Terminator - Salvation

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438488/

Im not so sure about Helena Bonham-Carter....but hey, I'll go with the flow...

Looking forward to seeing this one. I hear its a world apart from its predecessors.

 

A world apart in terms of scenario maybe. I have read that the SFX/CGI is excellent, but then it's a high budget movie so we must expect that, the acting and characterisation is so-so and that some scenes are ridiculous (given that it is supposed to be realistic and gritty). I was concerned that it might be too adult for my son (who has seen all of the franchise now) but it appears that it is tamed down from the previous movies (hence the 12A rating). Still looking forward to it though and I don't have as high expectations of it as I did for Star Trek.

As for the plot, I have watched all the trailers and released scenes as well as reading quite a bit about it and seeing a few pictures, artwork, etc. Don't know if anyone wishes to discuss this before it is released so I'll Spoiler Tag it;

1, Presuming that there is no time travel in this movie (advanced Terminators travelling back to 2018) then it looks like Serena Kogen is a cyborg like Marcus Wright. I'm thinking that they were probably both facing death somehow (MW was on death row) and donated their bodies to some research (Project Angel???). When J day happened the research from this Project was hijacked by Skynet. Transplanting human organs onto a mechanical skeleton is probably easier than growing flesh from scratch (a major plot point in T:S).

2, Where has John Connor been? There is a part in the movie where he questions what year, date it is. Perhaps he has been in a bunker for 12 years? We know that he is not the leader of the resitance at the start of the movie.


Edit: I love that last bit in the blurb "written by Warner Brothers". It had so many re-writes they would need an extra 5 minutes of credits to fit them all in...

 

I can't wait to see this movie. The trailers look awesome.

 

Here a site if anyone hasn't seen the trailers:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/terminatorsalvation/

Apperently Moritz Borman sued Halcyon Company for not paying him.

 

Really? You are kidding right? I can't quite believe it myself.

 

At long last we?re getting into hardcore Sci-Fi, rather than watching people running after each other round contemporary cities. Looks pretty good from what I?ve seen, but I had no idea Ms. Carter was going to be in it. Sure is a long way from the period dramas and Art House films she normally does. But then again, she does have a thing for doing dark movies, so she should really get off on this sort of thing.

 

Its quite interesting to see Helena Bonham-Carter playing the lead villain in this movies.
Although she has been in many dark related films, it is the first time I'll see her in such a role.

Here something interesting I've found:

http://skynetresearch.com/

 

Terrible movie, save your money and go and see Star Trek instead - that's what a SF movie should be.

 

I thought them equally boring.

 

Really? Then you must have had a great time watching the Prequels...

 

I didn't think it was terrible, but neither was it great. It had some annoying plot holes that bugged me and I thought there were too many times Bale was out-acted by the machines he was fighting against. I'd have guessed him as the Terminator over Sam Worthington, who was far more human then Bale.

 

You're actually right, it wasn't totally terrible. I have to disagree regarding the plot holes though, it was a fairly tight story although if you are a not a fan there maybe some gaps that needed filling. My main gripe was with the acting and dialogue. Unsure of Bale's performance, the Resistance Command seemed like comic relief and the supporting actors (bar perhaps Yelchin) were wooden and flat. Can't complain about the action, SFX and CGI, it was all good. I think perhaps I have been spoilt by the human side of The Sarah Connor Chronicles, there was more emotion in the opening scene of Star Trek than there was in the whole of Salvation.

PS: With his brain intact Marcus was still human (although with serious upgrades) and as such was not willingly on the metal's side.

* - What plot holes did you have problems with?

 

Not all are exactly problems with the plot itself, but still things that I didn't like.

In Terminator 2 the T-800 is destroyed after being lowered into moltern liquid. Yet in this movie the T-800 has moltern liquid poured onto it and rises up unaffected.

When the T-800 is frozen why don't they hit or do something to it?
They just wait for it to defrost and carry on.

Why was there a minimal amount of resistance inside Skynet itself? Wouldn't it have a massive army to defend it? John Connor encountered one dodgy CG Arnie T-800 and a couple of T-600s, and those seemed to come out in an orderly fashion as though queuing up to be destroyed.

I was annoyed at how the Terminators had a simple back of the neck kill spot, that made them look weak.

I liked the different types of new Terminators that were added, particularly the snake ones.

 

Valid points Richie, I thought that you may have had issues with continuity, etc. To tell you the truth I had never thought about your issues because at that point in the movie I was just waiting for it to finish .

Perhaps the T-800 did not melt because the molten metal was already cooling at this point? In T2 the T-800 lowered itself into a cauldron of metal that was being constantly heated.

To shatter the T-800 in Salvation you would need a lot of kinetic energy (such as a bullet) Connor did not have a gun at that point, we also have to remember that the T-800 and T-1000 are made from different types of metal.

The neck weak spot was obviously a bad design fault and rectified on the T-800s.

As for Skynet's defences - we know that Marcus knocked out the sentry turrets, perhaps there were other defence systems disabled that we did not see?

 

Mehtinks they'll need to improve on the next one if the franchise is to retain credibility.

 

How did you know? As entertainment they still rank a lot higher than any of these action movies.

 

I still love the Prequels (not as much as the OT obviously) but Star Trek is a better movie than any of the three.

 

Oh and Richie: The back-of-the-neck wasnt a kill spot, it was clearly stated in the film that it disrupted their targeting for a bit, thats it. Yes a bit of a design flaw, but only for the T-600's. And he couldnt smash the frozen Termie as he was trapped under it. Wouldnt be able to get enough momentum to break it apart

I enjoyed the film, Saw it twice opening day (the usual way of things for me now with most films).

CG Arnie looked great, much better than the Jim Henson-looking Picard at the end of Wolverine. God that sucked compared to Arnie. They even got his T1 hairstyle right.

Didnt mind anything in the film really, I was enjoying myself too much to care really. I can think fo a few things I would of liked them to do, but nothing 'Oh my god thats horrible' came up for me. Loved all the little references, especially:

The music being used to attract the bike, same as when John is riding around in T2

'Come with me if you want to live!'

John getting his scar that we have seen in the 'flash forwards' in the other films.