwing them into the story,they think that more sci fi = better.
They tend to forget that Terminator film was a thriller ,not sci-fi .
I also heard that in this new film terminator - endoskeleton instead of killing john connor just throws him and wrestle with him .... no words... is this a joke ? Its huge misunderstanding that the same guys were allowed to write the screenplay.
Same thing is with this tv series , why terminator would want to kill john with a gun when he could come very close to him and rip off his throat with own hands ,its terminator and he shouldnt do anything but kill him with own hands ,not throwing him... they forgot about this.What kind of fans they are ?
What is goin on out there and who let them do that ? This is some big misunderstanding , it seems like they check new films and include all stuff into this one messy fanboy film...
-previous terminator scenes and lines wannabes - CHECK
- transformers wannabes - CHECK
-star wars sky battles wannabes- CHECK
- high speed motor chase -CHECK
What i think those guys doing is they have some points like i made and they throwing them into the story,they think that more sci fi = better.
They tend to forget that Terminator film was a thriller ,not sci-fi .
I also heard that in this new film terminator - endoskeleton instead of killing john connor just throws him and wrestle with him .... no words... is this a joke ? Its huge misunderstanding that the same guys were allowed to write the screenplay.
Same thing is with this tv series , why terminator would want to kill john with a gun when he could come very close to him and rip off his throat with own hands ,its terminator and he shouldnt do anything but kill him with own hands ,not throwing him... they forgot about this.What kind of fans they are ?
Batutta
Major Contributor
This was stupid but kind of funny. The voice over guy does a dead on vocal impression of Christian Bale--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgPmH30OrQM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgPmH30OrQM
Last edited:
capitalP
Veteran
I agree with this 100%
Captain Pierce
Veteran
You know, I meant to say something about Terminator Salvation after that long post about the first three movies, but I honestly haven't figured out what to say.
Here's the thing--I liked the movie, I think that it being around the same rating on Rotten Tomato as Wolverine is ridiculous, because it was a better movie--but when I look back on the movie, mostly what I'm thinking of is the points that don't make sense (like how are they maintaining what seems like a full-on USAF base without Skynet knowing about it?) . I don't know, it kept my attention throughout the movie without too many "oh, come on" moments, and it was a fun ride. Usually I don't consider that enough, maybe I'm mellowing in my old age...
BTW, I don't consider myself an expert on cinematography or anything like that, but there was one shot in the movie that I thought was pretty cool. It was where you see Marcus up on a hill at the upper left, and the A10 pilot who's just ejected hanging from a decrepit power line tower down toward the lower right. Just thought it was a neat "wide" shot, like McG was just daring the future video release to "pan & scan this!"
Well, and this is SPOILER-ish, they couldn't really have any words in that sequence because Ahnold wouldn't come in and do anything new for the movie. Also, and this is very much a SPOILER, given that one of the main plot points of the movie is them turning Sam Worthington into a Terminator Lite, if you will, I wonder if Skynet didn't have the same thing in mind for Connor once the Marcus experiment was proven a success and they lured Connor in. I don't recall if we got any TerminatorVision™ sequences in the fight with the T-800 or not that might have said something about terminating him or not...
Here's the thing--I liked the movie, I think that it being around the same rating on Rotten Tomato as Wolverine is ridiculous, because it was a better movie--but when I look back on the movie, mostly what I'm thinking of is the points that don't make sense (like how are they maintaining what seems like a full-on USAF base without Skynet knowing about it?) . I don't know, it kept my attention throughout the movie without too many "oh, come on" moments, and it was a fun ride. Usually I don't consider that enough, maybe I'm mellowing in my old age...
BTW, I don't consider myself an expert on cinematography or anything like that, but there was one shot in the movie that I thought was pretty cool. It was where you see Marcus up on a hill at the upper left, and the A10 pilot who's just ejected hanging from a decrepit power line tower down toward the lower right. Just thought it was a neat "wide" shot, like McG was just daring the future video release to "pan & scan this!"
bwwd said:
Well, and this is SPOILER-ish, they couldn't really have any words in that sequence because Ahnold wouldn't come in and do anything new for the movie. Also, and this is very much a SPOILER, given that one of the main plot points of the movie is them turning Sam Worthington into a Terminator Lite, if you will, I wonder if Skynet didn't have the same thing in mind for Connor once the Marcus experiment was proven a success and they lured Connor in. I don't recall if we got any TerminatorVision™ sequences in the fight with the T-800 or not that might have said something about terminating him or not...
Last edited:
theyre all built to kill peoples,i thought about that possibility that theyre now just capturing peoples and not killing but why this half cutted endo would want to wrestle anyways.
Simple mistakes in the plot and its really stupid to see them wrestle.Did arnold wrestle sarah connor in the bar in T1 ? Or did he wrestle with his victims ,no.
Simple mistakes in the plot and its really stupid to see them wrestle.Did arnold wrestle sarah connor in the bar in T1 ? Or did he wrestle with his victims ,no.
Scott F
Pug Life
I'm glad there are still people who think like Nektonic.
Great film. Not as dark as I thought it was going to be, but overall I was not disappointed.
Shhhhhh....don't tell my wife I saw it today, cuz she still wants to see it. I have no problem going back for another screening.
One complaint was the lack of interesting title and credit motion graphics/animations. A real snooze. (They should have hired Andrew Kramer
rogar-Evil(DBG)The whole thing with the CGI Arnold, I thought it was pretty rad. I mean, he's the T-800, what the hell is he supposed to look like? Glad there was no reference to that in the trailers. And as mentioned, it's customary for the last scene to take place in some kind of factory/assembly line scenario. Willing to overlook some janky CG work here and there in this film. And the 50' robot WAS cool, I don't care what anyone says.
Questions:
1. In the opening sequence, who dropped the 2nd big bomb when Connor's chopper went down? Once he got in the helicopter and it crashed, I got confused.
2. Were they really going to do a heart transplant from cyborg to human? OK, that was pretty stupid.
Lastly, I have a thing for redheads, I gotta say Bryce Dallas Howard looked great. (probably more "put together" than a girl would look in a post-apocalyptic word, but whatever)
Scott F
Pug Life
Worked perfectly in the trailer, in the film...not so much.
As I'm sure has been said, it had some great action but lacked the writing that made the first two, and to some extent the third, work. But what I doubt was mentioned... did anyone else notice Marcus going to a British or something like that accent on occasion?
Also, I liked how both of the leads would yell sometimes in an inspirational Braveheart speech voice, then quickly go back to normal in a fairly senseless shift.
Also, I liked how both of the leads would yell sometimes in an inspirational Braveheart speech voice, then quickly go back to normal in a fairly senseless shift.
Captain Pierce
Veteran
1. My assumption was that Skynet did some kind of self-destruct to keep the Resistance from getting more information.
2. Oh, they did it, all right. Why else do you think they spent most of the movie hammering us over the head with the fact that Marcus still had a human heart?
I think Sam Worthington is Australian, so I presume that was his native accent. Not sure why it came and went like it did, though.
Scott F
Pug Life
Oh absolutely. By way of the trailer, I thought he sounded like Bono.
"Mah name is Marcus Wright, am I buggin' ya?"
chrislancaster
Active member
i felt let down.. i even liked the 3rd more than this one it didnt feel like terminator at all they just used the name recognition
just my 2 cents
just my 2 cents
Very, very entertaining film. Way better than T3. Excelent performances from Baile, Worthington and the rest of the cast. Great casting.
The film does have plot holes, but they are negligible, taking into account the fun and respect from the source material the movie had. The terminator Universe was well done, and McG really proved he can direct a serious actioner. The best summer flick I've seen this year, so far!
The film does have plot holes, but they are negligible, taking into account the fun and respect from the source material the movie had. The terminator Universe was well done, and McG really proved he can direct a serious actioner. The best summer flick I've seen this year, so far!
Chamber005
Carbonite Member
(The following was written last night, prior to me seeing Salvation this morning, but some Internet hiccups prevented its posting at that time.)
Slice's question cuts to the heart of what David said in the post before.
Speaking strictly from the terms of the first movie, it's a classic "circular" time paradox. Reese is around for the first session with Sarah, because the circle is closed. John has to send Reese back in time to become his father, and know that he's sentencing him to death in the past by doing so. (As Sarah says, it can drive a person crazy thinking about it.
Of course, this goes totally against the whole "no fate but what we make ourselves" bit that Cameron latched onto for the sequel. The obvious problem is that, if only Skynet can create time travel, and only time travel can make John's birth possible, then eliminating Skynet means eliminating John, and then we, the movie-going public, are up to our butts in paradoxes. As good a movie as T2 is, I personally can't vote for it as the best sequel ever, because it goes so totally against the idea of the first one. (Besides, Wrath of Khan is clearly the best sequel ever.
There's a lot wrong with T3, but I love that, at the end, despite everything, John isn't able to stop Judgement Day, and he's forced to become the man he's destined to be. In a strange way, it's like the new creative team had to bring the series back to Cameron's original vision that he lost in the sequel. I also love the idea of John being dead in the future, and that he was killed by the very Ahnold-model Tehminatah that Kate sends back to save him.
All in all, I think the timeline holds up fairly well. The way I see it, Cyberdyne's discovery of the T-800 chip and arm makes it possible for them to design Skynet ahead of the original schedule, thus advancing Judgement Day from its original date (July 24, 2004 from T3 works about as well as anything) to 1997. All the destruction of the chip in T2 does is revert back to the original. As for the problem of Reese telling Sarah that Skynet had lost the war in the future, and that sending back the Terminator was its last chance to save itself... what if (and I just thought of this, so it's a little rough as theories go) that's just what John had to tell him to ge thim to go back? "Next battle? Not gonna be one, we totally just kicked Skynet's shiny metal ass. You go back to '84 and have some fun." Not sure I buy it myself yet, actually, but it could work...
TOTALLY agree with you about T3. Before and since I cannot remember a movie in the history of film where the movie ends with the world being destroyed. Absolutely awesome and ballsy not going for the happy ending. I also think, funny enough, it was Arnold's best performance -- however much that equates.
Also, Terminator Salvation happens before John is even in command. As I understand it we should still see a final installment where John beats SkyNet and sends Kyle into the past. They didn't even dent Skynet in this movie. The whole thing was just a trial run to see how the T700 (?) would fare -- and it didn't fare well because they left too much human in it. Like, the T600 was all rubber and metal, the next one was all human and very little metal, and then Arnold's terminator was the perfect machine until the T1000 and then the T...whatever number the chick was in the 3rd one where she could make complex weapons.
Also, we should see John killed by a T800 at some point in the future (unless that T800 in the 3rd one was only programed to THINK it killed John). The problem is that by that time the T-(girl model) will have been developed is when John's wife is sending back the T800 to protect him in the 3rd movie. Which means SkyNet couldn't have been THAT messed up prior to Terminator 1984 if they managed to improve X2 terminators after sending back that original T800.
The real travesty in the Terminator universe was Sarah Conner Chronicles. I watched every episode hoping it would cohere to the franchise, but it just never did -- and Salvation completely ignored it. It's too bad that TV and movies can't play nice.
But everyone remember, Kyle says in the first installment, "One possible future". None of what has happened in T2, T3 or Salvation were the future that Kyle came from. Each one of them are their own distinct timeline. So John Conner defeated SkyNet in that ONE future that Kyle came from, but everything else is happening because of fate or what have you, not because the future is set (re: Lost).
So, in the end "our" John Conner who we've been following since insertion could decide tomorrow to blow his brains out. The bullet wouldn't stop, he'd die and never defeat SkyNet.
The ONLY question is how was John conceived in that first incarnation -- a John we've never seen. I think that's a chicken/egg question. A paradox. It could have started with the immaculate conception for all we know, right? It could be that the original Kyle that was sent back that first time actually wasn't THAT John Conner's father and that the John Conner we have is a different guy than the one Kyle knew and maybe the guy who was John's ACTUAL dad had already been killed by SkyNet in the past and the future John Conner (and his physicists) KNEW his real father had been killed and so sent back Kyle to father another John Conner with John's real mother, Sarah. Like, maybe Kyle is related to John's real father, so when they found out that his dad had been killed in the past and that another Terminator was sent back to kill his mom, they told the original Kyle Reese to go back and bang his mom to produce another kid named John Conner -- to save OTHER, ALTERNATE timelines, as the original John Conner obviously did not *disappear* after SkyNet killed his real father.
Just a theory -- but see, it can be figured out if you just make stuff up!
Jon Starr
Veteran
It's strange, so many people seem to be split with this film. I wonder why.
I enjoyed it a lot. It was surely different, but I really enjoyed the direction it took. Yes some plot holes, but meh...
But then why is the consensus so split? It's really strange. Maybe because it isn't what the other terminators are, but more along the lines of a war film? Maybe they didn't like some of the characters or connect to any of them? Hmm...
I enjoyed it a lot. It was surely different, but I really enjoyed the direction it took. Yes some plot holes, but meh...
But then why is the consensus so split? It's really strange. Maybe because it isn't what the other terminators are, but more along the lines of a war film? Maybe they didn't like some of the characters or connect to any of them? Hmm...
Just compare this to first terminator,its really very simple why peoples dont quite like it and why it doesnt feel like terminator film,New Terminator film hurts viewers intelligence sometimes with its scenes.
Even batman wont save film written by writers of "catwoman".Part 3 and this one is written by the same guys, i dont know what peoples expected.And its a disaster that they let them do this again.
Even batman wont save film written by writers of "catwoman".Part 3 and this one is written by the same guys, i dont know what peoples expected.And its a disaster that they let them do this again.
Last edited:
Captain Pierce
Veteran
The thing is, though, you can't necessarily compare this movie to the first (or even the second) Terminator, because the goal wasn't to make the same movie again. (Which is actually a refreshing breath of, dare I say it, orginality, even in a sequel. )
And, regarding the screenwriters having also worked on T3 and Catwoman... T3 wasn't, in many people's opinion, all that bad, and--well, I've never seen Catwoman, and God willing nobody will ever tie me to a chair, tape my eyelids open, and make me, but: A) technically those two were not the only credited screenwriters on Catwoman (and it also sounds like they were heavily rewritten on T:S), and B) you can't tell me that the only problem with that movie was those two guys.
Now, that said, I think you do have a point in that the movie probably suffered in some people's opinion because it wasn't like the first Terminator, or indeed like T2 or T3. But here's the thing--how could it have been? Oh, sure, they could have used the CG trickery that (I really don't think this is a SPOILER anymore, but just in case) allowed them to CG the Governator's face on a similarly buff dude (who of course actually played Arnold in his bodybuilding days in some TV movie) throughout the whole movie, and had him hunting John Connor through the whole film--but how could that work? At this point in his life, John's seen the T-800 Model 101 twice, and knows that a third unit that looked exactly the same is the one that tried to kill his mother before he was even born, so if he's walking through some Resistance base and sees Arnold, he's going to tweak to the situation pretty fast.
I think a more valid criticism to level at the movie is that it doesn't really do enough with John Connor. This is presumably supposed to be the movie that shows John Connor coming to lead the Resistance, and yet he doesn't ever really do that. (SPOILER: well, OK, he does, but just because the last remnants of the military industrial complex get taken out, and John just sort of seems to fall into that vacuum. He doesn't ever actually earn it anyhow. And maybe that comes out of how they did T3, where he seems to just be in the right place at the wrong time, as the survivors start to call in, looking for a leader, but then why give us General Katana--ERRRR, I mean Ashdown--and his international Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Resistance October?)
Another valid criticism is that Connor is at best a dual lead with Marcus, and at worst damn near to a supporting character in what should be his movie. I liked Marcus, and I think his story was an interesting use of the Terminator technology, but I can't help but wonder if we could have done with a little less of him, freeing up some screen time for John to actually do something leaderish.
And again, the thing that I can't quite figure out is why I liked the movie as much as I did even though I"m sitting here pointing out so many of its plot holes?rogar-Thinking(DBG
)And, regarding the screenwriters having also worked on T3 and Catwoman... T3 wasn't, in many people's opinion, all that bad, and--well, I've never seen Catwoman, and God willing nobody will ever tie me to a chair, tape my eyelids open, and make me, but: A) technically those two were not the only credited screenwriters on Catwoman (and it also sounds like they were heavily rewritten on T:S), and B) you can't tell me that the only problem with that movie was those two guys.
Now, that said, I think you do have a point in that the movie probably suffered in some people's opinion because it wasn't like the first Terminator, or indeed like T2 or T3. But here's the thing--how could it have been? Oh, sure, they could have used the CG trickery that (I really don't think this is a SPOILER anymore, but just in case) allowed them to CG the Governator's face on a similarly buff dude (who of course actually played Arnold in his bodybuilding days in some TV movie) throughout the whole movie, and had him hunting John Connor through the whole film--but how could that work? At this point in his life, John's seen the T-800 Model 101 twice, and knows that a third unit that looked exactly the same is the one that tried to kill his mother before he was even born, so if he's walking through some Resistance base and sees Arnold, he's going to tweak to the situation pretty fast.
I think a more valid criticism to level at the movie is that it doesn't really do enough with John Connor. This is presumably supposed to be the movie that shows John Connor coming to lead the Resistance, and yet he doesn't ever really do that. (SPOILER: well, OK, he does, but just because the last remnants of the military industrial complex get taken out, and John just sort of seems to fall into that vacuum. He doesn't ever actually earn it anyhow. And maybe that comes out of how they did T3, where he seems to just be in the right place at the wrong time, as the survivors start to call in, looking for a leader, but then why give us General Katana--ERRRR, I mean Ashdown--and his international Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Resistance October?)
Another valid criticism is that Connor is at best a dual lead with Marcus, and at worst damn near to a supporting character in what should be his movie. I liked Marcus, and I think his story was an interesting use of the Terminator technology, but I can't help but wonder if we could have done with a little less of him, freeing up some screen time for John to actually do something leaderish.
And again, the thing that I can't quite figure out is why I liked the movie as much as I did even though I"m sitting here pointing out so many of its plot holes?
rogar-Thinking(DBG
Last edited:
Scott F
Pug Life
It's an interesting question for which I don't quite have an answer but feel like rambling nonetheless....
Why did I like it? First and foremost, I'm in my late 30's, I've got more important things going on than analyzing every little plot discrepancy/bad acting/etc. Going to the movies is a luxury and I'm fairly easy to please if I can get out of the house.
Enough with Arnold. Aside from the "cameo" this movie is (as mentioned) a breath of fresh air. The formula had been done to death and was stale by the 3rd installment. Yes, this is a "war film". I mentioned several pages back regarding the trailer, I thought it was cool they had A-10s and helicopters to fight Skynet. There is a level of realism that these freedom fighters are gathering together any remaining weaponry to fight the enemy. (Now how they could safely inhabit that large military base w/o getting blasted by a hot nuke is beyond me)
rogar-Evil(DBG): Here's what I would like to see if this franchise continues: A progressive breakdown till we get to the dark, dark scenario we saw in T1. No sunlight, just black clouds, drizzle and lightning. And of course, the resistance living underground in dimly-lit caverns watching hollowed-out flaming TV sets.
I was really excited to see Terminator Salvation based on that great trailer. Ultimately, I think the trailer built my expectations up a bit high, but I still enjoyed the film and will be going back to see it again.
Lastly, I don't give a crap about any of the time travel loopholes or improbabilities. Do you know how much day care costs?
Batutta
Major Contributor
And again, the thing that I can't quite figure out is why I liked the movie as much as I did even though I"m sitting here pointing out so many of its plot holes?
I think it's because, as George Lucas once said to Lawrence Kasdan about a Star Wars plot hole, "If we put in enough action nobody will notice."