Topic: Terminator Salvation

[Dragonfire]

I went to see Terminator Salvation today.  I wasn't sure what to expect from it, but since I've seen the previous three movies and enjoyed what I've seen of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles I decided to see it. 

In 2018, the resistance is still fighting against Skynet and the machines.  John Connor is an important member of the resistance and he's determined to defeat Skynet.  Marcus Wright, a mysterious man, turns up and ends up involved in what is going on.  Marcus meets Kyle Reese and then later meets John and other members of the resistance.  Marcus is a bit different and John has to decide if he can trust him or not.

My Thoughts

First of all, it is just weird to see a Terminator movie without Arnold having a main role as a Terminator - either one bent on destruction or the reprogrammed version. 

The movie is a bit different from the others and even the tv show since in those, a Terminator was being sent back in time to eliminate John.  This time, just about everything takes place in the future after judgment day.  Things aren't exactly like John expected, but Skynet is still in control and trying to eliminate the remaining humans.  It is interesting to see the future and see some focus on John as an adult.  Some of the machines that were mentioned in previous movies - like the hunter killers - are shown.  I think they looked the same.  Some other machines are around that I don't remember being mentioned before that worked well with the story. 

The plot is interesting and has a few different things going on, but it isn't that complex.  The plot really isn't as strong as previous plots have been, though it still manages to be entertaining.  Most things are resolved by the end of the movie while also leaving some things open for future movies.  I've already heard that the producers want to make 2 more movies.  The action scenes are fine, though nothing special.  The violence is relatively tame thanks to the PG-13 rating instead of R like the previous movies received.  For all the shooting going on, few people get hit and there is practically no blood loss.  At one point, someone receives a major injury with basically no blood loss at all.  It somehow seems weird for a Terminator movie to be rated PG-13...Sort of like how I felt about Live Free or Die Hard being rated PG-13 instead of R.

There are a few references to things from the first movies.  John has the picture of Sarah that Kyle had in the first movie.  John also listens to the tapes Sarah made for him.  Kyle's importance is touched on, though most of the characters have no idea why John says that Kyle is important.  I did like the few references to the previous movies that I noticed.  I didn't pick up on anything that had been mentioned in the television show, though I haven't seen all the second season episodes.  There is no indication that the connection to Kyle that the show came up with exists in the movie.  The first of the T-800s is seen by the end of the movie.  Some sort of computer effects gave the T-800 Arnold's face. 

The cast does a good job with their parts overall even though there isn't a lot of development for any of the characters, even John.  Kate, introduced in the third movie, is back though in a smaller part.  She is still important, it just would have been nice if she has been around a little bit more.  It is nice to see more of Kyle, but it is also a bit odd to see him so young.  Marcus is a very interesting addition.  Most of the questions about him are answered - and I really wasn't surprised by the answers - but I still have a few that were left unanswered. 

I did get a review posted on Epinions if anyone wants to take a look.

Terminator Salvation

[Jimmy]

The violence is relatively tame thanks to the PG-13 rating instead of R like the previous movies received.  For all the shooting going on, few people get hit and there is practically no blood loss.

It sure a deal breaker for me. Are they able to do movie for someone else than the kid today
What next? A remake of Dirty Harry rated PG, a remake of Cannibal Holocaust rated G,...
No wonder actual Hollywood cinema doesn't interest me anymore

[Achim]

a remake of Cannibal Holocaust rated G,...

[Dragonfire]

The violence is relatively tame thanks to the PG-13 rating instead of R like the previous movies received.  For all the shooting going on, few people get hit and there is practically no blood loss.

It sure a deal breaker for me. Are they able to do movie for someone else than the kid today
What next? A remake of Dirty Harry rated PG, a remake of Cannibal Holocaust rated G,...
No wonder actual Hollywood cinema doesn't interest me anymore

I know what you mean.  I read some short interview with the director and he talked about removing one shot that was more violent because it would have gotten the movie rated R..and he didn't want kids not being able to see the movie just because of the one scene..or some nonsense like that.  It isn't that I love extremely violent movies with buckets of blood splattering and gore everywhere.  But some movies, because of the subject, will be more violent if they and done properly in a way that does the story justice.  Toning down those movies to get a PG-13 rating because the studio wants to make money is messed up.  There are all kinds of movies aimed at kids and families now - way more than when I was growing up - so there is no need to ....sanitize everything to make it kid friendly.  Not every movie made has to be kid friendly, but it seems like Hollywood feels differently.

I do wonder if they will be an unrated version on DVD.

[Jimmy]

It's not that I like violence with no reason either, I can't stand Hostel because of that... But not every movies had to be sanitized because of the young kids, this is why I haven't watch the last Die Hard... I don't even see the problem if a teenager watch some blood or violence when they have a reason to be. In fact all this no blood thing teach them that they can hit someone and nothing will happen (no injuries or consequences in the movie or tv show that are their guardians now). It's just "sad" to think of what happens now for those kids : they watch a sanitized G.I. Joe cartoon or over the top free violence movies like Saw. No middle line at all...

[DJ Doena]

That's why I disliked Wolverine a bit. I mean, that guy rams his three huge claws into the chest of some other dude and when he withdraws there ain't a single drop of blood on 'em.

[Najemikon]

Empire reviewed Salvation and particularly noted how brutal the action comes across, despite being bloodless. I know there were complaints about Die Hard 4 pulling its punches... I can't comment because I waited for the extended version.

[Tom]

I know there were complaints about Die Hard 4 pulling its punches... I can't comment because I waited for the extended version.

And I am still waiting for the unrated version to come out on Blu-ray. Though I saw the theatrical version at the cinema.

[Dragonfire]

Empire reviewed Salvation and particularly noted how brutal the action comes across, despite being bloodless. I know there were complaints about Die Hard 4 pulling its punches... I can't comment because I waited for the extended version.

There are just a few moments that really seemed brutal to me.  And the lack of blood just lessened the impact, especially for one moment in particular. 

I have the Unrated version of Live Free or Die Hard on DVD.  The profanity was definitely back, though I'm not sure how the violence compares to the theatrical version.  I have read in more than one article that with that one, the director filmed like it would be rated R, but the studio insisted on editing to get the PG-13 rating.

[Tom]

I have the Unrated version of Live Free or Die Hard on DVD.  The profanity was definitely back, though I'm not sure how the violence compares to the theatrical version.

Here a detailed comparison of the two versions.

[Dragonfire]

Thanks...I'll go check that out.

[Achim]

T2's violence was rather bloodless (except that scene where the arm is revealed), wasn't it. Actually, I am wondering if that would still get a R rating now, 18 years later...


I never bothered with the Theatrical Cut of Die Hard myself (bought the DVD though, as out came out before I went Blu). Funny how lots of stuff is pointed out in the comparison that is apparently in the film, just not in the subtitles.


I guess if everybody did what Tarantino supposedly did with Pulp Fiction the MPAA would see behind it by now (as you may now, he claims he had put additional ultra-violence in that he was happy to cut, hoping that the MPAA would then not bother with the stuff he actually wanted, hence, Theatrical=Director's Cut. Of course, that doesn't work with language like in Die Hard 4.0.

[Dragonfire]

T2's violence was rather bloodless (except that scene where the arm is revealed), wasn't it. Actually, I am wondering if that would still get a R rating now, 18 years later...


I never bothered with the Theatrical Cut of Die Hard myself (bought the DVD though, as out came out before I went Blu). Funny how lots of stuff is pointed out in the comparison that is apparently in the film, just not in the subtitles.


I guess if everybody did what Tarantino supposedly did with Pulp Fiction the MPAA would see behind it by now (as you may now, he claims he had put additional ultra-violence in that he was happy to cut, hoping that the MPAA would then not bother with the stuff he actually wanted, hence, Theatrical=Director's Cut. Of course, that doesn't work with language like in Die Hard 4.0.

Hmm...that is true for the most with T2.  There is violence, though it isn't as graphic as what has been in some other movies.  Maybe it wouldn't get rated R now..I know I've watched some older movies that are rated R that I'm sure would be PG-13 now.  Though I seem to remember some language in T2 that wouldn't cut it for PG-13.

I hadn't heard that Tarantino did that with Pulp Fiction.  It doesn't surprise me that a director would attempt that, though I'm sure you're right that the MPAA would have figured it out if all directors did that.

[Achim]

I just watched RoboCop Transformers Road Warrior(?) Terminator Salvation. As you can see by the previous sentence, I was not overly impressed by the clichéd(sp?) mash-up mess that I got offered.

Well, on the good side, I liked the core story. I had previously heard that the film was intended to be Kyle Reese's story and then turned into John Connor's story when Christian Bale preferred becoming the man himself rather than an apparent side-kick. However, I very much felt it was Marcus' story after all, which I thought had a good (even if quite predictable) arc which I wanted to see through to the end (and is one of the few reasons I didn't leave the theater). I also had a big grin on my face when the big cameo happened

(click to show/hide)

I refer to Arnie, of course, albeit in digital form

the best thing in the film for me was: Chekov! Well, I mean Kyle Reese of course, played by Anton Yelchin.

I think the film's failing was represented very well during the opening sequence by the music failing to introduce the main theme more elegantly. Instead of just suddenly blaring at us it should have slowly snuck into our ears... But maybe that's just me, still this sudden musical reveal didn't work for me. Then why does this film have to follow the trend to drain all colors until you're almost not sure anymore whether you are watching a black & white film? T2 with it's beautiful blues and T3 with it's slight over saturation sat much better with me. While the story in itself was good it was told in an overly conventional manner. Stereotypes followed clichéd behavior patterns and was often presented with cringe worthy pathos and John Connor sounded like he just dropped his Batman mask.

(click to show/hide)

Near the end I was disappointed because they are at Skynet and all they fight are two Terminators? And then came two plotholes right at the end (if a film ends on plotholes that cannot be a good thing):1. They destroyed Skynet. Somehow this doesn't fit in the whole concept for me. Skynet should be the driving force behind everything and with it gone time travel will not happen etc., etc. (you know where this goes). 2. I was under the impression that the T-600 had ripped out the prototypes heart, who/which then continued based on the fact it's a machine after all. Then how can he/it donate the heart to Connor at the end???

If you have McG direct a film then all you're gonna get is a McG film. Don't get me wrong, this is quite a decent action flick with a few awesome action set pieces and adequate acting. But somehow Terminator this is not. This is the 4th best film in the series and I am not sure I want to see a number 5.

Especially as a film in the franchise:

[Dragonfire]

I just watched RoboCop Transformers Road Warrior(?) Terminator Salvation. As you can see by the previous sentence, I was not overly impressed by the clichéd(sp?) mash-up mess that I got offered.

Well, on the good side, I liked the core story. I had previously heard that the film was intended to be Kyle Reese's story and then turned into John Connor's story when Christian Bale preferred becoming the man himself rather than an apparent side-kick. However, I very much felt it was Marcus' story after all, which I thought had a good (even if quite predictable) arc which I wanted to see through to the end (and is one of the few reasons I didn't leave the theater). I also had a big grin on my face when the big cameo happened

(click to show/hide)

I refer to Arnie, of course, albeit in digital form

the best thing in the film for me was: Chekov! Well, I mean Kyle Reese of course, played by Anton Yelchin.

I think the film's failing was represented very well during the opening sequence by the music failing to introduce the main theme more elegantly. Instead of just suddenly blaring at us it should have slowly snuck into our ears... But maybe that's just me, still this sudden musical reveal didn't work for me. Then why does this film have to follow the trend to drain all colors until you're almost not sure anymore whether you are watching a black & white film? T2 with it's beautiful blues and T3 with it's slight over saturation sat much better with me. While the story in itself was good it was told in an overly conventional manner. Stereotypes followed clichéd behavior patterns and was often presented with cringe worthy pathos and John Connor sounded like he just dropped his Batman mask.

(click to show/hide)

Near the end I was disappointed because they are at Skynet and all they fight are two Terminators? And then came two plotholes right at the end (if a film ends on plotholes that cannot be a good thing):1. They destroyed Skynet. Somehow this doesn't fit in the whole concept for me. Skynet should be the driving force behind everything and with it gone time travel will not happen etc., etc. (you know where this goes). 2. I was under the impression that the T-600 had ripped out the prototypes heart, who/which then continued based on the fact it's a machine after all. Then how can he/it donate the heart to Connor at the end???

If you have McG direct a film then all you're gonna get is a McG film. Don't get me wrong, this is quite a decent action flick with a few awesome action set pieces and adequate acting. But somehow Terminator this is not. This is the 4th best film in the series and I am not sure I want to see a number 5.

Especially as a film in the franchise:

(click to show/hide)

As far as destroying Skynet goes, they only got the one facility.  John's voice over at the end talks about how Skynet is still in control around the world.  They have facilities all over the place, so it is still there to be the driving force for future movies.
The T-600 didn't ripe out the prototypes heart.  It just punched him in the chest right over the heart, which caused the heart to stop.  John was then able to get the heart going again.  The prototype is different from the T-600s and T-800s because of the organs...He/it needs the heart to be beating to stay functional.  That's why he was just laying there until John used those cable things to shock the heart back into beating.