criterionforum.org

I couldn't help but think of Rise of the Robots when I read the title of the third Terminator movie...which turned out to be an appropriate association.

Of course it doesn't help that McCharlie'sAngelsG is heading up the next installment alongside Catwoman co-writers John Brancato and Michael Ferris. If Bale attaches himself to this film, I will have given up all hope that he'll become a credible actor again.

Ah, what the hell am I doing? Forgive me for bringing this up in the first place. I thought it might garner some discussion of Hollywood's often hopeless lack of creativity or the spiraling death of a once-great action/sci-fi film franchise.

The title is the start of that death.

As much as I love T2 the one gaping plothole in the entire series for me is why they don't send the Terminator back to when John Connor is toddler or an infant and kill him then? Why with each successive film are we seeing John Connor get older? Wouldn't the people in the future have a better strategy? And why don't they send multiple Terminators instead of just one? Is the cost of time travel prohibitively high?

Antoine Doinel wrote:As much as I love T2 the one gaping plothole in the entire series for me is why they don't send the Terminator back to when John Connor is toddler or an infant and kill him then? Why with each successive film are we seeing John Connor get older? Wouldn't the people in the future have a better strategy? And why don't they send multiple Terminators instead of just one? Is the cost of time travel prohibitively high?

Trying to unravel the neverending, nonsensical paradoxes of time travel is bad for the soul. You stop it. You stop it right now. [-X

Oh what the hell...why didn't they just send the T2000 back to 1937 to kill Frank and Nan Connor, stopping the bloodline two generations out? Frank was paraplegic and Nan was a blind school teacher.

While you're waiting for this gem, you can salve your longing with this, which should prove about equal in quality.

Marcel Gioberti wrote:

Antoine Doinel wrote:As much as I love T2 the one gaping plothole in the entire series for me is why they don't send the Terminator back to when John Connor is toddler or an infant and kill him then? Why with each successive film are we seeing John Connor get older? Wouldn't the people in the future have a better strategy? And why don't they send multiple Terminators instead of just one? Is the cost of time travel prohibitively high?

Trying to unravel the neverending, nonsensical paradoxes of time travel is bad for the soul. You stop it. You stop it right now. [-X

Oh what the hell...why didn't they just send the T2000 back to 1937 to kill Frank and Nan Connor, stopping the bloodline two generations out? Frank was paraplegic and Nan was a blind school teacher.

That's why only Futurama got it right, adding an anti-paradox mechanism to their time-travel apparatus.

And to answer your second question: because bad guys are stupid, that's why. That's probably the only thing I've ever learned from watching movies.

Marcel Gioberti wrote:Trying to unravel the neverending, nonsensical paradoxes of time travel is bad for the soul. You stop it. You stop it right now. [-X

Either that or watch Primer, easily the toughest synopsising job I've ever had to tackle in my Sight & Sound reviewing career.

Holy Christ, Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins?

What the hell were they thniking?

Easily the worst title of the past few years.

Cde. wrote:Holy Christ, Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins?

What the hell were they thinking?

Can't wait for the awesome Smash Mouth jam about terminatin' at the beach

Seems like an appropriate enough title for a film directed by a guy named McG. I can't believe Entertainment Weekly had a forum with "modern auteurs" in Hollywood included this guy. Though to be fair, the rest of the panelists were dubious at best.

Was Jon Turteltaub unavailable?

They couldn't send the original Terminator back to any other time. The time had to be precisely calculated so that the Terminator would leave it's arm behind thus causing the robots to be able to be built in the first place and the second time was so that, erm, something else could happen. In fact the robots got all confused, they seem to think there's a cop out scenario which results in the robots being created but not the human resistance force and, ya know, they're wrong. Because although the future's unwritten it actually is. You see?

The bees are on the what now?

Summer Glau is a Borg queen now? Who else saw that poster in the link above?

Jean-Luc Garbo wrote:Summer Glau is a Borg queen now? Who else saw that poster in the link above?

The chameleon like transformations of Edward Furlong never cease to amaze me. Daniel Day who?

What the hell, I'll step up to the plate. I still maintain that the first Charlie's Angels is a perfectly realized film and one of my favorites of the genre. T2 is another one of my genre favorites. Granted, McG has a silly name and has pumped out nothing but shit since, but I'm gonna hold a shred of hope that this is going to bring both director and series back to their full potential.

So there.

-Toilet Dcuk

jbeall wrote:

Cde. wrote:Holy Christ, Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins?

What the hell were they thinking?

"It was the best of times, it was THE BLURST OF TIMES!?"

Perhaps the film will focus on the rise of an apocalyptic former preacher who is elected president and starts the war, and then turns out to be a terminator, shattering the illusions of his sheep-like followers who are crushed beneath the wheels of his secret robot army?

It certainly would be funny as hell.

You really think Huckabee will win?

I love T2 so much, that only after seeing it a thousand times have all the side jokes caught up with me... like "I need a vacation," etc... I guess that's why some people prefer the first one, since it's all serious. Anyway, anyone catch the WMV version on disc two of the EE? It's amazing! 720p baby! (If you can get past the mess that is DRM!)

I liked the extended cut of T2, specifically the scene with Michael Biehn. Why that was left out of the theatrical release is mind-numbing. Without it, there's very little connection to the first film. Cameron's style had developed so much in that time between the two films, it's hard to believe that the same guy did both movies.

People drool and ape over Orson Welles, but I'm one of the few who can't get over Cameron doing The Terminator and Aliens back to back. It blows my fucking mind... Utter genius, just utter genius...

You know, Aliens is a great film, but in some respects it pales in comparison to the original. It's very easy to forget now that Alien was hardly an action movie at all, despite the sequels and Ridley's later reputation as an action director. It owed as much, if not more to Hitchcock than it did Star Wars.

exte wrote:I'm one of the few who can't get over Cameron doing The Terminator and Aliens back to back. It blows my fucking mind... Utter genius, just utter genius...

Don't forget The Abyss!