Terminator Salvation Review
Terminator Salvation
Directed by: McG
Written by: John D. Brancato, Michael Ferris
Starring: Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin, Bryce Dallas Howard, Moon Bloodgood, Common, Michael Ironside
Getting handed the keys to the Terminator franchise could either be a dream job or your worst nightmare, depending on your point of view. Back in 2003, Jonathan Mostow faced the unenviable task of stepping into James Cameron’s shoes and providing a “partly official” part 3 to the franchise that Cameron had created. Although he did have Arnold Schwarzenegger at his disposal in his last major on-screen role, the movie had little else to connect it to the previous films, and ended up being largely disowned by fans.
When The Halcyon Company picked up the rights to the Terminator franchise a few years later, it seemed like the series was destined to be watered down even further, particularly with the selection of McG (Charlie’s Angels) as a director. However, soon after that a major casting coup brought Christian Bale on board to play John Connor, and a series of impressive trailers started to change people’s minds on the movie. Could McG succeed where Mostow had failed, and provide the proper kickstart to a whole new trilogy of films set in the Terminator universe?
In a way, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s absence was a big advantage for McG and writers John D. Brancato and Michael Ferris. It allowed them to completely remove themselves from what came before and start something new and relatively self-contained. Terminator Salvation takes place during the year 2018 in a post-apocalyptic California. The war with the machines is underway, and John Connor has established himself as one of the main leaders of the human resistance movement. Skynet has begun sending out terminators to take human prisoners, while John Connor secretly searches the pockets of survivors for Kyle Reese, the man who will become his father. They both cross paths with a mysterious man named Marcus Wright, whose secret either holds the key to their future or the road to their demise.
The movie wisely stays away from most of the time travel issues and the convoluted chronology of the previous installments, allowing it play out as a fairly straightforward action flick. It does feel like we are just sort of dropped into the middle of the conflict with little explanation, and certainly newcomers to the series may be left in the dark about some of the details. Fortunately, the conflict and mystery surrounding Marcus Wright (played brilliantly by Sam Worthington) provides an interesting new angle for the franchise, and gives this particular story some dramatic weight. It does so at the expense of developing John Connor, but for most of us, there aren’t a lot of blanks to fill in.
As expected, Terminator Salvation is pretty damn bleak, which may disappoint some viewers who were hoping to see some of the humour that Arnold’s character previously brought to the equation. There aren’t many laughs to be had, although I happen to think that the grim approach suits the subject matter. The glimpses of the future that James Cameron offered in Terminator 1 and 2 weren’t particularly cheerful either. In a strange way, this is the Alien 3 to James Cameron’s Aliens, although aesthetically speaking, it seems to be combining The Matrix with Mad Max to create a believable, low-tech future on the human side with shiny high-tech robotics on the machine side.
Probably the biggest question going into this movie was how McG could handle the massive special effects vehicle. Sure, he had experience with action in the Charlie’s Angels movies, but they were much more cartoony than this. In the end, as much as I hate to admit it, the man came through. Make fun of his name all you want, but there are some thrilling action sequences in Terminator Salvation, definitely on par with anything else you will see in theatres this summer. There are a lot of practical effects and sets used where possible, eliminating the fake CG feel that many people had feared.
He also tried to do some interesting new things with the action scenes using a lot of continuous takes, with one helicopter crash scene in particular standing out in my mind as being pretty innovative. The action does not feel all that similar to Michael Bay’s Transformers, which is a good thing because it means you can actually tell what is going on. I was reminded of The Matrix Revolutions or Battlestar Galactica instead. It’s also worth mentioning that the PG-13 rating was never an issue, with no glaring examples of punches being pulled.
I think the biggest gripe people will have with this movie is related to the dialogue. There are certainly some cringe-worthy moments of cheese, although for me it only started to become a serious issue right near the end. After all, this is a war movie, and one-liners tend to come part and parcel with that. I could roll with it to a certain point, but after a while Christian Bale’s narration did get to be a little much, and Michael Ironside’s character was totally cliched. Also, let’s just say that if you had a problem with the Beastie Boys in Star Trek, you’ll probably roll your eyes when you hear what great modern war song pops up on the radio (and is that supposed to be John Connor playing pirate DJ?).
In general though, the acting holds up for me, even in the face of some poorly written lines. In addition to Sam Worthington and Christian Bale, Bryce Dallas Howard is much preferable to Claire Danes, and Anton Yelchin has a surprisingly strong performance as well. This kid has somehow managed to land himself roles in not one but two major summer blockbusters, and going into this movie I was still not quite sold on him. As the movie went on, however, it suddenly dawned on me: they hired him to play a mirror image of the young John Connor — which makes sense because he is playing the young Kyle Reese (John Connor’s dad). His appearance and scratchy voice totally evoke Edward Furlong without being too obvious about it. The one complaint I have is that they tried to recreate some of the Schwarzenegger/Furlong rapport between him and Worthington and it really falls flat.
There are a number of moments that feel like echoes from previous Terminator films, which to me, brings up the same issues as the Star Wars prequels. George Lucas always claimed some parts of his movies were meant to repeat like stanzas in a poem… but is it really poetic, or is it just a rehash? Is he playing with nostalgia, or abusing it? This is one of the reasons why I wasn’t really a fan of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s digital cameo here. It wasn’t necessary, and I think the movie should have continued trying to separate itself from the others… but I guess it’s hard to resist giving a nod to good ol’ Governator.
It seems like Terminator Salvation is getting killed by critics right now, but I’m trying to figure out what it is that people were expecting from this film. It may be a little thin on plot, but let’s face it, the first two Terminator movies were pretty simple. This installment delivers on what was promised in my opinion, and that is a solid action movie with impressive FX and an interesting (albeit dark) post-apocalyptic backdrop. It may not feel entirely like a Terminator movie, but at this point I’d say that is actually a strength. Ultimately, it’s hard to judge fully because this is setting the stage for a larger story, but as of right now I have to say that it’s a promising start to a new trilogy. I’ll take a bleak future war over the cheap comedic gags found in Terminator 3 any day. — Sean
SCORE: 
Recommended If You Like: The Matrix Revolutions, Battlestar Galactica, Minority Report
Comments (81)
Two words, Sean: Right on.
Posted by Dave on May 22nd, 2009Aint it cool tore this movie up…first decent review ive seen around. Seems that its another marmite movie. Will have to watch it to make up my own mind! Good review sean.
Posted by Teo on May 22nd, 2009i thought it was awesome looking forward to more podcasts!
Posted by Tony on May 22nd, 2009This movie was terrible. The action was poorly shot and served no purpose whatsoever, the writing was horrendous, and the acting was pretty much universally shitty. Throw in every time you shake your head or roll your eyes because of the stupidity of the what’s going on and it was hard to make it through the movie. I don’t want to go into spoilers, but Sean, come on: Cold calculating robots never acting intelligently? Hot wiring a terminator-cycle? The ending, in the desert?! It was so stupid. Oh, and the CG Arnold looked just as bad as the Prof. X at the end of Wolverine.
It’s not ok to give it a free pass as a dumb action movie. It has a loved lore and past to live up to, no different then Star Trek or Aliens. Hold it up to the same standards.
Posted by Justice on May 22nd, 2009Meant decent as in positive btw
Posted by Teo on May 22nd, 2009I like the point you made in the last paragraph, excatly what are the critics expecting? Good review
Posted by dom_g on May 22nd, 2009I’m really looking forward to this movie, no matter what the critics might be saying. Oh, and to hell with AICN, Harry Knowles is the worst sell-out around.
Posted by Kasper F. Nielsen on May 22nd, 2009The movie isn’t out over here in Ireland until the 3rd June. I guess I’ll have to skip the review in the next podcast. I’m looking forward to the movie though.
Posted by Stephen on May 22nd, 2009Good to hear that you liked it. I was getting worried with all the bad reviews out there. Look forward to see it myself.
Posted by swarez on May 22nd, 2009Sean, when was the last time you’ve watched the first two terminators? Those are some well thought out, well put together films, from any angle.
T4 was a mess. However…it wasn’t awful.
Posted by Bob The Slob on May 22nd, 2009A well balance review. Lets give it to McG, i think he’s got something coming. With a little more funds and the right kind of angle for the story telling, i think the next two parts should do well.
Posted by COMICPANEL on May 22nd, 2009Justice: The problem with the Terminator movies is much like The Borg in Star Trek: The Next Generation. You’re fighting high-tech machines that shouldn’t have a single weakness… but that doesn’t make for a very interesting movie. You get away with it in the first three Terminator flicks because there’s only one. I also didn’t the think the movie was just a “dumb action movie”. In my opinion there was some substance to it… probably more than Star Trek, although I had more fun with ST.
Bob: I rewatched the first Terminator back in December and was surprised by just how simple it is. I think people read a lot more into this franchise than there really is. They are great action flicks, but they’re not rocket science. Either way, I’m not arguing that this is better than the first two Terminator movies, not by a long shot. I just don’t see why everyone is hating it so much.
Posted by Sean on May 22nd, 2009I got to highly disagree with you on T2 sean, I’ll give you T1 for simplicity, but T2 is a film with several layers to the characters, as well as great satire and reflection on mental disability, nuclear arms, future paranoia, violence, control, and authority. Read the book ACTION SPEAKS LOUDER…the author does a great job of breaking it down, plus the entire book is a great read for action film fans. Also don’t forget that T2 had tight as hell filmmaking…the editing, lighting, and direction dont get much better.
Posted by Bob The Slob on May 22nd, 2009“You’re fighting high-tech machines that shouldn’t have a single weakness… but that doesn’t make for a very interesting movie.”
gotta disagree there on two accounts. 1) the machines do have weaknesses both physically and in their programming. They aren’t immortal and can be destroyed, and they have the disability of only being computers. They can’t think outside the box…this is exploited perfectly in T2
2)I think its just as interesting, if not more so…robots, much like zombies, due to thier lifeless in-human quality bring out those of the humans that much more…fighting an enemy with no emotion is much scarier due to the fact there is nothing to connect to, no human compasion, sympathy, or understanding to wrestle with.
ALSO…on a different note:
My biggest problem with T4, and I had ALOT, was that the terminators dont INSTANTLY kill people when they have them in their grasp. I’m not talking about the harvesting transformer-terminators…I’m talking about the human sized ones…like the arnie one…he just throws john around…WTF…in the first 3 (yes even including 3 here) the filmmakers never give the “bad” terminators a chance to even really touch thier targets…because the second they do, the targets are dead…there is no hesitation or human-like dramatic pause…or “toying” with them…THESE ARE TERMINATORS…they wouldnt give you a moment to live once your identity, or targeting, is confirmed.
Posted by Bob The Slob on May 22nd, 2009You’re right, T2 definitely has more depth to the characters, and the direction is pretty much perfect. But that’s yet another reason why T4 was never going to be as good as T2. I’m okay with that.
It seems like more people gave Terminator 3 a pass than this, but I think this is the better film.
Posted by Sean on May 22nd, 2009yeah…I wasn’t expecting McG to live up to James Cameron, whoever was is going in ready to dislike it already. I dont even hate McG…I dont really like his movies, but it pisses me off that people hate him for his name, his LAST NAME IS McGinty…McG was his nickname given to him by his family, it’s not like he chose the name out of vanity or supreme Doosh-baggery…and what the hell does his name have to do with his art? If you hate him it should be because of his movies…which most people do…even though they act like he was taking both Charlie’s Angels movies dead seriously…it should be obvious to anyone with a brain that he was in on the joke too. I’m not defending those movies, but there were pretty funny.
Posted by Bob The Slob on May 22nd, 2009I’m not going anywhere near this thing.
Posted by Goon on May 22nd, 2009I agree with Sean completely. I can’t understand the seemingly universal hatred of this movie. Bad reviews are one thing, but this thing is getting critically destroyed; which I think is unfair.
I give T4 3.5/5. Good review and of the summer popcorn flicks you’re going to see this summer, I think T4 is likely going to be the best of them. Especially in terms of action sequences and visuals.
Posted by Andrew James on May 22nd, 2009What I think the problem people have with this movie is that it barely echoes the future that Cameron and Kyle Reese put together for us in Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day. Where are the friggin laser rifles!!!!!
Posted by Dubo on May 22nd, 2009Thank you Sean for giving a real review based upon the movie and not the lofty expectations from previous installments. I read AICN’s reviews and a few others and couldn’t believe the shit-bagging this movie got. Totally unfair if you ask me. Your review nailed it for me. I happened to like this movie more than Star Trek or Wolverine. And I’m an X-Men fanatic. I was watching this movie just waiting for the moment that it was going to disappoint me, and to my surprise it never came. The acting was fine, nothing outstanding but It was good all around. The action was pretty tense most the time and I dug the storyline. When I hear people like Harry from Ain’t It cool saying this movie raped his childhood it makes me not ever want to read a review again from him. Film Junk on the other hand, I know will give a fair and decent review.
Posted by Dane on May 22nd, 2009excellent review! all I have seen it people bashing the film: http://www.newsy.com/videos/terminator_s_mixed_reviews_meanings I mean it is an action movie and the other Terminators are great but it isn’t like you go into the theater expecting an Oscar winning opus.
Posted by Rosa on May 22nd, 2009Dubo: This is true, but Terminator Salvation is only set 9 years in the future. I am guessing the laser rifles would show up in the next movie… Kyle Reese still has growing up to do.
Posted by Sean on May 22nd, 2009Regarding the hate on McG’s name. Do people have the same reaction to Sting, David Bowie, Elton John, Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Cher, Emminem, Fred Astaire, Bob Dylan?
Posted by swarez on May 22nd, 2009I wonder if this movie seriously lives up to the expectation. Cause I quite did not find it.
Posted by Kabir on May 22nd, 2009The music that john connor “popped” on the radio pumped me up because it was the very same music that was playing when young john connor sped off on his motorcycle from his foster parents house in T2.
In a way thats when they wanted to connect john connor to the little rebel boy we’ve seen in the past, it was destiny happening before our eyes. The song was by guns n roses and its part of the T2 soundtrack. Theres even a terminator themed music video for that song starring arnold who walks through the cheering crowd as the terminator looking for the guns n roses band members.
Posted by ian on May 22nd, 2009I dont know, I kind of feel like I’ve had my fill of the Hollywood reboot machine. With plenty of new franchises developed by some of the genres newest and most credible innovators (i.e. The Burning Skies/Autumn Rain series), theres no need for Follywood to keep torpedoing beloved franchises from my youth!! This might definitely be my last straw!
Posted by Johnny on May 22nd, 2009ian: Yes, the re-appearance of “You Could Be Mine” was pretty killer. I was talking about the other song that was on the radio when Marcus fixed the truck.
Posted by Sean on May 22nd, 2009sean: that was alice in chains, I love that group and that was some great 90s music so I didnt have much complaints with that one either, guess it depends on taste.
Posted by ian on May 22nd, 2009I mostly enjoyed it, though I did feel it fell a little flat.
There were two things I thought were missing. I’m hearing people claim that the story was too slight, but I felt it was too complicated. With all the threads throughout the movie none of the characters, human or otherwise, seemed to have time to exhibit much drive. They just wandered from place to place as McG cracked open his dungeon master’s guide and rolled on the random encounter tables. That thrill of characters racing against time, or obsessively pursuing a goal, was lost.
That and everyone seemed to be entirely too competent. I understand that it’s probably because they’ve been fighting for years and only the strongest have survived, but all the humans seems so tough that it was less man vs. machine than it was machine vs. machine. Worthington’s character seemed to be a stand-in for that part of the audience that wasn’t familiar with the world, but he adapted far too quickly. The suspense from the first two movies, with overpowered humans just trying to stay alive, just wasn’t there.
That said, I went in hoping for something at least half as good as an Italian post-apocalypse movie, and it certainly met my expectations.
Posted by Wintle on May 22nd, 2009I also wanted to comment on the laser rifle post. This is only the beginning, how did we get from using our conventional military grade weapons to having to use laser weapons? Well this story is the beginning of that transformation. There were some people out there that thought kyle reese was going to get sent back, well kyle reese has a lot of growing up to do before he goes back to 1984. We atleast know how John Conner got the scar on his face. Although John Connor isnt the undisputed leader of the resistance in this film (yet). The story still has to be told how he CAME to be the great leader of the resistance. Prophecy alone was never a good enough explaination, and so the movie does a good job of slowly evolving John Conner’s character into that leadership role. The time parodox will always be a paradox and just ignore it.
(increated spoiler alert)
I am a bit confused though with the Marcus story and why he was unable to compute like a terminator through his eyes like the others and realize what he was. The resistance soldier knocking him uncouncious with a rifle butt seemed ridiculous considering hes a terminator. I’m also not clear on what the Connor pregnancy is about. I think I may have missed something with that but im sure there will be a lot of significance to that. Nobody even mentions the pregnancy though and it sorta just happens out of nowhere unacknowledged.
I personally believe Kyle Reese could have been casted better and introduced for the first time better than he was, with a more rebel like arrogant personality to compliment his son played by edward furlong.
Posted by ian on May 22nd, 2009I have to say that the underlying story/plot line was quite good, but the delivery left much to be desired.
The futuristic wasteland, and armies on both sides were exactly what I had hoped for.
But there were major plot holes and errors that real Terminator fans shouldn’t forgive because they were integral to the movie….such as:
-how does a 20 storey tall Harvester sneak up on its prey like that?
Posted by Looch on May 22nd, 2009-the human sized Terminators are known for their efficient killing stylings,.. simply snap Connor’s neck when you have him in your grasps, don’t throw him at a wall so he can get up and grab a weapon.
-Why did Marcus need a heart to begin with? He obviously had no blood or need for blood , as evidenced by multiple occasions where he was torn apart by mines or gun fire, or whatever. Yet, without a Marcus’ physical heart, he couldn’t have saved Connor. They could have come up with a better metaphorical construct.
Alittle Alice in Chains can only make something better. Infact, thats one thing this Terminator has over the other ones. Alice in Chains. Not bad.
Anyways. I enjoyed the movie. It pretty much delivered everything the trailers promised. It was enjoyable.
Posted by Captain N on May 22nd, 2009Did anyone notice how Conner seemed “surprised” when he discovered the “new” T-800 models when they infiltrated the Skynet facility? Why would that surprise him at all? They were the models that tried to kill Sarah and him throughout his whole childhood. He should have known and have been warning the resistance fighters not to just band together, but what was coming in the Future. He didnt even look surprised when the “arnold” T-800 appeared. How the heck could he not have known that? That is like the Star Trek Federation going “What’s a Vulcan?”
Posted by elkr919 on May 22nd, 2009People expected more character development but it wasnt needed, Sean Connors development was pointless because if you have seen T1 and T2 you know what he was about,the addition of MArcus and his story was interesting even the twist towards the end, the action and FX in this movie is stunning even the effects of the post apocalyptic future looked believable as did the different terminators, i think critics these days dont kno what to do with themselves this movies was great they are just asking to much from a movie
Posted by JBru on May 22nd, 2009Let me begin by appologizing if what I am saying replays any of the comments above. I couldn’t get through all of them before I commented.
It was a “decent” movie. I would have to give it a 2.5 at best, out of 4 stars.
Am I the only one who thinks it’s time for Bale to attach himself to something different? It’s been at least his last two flicks where he does that “Batman” voice. He needs to mix another Prestige type movie in now. But it wasn’t as bad as everyone is making it out to be.
Here are the basic issues I have:
1. So Skynet knows that John Connor is the key, coaxes him to the Skynet headquaters and sends 1 robot after him? In terms of pure logic, wouldn’t it make more sense to get him to Skynet and have 10, 20, 30, 100, 1000 robots ready to eliminate the only thing standing between the “Resistence” and their eradication of humans? Skynet’s plan was to get John there and kill him. Why just one robot to fulfill the task?
2. Once they realized they had Kyle Reese, why keep him alive? Once he’s dead, doesn’t that put an end to John Connor? The big ass robot recognizes him and picks him out of the crowd then just sticks him in a cell? Why not just kill him and put an end to John Connor? None of this made sense.
All that being said, it was still fun. Once I gave up on the logic and took it for what it was worth, I enjoyed myself. It was a popcorn flick. And it delivered. I would say my only complaint would be that I have grown tired of reboots that serve no other purpose but to setup a sequel. Just for once I would appreciate a movie like this that had a conclusion. All this one did was setup the sequel.
I thought in the limited screen time Anton Yelchin had, he was nails.
Posted by HoopersX on May 23rd, 2009I really find it hard to like most action, sci fi, and fantasy movies, because that is my favorite genre, so my expectations are highest and I am more critical of them, and unfortunately, most of them turn out to be ridiculous. I liked Star Trek, but I don’t think I will see it again, and I grew up reading many Wolverine comics, but I didn’t like the movie that much, but it was ok. This movie however, I was expecting to be utter garbage after reading the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Now I wonder what guidelines and beliefs the critics have about what a movie is supposed to be like? A lot of them just sound like they are arrogant and eager to judge. But maybe those reviews lowered my expectations, because from beginning to end I really, really liked this movie, I know it might sound incredible, but I liked it more than T1 and T3, and maybe even more than T2, but maybe just because I didn’t see T2 on a big screen. This whole movie created an environment, and atmosphere, that made me feel like I was truly watching something out of a post apocalyptic future, a real nightmare of desolation, desperation and death. It kind of stands on its own from anything else I’ve seen. But if you don’t have much imagination, you probably won’t enjoy this movie, nor notice a lot of the symbolism, or understand, since its not spoon fed to you during the movie, that there are a lot of really important themes here about duality, conflict in modern society, our deepest fears and existential dilemmas. (of course, the action is what it is mostly about)
Posted by kuandio on May 23rd, 2009The real problem with most movies is that they shatter the imagination of the viewer because they are based on the perception of the director. If the director has never seen a Terminator movie, chances are it will suck if he does one. Chances are it will suck even if he’s a devout fan because he may over compensate.
That is why it is difficult to please everybody when doing a movie based on a book, a comic, a toy, whatever.
Posted by Tomas on May 23rd, 2009I agree with looch and hoopers on a few things they mentioned, like the inneficiency of the terminators to kill when they have the chance, very sloppy innacurate shooting and when they have you, are not advanced enough to simply break your neck.
The terminators captured kyle reese, knew who he was and had a chance to put an end right there and didnt. As a fan of the series i try to make exuses to justify the blunders but have a hard time with this one. Time travel wasnt even possible in the movie and perhaps the terminators dont quite know what kyle reese’s destiny is?, did marcus upload the conversation with connor immediately or did he upload it locally when he was at skynet?
I think the movie introduced the concept of time travel very sloppy in terminator 1 and it has ruined the logic for the following sequels because its a concept we had to stick with and its just really flawed, best thing is to ignore it and pretend that there are no holes or paradoxes with the time travel concept.
Posted by ian on May 23rd, 2009“I think the movie introduced the concept of time travel very sloppy in terminator 1 and it has ruined the logic for the following sequels because its a concept we had to stick with and its just really flawed, best thing is to ignore it and pretend that there are no holes or paradoxes with the time travel concept.”
I like this approach Ian, it makes for a more enjoyable moviegoing experience. There’s a lot to take in in TS, and I don’t the mystery of why they didn’t kill Reese was meant to be known just yet. I liked Salvation a lot- I give it an 8 out of 10. Sean’s review is much along my line of thinking, I look forward to Jay calling him an idiot. I think if the T-800s were able to kill with one punch then Skynet wins. And, well, that’s just sad. I liked the end fight- it’s not like there were no consequences. There was significant death and injury as a result.
Schwarzenegger’s CGI appearance didn’t bother me. In fact I thought it looked pretty good, and it fit really well in the storyline. Was I not looking close enough? Do I not have a good eye for such things. If so, please excuse me, fanboys.
Posted by Mason on May 23rd, 2009**********WARNING THIS COMMENT CONTAINS SPOILERS**********
*
*
*
*
*
*
I like the action ALOT.
The acting was terrible IMO other than Marcus and Kyle.
I really didn’t like the plot…w/ the signal to disable the terminators…until the end when the true purpose of the signal was revealed to Marcus by Skynet.
As far as Arnold’s cameo is concerned I thought it was cool.
Overall I give the film a 7 or 6 out of 10…oh and my favorite scene would have to be when Marcus finds out his true purpose when he is talking to SKYNET and the scene w/ “The Harvester” and “The Killer Motorcycles”.
Posted by Matt Keith on May 23rd, 2009I just saw it two hours ago and I really liked it. I guess I had no expectations going in. I think the critics are being too harsh or maybe I’m just easily amused.
When I see a summer movie or a big action film, I like just sit back and enjoy the ride. I don’t expect lasting art.
I had somewhat a hard time with Star Trek (especially afterward) doing that because I am a devoted fan and did expect a lot from that film. I feel better about it now that I know the timeline wasn’t destroyed.
With this film, I was entertained for two hours. The action was good and the effects/props were interesting and satisfying. I like that the film was a war/sci fi/action hybrid and it involved two of my favorite things: post apocalyptic settings and robots.
I don’t care that the dialogue was corny at points. Just like some other great war movies, there is going to be over-dramatic speech. At least there wasn’t any stupid jokes! I hate when great movies self destruct due to inappropriately time humor….I will never forgive you “Independence Day”.
What I did find with this movie is a weird combo of “bleakness” and “breeziness”. I think that this is because even with the bleak setting and lack of humor, there was no real tension or intensity. The imagery and story didn’t evoke a tone for me that I would have liked to have had as a backdrop. I didn’t “feel” the climax to the story and the risk/danger to John Connor never manifested any anxiety in me.
I liked Marcus. I felt that he was a “tough guy” without having to overtly wear it on his sleeve at all times. I am not that familiar with Sam Worthington but I found that he was able to communicate quite a bit using just his eyes.
I liked a lot of the supporting characters as well and I hope we get to see more of them and their backstories in the next film. I liked Moon Bloodgood; I liked her, I liked her character. I felt she was under utilized, perhaps unavoidably so. It looked her boobs were bigger than I thought….I have a new one to add to the marital free pass list.
I noticed there were some continuity issues with the TV show that was very unfortunately cancelled, maybe the events on the TV show are not canon.
I liked the movie and thought it was good, maybe it was a little like “cinematic Chinese food”, delicious, but not filling, two hours later and I’m hungry again.
Posted by Joe Puglia on May 23rd, 2009PS: I liked the sound effects and score quite a bit. The giant scooper robot noise reminded me of the War of the Worlds Tripod sounds or the Devastator sounds I heard in the TF2 trailer.
Speaking of trailers I saw the following:
Transformers 2: I didn’t hate the first one and was actually surprised how much I liked it…anyway, they sure put together a very enticing trailer for this one, it looks good based on the trailer.
Sherlock Holmes: Robert Downey Jr as an action hero Holmes! Maybe.
District 9: Already saw this trailer and I have actually been exploring the website, it’s pretty elaborate. I don’t know why this one has me so intrigued.
Pandorum: Looks good, had an Event Horizon vibe and it also reminded me of an Outer Limits episode I’m fond of.
Surrogates: The concept is very interesting and a lot can be done with it. I already see the allusions and metaphors. Bruce Willis doing sci fi? I will boldly proclaim, without further evidence, that this will be a great film.
Also, I heard they are remaking “Red Dawn”? Maybe I’m late to this party but wow. I don’t know if that would be a bad thing or good thing. Can the Soviets still be used as badguys?
Posted by Joe Puglia on May 23rd, 2009“There are certainly some cringe-worthy moments of cheese”
All Terminator movies have cheesy dialogue; its just way more noticeable outside of the 90s.
I thought the Arnold cameo was unbelievably awesome, looked incredible, and nothing was wrong with that brief little throwback. I was just expecting to see his face on a computer screen.
The only things that truly bothered me were:
1. Mute children are the biggest post-apocalypse cliche ever and that character was completely useless.
2. How the fuck did that Skynet facility have no guards outside whatsoever?
3. The opening credits and prologue were sorta lame.
Posted by Ryan M. on May 24th, 2009Something tells me Jay hated it.
Posted by Ryan M. on May 24th, 2009This was a good movie. It wasnt a great movie but was easily the 2nd best of the franchise.
It did have problems, but a lot of that is people over thinking it.
Why didn’t Skynet kill Kyle right there in line when they discovered him and effectivly destroy both him and Conner? This is not back to the future, Conner would not just vanish in to thin air.
Why did Marcus have a heart? He was meant to infiltrate a human orginization, even after he was severly injured they believed he was human till they looked real close. He needed a heart beat and living tissue.
Why didnt Skynet send a 1000 Teminators after Connor? Skynet is stretched thin, battleing worldwide human forces + trying to gather the resources it needs to build its necessary Infrastucture to continue to expand. There were reasons you saw trucks and haulers that would be 20 years old working in side Skynet instead of brand new shiney machines doing all of the work.
And finally, this movie was better than T2. Dont get me wrong I like T2, but this movie was much closer in theme and tone to T1 than parts 2 and 3 were. There were no comedy bits and it finally gave us the machine war.
Posted by Justin on May 24th, 2009Just saw it, agree with most points here, not elsewhere.
Posted by ian on May 24th, 2009Hey Sean my boy, how about you email me the whole f*%king script, it’ll save me the bother of watching the whole shitty film that I haven’t seen yet.
’ God thats cheezy…. CHEEZE, CHEEZE, GLORIOUS CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZE!!!
Posted by Alex Crossley on May 24th, 2009Look, we all knew that it was going to be a load of shite. No Arnie (means no ‘I’ll be back) no Sara conner as she got written off just in time to save herself from the embaressing 3rd installment and as for John Conner, well, he’s type cast as Batman for fuck sake, so wot can you do. Also, the dates are wrong (yet again for a movie like this). In the original Terminator you see Reese set in 2029, and this is set in 2018 hhmmm….. confusing. And then the obvious E equals (sorry, I cant find the ‘equals’ symbol) MC squared (no ’squared symbol either) scenario of time travel. How can a man (Reese) go back in time to the 80’s, shag some bird, get her pegnant to give birth to the son who is the leader of the resistence to the machines in an apocoliptic future that hasn’t happened yet – did you get all that – FUCK KNOWS??? I mean, what if Sara Connor was a Lesbian. That’s all good but mankind would be fucked.Anyhow, I shall watch it at some point purely for the sake of it and, although its a cheezy thing to say, I gotta say it ‘I’LL BE BACK
alexjcrossley@yahoo.co.uk
I also just picked up on somebody saying that their are no laser guns. Like I said before, in the terminator, the future was set in 2029 and T4 is set in 2018. This gives time for the humans to get more advanced and I’m afraid it also leaves the whole thing wide open for an inevitable T5, AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
Posted by Alex Crossley on May 24th, 2009alexjcrossley@yahoo.co.uk
“In the original Terminator you see Reese set in 2029, and this is set in 2018″
Yes, which is why Reese is much younger here than he was in Terminator 1.
“it also leaves the whole thing wide open for an inevitable T5″
They announced from the start that this was going to be another trilogy, so yes there will be a T5 and a T6 as long as they keep making money.
Posted by Sean on May 24th, 2009This franchise should have ended with the first sequel. Once you start showing and fleshing out the world after Skynet gets activated, the story loses its appeal. I’m not particularly interested in the post-apocalypse or seeing swarms of Terminators fighting a Resistance army. I like one Terminator or one Terminator per side.
Which is strange because I’m not interested in watching a group of humans fight one Alien.
Posted by mike d on May 25th, 2009Mike D,
I agree, I thought continuity should have ended w/ T2, however I liked “Terminator Salvation” alot, but still feel it was unnecissary to have another sequel, but hey this is Hollywood we are talking about.
Posted by Matt Keith on May 25th, 2009When this comes out on DVD I want to watch this one back to back with part 1 and see how closely it plays off of the orginal. Anton looks alot like the first Reese and the CGI Arnie is obviously from the first movie. I bet if you skip parts 2 and 3, that this movie is more of a direct sequel.
Posted by Justin on May 25th, 2009I’ve made premature, outspoken comments. I mean after all, I havent seen it yet. Firstly, sorry Sean for my flippant remark about emailing me the whole script, I was just fucking around and on reflection it came out wrong – Nuff said. I do think however that it is pretty fair to say that most people would agree that it should have been left at T2. Thats how James cameron wanted it and thats precisely why he had know interest in a 3rd. Linda Hamilton was busy doing TV stuff and she either had the same vision or just wanted too much money. As for Arnie, well, where was his career going. Another last ditch attempt to play a cool character with a nice bank roll. I fear it is yet another classic mistake. Sequels left too long and arguable pointless -except for the money of course.
Posted by Alex Crossley on May 26th, 2009I just cant deal with these shitty, money making sequels anymore. They belittle the originals, e.g.
THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS – EXCELLENT. Sequel potential but totally SHIT!
JAWS – LEGENDARY. Sequel? Don’t even fucking talk to me about it.
THE HITCHER – AWESOME. Sequel about 137 years later, hhmmm…. almost slit my wrists.
However, There is the ‘SAW’ saga, hhmmm….. pretty well shit my pants all the way but then they made a 5th, AAAHHHHH!!!!!
I could go on forever, bouncing back and fourth through my DVD library and not many movies make worthy sequels and a 3rd is rare. After that its just money, money, money. I mean, the cast talk about movie seqeles in film class in ‘SCREAM 2′. How often does a sequel out class the original??? And can somebody please tell me what all the fuss is about ‘THE GODFATHER’ saga. only watched all of them back to back about 5 years ago and I was like, “So thats it then, great, eerrrr…. no, pretty damn boring really”. But it still doesnt change the fact that De Niro and Pacino are, well, GODS!!!
alexjcrossley@yahoo.co.uk
Terminator Salvation! Great movie. Get off Christian Bale’s jock about how his voice sounds similar to his Batman voice. So what if they sound similar, maybe it just so happens that pissed off/stressed John Connor has a similar voice to the roof crawling vigilante (Bruce Wayne/Batman).
Posted by Pshooter on May 27th, 2009That Sam Worthington dude, improved the movie a bunch. Acting was great. Shame he wont be in the next two. [Or will he?]
People need to look at these trilogies separately. T1, T2, and T3 are pre-judgement day and TS and the following two movies are post-judgement day. Simple as that.
I love how they showed how John Connor got that scar.
I was pissed off about how shitty the terminators acted. They were designed to kill, not sling everyone around and hope they snap there neck. Is there some explanation of why the terminators didn’t kill John when they saw him? I can understand why they didn’t kill Kyle Reese because how would they know that he was his the father of John Connor? Why would skynet know that?
Posted by Pshooter on May 27th, 2009I liked this film. 3 out of 4 stars.
This, and especially Star Trek, really delivered for me. ILM has come a long way in making believable CG, and this had plenty of it. You’re making a big mistake staying away from either film for fear of ruining gooshy feelings from the previous movies. Just go with the flow and take things for what they are worth, that being entertainment, not what you define your existence by.
And for why the Terminators handled the humans so delicately throughout the movie, are there no hints in The Sarah Connor Chronicles or the previous films? They kept Kyle alive to lure Connor in to kill him, toying with both like they were rats.
Posted by Cochise on May 29th, 2009Mice I mean, not rats…..
Posted by Cochise on May 29th, 2009Just watched T3 last night for a build up to TS which I’m looking forward to watching. Couldn’t help notice Arnie mention he kills John Conner in 2034?? Fit that into the story line??
Posted by Alan Brown on June 1st, 2009I LOVE IT HOW NERDS RUIN FILM FRANCHISES WITH LAME NITPICKING.
Its a film, its meant to entertain you for 2 hours, thats it.
If you choose to try and take it apart and look for social commentry or if you try and fact check that everything in the terminator universe your just backing up the cliches about the types of people you are.
I just saw it, I was expecting a flaming turd, I was wrong.
Sure some shoddy acting from Common and ironside.
But this is an action film with sci fi elements.
Worthington owned this film, without him this would have sucked and I can say he has as mutch prescence as Arnold did. I cared about his character.
ALl in all I cant see why it got so much hate, be thankfull this is 1000 times better than T3.
Posted by Aussie invasion on June 1st, 2009I don’t get the hatred on this. It had it’s cheesy moments, but so did Star Trek. I think people had their hopes set so high that it disappointed them.
Posted by Chris on June 1st, 2009As an action movie, fine..but if anyone saw this after being a fan in general as well as someone who watched and likes terminator SCC it was an utter joke…Any 2 episodes of SCC were better acted, more thought provoking and way more interesting..Wanna see cool explosions, gunfire and robots? See terminator salvation..want to see anything resembling term 1,2 or TSCC, re watch them
Posted by karl on June 1st, 2009From what I understand, in the original script for ‘Salvation’ John Connor was supposed to die in the end…
Marcus Wright (a rogue hybrid created by Skynet) was supposed to assume John’s identity and actually create the legacy mistakenly attributed to the flesh & blood Connor in Terminators 1 thru 3.
They rewrote the ending, though… and audiences left theaters scratching their heads wondering why they just watched an entire Terminator movie about some human/robot named Marcus?
Posted by siparaka on June 2nd, 2009…and had they left ‘that’ ending intact, folks would be praising this movie instead of universally hating it
It would have advanced the storyline `and` would have provided the obligatory ‘twist’ that fans have come to expect from Terminator.
Posted by siparaka on June 2nd, 2009See this tonight. Good review…
Posted by Kenny Dodd on June 2nd, 2009Watched this last night… I thought it was good, we’ll go with 7/10. Some of the action sequences were absolutely brilliant and the Arnie scene through to the end of the Terminator fight was very good.
Couple of points here though…
Kyle is a teenager, not the same age as he was sent back in T1 – it made sense that the film was set earlier in 2018. I don’t understand people’s complaints there.
Also Marcus was an infiltration unit so made sense to have a heart so if ever medically examined he’s have a pulse, etc. At least that’s what I think they were going for…
One thing that really irked me was a rather glaringly obvious mistake. The world is now virtually under the entire control of machines and the resistance have to keep their leadership in a submarine in secret so that they cannot be found…. However, the resistance also have airfields and open military bases that they can launch their attacks from. Err… doesn’t Skynet have access to satellites anymore? Or even radar? Nothing that can track down these very visible and I should imagine very large areas from which the resistance operate?
Am I crazy or isn’t that an issue? In the previous Terminator movies the resistance was very much an underground setup. Now they were very much overground and in the open. Hmmmm… it bugged me a bit. But besides that… all good, enjoyed it!
Posted by T456 on June 4th, 2009Entertaining-ish if you leave your brain switched off and have zero expectations from previous movies. Bad acting aside from Worthington and the kid who plays kyle reese. Bad dialogue. Braindead plot
—SPOILERS——
-
-
-
-
–
So many stupid things oh where to start
a.) Why is Connor remotely surprised at T800 after the events of T2 and T3????
b.) How are the humans able to have massive surface bases, racks upon racks of LCD screens, A friggin 10 attack planes etc. WHy wouldn’t skynet just demolish the airfield, crater the runway, oh I dunno blow up refineries so there’s no hi octane fuel for planes, how the —- do the resistance – scrounging for parts, no cities and massive factories / infrastructure, keep A-10s in the eky and have rack after rack of computer goodies, setup in open hangers in the broad daylight, etc. It does not make sense and doesn’t fit into the grim post apocalypse theme. They should be scrounging like rats and fighting a hit and run guerilla war against vastly superior forces.
c.) Skynet central guarded by two terminators, the one that Kyle jabbed in the back of the head and then the arnie lookalike. And when they were getting their behinds pounded, of course they didn’t bother sending replacements
d.) Wouldn’t it have been easier to wipe Marcus’s memory or take control when he interfaces the first time, he should never have the chance to ‘turn’
e.) So many opportunites to kill Connor outright but the super efficient klling machine terminators give him more chances to live than a roger moore bond movie bad guy
f.) when they get nabbed, so a three storey mech and a hunter killer with turbofan engines is so quiet they can sneak right on top of a dozen people and nobody hears a thing… GAH
I could go on and on but won’t.
Oh why oh why could they not do the post apocalypse thing right: everyone remembers those ‘flashback’ sequences in T1 and T2 where it was dark and claustrophobic as hell. Yet in this movie the humans have hi tech, wander the surface openly just a few days hike from Skynet…. would have been much cooler if they stuck to the super gritty urban guerilla themes. And no set pieces w/ resistance and terminators en masse. I think there were something like a dozen terminators in the whole friggin film (not counting the HKs, cycles and giant bots etc.).
Posted by Johann Lo on June 7th, 2009Having highly anticipating this film, I think it gave me what I was looking for. The only problem I had with it was the final 15-20 mins or so. Otherwise, I found it highly enjoyable, not getting bogged down in the history of the franchise. Just enjoy it as it is.
Posted by Mike on June 7th, 2009READ THE POSTS BEFORE YOU FLAP YER GUMS, NERD-BOYS. This movie is set WAY before Kyle Reece is sent back to the past to Save Sarah Connor. The years between this movie and the end of the trilogy will allow the secrecy, the claustrophobia, the laser rifles etc to develop. U think John Connor just went down to the Bat Cave and found all that stuff down there??? (Actually he could, unless the terminators destroy Wayne Manor along with the X-Men and the Fantastic Four’s pads before they jump in and spoil Skynet’s plans.) Any way the big thing you all need to grasp is “Its Just A Movie!!!” Now can we relax and enjoy it??
Posted by Frank Hutton on June 8th, 2009Very stupid script.
Lousy ending
But you can analyze Skynet decisions it´s stupid,it´s just a movie.
Or you people want to make a movie about Skynet breaking the ozone layer or fucking with the atmosphere to eliminate all life form?
My only complain… Skynet capture Reese?? he it´s 1 first priority and a the moment he it´s spoted Skynet decides to just capture him.
Hope next got directed by someone else this guy sucks.
Posted by McBain on June 9th, 2009I loved this film and it make me smile – I could analyse the storyline, compare with the other films but all that mattered to me was that I found it entertaining – which I did very much so.
I just beamed when ‘you could be mine blasted out that radio’.
I thought the reviewer had it spot on with his review.
Posted by Neil on June 9th, 2009Many people are bashing this movie due to there own misunderstanding:
Such things like “Why was John Surprised by the T800’s being developed”
Because they came “earlier” than he expected. 2018 is pretty early tbh. (This was mentioned somewhere in the movie, and some guy even says “T800… Just like you said Connor.”)
Why are there no lasers? Because they havent been created yet.
Personally I loved the movie and it holds up against T1, a little short compared with T2 but then most films are. (Blows away T3 as expected!)
As for the plot, I’ve heard many people criticizing “why didnt they just killed Kyle to begin with?”
Skynet didnt know he was the father of John until it downloaded the information from Marcus – at which point a T600 goes for Kyle.
I will however agree, why was Kyle – a civillian, important enough to be on that kill list of skynets (High ranking officers seemed to be the only people on it aside from him)
Nice review Sean, its very refreshing to see someone who doesnt just follow suit of Revviewer X or Y by jumping on the “HEY IT HAS NO PLOT SO IT SUX” train.
Movie gets a 4.5/5 for me.
Posted by Jay on June 9th, 2009Were you watching the same film as me? I had high hopes for this; Christian Bale on board, set during the war that we only catch glimpses of in 1 & 2, and some damn fine trailers on the lead up to release. But what do we get? A plot line that simply does not work and is utterly transparent (I guessed the plot reveal for Marcus and the nature of the ’secret’ signal disappointingly within the first 10 minutes or so), some awful dialogue (most of which is shouted to make it sound some how more important), some quite dreadful performances (including the usually excellent Bale but excluding Worthington), poor set pieces (why do no HK’s or any other machines turn up when Skynet central is under attack?), but worst of all no real feel for the iconography set up in 1 & 2and waiting to be developed further. And no it wasn’t entertaining or ‘just a film’ or any other excuse people want to offer up as an excuse for poor film making, it was just bad and I wish I hadn’t paid to go and see it.
Posted by Ian on June 12th, 2009Bad Movie.
Posted by Ernie on June 13th, 2009I agree with the previous poster I don’t think doing this movie has had a positive effect on his reputation especially after his antics off screen. But getting back to the movie, I’m glad I read all the bad reviews before I watched it because I think I enjoyed the movie more because of it. I was expecting something far worse than it actually was. Overall it’s a good movie with mad crazy special effects the bikes were cool!
Posted by Apocalyptic movie fan on June 19th, 2009I liked this movie. If you forget about Terminator 3, I think it makes a worthwhile addition to the Terminator franchise, and is definitely better than I thought it was going to be. Bale’s tantrum during the filming is what most people probably think of walking in, but damn, he is a genuinely good actor, although Worthington is even more impressive. Definitely thumbs up.
Posted by Dave on June 19th, 2009Right on man. I can’t figure out what people expected out of this movie, and everyone seems to be ignoring the subtle themes examining the nature of humanity through the character of Marcus and the discourse between Connor and Command. I expected so much less from this film, and after the general disappointment of Star Trek XI, it was a refreshing change to leave the theatre entertained.
Posted by RA on June 23rd, 2009Come on guys. We are talking about a terminator movie without arnie AND without cameron. Thanks god it was better than 3 than complaining about it…
Posted by no name on June 24th, 2009I loved the movie only thing I disliked was the appearance of Arnie. Pretty much spot on with the review.
Posted by Chris A on June 26th, 2009il leave it short, this film was pathetic, poor acting poor screenplay pathetic story, feeble acting, it looks like it did when i saw T3 … i should have only watched the first 2
Posted by karl on July 2nd, 2009could it be any worse?
Posted by giorgos on August 1st, 2009why do the actors speak as if they got full sinus?
and so low you can hardly hear what they say?
by brain snoozed….whats the lowest i can rate it?
ZEROOOOO
Terminator Salvation is a very good movie. It is obvious that Terminator can be stand-alone movie, without Schwarzenegger. The action scenes are awesome.
Posted by Introspective on August 2nd, 2009Leave a Reply