Terminator: Salvation, and a rant about modern film-making.

2009-06-07 16:44:46

#1

Switch: Knee Deep In Clunge; +489|6464|Tyne & Wear, England

FFS why on earth do modern directors seem to want to do everything in their power to totally ruin great movie franchises? If Terminator was supposed to be an action film then maybe this would have been half decent. Terminator is NOT an action film though, it is supposed to have heart. It is supposed to drag us in and engage us, it should be filled with suspense and even elements of horror. TS however is devoid of all of these things, all it is is head candy. The creators sell-out and make it a 12 certificate to boost audiences, which just adds to the lack of intelligence. There is no character development and the plot is about as robotic as the villains in the movie.

Why can't James Cameron come back to do the Terminator series?

Why can't Ridley Scott come back to do Alien?

Why do they have to go out and ruin two perfectly good movie franchises by incorporating Alien and Predator into one utterly shite film?

Fucks sake.

Rant over.

Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.

2009-06-07 16:48:16

#2

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6650

So is it even worse than the third one then?

2009-06-07 16:49:27

#3

Winston_Churchill: Bazinga!; +521|6740|Toronto | Canada

I liked it

2009-06-07 16:50:02

#4

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|6763

"you are the resistance"

2009-06-07 16:51:18

#5

Switch: Knee Deep In Clunge; +489|6464|Tyne & Wear, England

ghettoperson wrote:
So is it even worse than the third one then?

It's hard to choose which one was worse.

Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.

2009-06-07 16:55:04

#6

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6415|Finland

Switch wrote:
Terminator is NOT an action film though, it is supposed to have heart.

That is outrageous. Older terminator movies (T1, T2) are fine examples of good action movies.

You should be burned in flames of nuclear fire for even talking about T as anything else than action.

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2009-06-07 16:58:19

#7

Doctor Strangelove: Real Battlefield Veterinarian.; +1,758|6469

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Switch wrote:
Terminator is NOT an action film though, it is supposed to have heart.
That is outrageous. Older terminator movies (T1, T2) are fine examples of good action movies.

You should be burned in flames of nuclear fire for even talking about T as anything else than action.

The point Switch was trying to make was that the Terminator films of yore had more than just action

2009-06-07 17:04:13

#8

CC-Marley: Member; +407|6830

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=125800

2009-06-07 17:10:49

#9

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|6776|Noizyland

The thing is Terminator Salvation is not a Terminator movie as such. Yeah it's part of the franchise but c'mon, it's not even close to the Terminator "formula". It's more a war movie wheras T1, 2 and even 3 are more action thrillers... with "heart" apparently. 1, 2 and 3 were in this order; man protecting person vs. robot, robot protecting person vs. more advanced robot and finally, robot protecting person vs. more advanced sexy robot who could make her boobs grow bigger at will which in my opinion is completely awesome even though the movie was pretty shi... I'm sorry where was I?

Salvation, without my seeing it, is no longer this formula, therefore it's dumb to go along to it and expect a "Terminator" movie as such. Expect a sci-fi war action movie with references to the Terminator movies. I'm sure it doesn't dissapoint in that regard.

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2009-06-07 17:14:03

#10

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6415|Finland

Ty wrote:
Salvation, without my seeing it, is no longer this formula, therefore it's dumb to go along to it and expect a "Terminator" movie as such. Expect a sci-fi war action movie with references to the Terminator movies. I'm sure it doesn't dissapoint in that regard.

You just sold it to me completely. Gotta watch it despite the general hating.

Should work in advertising business if not already.

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2009-06-07 17:20:09

#11

ScOrPiOn1189: Member; +8|6463|New York

Terminator salvation is its own breed of the Terminator series, personally I'm glad it wasn't another robot coming back in time to kill someone because I've already seen that 3 times before. This breathes some new life into the series and its a war so I'd expect there to be more action. They never really went into detail with the war between humans and robots before, so its what they will be doing now thus completing the series.

As far as character development goes im not worried,i belive there were 2 more that will be coming out that bale is contracted to. plenty of time for development there.

In my opinion it was a solid movie and much better then T3.

2009-06-07 17:20:56

#12

CC-Marley: Member; +407|6830

Ty wrote:
The thing is Terminator Salvation is not a Terminator movie as such. Yeah it's part of the franchise but c'mon, it's not even close to the Terminator "formula". It's more a war movie wheras T1, 2 and even 3 are more action thrillers... with "heart" apparently. 1, 2 and 3 were in this order; man protecting person vs. robot, robot protecting person vs. more advanced robot and finally, robot protecting person vs. more advanced sexy robot who could make her boobs grow bigger at will which in my opinion is completely awesome even though the movie was pretty shi... I'm sorry where was I?

Salvation, without my seeing it, is no longer this formula, therefore it's dumb to go along to it and expect a "Terminator" movie as such. Expect a sci-fi war action movie with references to the Terminator movies. I'm sure it doesn't disappoint in that regard.

Oh it disappoints on a whole new level.

2009-06-07 17:21:49

#13

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|6776|Noizyland

Well that may be so but my point remains, it is a new level.

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2009-06-07 17:32:14

#14

Switch: Knee Deep In Clunge; +489|6464|Tyne & Wear, England

You're right, it shouldn't have been another 'Terminator going back through time movie', we have had that three times and we needed a change. But just because it is a war movie doesn't mean that theres any excuse for no real plot-line and no character development what-so-ever. Hell some of the best character development in movie history has come from war movies.

They could have changed the recipe of the Terminator series and still made a great film. Instead they failed, miserably.

Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.

2009-06-07 17:40:45

#15

Defiance: Member; +438|6672

Same reason someone tried to make a Donnie Darko sequel.

2009-06-07 18:02:53

#16

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|6776|Noizyland

Making a bad movie isn't really the fault of modern film-making it's just what happens. Constantly. Something that I would define as being a characteristic of modern film-making is the rise of the "give the brainless masses what they want" mentality. Movies like Zombie Strippers and Lesbian Vampire Killers are obvious examples of this - the brainless masses want violence, blood, boobs and preferably some girl-on-girl - give 'em what they want. These are obvious examples but others are more comparable to Terminator Salvation, (should really wait 'till I see it to make these calls.) Take Transformers for instance. The brainless masses are not going to go see Transformers to see an intricate story involving ones inner-most emotions and yadda-yadaa-bullshit, they want to see giant fucking robots fucking some serious fucking shit up. Die Hard 4, people don't want an in-depth look at the darker aspects of John McClain's persona in an enlightening examination of what it is to- no they want fucking Helicopters being blown up by fucking cars and shit!

By the same logic I think Terminator Salvation was made in part to cater to the masses who want to see fucking explosions and shit with fucking robots fucking people's shit right up the eye socket. Maybe the emphasis on this part of film-making was what you're alluding to and it does get in the way of creating "great" movies. To be honest I will see Terminator Salvation because I want to see fucking explosions and shit with fucking robots fucking people's shit right up the eye socket and to be honest I never really saw the other Terminator movies as anything more than action-y escapism either.

Still I have to say that although the brainless crap is indeed crap it can be more tolerable than the forcably in-depth action movies where everyone's trying to second-guess everyone elses philosophies. Dark Knight, you were a decent movie but I'm looking at you.

"You will find that you can't manipulate people..."
"Oh but I can..."
"People are good.."
"But that's not what I meant to show..."
"Your plan will fail.."
"I don't have one..."

SHUT UP!

JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP!

FUCKING KILL SOMETHING ALREADY!

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2009-06-07 19:26:01

#17

loubot: O' HAL naw!; +470|6579|Columbus, OH

It was a good movie. Though I thought Terminators outnumbered humans, however that ratio is off in the movie.

2009-06-07 20:31:20

#18

TimmmmaaaaH: Damn, I... had something for this; +725|6441|Brisbane, Australia

This is the same stuff people were going on about after Quantum of Solace.

I thought Salvation was awesome. I also thought Quantum of Solace was awesome.

So they are different than the others. Why does it matter? They are still good movies.

https://bf3s.com/sigs/5e6a35c97adb20771c7b713312c0307c23a7a36a.png

2009-06-07 21:02:44

#19

Rod Foxx: Warblgarbl; +78|5985|Perth, Australia

I can't comment on Salvation, but Quantum of Solace was total ballz. The whole movie had no point and went nowhere. Still better then some of the others though i suppose.

2009-06-07 21:13:02

#20

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6582|the dank(super) side of Oregon

what do you expect from a movie based on shitty time travel rules? he sent some guy back in time to fuck his hot mommy, thereby creating himself? sorry, it doesn't work like that.

Last edited by Reciprocity (2009-06-07 21:13:32)

2009-06-07 21:15:32

#21

Flecco: iPod is broken.; +1,048|6666|NT, like Mick Dundee

Liked the curve ball that was Marcus, interesting character to say the least imo, was hoping they'd do more work on showing how the whole time travel shindig kicked off. Guess they are saving that for later. Like what they did with the character of Kyle Reese, like the way they worked in the idea that the machines already know that Kyle is going to go back in time to father John etc. etc. Some of the fight scenes were very well shot, in particular the one...

Spoiler (highlight to read):
... that the cyborg dude Marcus gets into when those guys try to rape the pilot. Plot surrounding John Connor and that needed some real work although the really crappy nature of the intro sequence of events and finding exactly what they needed to win the war is nicely explained later on. I actually really liked that they'd set up something highly improbable that made me roll my eyes about movie bullshit, only to show it was all intentional later on. I did like the way they changed Marcus around a bit as the movie went on, how he seems to be constantly chasing the chance to save lives to redeem himself.

Didn't have that suspense/horror feeling that T1/T2 had, but I really wasn't expecting it to, as T3 really proved how stale that format was for the series.

One of the things that threw me a bit was Christian Bale and his INTENSIVE FUCKING STARES. Seriously, he should have humanised the character a bit more, yes, in T3 Connor was a whiney emo kid but now they've gone to the other extreme and he's almost as robotic as Arnie was in T1 ffs.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
Laughed out loud when Bale said 'I'll be back' though... That was epic imo.

Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.

2009-06-07 21:17:58

#22

blademaster: I'm moving to Brazil; +2,075|6646

k the movie sucked, T2 is still the best Terminator movie, then T1 then T3 then this last one. The last one had too many inconsistencies a lot of stuff didnt fit in right. Also the story was not clear from the beginning and also the story didnt have that awsm presence to it like u would wonder what would happen next. Also it was only T-100, wth happened to T-1000 from T2 and T-X version.

2009-06-07 21:30:18

#23

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5587

Didn't see it yet, but going to just because Sam Worthington is in it.

2009-06-07 21:34:26

#24

DefCon-17: Maple Syrup Faggot; +362|6157|Vancouver | Canada

Ty wrote:
The thing is Terminator Salvation is not a Terminator movie as such. Yeah it's part of the franchise but c'mon, it's not even close to the Terminator "formula". It's more a war movie wheras T1, 2 and even 3 are more action thrillers... with "heart" apparently. 1, 2 and 3 were in this order; man protecting person vs. robot, robot protecting person vs. more advanced robot and finally, robot protecting person vs. more advanced sexy robot who could make her boobs grow bigger at will which in my opinion is completely awesome even though the movie was pretty shi... I'm sorry where was I?

Salvation, without my seeing it, is no longer this formula, therefore it's dumb to go along to it and expect a "Terminator" movie as such. Expect a sci-fi war action movie with references to the Terminator movies. I'm sure it doesn't dissapoint in that regard.

That's how I looked at Casino Royale.

Not a bad movie if you ignore that it's using the JB name.

2009-06-07 21:35:57

#25

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|6721|California

We've been fighting for so long . . . . . . .

BF2S Forums Terminator: Salvation, and a rant about modern film-making.

ghettoperson wrote:

Switch wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Switch wrote:

Ty wrote:

Ty wrote:

Ty wrote:

Board footer