# Terminator 4



## Black Wraith (Feb 28, 2008)

> The fourth movie in the Terminator series will be released on 22 May 2009, film studio bosses have announced.
> 
> Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins features Batman Begins star Christian Bale as rebel leader John Connor.
> 
> ...




If they make it like the show it should be good.


----------



## Undercovermc (Feb 28, 2008)

I'm apathetic towards this movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a man versus machine battle with awe-inspiring special effects. I wonder if this will conflict or go in accordance with the plot of The Sarah Connor Chronicles.


----------



## Ennoea (Feb 28, 2008)

With McG on the helm we can pretty much give up hope of it being good.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Feb 28, 2008)

Christian Bale will make this movie good.


----------



## Mider T (Feb 28, 2008)

Next Bale is gonna be Bond.

Perhaps we'll see a young Kyle Reese?


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Feb 28, 2008)

cany anyone write new stories these days, or must i suffer the stories of my youth being drawn out ad nauseum


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Feb 28, 2008)

I'm actually annoyed at how this movie has been taken up. With Joseph 'McG' McGintey running the shots and the same writers as for the third movie, I can't see anything other than this being a failure and leading to a further degradation of the franchise, especially if it spawns sequels to be created by the same team.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Feb 28, 2008)

Mider T said:


> Next Bale is gonna be Bond.
> 
> Perhaps we'll see a young Kyle Reese?


We can only hope!


----------



## Dionysus (Feb 28, 2008)

Should have ended at T2.


----------



## testxxxx (Feb 28, 2008)

T-3 sucked lets hope T-4 will be better.


----------



## Snakety69 (Feb 28, 2008)

Well, I for one am looking forward to to this movie. Ever since I watched the first one, I've always wanted to actually *see* the war against the machines. Looks like half of my prayers have been answered, now all that's left is for the film makers to actually pull it off.


----------



## Cooli (Feb 28, 2008)

not high on my list to see but i guess i'll watch it


----------



## Trias (Feb 28, 2008)

If it has Christian Bale in it, I'll watch it even if it's smuff porn.

 But well, what is else for us to see from Terminator series? I'd watch a film of how the whole war and re-civilization issues went like a documentary, but that would not make any money for the producers. 

 Wondering that else we'll get now. T-XXX? ...


----------



## Bathroom_Mop (Feb 28, 2008)

Hopefuly this will not be as bad as T3. Not really expecting much from it though. The writters from T3 should not be allowed anywhere near this one. I wonder if there will be a bit of time travel in it- though I know it wont take central role in it


----------



## Sunuvmann (Feb 28, 2008)

Glad to have specifics but there already was a thread on T4.

Link removed


----------



## Mider T (Feb 28, 2008)

It's times like this that I'm glad I'm not old enough to remember clearly when movies like the first Star Wars trilogy, Blues Brothers, and the first Terminator came out.  My mind always has questions, and all of the films were based on things we hadn't even seen yet and wouldn't see for another 20 years.  It would've drove me insane in the membrane.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Feb 28, 2008)

By the way, I heard John Connor apparently only plays a relatively small role in this movie which is a planned trilogy. The focus in T4 is on a new character called Marcus, and John (Bale) will come into the story's focus in the 2nd & 3rd movies. [if they ever get made]


----------



## illusion (Feb 28, 2008)

If it is a trilogy, it would be tight if Arnold makes a cameo on the final one, showing John sending him back to save himself.

Or, maybe it'll show John sending his father back first to have smex with his mother, so he can be born. God damn, time travel movies!


----------



## Dan (Feb 29, 2008)

I wonder what this ones gonna be like.

terminator 3 was so crap.

hopefully this one raises the bar.


----------



## Vault (Feb 29, 2008)

bale as john connor FTW


----------



## Dan (Feb 29, 2008)

Anyone watching Sarah Connor chronicals?

can I ask is that continuing from the films?


----------



## Sean Connery (Feb 29, 2008)

could be a possibility Venom


----------



## Graham Aker (Mar 1, 2008)

> The film will open against family film Night at the Museum II: Escape From the Smithsonian - the sequel to the 2006 film starring Ben Stiller as a night security guard who realises the exhibits where he works come to life when the sun goes down.


Woohoo! I love the first NotM, I'm glad its getting a sequel.

edit:


> *Charlie's Angels director McG* will take the helm on the movie, which is expected to be the first in a new Terminator trilogy.


Fail, not even Bale can save this film.


----------



## Sean Connery (Mar 1, 2008)

Graham Acre said:


> Woohoo! I love the first NotM, I'm glad its getting a sequel.
> 
> edit:
> 
> Fail, not even Bale can save this film.



all I can to that is ouch


----------



## Wolfarus (Apr 6, 2009)

Here's a nice trailer for it.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_hIIDEQY3w&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Violent-nin (Apr 8, 2009)

I'm looking forward to this film, hopefully it doesn't disappoint.


----------



## ctizz36 (Apr 8, 2009)

Same here I hope it will be *a lot* better than the third one


----------



## Mider T (Apr 8, 2009)

Venom said:


> Anyone watching Sarah Connor chronicals?
> 
> can I ask is that continuing from the films?



No it's not, the Judgement day isn't even the same, and T4 goes off of T3 continuity, which SCC ignores entirely.


----------



## cubano2919 (May 1, 2009)

i hope it follows the line of the past movies


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

The show sucks, both the show and Terminator 3 I pretend that they never existed.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 1, 2009)

The show is good, GTFO.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 1, 2009)

so was it skynet that first made terminators that look like humans, and humans just steal that thing?   cause that's what i imagine this movie intends to explain.  and if they are gonna cover the part where humans obtain a human/terminator, i wonder how they intend to explain the time travel part.  Back to the future cross over?


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 1, 2009)

I thought they already explained that stuff? Skynet made the terminators look like humans to infiltrate John Connor's base and assassinate him, right?


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

Yea, that was covered in the first movie.

And I don't like the show cause it doesn't provide anything new, I don't like that chick who's playing Sarah Connor, and that John Connor is a pussy. Plus it was too romantic.


----------



## ctizz36 (May 1, 2009)

I only watched the first episode and for some reason never watch it again despite the fact that I like the Terminator movies... most of them


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 1, 2009)

CrazyMoronX said:


> I thought they already explained that stuff? Skynet made the terminators look like humans to infiltrate John Connor's base and assassinate him, right?



oh yeah, i'm crossing up movie 1 and 2.  But then, how is this terminator in prt 4 friendly, an unfinished one no doubt.

Still , the time traveling will be the most difficult to explain.  hope they don't just gloss it over.


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

They explained the time traveling issue in the first one as well.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 1, 2009)

Chee said:


> They explained the time traveling issue in the first one as well.



haha, what?  i don't remember at all.  that movie came out in late 80s early 90s remember?  i might have seen it 1 or 2 x in last 15 years


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

Oh, well, the Resistance finds the machine at some robot factory thing. They take it, and Connor sends Reese back in time. The machine only sends living matter, so he goes back in time naked and without weapons. The Terminator is surrounded by living tissue so it can go back in time.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 1, 2009)

yeah but that doesn't explain the mechanism or whatever they use to travel.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 1, 2009)

I think the time travelling machine was created by Skynet and Connor took it over, right? At least that's how I remember it.


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

narutosimpson said:


> yeah but that doesn't explain the mechanism or whatever they use to travel.



Yea, its a machine. The robots made it and the resistance found it.


----------



## James (May 1, 2009)

"Terminator" is 2 films, perfect ending, permanently finished. 

Everything since has simply been works of bad fanfiction that's non-canon!


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 1, 2009)

CrazyMoronX said:


> I think the time travelling machine was created by Skynet and Connor took it over, right? At least that's how I remember it.





Chee said:


> Yea, its a machine. The robots made it and the resistance found it.



thats what i mean, u can't just gloss over that part!   it's one thing to develop antagonistic AI, but a time machine? hello, thats a movie unto itself!

the fact that the cyborg of this movie is sentient made me think that skynet wanted to reconcile with the humans thru a "marriage" of the species.  

wouldn't it be a great twist if that was the goal of skynet ?  but obviously it wasn't cause that terminator was an assassin.


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

Gloss over? Shit, I was more interested in two naked guys. Fuck time machines.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 1, 2009)

Time-travelling robots hell-bent on the destruction of mankind? That could never a movie make. 

Not logically, anyway. They'd just have to send a robot army back a few thousand years and kill everything easily.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 1, 2009)

true.  didn't part 3 make it clear that the robots needed conner to live to make the security system vulnerable?  therefore the robots should have just sent an assassin to kill sarah conner as a kid...uh-oh, my eyes crossed


----------



## Chee (May 1, 2009)

Don't think about time travel, that shit is just confusing.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 15, 2009)

i can't believe none of you elitist movie ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) have posted anything about this yet...how was it?

should i see it soon or can it wait?


is it better than T3?


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 15, 2009)

Is it out today? 

I gotta see this shit.


----------



## Bear Walken (May 15, 2009)

the 21st, next Thursday.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 15, 2009)

That's what I figured. Damn you, boner.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 15, 2009)

fuck me to hell


----------



## Violent-nin (May 15, 2009)

Lucky fucking Americans, doesn't come out till Friday here.


----------



## Chee (May 15, 2009)

I saw it. IT WAS AMAZING.

I didn't see it.


----------



## Chee (May 18, 2009)

Welp. Not amazing.

17% right now on RT.com


----------



## Vault (May 18, 2009)

CrazyMoronX said:


> Time-travelling robots hell-bent on the destruction of mankind? That could never a movie make.
> 
> Not logically, anyway. They'd just have to send a robot army back a few thousand years and kill everything easily.



The machines rely on the humans to create Skynet to start of with so if they wipe out the humans 10k years ago then they wont be any humans to create skynet thus effectively wipe their own existence


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 18, 2009)

Chee said:


> Welp. Not amazing.
> 
> 17% right now on RT.com


I don't buy what RT has to say anyway. They can suck a tomato.



Vault said:


> The machines rely on the humans to create Skynet to start of with so if they wipe out the humans 10k years ago then they wont be any humans to create skynet thus effectively wipe their own existence


But if they go back in time and kill Sarah Connor they wouldn't have John Connor fighting them in the future resulting in them not needing to send anything back in time to begin with and would not have created the time machine in the first place, thus effecitively wiping out their own existence via TIME PARADOX.


----------



## Vault (May 18, 2009)

Machines already ruled before the time machine, so yeah the machine still will be ruling this time without the *John Connor*'s resistance


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 18, 2009)

Paradox, I say. Paradox!


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 19, 2009)

25% now on RT, ah well its not like even a 0% would stop me from seeing this movie :ho


----------



## Vault (May 19, 2009)

Rotten tomatoes can go suck eggs for all i care


----------



## excellence153 (May 19, 2009)

I don't like McG... I think he's a tool.  But I'll still see this just for... what's left of the story.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 19, 2009)

Rotten Tomatoes is pretention concentrate.


----------



## Wesley (May 19, 2009)

excellence153 said:


> I don't like McG... I think he's a tool.  But I'll still see this just for... what's left of the story.



If you think of it as a prequel, rather than a sequel, there shouldn't be a problem.  Afterall, the war against the machines did take place.


----------



## mystictrunks (May 19, 2009)

So I guess the series should have ended at 2.


----------



## Chee (May 19, 2009)

Oh jeez, RT just compiles critic's opinions into a percentage. They do absolutely nothing after that. Most of the critics agree that this movie is nothing but a mindless blockbuster, RT doesn't do shit.

I'm seeing it anyways cause my parent's are going and paying for me, but my expectations are lowered.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 19, 2009)

mystictrunks said:


> So I guess the series should have ended at 2.



But I liked 3....>_>....don't kill me 



CrazyMoronX said:


> Rotten Tomatoes is pretention concentrate.



I gotta agree here, for me anything over 60% is worth a watch in my experience but of course there have been times when its been dead wrong on the rating, most of the negative reviews say that the acting is not good enough, seriously? I feel some of the critics don't get the point of the film,IE a typical summer blockbuster


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 19, 2009)

Exactly. The acting in a movie isn't the end-all measuring stick of a movie. I've seen a lot of "great-acting" movies that were boring as all get-out, and plenty of "bad acting" movies are very enjoyable. 

Critics and their acting snobbery can get bent by a tranny.


----------



## Chee (May 19, 2009)

> I feel some of the critics don't get the point of the film,IE a typical summer blockbuster



It wasn't supposed to be a typical summer blockbuster, it was trying to be par with Terminator 1 and 2 and it isn't.


----------



## Rampage (May 19, 2009)

it wont be the same without ARNIE!
but lets wait and see


----------



## mystictrunks (May 19, 2009)

Rambo 21st century > Terminator 21st century.


----------



## Vault (May 19, 2009)

But ofcourse its John Rambo


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 19, 2009)

Rambo was okay, but I wouldn't go making that claim without actually seeing Terminator first.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 19, 2009)

Chee said:


> It wasn't supposed to be a typical summer blockbuster, it was trying to be par with Terminator 1 and 2 and it isn't.



I don't think it will be as good for the fact that there is  no Arnie, we've becomed used to seeing him and he was iconic to say the least to the series. 

I think it wont be as good but I don't think its going to be a bad movie either

This will be the most different one of the series as there is no Arnie, different plotline and different timeline, I just hope I won't be as disappointed as some of the RT critics were ,but lets see.


----------



## Chee (May 19, 2009)

3rd one had Arnold in it and that sucked as well. Arnold or no Arnold, it doesn't matter.


----------



## mystictrunks (May 19, 2009)

CrazyMoronX said:


> Rambo was okay, but I wouldn't go making that claim without actually seeing Terminator first.



Rambo is a contender for best action flick of the decade.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 19, 2009)

Chee said:


> 3rd one had Arnold in it and that sucked as well. Arnold or no Arnold, it doesn't matter.



shit I think I'm the only one who liked T3 >_>

While not the deciding factor, not having an actor or character that has appeared in the last 3 movies can make it a little harder to attract some of the fanbase. That too one that fit the role really well.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 19, 2009)

mystictrunks said:


> Rambo is a contender for best action flick of the decade.


 According to whose list?


----------



## mystictrunks (May 19, 2009)

The Only One That Matters; Swapmeet Ricky The Big Bossmane's.


----------



## excellence153 (May 20, 2009)

Cyborg Superman said:


> shit I think I'm the only one who liked T3 >_>



Dunno if anyone has seen this...

I think it really discredits T3, which sort of makes it an unnecessary addition to the series.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 20, 2009)

excellence153 said:


> Dunno if anyone has seen this...
> 
> I think it really discredits T3, which sort of makes it an unnecessary addition to the series.



 thats awesome, there were many scenes that were almost identical to T2 which i noticed but I didn't think so many of them would be .


----------



## Chee (May 20, 2009)

One of the worst reviews I've ever seen:



> Let me do my best to re-cap them for you. In the first film; The Terminator, Arnold Schwarzenegger is sent back in time from the future to kill Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton). A *"good" Terminator* is sent back as well to help her. He went by the name of Kyle Reese and he is John Connor's father. Kyle and Sarah Connor defeat Schwarzenegger.



Wow...Kyle Reese was a human dude.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 20, 2009)

Kyle Reese, a terminator. Classic.


----------



## Undaunted (May 20, 2009)

I haven't seen any of the other movies, or the tv show but I'm gonna catch this flick anyway.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 20, 2009)

I'm gonna watch it in about 12 hours or so


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 20, 2009)

honestly, i wasn't expecting much from the moment Christian Bale went berserk on one of the background guys and said the shit was amateur hour over there...

he may have over reacted but i know Bale takes acting seriously and if he thinks the production team was lacking, it was lacking.

from then on i expected a mediocre action flick at best. 

I'm still gonna watch it, if only because ive always wanted to see the T-future.


----------



## FFLN (May 21, 2009)

It was a pretty good movie.


*Spoiler*: __ 



Surprised to see Chekov in it though.
The original "Terminator" was a nice surprise too.


----------



## Starrk (May 21, 2009)

*Spoiler*: __ 



Is Arnold actually in it or is it just a cameo of his model in skinless form?


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 21, 2009)

Just watched it , I think it was a pretty good movie overall.



Stark said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> Is Arnold actually in it or is it just a cameo of his model in skinless form?




*Spoiler*: __ 



 I think it was just really good CGI


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 21, 2009)

Was Bale awesome in this film? The only answer is yes.


----------



## Vault (May 21, 2009)

Im with CMX here


----------



## Rukia (May 21, 2009)

Not that excited about it.

Look, I have seen John Connor struggle with the realization that he would have to lead the human resistance for 20 years.  I knew if this movie were ever made that it would be incredibly bleak and incredibly depressing.

But that sort of movie isn't what I am in the mood for.  Don't I get enough of that at work and in my every day life?  This is going to be a humorless/joyless world.  There isn't going to be a character in the group with a sense of humor.  Not a single character I can sympathize with.  And frankly...I can tell already that I don't care whether or not any of the characters live or die.

That's why I liked Star Trek.  The world was at stake, but people were able to have fun.  I didn't feel like I was back in Iraq while I watched it.  I felt like I was on R & R at Camp As Saliyah.

So screw Terminator.  If I am looking to see a movie over the Memorial Weekend...I may end up choosing Night at the Museum instead.


----------



## Adonis (May 21, 2009)

Movie looks bland to me. It might be the fact everything is metallic-gray.

I can't decide whether to see this anyway or to just watch Star Trek a second time. I'll probably go see Star Trek then sneak into T4.


----------



## Coldbid (May 21, 2009)

wait wa!!?? may 22nd? i thought i was May 21st, someone confirm!


----------



## Sheepy (May 21, 2009)

I am not going to watch because in my opinion, Terminator has always been a horrible moriv.e


----------



## DominusDeus (May 21, 2009)

Saw the midnight showing of it (17 hours ago). Was a pretty good movie.


*Spoiler*: __ 



The CGI cameo appearance of Arnold as the T-800 was a very pleasant surprise. The giant assed terminator was awesome, too.




It was a good experience in the theater, too. The sounds emitted from the aforementioned terminator was chilling, and every whuup of the chopper blades reverberated in your chest.


----------



## Thorn (May 21, 2009)

Pretty lame.  I never knew that somebody could perform a heart transplant after being stabbed in the heart the previous day and then have the operation in a non-sterile environment...  I know it's sci-fi but come the fuck on.  Also that nuclear explosion was the lamest thing I've ever seen.  

Then they totally ripped the human cages off of whatever the Tom Cruise movie was.  They're called "Terminators" for a damn reason.  Not "Cagers."  And it doesn't make any sense that they didn't kill Reece right away...  It's not like the machines to be so fucking dumb.

The only thing that was decent was that they put Arnold back on the 'roids.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 21, 2009)

excellence153 said:


> Dunno if anyone has seen this...
> 
> I think it really discredits T3, which sort of makes it an unnecessary addition to the series.



wow I never realize how similer they were...T2 still wins because arnold is sexier in that one:ho


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 21, 2009)

Makes you want to watch T2 all over again, eh?


----------



## Chee (May 21, 2009)

Wish Cameron did the other installments. He knew how to make a good Terminator film.


----------



## Ravaa (May 21, 2009)

T2 remains to be one of the scariest (and best) movies ever created. But I haven't seen T4 so I'll reserve my judgement.


----------



## Chee (May 21, 2009)

Ravaa said:


> T2 remains to be one of the scariest (and best) movies ever created. But I haven't seen T4 so I'll reserve my* judgement*.



Pun intended?


----------



## MartialHorror (May 21, 2009)

T4 is getting mixed reviews. The more positives ones come from people who liked T3.

So while I'll probably like it(since I liked T3), I doubt this will be as good as the first two.


----------



## Chee (May 21, 2009)

And I hated T3, so I'm probably gonna hate this one.


----------



## Heran (May 21, 2009)

Ravaa said:


> T2 remains to be one of the scariest (and best) movies ever created. But I haven't seen T4 so I'll reserve my judgement.



If anything T1 is the most chilling.


----------



## Shark Skin (May 21, 2009)

Just got back from watching this. I've seen the first 2, although a really long time ago. So I don't really remember them to well, so I can't really compare this to the earlier films. Never seen all of T3 so I can't really compare this to that either. But I really liked this movie. Thought Sam Worthington was great in the role of Marcus, he really evoked the confusion of his character well. Bale was good, for what he was, ragged leader of a human resistance group. Wouldn't rate it too highly. Thought the action scenes were very well done.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 21, 2009)

Hmmm, T1 was a horror film with sci-fi and action elements. T2 was an action film with sci-fi and horror elements.

T3 was pure action/sci-fi. T4 looks the same.


----------



## Shark Skin (May 21, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> Hmmm, T1 was a horror film with sci-fi and action elements. T2 was an action film with sci-fi and horror elements.
> 
> T3 was pure action/sci-fi. T4 looks the same.



That is correct. If your looking for horror, this isn't the Terminator for you.


----------



## Mider T (May 21, 2009)

Saw it *sigh* 2009 just doesn't seem to be an explosive year for movies


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 21, 2009)

Mider T said:


> Saw it *sigh* 2009 just doesn't seem to be an explosive year for movies



don't worry, Transformers 2 and G.I. Joe 1 are coming soon!


oh wait...


----------



## Chee (May 21, 2009)

Mider T said:


> Saw it *sigh* 2009 just doesn't seem to be an explosive year for movies



Star Trek is the only 'action' movie that scored high with the critics. Half way through the year though, could turn around but I doubt it. 2009 has been sucky.


----------



## Zeroo (May 22, 2009)

[rant]
I know it's only natural to compare sequels with the previous installments but goddamn...
I hate it when people have the mentality of 'if it wasn't as good as the first two then it must suck' ...I mean whatever happened to the middle ground...
 for all you know the first movie could've been a masterpiece which will forever remain a classic (which it is in this case)...so does that mean all the sequels following should be as great as that? ..
it's like saying Nolan will top his work of 'The Dark Knight' with an even greater sequel....it'll probably be a good movie but people will say 'nah it wasn't better than TDK, so yeah it sucked'....

[/rant]


----------



## crazymtf (May 22, 2009)

Yeah gotta say 2009 isn't the best year so far. I enjoyed Star Trek for big movies. Friday the 13th, Mall cop, and I love you man for smaller movies this year.


----------



## dragonbattousai (May 22, 2009)

T4 was okay.  I liked the direction they went with the angles and didn't go and make it action packed.  It had its moments,  but definitely isn't the movie I'm wanting to see this summer.


----------



## Vault (May 22, 2009)

Its like T3 ?!?!  Oh my gawd


----------



## Violent-nin (May 22, 2009)

2009 is failing so far movies wise, but there's still time to turn it around.

I'll probably watch T4 on Monday. I'm going in there basically expecting it to top T3 but not as good as T1 and T2. Actually I don't think any other Terminator sequels will top T1 and T2 for me, ever.

No one can top this man:

Link removed


----------



## Ravaa (May 22, 2009)

Chee said:


> Pun intended?



lol...maybe?


----------



## Grrblt (May 22, 2009)

Violent-nin said:


> 2009 is failing so far movies wise, but there's still time to turn it around.


Uh. Transformers 2.


----------



## Adonis (May 22, 2009)

Grrblt said:


> Uh. Transformers 2.



As we said, 2009 is a failing year for movies.


----------



## Shark Skin (May 22, 2009)

Yeah I don't know why, but I just have a feeling that Transformers 2 might not be all that great. It'll have plenty of eye candy, which is cool with me, but it looks like a meh movie to me.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (May 22, 2009)

Transformers 2 is gonna be awesome. You just wait.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 22, 2009)

out of Trannies 2, Harry potter 6 and GI Joe 1 my only flicker of mild hope for a semi-decent flick is HP6...

i haven't seen T4 yet so i'm gonna go in with a neutral outlook.


----------



## Grrblt (May 22, 2009)

Adonis said:


> As we said, 2009 is a failing year for movies.



Yes, but as I then said, Transformers 2 is coming, which renders your comment dead wrong.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 22, 2009)

Grrblt said:


> Yes, but as I then said, Transformers 2 is coming, which renders your comment dead wrong.



i dunno...i just don't get the same feel from this one as the first...the shorts at the theaters just feel like theyre trying to force feed you this movie.


i think it will fall short...


----------



## Vix (May 22, 2009)

My brothers said it was "alright"


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 22, 2009)

it was alright


----------



## Ciupy (May 22, 2009)

The movie is..uhm..average..

The special effects are nice and all,but the thrill I got from watching the first two Terminator movies is not here..not here at all..


Also,for those that said that this is a shitty year for movies..well we got Star Trek..and in December is stated to open none other than Avatar by James Cameron!


----------



## Shark Skin (May 22, 2009)

Grrblt said:


> Yes, but as I then said, Transformers 2 is coming, which renders your comment dead wrong.



One movie does not take a year worth of films out of the shitter.


----------



## Violent by Design (May 22, 2009)

The best movies come out more close to the end of the year noobs.

Anyway, T4 was alot better than I thought it'd be. I think critics were way too harsh on it. It's fucking terminator, who gives a shit about the plot.

Also I'll be surprised if Transformers 2 was better than T4.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (May 22, 2009)

I can't actually believe there were people expecting a good film out of this. Makes me lose faith in analytic thought that.


----------



## Adonis (May 22, 2009)

Grrblt said:


> Yes, but as I then said, Transformers 2 is coming, which renders your comment dead wrong.



The first Transformers was mediocre, so if you're hoping for the second, which looks even worse, to save this movie season...whoa ho ho are you going to be disappointed. Unless you just think Shia Lebouf is dreamy...

I'll say four words that nullifies your hype: directed by Michael Bay.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 22, 2009)

Adonis said:


> I'll say four words that nullifies your hype: directed by Michael Bay.



on the upside it'll have *GREAT* explosions!


----------



## Chee (May 22, 2009)

Transformers will be an average summer flick, not enough to raise 2009 from the dumps.

Hopefully the winter season will be good, lots of Oscar films come out during that time.


----------



## Irishwonder (May 22, 2009)

My only complaint so far (havn't seen the movie yet lol) is why would they reveal such a huge twist of Marcus being a terminator in the trailers?  Doesn't make sense.  I felt so spoiled after seeing that and figured they must have some *even bigger *twist planned for us if they were revealing something like that to us from a mere minute-thirty trailer.  But from what I've read so far that was it.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 22, 2009)

Ugh, saw it. Wrote the review, but can't copy it onto freewebs for some reason.

Anyway, this is one of those movies where my rating seems completely at odds with the review..............


----------



## Chee (May 22, 2009)

Post it here, I'd like to read it.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 22, 2009)

Damn it. Bye bye hits.



> TERMINATOR SALVATION(2009)
> (Directed by McG)
> 
> Plot: In the near future where machines have taken over the planet, only the resistance of humans stand between the machines and the destruction of the human race. When the possibility of salvation arises, it’s up to John Connor to save everyone.
> ...


----------



## Chee (May 22, 2009)

Like you got much any ways. :ho



You have a typo:


> Also, why is he just knocking people around? Didn’t he rip someone’s *hard* out in the first film?



Unless Arnie likes dicks, but...ya know.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 22, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> Damn it. Bye bye hits.



from your description it sounds to me like a 2 out of 4...i think you may place too much emphasis on personal enjoyment in your ratings rather than looking at the actual art at hand.


either that or you are giving out way to many points for action sequences.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 22, 2009)

Hey, my Haunting of Molly Hartley review has over 600 hits!

Yikes. You see, I check all of that out when I put it in FREEWEBS! SO HURRY AND START WORKING!

Edit: RagingBoner: It probably is......I think my tastes have dulled since my rewatching of "Terror Toons". How else could I give "Troll 2" a 2/4?

Anyway, my intent always is to use the rating to express its qualities and its entertainment value, not just qualities or entertainment value.

But once again, I suspect my rating will go down once I watch it again.......


----------



## Shark Skin (May 22, 2009)

Well I agree with the review. Never really put much into point ratings, but as MH said, Worthington did well. I also thing that he's right about the main character or the lack there of. Just felt like they tried too hard give both major roles, but it just didn't feel right.


----------



## Chee (May 22, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> Hey, my Haunting of Molly Hartley review has over 600 hits!
> 
> Yikes. You see, I check all of that out when I put it in FREEWEBS! SO HURRY AND START WORKING!



Stop refreshing the page 600 times.


----------



## LayZ (May 23, 2009)

I liked it when the Rednecks of the Future got beat down.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 23, 2009)

Chee said:


> Stop refreshing the page 600 times.



......................................................

I hope you get raped by a Terminator.


----------



## Grrblt (May 23, 2009)

Adonis said:


> The first Transformers was mediocre, so if you're hoping for the second, which looks even worse, to save this movie season...whoa ho ho are you going to be disappointed. Unless you just think Shia Lebouf is dreamy...
> 
> I'll say four words that nullifies your hype: directed by Michael Bay.



The first Transformers was incredible and this one is going to be even better (more and bigger Transformers in it).

I'll say three words that nullifies everything bad you have to say about it: it's fucking Transformers.


----------



## Violent by Design (May 23, 2009)

It was hardly transformers and it was really cheesy (even more so than transformers in general)


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 23, 2009)

I enjoyed the movie very much   what people seem to forget though is that this is most certainly an alternate universe continuity. time probably won't run in a circle, because of his exploits in T2 and T3...he won't be killed by T-850, because he already knows that he'll be programmed eventually..plus 
*Spoiler*: __ 



he was already technically killed by a prototype T800 in this movie and marcus saved him, so it changed everything that was supposed to happen so that it happened a little different


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 23, 2009)

why did Christian Bale continue to talk in his batman voice ...


----------



## Vonocourt (May 23, 2009)

MartialHorror said:
			
		

> Violence: PG-13. I wasn’t bugged by the lack of gore.



Terminator 2, barring some fucks and shits, the nuclear blast and two shots of the metal blades piercing someone skull, was a pg-13 film.

That's why the pg-13 rating for this movie never really bothererd me.


----------



## kibolatuEHbete (May 23, 2009)

IS CRAP!


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 23, 2009)

Nice explanation there


----------



## MartialHorror (May 23, 2009)

Vono: T2 had that scene where the dude gets impaled through the mouth. That's R worthy.



Grrblt said:


> The first Transformers was incredible and this one is going to be even better (more and bigger Transformers in it).
> 
> I'll say three words that nullifies everything bad you have to say about it: it's fucking Transformers.



Transformers had a weak structure and even worse plotting.


----------



## Gooba (May 23, 2009)

Ok so I haven't read this thread but I have to point out how retarded parts of that movie were.

For murder-robots they seem awful at actual murder.  Throwing people against walls is the least effective way to kill someone when you have car crushing power at your disposal.  Arnold from T1 was way smarter than the ones in this.  He ripped out your heart, shot you 10 times in the chest, or strangled you.  That is how you kill someone.  It was so retarded seeing him catch up to John, throw him, then walk over and throw him again for 10 minutes until a better robot showed up.  Then he figured out Marcus's heart was vulnerable so he punched him in it.  Guess what?  Human's hearts are vulnerable too, why didn't he ever punch that?  Also, why didn't Skynet put his heart in a metal case?  Seems like retarded design.

How did Skynet know about Kyle Reese?  Even the resistance didn't, know John did due to the tapes.

Knowing about Kyle, why did they imprison him instead of just crushing him like a bug as soon as they saw him?  You can't say it was to lure John there so they could kill him too, because if they crushed Kyle John would fade from existence.

Why doesn't Skynet just fill itself with poison gas as soon as people break in?  They are robots, they wouldn't care.

Why did they fight 2 terminators total in a terminator factory?  They didn't even really fight two, since Arnold ripped the other one in half for no goddamn reason.

What happened to the plastic skinned infiltration bots, and why is John just a lowly captain or whatever in the resistance.  There was no resistance until he banded some people together and started everything?  Fuck this new timeline's version.  John _is_ the leader and the founder and this new story is bullshit.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 23, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> Vono: T2 had that scene where the dude gets impaled through the mouth. That's R worthy.





> two shots of the metal blades piercing someone skull,


You could make that movie pg-13 easy, it's not like the film is covered with blood.


----------



## Chee (May 23, 2009)

Gooba said:


> Ok so I haven't read this thread but I have to point out how retarded parts of that movie were.
> 
> For murder-robots they seem awful at actual murder.  Throwing people against walls is the least effective way to kill someone when you have car crushing power at your disposal.  Arnold from T1 was way smarter than the ones in this.  He ripped out your heart, shot you 10 times in the chest, or strangled you.  That is how you kill someone.  It was so retarded seeing him catch up to John, throw him, then walk over and throw him again for 10 minutes until a better robot showed up.  Then he figured out Marcus's heart was vulnerable so he punched him in it.  Guess what?  Human's hearts are vulnerable too, why didn't he ever punch that?  Also, why didn't Skynet put his heart in a metal case?  Seems like retarded design.
> 
> ...



That's it. I'm seeing Night and the Museum.


----------



## Gooba (May 23, 2009)

Oh yea, I forgot to point out, how the fuck did Marcus not realize he was a robot?  Not needing to eat, sleep, get tired, and being like a hundred times stronger than normal?  How the fuck did he swim and be able to float to the surface?  He is made of metal!  It is fucking noticeable.


----------



## ez (May 23, 2009)

it's in his programming not to notice, probably.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 23, 2009)

Urgh, freewebs still won't let me paste. 

Anyway, him not noticing he was a robot didn't bug me. After all, when he died there weren't any robots and once they started attacking, he never really got the chance to ponder it. 

He probably suspected that the doctor did something to him, but didn't expect that it went that far. After all, he did bleed still.

edit:



Gooba said:


> and why is John just a lowly captain or whatever in the resistance.  There was no resistance until he banded some people together and started everything?  Fuck this new timeline's version.  John _is_ the leader and the founder and this new story is bullshit.



I blame Christian Bale's tampering with the script. If he was originally a minor character, he probably would've been the leader. I 'lol'ed at the fact no one believed him, when most likely there would be some knowledge of the events of T1 and T2(probably not T3 as the nukes would've distracted him).


----------



## mystictrunks (May 23, 2009)

Movie was pretty dumb.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

I liked it


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 23, 2009)

movie does have high and low points.  The low points being it suffers from typical summer blockbuster plot induced stupidity, as gooba explained above.  I'll say more later.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> I liked it



so did i, eventhough I don't know how skynet found out about Kyle reese. BTW kyle reese was my favorite character in this movie. maybe because he was the only character who had a shred of innocence left in him.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

~Gesy~ said:


> so did i, eventhough I don't know how skynet found out about Kyle reese. BTW kyle reese was my favorite character in this movie. maybe because he was the only character who had a shred of innocence left in him.



Yeah that did have me confused also.  But I figured if they knew that Sarah was John's Mom a simple DNA test could conclude that Kyle was his Dad :ho


----------



## MartialHorror (May 23, 2009)

based on how Sarah wasn't keeping it a secret that Kyle was his father, it isn't too hard to believe they found out.

I liked this Kyle Reese because he acted like a younger version of the original, in contrast to Bale turning John Connor into.......Batman.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 23, 2009)

A bum review.


----------



## Chee (May 23, 2009)

lol, they showed the movie title twice?


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 23, 2009)

Chee said:


> lol, they showed the movie title twice?



They did, actually they showed it plenty of times in the title credits.  The second movie did it too.

But the fourth one as i recall, showed it once right after the company logos showed up and again later on, it wasn't distracting IMO though.

I liked star a lot...which was the little girl..


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 23, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> based on how Sarah wasn't keeping it a secret that Kyle was his father, it isn't too hard to believe they found out.
> 
> I liked this Kyle Reese because he acted like a younger version of the original, in contrast to Bale turning John Connor into.......Batman.



lol was kyle even alive when she talked about him thats so weird though,imagine having a father who isn't even born yet


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 23, 2009)

~Gesy~ said:


> lol was kyle even alive when she talked about him thats so weird though,imagine having a father who isn't even born yet



No he wasnt, he was born in 02 i think which made him a teen in 2018, sarah made those messages in 84..


----------



## T4R0K (May 23, 2009)

OK, you people killed this movie for me. 

I think I'm grateful.


----------



## RAGING BONER (May 23, 2009)

Full Spill


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 23, 2009)

i dnno what the problem is..i enjoyed the movie..everyone who was in the theatre clapped plenty of times and i haven't talked to anyone outside of the net who didn't like it..i'm not sure what people are saying is bad about it


----------



## Chee (May 23, 2009)

I have yet to see it but, I'm sure I'll like it as a mediocre action flick.


----------



## Shark Skin (May 23, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> i dnno what the problem is..i enjoyed the movie..everyone who was in the theatre clapped plenty of times and i haven't talked to anyone outside of the net who didn't like it..i'm not sure what people are saying is bad about it



Just some plot holes. But I still like it for what it is as Chee said. Really wasn't that bad, IMO.


----------



## Superrazien (May 23, 2009)

I liked it, it was a cool movie. Very entertaining.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

I really don't understand why so many people slam the movie either. When I go to see an action movie, I am in it for the ACTION nothing else.  If it happens to have a great story ie Iron Man then I feel like I am get a bonus.  

What ever happened to people going to see movies just for the hell of it, and not what other people say about it?


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> I really don't understand why so many people slam the movie either. When I go to see an action movie, I am in it for the ACTION nothing else.  If it happens to have a great story ie Iron Man then I feel like I am get a bonus.
> 
> What ever happened to people going to see movies just for the hell of it, and not what other people say about it?



there's too much crap out right now.  It's like movie goers are expected to accept crap movies.  How many times have you been burned by a movie that was bad? or you thought would be good and sucked? for me it's countless.  The good movies are few and far between.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

Well I only go to see movies that I will like regardless, If I am not sure about it I will wait for the DVD  The last movies that I saw in theaters that burned me was Spider-man 3 and Quarantined .


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> Well I only go to see movies that I will like regardless, If I am not sure about it I will wait for the DVD  The last movies that I saw in theaters that burned me was Spider-man 3 and Quarantined .



yeah, spderman 3, i had reasonalbe expectaions, got burned bad.

I wanted to watch quarantined. seems like it would have been a bad move on my part.


----------



## Chee (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> What ever happened to people going to see movies just for the hell of it, and not what other people say about it?



lol whut? The majority of the American population go to the movies for the hell of it, that's why all the summer action flicks get all the money while deep and thoughtful movies like The Wrestler gets kicked in the ass.

If anything, more people need to watch movies that have a point instead of wasting 8 bucks to watch explosions.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

Don't Ever watch it... Not even for the lulz.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

Chee said:


> lol whut? The majority of the American population go to the movies for the hell of it, that's why all the summer action flicks get all the money while deep and thoughtful movies like The Wrestler gets kicked in the ass.
> 
> If anything, more people need to watch movies that have a point instead of wasting 8 bucks to watch explosions.



I was referring more to the people on this forum, than America as a whole. But lets go with what you said. For me I don't want to be bored when I go see a movie in theater's, and that is the chance you take when you go Watch a movie like the Wrestler(I loved it in theaters but I am just using your example) or any movie that gets the Oscar nod.  For me those movies are better fit for an at home movie where you can just enjoy it more.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> I was referring more to the people on this forum, than America as a whole. But lets go with what you said. For me I don't want to be bored when I go see a movie in theater's, and that is the chance you take when you go Watch a movie like the Wrestler(I loved it in theaters but I am just using your example) or any movie that gets the Oscar nod.  For me those movies are better fit for an at home movie where you can just enjoy it more.



I agree with you and i feel the same. for me i see movies for what they are...entertainment. some people are just to serious about this stuff.


----------



## Rukia (May 23, 2009)

Blair and Marcus were by far the most interesting characters in this movie.  I guess the writers and director wanted this movie to be a bit different than the previous 3.  They tried to break the focus away from John Connor a little bit.

The movie was better than I thought it would be I guess.  It was better than Wolverine.  Just not as good as Star Trek.


----------



## Chee (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> I was referring more to the people on this forum, than America as a whole. But lets go with what you said. For me I don't want to be bored when I go see a movie in theater's, and that is the chance you take when you go Watch a movie like the Wrestler(I loved it in theaters but I am just using your example) or any movie that gets the Oscar nod.  For me those movies are better fit for an at home movie where you can just enjoy it more.



I'm the complete opposite from you then.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 23, 2009)

Hellion said:


> I was referring more to the people on this forum, than America as a whole.


Well this is a place largely for enthusiasts, who believe or not, may have higher standards than just watching shit blow up. If you find this place to critical, there's nothing stopping you from not coming here.



> I agree with you and i feel the same. *for me i see movies for what they are...entertainment.* some people are just to serious about this stuff.


No one is asking for this movie to go and teach the audience lessons about life. A lot of the detractors of this film just wanted a story without numerous gaps in logic(Well, as few as possible what with time-traveling and all), and likeable characters.


----------



## Hellion (May 23, 2009)

This is the classic case of agree to disagree then 

On Topic
Does anyone know what the original ending was that they had planned for the movie?

EDIT: Pssh I think you are thinking a little to hard in the Terminator 4 thread.  Now if this was the TSSC thread then I could understand.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 23, 2009)

Vonocourt said:


> Well this is a place largely for enthusiasts, who believe or not, may have higher standards than just watching shit blow up. If you find this place to critical, there's nothing stopping you from not coming here.
> 
> 
> No one is asking for this movie to go and teach the audience lessons about life. A lot of the detractors of this film just wanted a story without numerous gaps in logic(Well, as few as possible what with time-traveling and all), and likeable characters.



I guess i'm just different. I don't analyze movies looking for plot holes. I leave all the thinking for books because thats where your imagination truly lies. I admit when I buy movies on dvd  I pay closer attention to the movies i watch. but in a movie theater I just sit back eat popcorn and enjoy the ride. so i'm probably the type who enjoy the movies that goes boom. or movies that have a good sense of humor.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 24, 2009)

~Gesy~ said:


> I guess i'm just different. I don't analyze movies looking for plot holes. I leave all the thinking for books because thats where your imagination truly lies. I admit when I buy movies on dvd  I pay closer attention to the movies i watch. but in a movie theater I just sit back eat popcorn and enjoy the ride. so i'm probably the type who enjoy the movies that goes boom. or movies that have a good sense of humor.



movies with farting!


----------



## Furious George (May 24, 2009)

So I just saw this movie a few hours ago... 

Honestly, the harsh criticism makes sense but I still think its a bit... too harsh. This movie wasn't T1 or T2 by a long shot, but what is here was very enjoyable. The action scenes were great (love the fact that CGI was kept to a minimum), all the characters were pretty interesting to me (apart from the little girl) and the plot was decent barring the plot holes. Its no masterpiece, but I feel like I got my money's worth. MUCH better then T3.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

Bleh, the more I think about it, I think Im inclined to call it a 2.5/4 star movie.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 24, 2009)

~Gesy~ said:


> I leave all the thinking for books because thats where your imagination truly lies.



Well, then we're on two separate wavelengths then. Though I really think you're missing out.


----------



## Roy (May 24, 2009)

I enjoyed the movie..nice cameo of Arnold


----------



## illmatic (May 24, 2009)

skynet found Kyle Reese and don't kill him even though he is #1 on their kill list. facepalm moment



Hellion said:


> On Topic
> Does anyone know what the original ending was that they had planned for the movie?


John Conor dies but so not to depress any one...they put his face/skin on Marcus and now Marcus is John Conor of the future. lolwut


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

Roy said:


> I enjoyed the movie..nice cameo of Arnold



It was actually his CGI face put on a body double. Come on, even in his prime I don't think Arnold was that buff.


----------



## Wesley (May 24, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> It was actually his CGI face put on a body double. Come on, even in his prime I don't think Arnold was that buff.



pics/sum


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 24, 2009)

@illmatic  - 
*Spoiler*: __ 



They found kyle but they wanted to lure a trap to kill both him and conner at the main factory via T800 along with the rest of the people. yea you could probably call it PIS but its hardly unbearable




All i know for sure, is that rotten tomatoes's tomatometer is a shitty way of decidin to go see this movie. Trust me, considering they gave 3 a fucking 70% 

)here)

i woulden't trust anything of what they say


----------



## Kusogitsune (May 24, 2009)

I'm waiting for this movie to come out on TNT or FX. So just 2 more years.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 24, 2009)

Roy said:


> I enjoyed the movie..nice cameo of Arnold



i was waiting for him to say something about destroying california in the movie.


----------



## Gooba (May 24, 2009)

> They found kyle but they wanted to lure a trap to kill both him and conner at the main factory via T800 along with the rest of the people. yea you could probably call it PIS but its hardly unbearable


Killing him already kills both him and Conner, since apparently they know he time travels and is his father.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 24, 2009)

Gooba said:


> Killing him already kills both him and Conner, since apparently they know he time travels and is his father.




PIS as i said


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> @illmatic  -
> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> ...



Because most people liked 3 alright. Rotten tomatoes's rating only depends on the amount of critics. So if everyone(of the 70%) gave the film a 3/4(or 2.5/4, if thats positive for them), which is an unenthusiastic positive review, then the rating makes sense.

It's only real flaw is, as pointed out, the same formula being re-used. This one had too many plot holes, pretentious tampering by Christian Bale, and weak relationships. 

Ugh, I hope Bale doesn't get it in his mind to tamper with the Batmans 3 script.....


----------



## Spencer_Gator (May 24, 2009)

I enjoyed it. Better than 3 by a mile


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 24, 2009)

Much better than 3...


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

Any of you dare to explain why?


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 24, 2009)

I'm just glad it finally happened and their wasn't any time travel involved.

I'm also glad we got to see John as a soldier and not a defensless kid who need protecting.


----------



## The Big G (May 24, 2009)

IMO i think this movies is _wayyyy_ better than T3 and a little bit better than T1. But nothing can beat the win that is T2. 

I thought Marcus was a badass, Bryce Dallas Howard and Bloodgood were hot, and Bale was Bale. 

I give it a 3/4.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

So nobody can give a good reason as to why this film is superior?


----------



## crazymtf (May 24, 2009)

If i enjoyed 3 I'll probably enjoy this then right? I mean 3 had pretty good action and decent acting, does this follow?


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

Bleh, I think 3>4.

Anyway, I'm rewriting my review(because freewebs doesnt allow pasting from word processors anymore). I'm not copying from my old review either, so it's basically a remake.

But writing it again has given me a new perspective of the movie. So I guess this is the quickest drop in terms of rating that I've ever done. I think I'm going to rate it a 2/4. Any higher would be me ignoring common sense. 

One thing that actually bugged me is how the future seems so different than the one in T1.......wierd how the smaller things disapoint.

Anyway, my main reason for the drop is becaus eof how it compares to the first 3. Expect it in my sig soon.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 24, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> Bleh, I think 3>4.
> 
> Anyway, I'm rewriting my review(because freewebs doesnt allow pasting from word processors anymore). I'm not copying from my old review either, so it's basically a remake.
> 
> ...


this movie is before the future in T1. t-800 wasn't invented until the end of the movie.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 24, 2009)

crazymtf said:


> If i enjoyed 3 I'll probably enjoy this then right? I mean 3 had pretty good action and decent acting, does this follow?



If that's what your rating the movie by then this movie destroys T3 in every way. 

Better action, almost nonstop action to be honest..a flowing plot that hardly slows down, almost every scene is necessary and works quite well...characterization is good..actors play their parts well..good obligatory T1/2/3 throwbacks...and it ends on a high note, that could almost be construed as an ending to the series had we not known that they were possibly considering sequels


WHat you guys have to remember though, is that this is an alternate future, its not what happens before T1...this is similar to star trek in that way, if you want proof i can give it


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> If that's what your rating the movie by then this movie destroys T3 in every way.
> 
> Better action, almost nonstop action to be honest..a flowing plot that hardly slows down, almost every scene is necessary and works quite well...characterization is good..actors play their parts well..good obligatory T1/2/3 throwbacks...and it ends on a high note, that could almost be construed as an ending to the series had we not known that they were possibly considering sequels
> 
> ...



flowing plot and every scene is necessary? Er, not really. The general dying wasn't really necessary, the opening kiss wasn't necessary, the exposition stating that people were mixed on Connor wasn't necessary, the long monologue by the villain in the end could've been trimmed, Common's character wasn't necessary......Moongood's character wasn't necessary......so I can't agree with that.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 24, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> flowing plot and every scene is necessary? Er, not really. The general dying wasn't really necessary, the opening kiss wasn't necessary, the exposition stating that people were mixed on Connor wasn't necessary, the long monologue by the villain in the end could've been trimmed, Common's character wasn't necessary......Moongood's character wasn't necessary......so I can't agree with that.



The generals dying was the instate his command in the later movies, the opening kiss was the bargaining chip because he wanted to know what death tasted like, comedic effect, the fact that people didn't belive in him was to put him at odds with the supposed leaders of the organization. He's not going to become a leader overnight, they had to show that through circumstances he grows into his role. The monologue was fine, common i agree with, and moongood was to emphasize attachment to marcus's character and give him more moral background.  

I'm not going to argue it with you because i know you personally didn't like the movie so, its not going to change you mind.


----------



## Mider T (May 24, 2009)

My favorite movie.

The fact that the T-800 was top of the line here means that it was available in line for at least a decade (sent back when Reese was an adult).  Also, he stated that the battle was almost won when he was sent back.
The T-1000 must've started mass production in two decades (John Conner was about 40 when it was sent back)
Don't know about the T-X since Kate sent it back.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 24, 2009)

I'm aware that the time is different, but less time based on the future battles, they have more problems with the giant ships than the T-800. Even so, based on the timeline, things should get better for the humans before worse. It just doesn't fit very well.



Inuhanyou said:


> The generals dying was the instate his command in the later movies, the opening kiss was the bargaining chip because he wanted to know what death tasted like, comedic effect, the fact that people didn't belive in him was to put him at odds with the supposed leaders of the organization. He's not going to become a leader overnight, they had to show that through circumstances he grows into his role. The monologue was fine, common i agree with, and moongood was to emphasize attachment to marcus's character and give him more moral background.
> 
> I'm not going to argue it with you because i know you personally didn't like the movie so, its not going to change you mind.



1) At that point, it was obvious most people respected Connor more than the general. Hence, the fact only the general seems to be the one who doubts him makes the "people not believing in him" issue seem even more pointless. So the generals death wasn't necessary. They just killed him off for being a one dimensional douche.

2) So the kissing thing was comedic effect? Was that supposed to be funny because no one laughed in my theater. The only thing it did was make him look like a sexual devient. It suggested they had a history together, but they never went anywhere with it.

3) He's not going to become a leader overnight? Er, actually he did in this.....

4) Monologues: When I was a kid, I never noticed bad monologues. But the more critical you become of movies, the more they annoy you. What stupid ass villain tells their plans before they happen? At least in Watchmen the villain tells them after its happened. 

5) In other words, Moongood was a plot device. 

Dammit, I always notice those "I'm not going to argue" comments too late. 

Anyway, my newer, revised review of it is up. May I remind you that I initially did like it. It was just the more I thought about it, the worse it seemed to me.


----------



## Shidoshi (May 24, 2009)

~Gesy~ said:


> so did i, eventhough I don't know how skynet found out about Kyle reese. BTW kyle reese was my favorite character in this movie. maybe because he was the only character who had a shred of innocence left in him.


The T-800 in _T2_ was aware of Kyle Reese's relationship to John Connor, so Skynet definitely knew about it at the point of it sending the T-1000 back in time.  One can figure that Skynet sent that information back with the T-X it sent in _T3_, and by that function, the T-X told that "present" Skynet all it knew about everything.  Therefore, the Skynet of _T4's_ time knew probably because it was informed by the T-X back in _T3_.

I saw it; the only complaint I had was that the Terminators did, indeed, seem like Bouncers than killer robots, but I liked the fact that they way they moved made them seem like a credible threat, compared to the Terminators shown in T2's opening sequence that lumbered along at only a mile an hour.  These things were pretty quick and agile.

I didn't like T3 all that much, but I enjoyed this movie quite a bit.


----------



## Chee (May 25, 2009)

I liked it, had some problems, but overall I really enjoyed it. Not bad and horrible as so many RT critics complained.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 25, 2009)

Chee said:


> I liked it, had some problems, but overall I really enjoyed it. Not bad and horrible as so many RT critics complained.



told yeh


----------



## Chee (May 25, 2009)

I wish John Conner and his wife had more to them though. That's my biggest problem with the film.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 25, 2009)

Chee said:


> I wish John Conner and his wife had more to them though. That's my biggest problem with the film.



 yea this was marcus's story for the most part, but john will have his time in the sequels, along with kate..not to give anything away but 
*Spoiler*: __ 



 Mc was actually thinking about having the time displacement module introduced in T5, and have conner go back and fuck things up even more to prepare the world to be better equipped for Judgment day..with Linda Hamilton as a lead star


----------



## Chee (May 25, 2009)

That would be stupid. Yea, John Conner is he savior of humanity, but he fucks things up. THAT'S SMART.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 25, 2009)

problem with t3 was it was the height of summer blockbuster trash when blockbuster trash was at its worst.  

the idea of killing the generals and officers was kind of tacked on.  It was one thing to kill the creater of the rebellion, which t1 and t2 brought us.  T3 said there's multiple people that should be killed , and then it just leads to a problem: why not start killing all sorts of people in the past to stop a future rebellion? 

Or better yet, as soon as the nukes of t3 went off , why not send an armada of of robots to eradicate the leftover humans in the past b4 they organized?  T3 started us down this bad line of thought and cheapened the universe a little.

In addition the production was ok.  The CGI was excellent, in the vain of most summer blockbusters, however production was weak in other places.  The cliche LA settings used, like the LA river and the desert area between LA and LV is overused for action flicks.  Transformers uses it, other blockbusters use it, it's not special it's boring.  

the actor playing john connor wasn't that cool in that movie.  What has he been in as of late?  Not memorable.  

10+ years on arnold is a relic of the movie industry, i really don't care to see him in a movie, and in t3 his performance was stale and typical.

I'm having trouble remembering all the things i disliked about the movie, it wasn't memorable. I'm being pretty harsh but, it's to advance my own movie experience.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 25, 2009)

what i remember most about T3 was the ending..when i first saw it i thought the rest of the movie comparatively unremarkable to that ending scene, this was long before there were any talks of sequels of course


----------



## Darc (May 25, 2009)

This movie was over hyped, I enjoyed it though, 8/10 from me.


----------



## Gooba (May 25, 2009)

Did someone serious say this is better than T1?  I'm out.


----------



## Chee (May 25, 2009)

Nah, this movie isn't remotely close to T1 and T2. I liked it though.


----------



## Bear Walken (May 25, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> 3) He's not going to become a leader overnight? Er, actually he did in this.....



Yeah after years of fighting & leading the top tech-comm unit within the resistance under General Ironside's (forget character's name) command. 



~Gesy~ said:


> so did i, eventhough *I don't know how skynet found out about Kyle reese.* BTW kyle reese was my favorite character in this movie. maybe because he was the only character who had a shred of innocence left in him.



This post from imdb answers that.



Inuhanyou said:


> yea this was marcus's story for the most part, but john will have his time in the sequels, along with kate..not to give anything away but
> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> ...



I read that shit too. Read that .....

*Spoiler*: __ 




JC comes across the scientist who is currently building the t-1000. But bwfore he can do anything about him & it. Skynet one ups JC by sending back an army of terminators & HKs. Shit sounds like a big fuckin mess.


----------



## Chee (May 25, 2009)

> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> JC comes across the scientist who is currently building the t-1000. But bwfore he can do anything about him & it. Skynet one ups JC by sending back an army of terminators & HKs. Shit sounds like a big fuckin mess.


McG needs to get bitchslapped and told not to produce fanfiction level shit.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 25, 2009)

narutosimpson said:


> problem with t3 was it was the height of summer blockbuster trash when blockbuster trash was at its worst.
> 
> the idea of killing the generals and officers was kind of tacked on.  It was one thing to kill the creater of the rebellion, which t1 and t2 brought us.  T3 said there's multiple people that should be killed , and then it just leads to a problem: why not start killing all sorts of people in the past to stop a future rebellion?
> 
> ...



1) "the idea of killing the generals and officers was kind of tacked on"- Technically, this is a problem that T1 and T2 had as well. If they kill John Connor, then someone can easily take his place. I'm guessing that all these 'going back in time' things which change certain things(or cause the problem to begin with) was causing more people to emerge and be a threat to skynet. hence, the sudden issue with the generals. I won't deny it was kind of padded on.

2) Well, why not send an armada of robots in T1 and T2? Why only one Terminator a time? Why not three? My guess is that there is a limit to time travel in the Terminator universe. Otherwise, why send Kyle Reese alone? 1 man vs 1 terminator? hmmm, who will win?

3) I liked him cause he acted more like John Connor from T2, just older. My issue with Bale is that Bale just acted like Bale. As for the actor himself, he did some TV show(dont remember the title) and seems to have had more success playing villains(He was creepy as the Yellow Bastard in "Sin City".


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 25, 2009)

Chee said:


> McG needs to get bitchslapped and told not to produce fanfiction level shit.



This is alternate continuity though..things may very well have to be different..considering how everything in pretty much messed up anyways


----------



## Shidoshi (May 25, 2009)

I think what most people think of as "plotholes" are actually the result of the time paradox created in T1 and continued, then distorted, in T2 and T3.

People have to remember that there are two timelines at work in this franchise now:  the "original" timeline where Connor was thrust into leadership of the entire rebellion, most likely because all military leaders were killed and no one *but* Connor was able to organize a rebellion.  That John Connor didn't have the foreknowledge that this John Connor does.  That John Connor never destroyed Cyberdine Systems with his mother, a Terminator and Miles Dyson.  That John Connor didn't create a delayed Judgement Day.

Then there's the current timeline, created in the events of T2 and continued in T3.  *This* John Connor had advance knowledge of what was to come...to a certain extent, given that the tapes Sarah left behind told of the future of the original timeline, but the principles remained the same.  *This* John Connor probably forewarned the survivors of *this* Judgement Day of the attacks to come so that more people could survive:  that there would actually be Generals around to order other groups and that Tech-Comm became only a single cell of an entire human resistance, rather than the resistance itself like stated in T1.  *This* John Connor had mentioned what he knew about what was to come, and it was touched upon during their raid and discovery of the T-800 factory; one of the soldiers remarked, upon seeing the specs for the T-800 "just as you said it would happen", so obviously, he hasn't been keeping his knowledge a secret, changing the "history" of the future by his very presense in his "present"...if that makes any sense.

The thing about Bale as Connor is, there hadn't really been any real reference for him to play off of as an adult.  Nick Stahl from T3 was a passable Connor (in my eyes) of an older adolescent Edward Furlong from T2.  In a sense, Furlong created the John Connor character (as the previous mentions of him were in non-speaking roles and information relayed by Kyle Reese).  Anton Yelchin in this movie had Michael Beihn's characterization as inspiration, so his job was "easier" in a sense than Christian Bale's --- he wouldn't be a credible leader if he tried playing Connor as an older version of Edward Furlong or Nick Stahl's total burnout Connor, but he at least kept the humanity aspect of Furlong's respect for life, especially in the face of sacrificing the prisoners in exchange for a quick end to the war.  When I watched him, I didn't see Bale, I didn't "hear" Batman...though, I can understand why a lot of people might have, but ironically, I felt he actually had a good *reason* for his voice to sound like it did.  I'd probably sound just as tired and ragged if I were in that position in such a hellish future, fighting for such a long time.

Like I said, my only complaint is the fact that aside from the T-600s and the water robots (since, technically, the only cyborgs that existed were Marcus and the T-800), was that they did, indeed, seem more like robotic UFC cage fighters than efficiently murderous machines, but my "complaint" is tempered by the fact that they moved so quickly and were so agile that I could actually understand how an army of these wouldn't simply be like shooting fish in a barrel (the unskinned T-800s in T2 were portrayed as slow-moving lurches that should probalby have been picked off like Space Invader enemies...even if they had guns).  It was actually unnerving how fluidly they were able to move.  I realize it's odd to say when we saw three movies of actors moving exactly the same way, but from a practical standpoint, those were people; the unskinned T-800 in the same film didn't move like Arnold did as the same model cyborg.  The CG in this movie was superb.

This wasn't better than T2 to me, but, at least, in my opinion, it's a worthy sequel...unlike T3.


----------



## excellence153 (May 25, 2009)

Chee said:


> McG needs to get bitchslapped for everything he's done ever.



Fix'd.

I will admit... the movie was fun.  It was too short though.  It ended so abruptly.

Still though... fuck McG.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 25, 2009)

The most memorable part of this movie to me oddly enough was when marcus first encountered a T600, it just moved so fluidly with those giant rail guns on its arms and started shooting, it gave me a big "holy shit moment"


----------



## Chee (May 25, 2009)

I LIKED ARNIE. 

What else did McG do, just Charlie's Angels?


----------



## Vonocourt (May 25, 2009)

Chee said:


> I LIKED ARNIE.
> 
> What else did McG do, just Charlie's Angels?



He did We Are Marshall.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 25, 2009)

I liked when kyle said "if you point that gun you better be ready to use it" or something along those lines lol.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 25, 2009)

I liked when marcus just took the gun from his hand, and showed him a trick..that was a good bondin moment..star was a great girl..i wonder if she'll have a stronger part in the sequals


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 25, 2009)

I wish we knew more about marcus...all we know is he killed his brother. I wish we knew more about him. By the way he moves i'm guessing he had military training.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 25, 2009)

How spoony would ruin the Terminator franchise.

*Spoiler*: __ 





> At first, I was thinking something along the lines of “John Connor must die” to save the franchise. From the beginning, the series has been somewhat shackled to the belief that John Connor is this mythical “chosen one” who would rally the last remnants of humanity and lead them against the machines. It’s a cool idea, but perhaps something that’s better left to the imagination. I was, to be blunt, unimpressed with the way Terminator Salvation portrayed Connor as humanity’s savior. Why was he so highly-regarded? What made him such a big damn hero as opposed to the others? Because he gave useless advice to people on the radio? Please. We only know he’s the savior of humanity because people from the future told us that he is.
> 
> And that’s what killed John Connor. More assuredly than a T-800 shooting his mother between the eyes, knowledge of Judgment Day irrevocably changed the future. It gave Sarah and John forewarning, allowed them to prepare, and set into motion a chain of events radically different than the original timeline. More terminators were sent back, people died, and John was a completely different person than he was in the original timeline when Judgment Day came around. In fact, when John destroyed Cyberdyne, he delayed the original Judgment Day and the timeline really took it in the ass. Now we’re talking about a completely different war, where Connor might not have been important to the war effort at all!
> 
> ...


----------



## Wesley (May 25, 2009)

Well, Kyle wasn't exactly the picture of sanity in the first movie.  He might have been a true believer if that were the case.


----------



## Narcissus (May 25, 2009)

Meh, it was okay.  Plenty of action.  But anyone who sadi this was better than the first or second one is clearly out of their mind.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 26, 2009)

I have to ask, in the first main trailer, we see Bale yelling at Marcus abou how he tried to kill his Mother, killed his father, etc.....I actually thought that was Arnold's T-800 he was yelling that at. When I saw the movie, I realized I was wrong but it still kind of looks like him from that angle.

Anybody else think the same thing?


----------



## Vonocourt (May 26, 2009)

Martial, did you read that giant thing I quoted.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 26, 2009)

Yes. I actually think it would be interesting and would make a great final movie twist. But alas, people would be pissed.


----------



## Violent-nin (May 26, 2009)

Saw the movie earlier tonight.

I thought it was okay, nothing special but not horrible either. The movie could of been better of course but I went in there expecting to be entertained but not liking it as much as T1 and T2 and that's what I got.


----------



## The Boss (May 26, 2009)

*WTF*? Terminator 4 is basically a movie about _TRYING _to kill the Terminators... Whose great idea was this? "_Oh hey guys! Lets make this 2 hour movie about trying to kill the Terminators and not succeed in the end so we can make more movies about Terminators! Yeah!!_"


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 26, 2009)

^ yeah, that was one thing at the end that got to me.  Still no conclusion.

T1, T2 left you with a feeling that the problem was over. now it's unknown when the story will end, it could go on 10 more movies 

and i still don't see how the leap will be made to nanotechnology "liquid" cyborgs, or combo cyborgs, or how they'll invent time travel :S


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 26, 2009)

The other terminators were just about the teminator killing the subject anyways...

and to simpson,it may not happen due to the screwing up of the timeline because of their interference in it and the foresight...i'm still confused as to how in less than twenty years we'll have lasers and starships..partly the fault of cameron i guess


----------



## Chee (May 26, 2009)

Godjima said:


> *WTF*? Terminator 4 is basically a movie about _TRYING _to kill the Terminators... Whose great idea was this? "_Oh hey guys! Lets make this 2 hour movie about trying to kill the Terminators and not succeed in the end so we can make more movies about Terminators! Yeah!!_"



That basically what all of the movies are about...


----------



## Zeroo (May 26, 2009)

I think this movie's primary goal was to show everybody the state of the war...as in how far away they are in winning the war...also show John Connor's climb to the top as the leader and all that...

for people saying 'omg the war is still going on, nothing's changed' and all that, they have to understand that WB is planning on two more movies after T4 so why the hell would they end the war in this one....


----------



## masamune1 (May 26, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> The other terminators were just about the teminator killing the subject anyways...
> 
> and to simpson,it may not happen due to the screwing up of the timeline because of their interference in it and the foresight*...i'm still confused as to how in less than twenty years we'll have lasers and starships..partly the fault of cameron i guess *



*We* won't have them. SkyNet will.


----------



## Chee (May 26, 2009)

It was the 80s, lasers were the thing. Along with synthesizers and big hair.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 26, 2009)

I suppose that's true...


----------



## Chee (May 26, 2009)

If Skynet sent a Terminator back in time and they defeated the Terminator then Skynet would've known not to send back a Terminator cause it would be useless. But then, if they didn't they wouldn't know it was useless so they would send it back anyways. And...I went crosseyed.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 26, 2009)

basically whut ur saying is skynet knows not its own past mistakes


----------



## The Boss (May 27, 2009)

Chee said:


> That basically what all of the movies are about...



Yeah.. but in T1 & T2 it always succeed at what it wanted to do. T3 was about, "lol... we just post prone the war" ... and T4 is oh we tried to kill them..


----------



## Mider T (May 27, 2009)

Godjima said:


> Yeah.. but in T1 & T2 it always succeed at what it wanted to do. T3 was about, "lol... we just post prone the war" ... and T4 is oh we tried to kill them..



lol wut?  Movie 4 wasn't a surprise, it was just finally accomplishing what we've been waiting on for a quarter century.  Did you expect to see Kyle Reese being sent back in time or something?



Was that kid with Kyle the one who was mentioned in the first one not making it through the time portal?


----------



## Shidoshi (May 27, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> basically whut ur saying is skynet knows not its own past mistakes


If Skynet didn't, it wouldn't have created Marcus.



			
				Chee said:
			
		

> If Skynet sent a Terminator back in time and they defeated the Terminator then Skynet would've known not to send back a Terminator cause it would be useless. But then, if they didn't they wouldn't know it was useless so they would send it back anyways. And...I went crosseyed.


Welcome to Time Paradoxes.  Having sent a cyborg back in time is what created Skynet in the first place, through reverse-engineering.  Although, you can't exactly fault the logic in Skynet's decision.  A T-800 didn't work, so it sent back a T-1000 that's superior to both humans and the T-800 that was a countermeasure.  Not necessarily a _bad_ plan, but Skynet wasn't able to fully comprehend human beings, which is why (at least in the T1 and T2 future) the resistance was close to winning the war (which prompted Skynet to send the cyborg back in time to begin with).


----------



## Bushin (May 27, 2009)

I really am looking forward to seeing this movie. Lets hope it lives up to all the hype. At least we get a glimpse of the future war... Well, hope springs eternal..


----------



## Para (May 27, 2009)

I haven't been this excited about a film in a while. I even watched T1 and T2 in preparation. I would've watched 3 too but meh


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 27, 2009)

^ there are things in t3 that prepare you for this movie..cause they do follow the timeline even if..that movie may not be up to par with many


----------



## Para (May 27, 2009)

Let me clarify; I saw the original Terminator 1 and 2 years ago (and many times since) and watched them again the other day to refresh my memory before the trip to the cinema to watch 4.

T3... I saw it in the cinema, I just didn't feel like seeing it again


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 27, 2009)

Para said:


> Let me clarify; I saw the original Terminator 1 and 2 years ago (and many times since) and watched them again the other day to refresh my memory before the trip to the cinema to watch 4.
> 
> T3... I saw it in the cinema, I just didn't feel like seeing it again



 its not out where you live, where are you at?


----------



## Para (May 27, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> its not out where you live, where are you at?



What are you talking about? I said I watched the ones that are already out to refresh my memory before I go to see the new one.

edit - I see my wording was a bit dodgy there. My mistake. I meant my trip to the cinema in the future.

edit again - not a cinema in the future, as I cannot time travel. I mean I am going to go to one to see this film.

edit yet again - I'M TIRED OKAY? T_T


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 27, 2009)

<_< what i meant was, why havent you gone to see it yet, where do you live?


----------



## Para (May 27, 2009)

Oh crap, double misunderstanding  I'm really not with it today.

UK; according to imdb it's not out here until June 3rd.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 27, 2009)

._. indeed..and they do use mythology from the past movies so you'd have to be pretty familiar to get atleast a bit of the story, you took the right path


----------



## Para (May 27, 2009)

Well yeah, I was always interested in seeing the actual war and resistance in full detail, and the short flashback sequences in the first two films have made me look forward to it even more. I can't wait


----------



## Chee (May 27, 2009)

I thought Conner was the Resistance's creator?


----------



## Vonocourt (May 27, 2009)

Chee said:


> I thought Conner was the Resistance's creator?



I thought he just was a leader.

Article about The Terminator Salvation that never was.

It's a pretty interesting read. It seems the original script wasn't that grand to begin with, and the reason for Salvation in the title...to be frank, is incredibly stupid. Glad they cut that out.

*Spoiler*: __ 






> In the original script the title Terminator Salvation actually meant something. Watching the finished film it's hard to figure out why it has that name - is it because Marcus saves Connor's life in the last minute? In the original script Serena has a bigger role than a quick cameo, and she explains the salvation element.
> 
> Marcus comes to Skynet City and finds... a seaside resort populated with humans. He sees Terminator landscapers! It turns out that Skynet hasn't been trying to wipe out humanity. It's been trying to save us.
> 
> This is perhaps the most bizarre idea in the whole script, and the one that most obviously doesn't work. It seems as though Brancato and Ferris thought people liked the Matrix sequels, as this all feels like it could be in those films. See, Serena heads Project ANGEL, which is making Hybrids (ie, Cyborgs). The reason? Skynet did a calculation and realized that humanity was going to be extinct in 200 years; the machines decided to save a few by turning them into Hybrids and wipe the rest out. It makes no sense, and is the kind of thing that makes you wonder if these guys ever even watched the previous Terminator films.


----------



## Chee (May 27, 2009)

I'll need to read T1's script, but I thought I remembered Kyle saying how Conner rose up from one of those prison camps, rallied tons of people against the machines and created the Resistance.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 27, 2009)

It's been years since I've seen the first one, so I don't know. I remember until I rented it last week, I hadn't watched T2 since '96.


----------



## Chee (May 27, 2009)

'96!?  You were like what, 5? 

I think I saw it for the first time when I was 11. Then I kept rewatching it every year, one of those family movie rituals.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 27, 2009)

Chee said:


> '96!?  You were like what, 5?
> 
> I think I saw it for the first time when I was 11. Then I kept rewatching it every year, one of those family movie rituals.



I saw it on TV, my parents aren't big fans of the series. So we never had it on home video.

Though my Dad really wanted to see Salvation...until we were about to go see it.


----------



## MartialHorror (May 27, 2009)

I havent seen T2 for possibly 10 years or so. I remember it pretty well. I saw T3 once(I think), when it was in theaters. Maybe I saw it when it came out on video. I don't remember.

I saw T1 more recently than either of them, but apparently this was before I began my reviews.


----------



## Chee (May 27, 2009)

Jeez, Martial, 10 years?


----------



## MartialHorror (May 27, 2009)

I could be wrong. Remember, bad memory.

But it's been a very long time. Surprisingly though, I remember most of it.


----------



## Chee (May 27, 2009)

You should rewatch it anyways.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 27, 2009)

Yep...even if the dialogue is kinda...eghhhh.

"No problemo."


----------



## The Darkstar (May 28, 2009)

the movie didn't really hit the epicness i was hoping for. little annoying that there will be a 5th and hopefully final one. i LOVED the Arnold cameo, even if it asnt eally him. >

i give the movie a 6/10. could have been better.


----------



## Para (May 28, 2009)

Chee said:


> I'll need to read T1's script, but I thought I remembered Kyle saying how Conner rose up from one of those prison camps, rallied tons of people against the machines and created the Resistance.



"He taught us to fight" or something along those lines I believe. Yeah, Kyle definitely implies that John Connor is the guy that started it.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 28, 2009)

Chee said:


> I'll need to read T1's script, but I thought I remembered Kyle saying how Conner rose up from one of those prison camps, rallied tons of people against the machines and created the Resistance.



Remember that this is an alternate timeline based on the happenings of T2 and T3..its different from how it was before T1 because they fuxed everything up


----------



## Para (May 28, 2009)

Kind of like the alternative timelines in Back to the Future?


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 28, 2009)

Para said:


> Kind of like the alternative timelines in Back to the Future?



yes, and the new star trek


----------



## Para (May 28, 2009)

The amount of timeline mindfucks in this series is already ridiculous lol

Like how John Connor wouldn't exist if Kyle Reese hadn't been sent back to protect Sarah from the Terminator. Which was sent back by Skynet. That's gotta be a kick in the proverbial balls.


----------



## Gooba (May 28, 2009)

Here is a comment from Digg that I liked.

"Two plans that would've worked much better than Skynet's plan.

Plan A: Kill Kyle Reese immediately thus preventing him from travelling back in time to father John Connor who will some day get around to leading the resistance.

Plan B: Don't fucking invent time travel, goddammit."

If there are alternate timelines then John Conner can't exist in the original one, and he does.  Which is why everything after the first movie is BS, besides the second one being a good action flick.


----------



## Dr.Douchebag (May 28, 2009)

^ Terminator 5 can show skynet's origins tracing back to windows and microsoft, problem solved


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 28, 2009)

In a T4 preview kate herself said that it was an alternate future..it IS an alternate timeline


----------



## Gooba (May 28, 2009)

Inuhanyou said:


> In a T4 preview kate herself said that it was an alternate future..it IS an alternate timeline


My point is that it is retarded because the whole existence of John Conner, who is the center of the series, is founded on the principle of no alternates.


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 28, 2009)

well, he's one of the only constants that's for sure, besides judgment day..but that's what makes his role his role i suppose


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (May 28, 2009)

Para said:


> The amount of timeline mindfucks in this series is already ridiculous lol
> 
> Like how John Connor wouldn't exist if Kyle Reese hadn't been sent back to protect Sarah from the Terminator. Which was sent back by Skynet. That's gotta be a kick in the proverbial balls.





Gooba said:


> Here is a comment from Digg that I liked.
> 
> "Two plans that would've worked much better than Skynet's plan.
> 
> ...



all roads lead to skynet and john conner, that's the logical conclusion.


----------



## Chee (May 28, 2009)

Vonocourt said:


> Yep...even if the dialogue is kinda...eghhhh.
> 
> "No problemo."



Early 90s for you. 

CURSE YOU MULLETS. CURSE YOU.


----------



## blackshikamaru (May 28, 2009)

Pretty weak movie. Bale was...Bale. I heard his Batman voice a couple times. Worthington did a good job. Best part of the movie was the T-800.


----------



## Adonis (May 28, 2009)

Bale doesn't impress me at all.

People talk about how he's one of the greatest actors ever and a master of accents but I never see it.


----------



## Chee (May 28, 2009)

Bale needs to do a different genre before returning to Batman. Agreeing with Martial now, he's becoming a one trick pony.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (May 28, 2009)

Bale was great in American psycho


----------



## Chee (May 28, 2009)

~Gesy~ said:


> Bale was great in American psycho



I liked him in Empire of the Sun. Little Bale is sooooo cute.


----------



## Bear Walken (May 28, 2009)

Chee said:


> I liked him in Empire of the Sun. Little Bale is sooooo cute.



I love the ending to that movie 

[YOUTUBE]SDqKGasCynA[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Chee (May 28, 2009)

The part where he reunites with his parents got me on the verge of tears.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 29, 2009)

Adonis said:


> Bale doesn't impress me at all.
> 
> People talk about how he's one of the greatest actors ever and a master of accents but I never see it.



His american accent drives me crazy, Batman shouldn't have a lisp.


----------



## Chee (May 29, 2009)

His American accent is fine, when he is Bruce Wayne its perfectly normal. But that Batman voice in TDK....urgh.


----------



## mystictrunks (May 29, 2009)

Adonis said:


> Bale doesn't impress me at all.
> 
> People talk about how he's one of the greatest actors ever and a master of accents but I never see it.




*Spoiler*: __ 



He's a mildly attractive male who stars in "high-art" films and pop films. That combination gets him love from girl, the art-house types who suck off any actor who will do 'classy' film, and people who think anyone who stars in a movie with explosions is a god.


----------



## Stan Lee (May 30, 2009)

The Darkstar said:


> the movie didn't really hit the epicness i was hoping for. little annoying that there will be a 5th and hopefully final one. i LOVED the Arnold cameo, even if it asnt eally him. >
> 
> i give the movie a 6/10. could have been better.



 Whole new trilogy.

This



~Gesy~ said:


> Bale was great in American psycho



Don't just look at it, EAT IT!


----------



## Ebisu's Shades (May 30, 2009)

mystictrunks said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> and people who think anyone who stars in a movie with explosions is a god.



I think that would be me.  

Well I suppose he is an action hero who can actually deliver more than five lines throughout the entire length of a movie.  Not that there is anything wrong with Stallone, Arnie or Van Damme running around messing people up either.


----------



## Violent by Design (May 30, 2009)

mystictrunks said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> He's a mildly attractive male who stars in "high-art" films and pop films. That combination gets him love from girl, the art-house types who suck off any actor who will do 'classy' film, and people who think anyone who stars in a movie with explosions is a god.



Wouldn't it be the opposite? Most actors who star in movies with explosions are viewed as jokes and are usually the butt end of many jokes like Vin Diesel. Also Christian Bale isn't exactly an action star.


----------



## Chee (May 30, 2009)

Violent By Design said:


> Wouldn't it be the opposite? Most actors who star in movies with explosions are viewed as jokes and are usually the butt end of many jokes like Vin Diesel. Also Christian Bale isn't exactly an action star.



He's only starred in three action films. Most of his other films are in a different genre, he has a couple of dramas, period pieces, one musical, a satire, and a psychological thriller. So yea, he isn't an action star so he isn't taken as a joke. He needs to do something else before another action film, maybe another drama.


----------



## Stan Lee (May 30, 2009)

Chee said:
			
		

> He's only starred in three action films


Bale also starred in the 2000 action film Shaft so that would count as four.


----------



## Chee (May 30, 2009)

Xenomorph said:


> Bale also starred in the 2000 action film Shaft so that would count as four.



Does that dragon movie (or whatever that movie was about, no idea) count as well? I've never seen it so I don't know if he does anything actiony.


----------



## Bear Walken (May 30, 2009)

Chee said:


> Does that dragon movie (or whatever that movie was about, no idea) count as well? I've never seen it so I don't know if he does anything actiony.



Yes, the dragon flick with what'shisface counts as an action flick. Not the Shaft movie though. The only action scenes he was involved in were when Samuel L. Jackson kicked his ass, he got robbed & finally when he got shot at the end.

EDIT: I forgot that Bale did kick some ass in the movie.

[YOUTUBE]zSRNCAyHI9I[/YOUTUBE]

"You want my shoe !?"


----------



## Chee (May 30, 2009)

Shaft any good?


----------



## Inuhanyou (May 30, 2009)

Samuel fucking jackson was in it what do ya think 

plus the classic original and the novel were greats too


----------



## Stan Lee (May 30, 2009)

Chee said:


> Shaft any good?


It was okay imo.


----------



## Bear Walken (May 30, 2009)

Chee said:


> Shaft any good?



It's alright. Bale plays a great spoiled racist prick in it.


----------



## Chee (May 30, 2009)

Cool. :ho

RENTING.


----------



## Vonocourt (May 30, 2009)

Christian Bale action films:
Reign of Fire
Equilibrium
Batman Begins 
3:10 to Yuma
The Dark Knight 
Terminator Salvation
And probably Public Enemies too.


----------



## Chee (May 30, 2009)

3:10 to Yuma was pretty good.


----------



## Stan Lee (May 30, 2009)

Bear Walken said:


> Yes, the dragon flick with what'shisface counts as an action flick. Not the Shaft movie though. The only action scenes he was involved in were when Samuel L. Jackson kicked his ass, he got robbed & finally when he got shot at the end.
> 
> EDIT: I forgot that Bale did kick some ass in the movie.
> 
> ...



I love that scene.


----------



## Chee (May 30, 2009)

That's awesome. :ho


----------



## Toffeeman (Jun 6, 2009)

Just got back from the theatre. Overall I enjoyed it a lot, but I do have some thoughts on it..



*Spoiler*: __ 



Who else was under the impression before they went into it that this would be the _last_ film? It was because of this mistake on my part that I was expecting a totally different ending to the one we saw..

In a nutshell, I was expecting Connor to die, Marcus Wright to "die" (I know he does, but not in the way that he did) the T800 to "survive" (even though the Arnie was supposed to be a T101 right? this part confused me..) and that Kyle Reece would be send back in time at the end of the film. It would have nicely rounded up the franchise and basically complete the "loop" in terms of the story.



Overall though, it was a solid effort. Though I must say that the real star of the film wasn't Christian Bale's John Connor, but Sam Worthington's Marcus Wright. Solid performance and a likable character.


----------



## Felt (Jun 6, 2009)

I watched it earlier, I really enjoyed it.  Much better than 3, it fitted well and had some nice plot connections.


----------



## Undercovermc (Jun 7, 2009)

Taken from RottenTomatoes



> With storytelling as robotic as the film's iconic villains, Terminator Salvation offers plenty of great effects but lacks the heart of the original films



^That's disappointing and so is the score it recieved. Is Salvation really the worst movie in the franchise?


----------



## Chee (Jun 7, 2009)

T4 definately didn't have any heart, that's for sure.


----------



## Vonocourt (Jun 7, 2009)

I still haven't seen it, gorram jerk of a father.

He'll get all pissy at me if I don't see it with him.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jun 7, 2009)

i liked it...

@Toffeman - alternate continuity 


And in other news apparently MCG likes Sailor Senshi  which made news on animenewsnetwork for some reason


----------



## Felt (Jun 7, 2009)

Undercovermc said:


> Taken from RottenTomatoes
> 
> 
> 
> ^That's disappointing and so is the score it recieved. Is Salvation really the worst movie in the franchise?



Nah, #3 is much worse.


----------



## Vonocourt (Jun 7, 2009)

Hollie said:


> Nah, #3 is much worse.



Careful, Martial gonna go swing his big dick around and say that no one has been able to challenge him on why Salvation>T3.


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 8, 2009)

Well, to be fair, no one has challenged my dick in actually explaining why T4>T3. Sure, it breaks the structure that T3 copied, but doesn't necessarily make it better. Anyway, I'm posting mini reviews on another site, so here is my mini review of T4.



> TERMINATOR: SALVATION(2009)
> (Directed by McG)
> 
> Review:
> ...



Maybe I should stick to smaller reviews....


----------



## Run.The.Animal (Jun 8, 2009)

I liked how T4 wasn't about John Connor.

"Hi, I'm Marcus. You'll be wondering what's happeneing to *me* everytime we shift to J-Con's perspective."


----------



## Bushin (Jun 8, 2009)

I saw the film last night and overall I was impressed.
Not what I had expected but still a very enjoyable film.
Looking forward to the other installments to follow. 

Wouldn't mind seeing it again to catch all the details I am sure I missed


----------



## Chee (Jun 8, 2009)

Run.The.Animal said:


> I liked how T4 wasn't about John Connor.
> 
> "Hi, I'm Marcus. You'll be wondering what's happeneing to *me* everytime we shift to J-Con's perspective."



lol, that's exactly how it was.


----------



## Seany (Jun 8, 2009)

The only dumb part about the movie was how they never killed Kyle Reese. I loved the rest!


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Jun 9, 2009)

I love the Terminator Franchise as much as the next guy but I gotta say I'm a little concerned.

THE GOOD

[01] The Terminator
[02] Terminator II: Judgment Day
- Terminator II: Cybernetic Dawn (Comic)
- Terminator II: Nuclear Twilight (Comic)
[03] Terminator III: Rise of the Machines
- Terminator II: Infinity (Comic)
[04] Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (Tv)

The Bad

[01] Terminator IV: Salvation


----------



## Vault (Jun 9, 2009)

Seany said:


> The only dumb part about the movie was how they never killed Kyle Reese. I loved the rest!



How is that dumb, killing Kyle reese will make John Connor nonexistent


----------



## ~L~ (Jun 9, 2009)

i actually enjoyed the movie. It was entertaining as a pure action movie and you certainly get plenty of action from start to finish. I didn't watch any trailers or read up about the movie so the whole time i was wishing that Arnie was going to make a cameo and he did  well his CGI anyways  although the part where Marcus and that chick got all romantic made me cringe a little.


----------



## ZenGamr (Jun 9, 2009)

Just saw it. Better then the score it got on Rottentomatoes. Plenty of action, very exciting, but like some of you have already said, lacked heart.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Jun 10, 2009)

You want to know where the heart & Soul of Terminator IV: Salvation went
here we go go go: Kanako Toujou


----------



## ssj3boruto (Jun 11, 2009)

Saw this yesterday, had some *spoilerific* thoughts.


*Spoiler*: _Terminator Salvation Spoilers within_ 



What is it with Terminators and throwing people? Why not just crush? I mean the T-800 had enough strength to tear a T-600 in two, so why not do the same to John Connor? And why not use a freakin' gun for that matter?

Also Marcus sure took it easy on those would-be rapists didn't he? Barely much of a scratch on them considering. And if Skynet were going to keep Marcus alive, it seems like they could've kept him under control a bit more easily, or at least had the conversation a bit further away than the floor above where the fight was going on.

It felt too contrived at the end too, though it would've been a kick in the nuts if the organs didn't match and John Connor died on the table while they all shrugged. Just didn't feel like there was that much of a purpose to the film at that point. Both Skynet and the Resistance took some knocks but are still more or less moving along the same (as the voiceover reaffirmed that Skynet had a lot more where that came from across the globe).

It wasn't all bad though, the action was good and there were some fun moments, but all in all it suffered from a substandard script more than anything. Christian Bale's first lines after the helicopter crash got an audience laugh though, perhaps reminding of his memorable batman voice.






Vault said:


> How is that dumb, killing Kyle reese will make John Connor nonexistent




*Spoiler*: _Terminator Salvation Spoilers within_ 



He's referring to Skynet killing Kyle Reese. They could've easily killed him and still lured John in to kill him too, assuming he didn't vanish then anyway.






Hellrasinbrasin said:


> You want to know where the heart & Soul of Terminator IV: Salvation went
> here we go go go: *A Discrepancy in Design*


*

It's definitely a part of it, but the script they started with was pretty flawed. Project ANGEL was absolutely ridiculous. It would've been nice if this film delved more into what made John Connor into the John Connor that saved humanity. Last we saw him, he still wasn't really at a point of fighting back and kinda skipped ahead a bit too much.*


----------



## Vault (Jun 11, 2009)

Lol thats retarded they should know killing him would effectively change the whole future for the better (well for the machines atleast)


----------



## Wicked (Jun 11, 2009)

Wtf did common do? They better give him a more important role in the next movie..

Why can't the terminators run really fast? Im sure they can but at the flipside wtf will the resistance do? Speaking of that marcus is gone?, john connor is injured and kyle reese is still young so wth are they doing to do to take down more skynet? The chase scene was the best part of the movie, just wished they kept that intensity throughout the whole movie and it would of been awesum.

Oh yea i was pissed common didn't do jack squat in this movie, please give him a more important role in the next T.


----------



## ssj3boruto (Jun 11, 2009)

The Resistance needs to wear cushioned outfits, then the new model Terminators will be massively ineffective in hand-to-hand combat due to their new tendency to just throw humans about.


----------



## Slips (Jun 11, 2009)

well I just got back and keeping it nice and short 

I rank it up there with the Spirit for worst movie I've seen for a long time 

If they ended the franchise at T2 I would of been a happy camper


----------



## Chee (Jun 11, 2009)

Shroomsday said:


> The Resistance needs to wear cushioned outfits, then the new model Terminators will be massively ineffective in hand-to-hand combat due to their new tendency to just throw humans about.



 

Seriously, that was dumb. Terminator had a perfect chance to hit John Connor's heart out.


----------



## Bear Walken (Jun 11, 2009)

Chee said:


> Seriously, that was dumb. Terminator had a perfect chance to hit John Connor's heart out.



Now that I think about it. It was odd seeing the terminator resorting to a makeshift shanker to semi finish off Connor. I mean, didn't this thing rip out Bill Paxton's heart in T1 with it's bare hand ?


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Jun 11, 2009)

JOHN CONNOR IT IS TIME ...


----------



## Kusogitsune (Jun 11, 2009)

I'll wait until it comes out on cable.


----------



## Kameil (Jun 12, 2009)

Point is Im still wondering what the *fuck* does it take to fuck over skynet?

I see the outcome this way probably for the next T-movie it revolves around Conner's troops and they're mislead into infilitrating and destroying the "true mainframe" of Skynet amongst the troop angst and terminator slaughtering Conner attempts to re-connect with his wife and fucking with more shit that could lead the resistance to victory unknowingly his wife has the mainframe chip lodged in her fucking brain that could've ended the war years ago and conner must choose to see his beloved troops die and the rest of the resistance crumble?  Or just easily cock a lovely magnum and blow his wife's entrails to the curb ending the war?  But then again It would be a fucked up ending.


----------



## Chocochip (Jun 12, 2009)

i HATED that fucking dumb kid.
What the fuck was that?
THat kid bonded with Conner off screen somehow I guess.
I mean seriously...plot development and character development was absolutely terrible.


----------



## AlexForest9 (Jun 12, 2009)

i crapped myself when right at the start the terminator appears suddenly behind him, i screamed in the theatre


----------



## masamune1 (Jun 12, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> Well, to be fair, no one has challenged my dick in actually explaining why T4>T3. Sure, it breaks the structure that T3 copied, but doesn't necessarily make it better.




*Spoiler*: __ 



I'd say it goes a long way. Though, for me, I was'nt expecting that much from this film and was more irritated by the last partly because of that.

Link



> Marcus Wright(Worthington) is about to be executed for murder. He gets a visit from from Dr. Kogan(Carter), another plot device, who convinces him to donate his body to science. They share on awkward kiss which sort of confused me because their relationship is never explored at all.



Pretty sure their husband and wife. Their relationship isn't that important though.



> John Connor(Bale) doesn't lead the resistance, which is kind of strange, but I guess that's for the sequel. We learn that everyone is divided as to if he's their savior or not. This bit is kind of useless because they never go anywhere with it. Also, this brings up a plot hole. Wouldn't the events of the first few movies become common by now? Sure, they might not suspect that the terminators came from the future, but it shouldn't be that difficult to look up the actions of the Terminators and tie John Connor into it.



Considering the world has underwent nuclear apocalypse and, according to the last film, SkyNet has infected every computer on the planet it could connect to, I don't think that's a plot hole. And I can quite easily imagine why guys like Michael Ironside- whose characters seem to have genuine military experience- would be chosen over this vagabond who claims to have seen it all coming.



> Regardless, as I said, the movie never goes anywhere with it. John Connor is looking for his soon-to-be Father, Kyle Reese(Yelchin), because Skynet(the machines) wants him dead as a top priority. Why? Do they know he's going to be sent in time? I can buy this, but I don't know if I'd buy the fact they know he is Connor's father.



Of course the machines know. In T2 SkyNet was based on technology from the original Terminator, and it was switched on by the T-X in T3 which could have (and shold have) uploaded it's memory banks from the future into SkyNet. Cyberdyne and the LAPD as well asthe US military would all have records, plus Sarah and John Connor both had criminal records and the former was in a mental institution for terrorist activities relating to fears about SkyNet and Terminators.

It's interesting because, by sending Terminators back through time, SkyNet perpetuates it's own existence even when it fails to kill Connor.



> For example, why didn't the machines just kill Reese? Aren't machines supposed to be smart?



Well, there are sequels, so this might be explained.

Convoluted theory time- Either SkyNet is caught up in some hellish time-paradox whereby it only comes into existence by sending assassins back in time to kill it's arch-enemies' mother (consequently causing Connor's birth via Kyle Reese) or at some point John Connor originally had a different father meaning that was a different John Connor (in which case the Connor mentioned in the first film is not the original, since he knew to send Reese back).

In either case one can surmise that Kyle Reese is more useful alive than dead to SkyNet so long as John Connor lives, since if he lives he can send Reese back in time to keep the cycle going. But SkyNet has been subtly altering the past each time it send Terminators back (eg. SkyNet was supposed to be activated in 1997; it was actually activated in 2003), and each time-alteration ends up with SkyNet getting stronger (notably, it knows in advance the roles Reese and Connor play in it's fate, plus it seems to be getting more advaced judging from T-800-T-1000-T-X).    

It's reasonable to assume that saying Reese was more important than Connor might just have been a ruse (like the whole film was), and in actuality it needs to kill Reese only after Connor dies since, after all, if Reese dies but Connor lives Connor will have to send someone else back and SkyNet will have less control of it's own past/ future, which as I've said has led it getting stronger each time. 

SkyNet _was_ going to kill Reese anyway (a Terminator was about to finish him off)- it just chose to wait for Connor to show up first.

I'm not sure if I'm making any real sense- the point is as events stand SkyNet has been activated later by it's time-meddling, but it has still been activated and even though it failed to kill Sarah Connor it still guaranteed it's own life. And since it's activated later each time it has access to better and better tech each time ('97 tech vs '03 tech) and was made aware of it's own future. Reese and Connor might be it's nemesis-es, but they are also it's ace-in-the-hole.

Say what you want about _Salvation_- at least it makes you (or me) *think.*




And _that_ is why T4>T3!


----------



## little nin (Jun 12, 2009)

Saw the movie last week, it was ok

A good night out, fun for me, my friends jumped sometimes 

there were some good funny bits in the film, i enjoyed it 


Plot wise was ok, wasn't expecting the ending as much


*Spoiler*: __ 



just thought connor would die after the term got him, but i guess the dude giving him his heart made sense


----------



## Chocochip (Jun 12, 2009)

The "connection" John and Marcus made was freaking pathetic. John barely did shit for Marcus except lock him up, almost kill him, and use him to get into skynet's system. That shit was just stupid.
IT was almost as stupid as that fucking woman falling in love with marcus in two minutes just because he saved her. Any resistance member would have saved her. She is a fucking resistance woman, her heart shouldn't be so easily swayed.
Bullshit all the way.


----------



## Stan Lee (Jun 13, 2009)

I saw the movie 2 days ago and it was pretty good. Glad that Skynet finally made an appearance.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 20, 2009)

What a load of shit, so many plotholes.

And why did the terminators always throw John Connor around? Just crush his fuckign neck ffs!!! Sam Worthington absolutely outacted the shit out of Christian Bale, Bale showed his true acting ability which is none. 

And I never knew heart transplants were so easy, esp if a Vet can do them, oh btw are they even of the same blood type


----------



## Chee (Jun 20, 2009)

Yea, the blood type issue pisses me off as well.


----------



## Havoc (Jun 20, 2009)

Ennoea said:


> Sam Worthington absolutely outacted the shit out of Christian Bale, Bale showed his true acting ability which is none.



Yea, he really was gonna show the extent of his acting ability in a Terminator movie...


----------



## Chee (Jun 20, 2009)

Christian Bale is a fine actor...its just this movie really didn't give him the opportunity to be more than an "angry guy."

Shit, even Sarah was constantly angry in Terminator 2, but she also showed other aspects to her character.

I think its the screenplay's fault for not adding depth to John's character, which made Christian a really boring actor in this one. I really hope Christian goes for a more character-driven movie after this failure.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 20, 2009)

> he really was gonna show the extent of his acting ability in a Terminator movie



If Sam Worthington could do it then why not him?


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Jun 22, 2009)

Why didn't the Terminator just kill John Connor instead of throwing him? Seriously? That's your question?

My question would be why don't the Terminators have 100% accuracy with their weapons? 

This isn't supposed to be realistic. If it were, the entire franchise would've ended in T1 with Arnold shooting Sarah right in the face in the first 20 minutes of the film. Kind of like in Sarah Connor Chronicles where the guy just gets shot and is dead. Everyone would just be shot and die like that. It'd make for a boring movie.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 22, 2009)

> If it were, the entire franchise would've ended in T1 with Arnold shooting Sarah right in the face in the first 20 minutes of the film.



Atleast the Terminator tried to kill Sarah Connor, here everytime they'd just throw John Connor around, it was incredibly inefficent for a killing machine.

And how was it that Skynet headquarters were empty and the whole resistance came in with helicopters and shit?


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 23, 2009)

yeah sorry CrazyMoron. It's one thing to miss, it's another to purposely not kill him thanks to bad writing.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Jun 23, 2009)

Ennoea said:


> Atleast the Terminator tried to kill Sarah Connor, here everytime they'd just throw John Connor around, it was incredibly inefficent for a killing machine.
> 
> And how was it that Skynet headquarters were empty and the whole resistance came in with helicopters and shit?


 It was empty because they had planned it out to catch Connor off guard.


MartialHorror said:


> yeah sorry CrazyMoron. It's one thing to miss, it's another to purposely not kill him thanks to bad writing.


 If you'd rather the Arnold model could've been just waiting with a gun. Shoot him in the head and the movie's credits roll.

I can see the arguments, but Connor getting out of there at all makes no sense.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 23, 2009)

> It was empty because they had planned it out to catch Connor off guard.



Fine but then Skynet allowed the rest of them to land and be able to get all the prisoners out without even having a real fight? Skynet headquarters should have plenty of fucking terminators to kill the lot of em.

Also the T800 was suppoused to take out Connor but when he did grab Connor by the neck he just threw him rather than I don't know crush his fucking neck? Anyway too many silly things for me to go in to.


----------



## Chee (Jun 23, 2009)

They should've written it differently. Ennoea has a point, the Terminator was just throwing around John Connor instead of just killing him when he had the chance. Writer was just lazy, he could've fixed that with a different scenairo or something.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Jun 23, 2009)

Ennoea said:


> Fine but then Skynet allowed the rest of them to land and be able to get all the prisoners out without even having a real fight? Skynet headquarters should have plenty of fucking terminators to kill the lot of em.
> 
> Also the T800 was suppoused to take out Connor but when he did grab Connor by the neck he just threw him rather than I don't know crush his fucking neck? Anyway too many silly things for me to go in to.


Their plan was to let them enter Skynet then kill them. This is a pretty bad plothole, I'll agree. They let them in but didn't attack them at all.



Chee said:


> They should've written it differently. Ennoea has a point, the Terminator was just throwing around John Connor instead of just killing him when he had the chance. Writer was just lazy, he could've fixed that with a different scenairo or something.


 I know it's stupid but it didn't kill the movie for me. These are things I've learned to accept via suspension of disbelief. If I worried about this stuff all the time I would hate and complain about almost every movie in existence. How exhausting.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 23, 2009)

It is exhausting tbh, normally I wouldn't care but some glaring plotholes I just couldn't ignore. Tho I guess I don't enjoy movies as I used to, hell I remember watching Mummy returns and thinking it was the greatest movie ever but now I pretty much despise most movies I see in cinema.



> he could've fixed that with a different scenairo or something.



Exactly, it was simple things that should have been sorted out and I wouldn't have the mind it so much.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Jun 23, 2009)

I'm more concerned with the Terminators not just getting sniper rifles in T1 and T2 and just sniping the Connors. That'd be pretty easy. Instead they make them miss all of their shots--which is completely unrealistic--and relying on PIS and luck to keep Sarah and John alive.

The other scenario would be just that. Terminator coming at John with a gun and then he just dodges all the bullets. Ultimately it'd end the same.


----------



## Ennoea (Jun 23, 2009)

> I'm more concerned with the Terminators not just getting sniper rifles in T1 and T2 and just sniping the Connors. That'd be pretty easy



But they didn't have the luxury of knowing their locations to kill them off so easily.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Jun 23, 2009)

They did after a while.


----------



## Geek (Jun 23, 2009)

I liked TS.


----------



## HugeGuy (Jun 23, 2009)

It was a much better movie than I expected. Despite all the PIS and CIS, Sam Worthington's character won it for me. Even with all the PIS and CIS, I still like it better than T3.

As for why Skynet didn't kill Kyle Reese, that's because they don't know he's John Connor's father. All they probably know is that Kyle is going to go back in time to protect Sarah. That's why the T-600 got the young Kyle onto the scanner and tried to scan his face, probably to fool the resistance.


----------



## Chee (Jun 23, 2009)

CrazyMoronX said:


> I know it's stupid but it didn't kill the movie for me. These are things I've learned to accept via suspension of disbelief. If I worried about this stuff all the time I would hate and complain about almost every movie in existence. How exhausting.



Yea, it didn't kill the movie for me either. It was irritating though.


----------



## Raiden (Jun 25, 2009)

Like the others said, there were some rather obvious plot holes, but I enjoyed the movie overall. From the overly loud explosions to androids blowing the crap out of stuff, the movie was awesome.


----------



## soulnova (Aug 2, 2009)

I liked it pretty much. I didnt care for arnold playing throw-the-connor-around, it was highly amusing. The only thing that bugged me was Skynet's "ZOMG MASTER PLAN" for Marcus. I mean, I would have liked it better that he WAS supposed to infiltrate their ranks and stuff, but didn't actually got to get programed. And by chance and luck he ended up helping skynet in it's original plan. It would have gone like this...
 Skynet: "_ Marcus, you are WIN! Take a cookie_"
Marcus: "!.... !"


----------

