|
http://teamcoco.com/video/robert-patrick-t2-look?playlist=featured-videos Robert Patrick on Conan. He could've pulled it off, age or not!
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 11:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 06:46 |
|
|
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/12/08/christian-bale-says-terminator-salvation-didnt-work Christian Bale admits that Terminator Salvation was a steaming pile of poo poo while wishing Genisys the best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:There's also the learning mode that the T-800 has, that Skynet rarely uses - in the wiki it says that some of the units go rogue, or even end up fighting with the humans. A story where a Terminator learns how hosed up it is to do a holocaust and switches sides sounds pretty Something like that happened with the T1000 on the show.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:The dread in the first T-1000 vs T-800 scene is incredible. It's partly the droning music, partly the slow mo, the random guy who doesn't know what's about to happen. It's like an awful dream, I get this bad feeling in the pit of my stomach. The music alone is amazing in T2. Everythng has it's own theme. The drone is the war and always playing during confrontations. The shifting, stabbing, liquid strings when the T1000 is doing his thing, the subtle "gongs" of Skynet (also plays when Sarah walks across the lawn to kill Dyson and is using Skynet time war tactics against it), the famous tune for Arnie (which cuts in beautifully when he picks john up off the bike). Seriously, the music itself is amazing at telling the story. The way it's all the war and T-1000 theme during that first bike chase until Arnie rides off the edge into the storm drain (dead silent) and then the music cuts back with his theme building up to peak when he reaches out and saves John. It gets me every. loving. time. Groovelord Neato posted:
I love special editions as they add to a movie, but Cameron is REALLY good at knowing what to hold back on a first viewing. It's the same with Aliens. It's nice to see Hadley's Hope and Newt before the fall, but the FIRST time you watch it and you're seeing the ruined colony through the eyes of Ripley just oozes dread. Same with the sentry guns. I never understood why he cut it as I LOVED that scene as a teenager, but looking back now it was pointless and also took away from the feeling of being trapped with no weapons. Killing the dog was good because it showed us the T-1000 figured out he'd been duped, but it didn't matter because we knew he was going to find them somehow anyway. It was reduntant in a first time watch. As someone else said, it feels a bit like spoon feeding the audience to say "ah-HA! I'm onto you, you sneaky terminator, you". The reprogramming scene was amazing practical effects and was a ridiculous amount of work to throw away. I personally like it, but can see why a scary efficient director like Cameron would cut it. Arnie says he's a learning computer and he learns. job done. Again, it was extremely cool to see on a later watch. Arnie practicing his smile in the desert was hillarious and had me crying with laughter, but I can see why it was cut. I will ALWAYS watch the full version, but these little touches are the fine line Cameron walks without falling into campy T3 territory. Looking back without 90s rose tinted glasses, I SHOULD cringe at the Terminator no longer ripping hearts out of the bikers to take their clothes and then walking out to 'Bad to the Bone' or talking like a Bart Simpson reject, but it was added in just the right amount. Be honest - if T3 had pulled that poo poo we'd have slated it. I agree with whoever said they should have kept the T-1000 malfunctioning though. I never did quite understand how John knew his mother was the one behind until the director's cut showed the mangled feet. I'll probably get hate for this, but the Kyle "our son is all alone" and "on your feet soldier" scene fell flat for me and belonged on the cutting room floor. The original cut shows Sarah as a cold, broken bad rear end and that scene just felt too 'TV Movie' to me. Same as Kyle's tearful breakdown in T1 about plants and trees. Michael Biehn does crazy eyed, twitchy, damaged veteran like nobody else - but he's AWFUL at any emotions that don't involve "RUUUUN!". Neo Rasa posted:Realistically? It doesn't kill her because how can you have a movie about a mom and kid that involves a doppleganger type thing and NOT have a scene where someone has to guess who their real loved one is, plus she's an awesome character. Not to mention any oppurtunity to get Linda Hamilton's twin sister into the film should be taken. Dog_Meat fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
Rewatched T2 today it it makes a sort of sense that the T-1000 leaves Sarah alive. Initially it is trying to use her to lure John back, I assume it figures it's a better strategy since from its perspective John saw through his imitation once already when they had the phone call, and that was when he was fully functional and not malfunctioning. Then the T-800 arrives and the T-1000 turns its attention away from Sarah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Gatts posted:The tone and what Arnold and the TX are in T3 is not the same as in T2 or T1. It isn't as serious and tries for more fun. His performance is good and in line likEly with the direction. I really like it when the Terminator sacrifices himself for John and says, "Go! We will meet again." And you can tell there's real feeling in his voice. That was one of like two parts of that movie that actually got an emotional reaction out of me. I don't know why. I guess I'm just a sucker for Robo-Arnie learning how to love.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Darko posted:Something like that happened with the T1000 on the show. That whole sub-plot with the underwater T1000s was cool as hell, they could see the war was destroying the planet and probably the time stream so they became a splinter group. Genesys won't have any of that probably but it was a neat idea at least! I have T2 on laser-disc and I can't wait to find a working player, all of Camerons films translate really well to LD.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I really like it when the Terminator sacrifices himself for John and says, "Go! We will meet again." And you can tell there's real feeling in his voice. The sequence between "You are about the fail that mission" and that point is actually good and it's a shame the rest of the movie doesn't come close it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:I really like it when the Terminator sacrifices himself for John and says, "Go! We will meet again." And you can tell there's real feeling in his voice. It hits because the line is simultaneously emotional and an ice cold efficient fact because we know that this T-850 kills John himself before being reprogrammed and sent back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Rewatched T2 today it it makes a sort of sense that the T-1000 leaves Sarah alive. Initially it is trying to use her to lure John back, I assume it figures it's a better strategy since from its perspective John saw through his imitation once already when they had the phone call, and that was when he was fully functional and not malfunctioning. Then the T-800 arrives and the T-1000 turns its attention away from Sarah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:I totally forgot that the T1000 gets interrupted while interrogating her, and then she has an opportunity to escape. Good catch. So did I. Which is worrying as I was one of those kids who knew every line, scene and detail off by heart. When my girlfriend watched the film for the first time she was looking away from the screen because she hates anything to do with poking eyes. The last thing she saw was the T-1000's blade extending towards Sarah's eyeball. Then she hears the "SPLOOOORTCH!" noise of the T-800 ramming the bar down the T-1000's shoulder and she shouted "Jesus, what the gently caress did he do?!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
If you think about it, T2 actually refutes the idea that destroying Skynet is the best way to change the future, because if the T-800 was able to learn to value human life, presumably Skynet could be reworked to the same end. I'm going to poo poo myself laughing if Genisys has the same idea and ends with Skynet being reprogrammed into the backbone of a communist utopia, since its existence is inevitable.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:If you think about it, T2 actually refutes the idea that destroying Skynet is the best way to change the future, because if the T-800 was able to learn to value human life, presumably Skynet could be reworked to the same end. That was one idea for the ending of Salvation. Skynet had a colony of humans of some kind and was taking care of them under its rule. It just had to eliminate a lot of the population to help foster a new world. If i can dig up the article I will.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:If you think about it, T2 actually refutes the idea that destroying Skynet is the best way to change the future, because if the T-800 was able to learn to value human life, presumably Skynet could be reworked to the same end. Hmm I don't think it counts for much once you've wiped out billions of people. Neo Rasa posted:It hits because the line is simultaneously emotional and an ice cold efficient fact because we know that this T-850 kills John himself before being reprogrammed and sent back. It's also a good bit of dark humor like the "Of course, I'm a Terminator" or "He'll live" lines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
The original ending of Salvation was exactly the premise of Elysium. Rather than being an AI that malfunctioned or went crazy, Skynet was revealed to be doing exactly what it was programmed to do: defend 1% of the population against the other 99%. Its only sin was doing exactly what it was told by foolish humans who thought the invisible hand, set free, would create a utopia. These wealthy lived in a gated community that Skynet had set aside for them, with robot butlers and such. John Connor would then do the Jesus Christ thing, dying and being reborn as, (essentially) the holy spirit controlling a good robot. This would hint towards an eventual Elysium-like ending where Skynet is reprogrammed to defend 100% of the population. This anticapitalistic message is still present on the film, but with the difference that Skynet kills even the richest so that it can embody capitalism at its absolute purest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
That isn't what Skynet was programmed to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 01:28
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:If you think about it, T2 actually refutes the idea that destroying Skynet is the best way to change the future, because if the T-800 was able to learn to value human life, presumably Skynet could be reworked to the same end. the tv series plays with this idea during its second season
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
It doesn't really matter what it was programmed to do, it's self-aware. It does what it wants, like any of us.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:It hits because the line is simultaneously emotional and an ice cold efficient fact because we know that this T-850 kills John himself before being reprogrammed and sent back. Holy gently caress I forgot about that plot detail I thought he was referring to a difference T-850. That makes that scene that much more powerful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
What do you suppose was going through the T-1000's mind right after it threw Arnold through the window of the clothing store, when it was staring at that silver mannequin? "Hey, I know that guy?" Somebody like Xenomrph probably knows the canonical answer. I remember reading one of those novelizations of T2 once upon a time, the only bit I remember is where the T-1000 felt pain for the first time being exposed to the liquid nitrogen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
The reason why the show was relatively good, no matter what detractors who never watched many of the episodes say, is that it took the T2 script and basically ran with the ideas. It was the definition of hit and miss, true, but many of the ideas that Cameron breached in the first two movies were addressed there, making non future war movies kind of superfluous unless they mange to -not- hit on one of the many things the show touched, themewise and plotwise. This movie is doing the multiple timeline play on each other thing, apparently, but the show even did that already, leading to one of the most shocking episodes of anything I've seen (Kyle's brother, haha).
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
I watched the entire show and found it relatively uninteresting and oftentimes undermining what made the two films interesting and also the story had been completely told by the end of Terminator 2. Like "Skynet learns the value of human life" is uninteresting to me because the horror of Skynet is there's never any direct interaction with it and it's like some unseen force. The cycle of violence that creates the time travel cycle that is eventually broken by humanity taking fate into its own hands was far more interesting than any of the explorations the show made. The films said most of what the show tried to say better. Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:I watched the entire show and found it relatively uninteresting and oftentimes undermining what made the two films interesting and also the story had been completely told by the end of Terminator 2. The first season, I'd agree with you on, and I basically watched it for shits and giggles, but once it started actually opening it, it basically became the idea of "elseworld" comics, where, free from continuity, different writers could take the story and themes wherever they felt, which would result in new things that were hit or miss, but some worth exploring. When unleashed, some very interesting possibilities opened up. The natural progression of the idea, once T2 happened, was basically that, a) you have a bunch of robots that would eventually become self aware wandering around, and b) the timestream is open to infinite possibilities once opened. There is actually a wealth of possibilities that can happen with those things, but only the show explored it to ANY degree, outside of the end of T3. I still do kind of like the fancut of T3 that cuts out most of the crap, and manages to have decent cutting/editing and maintain the score. I actually do feel that's a worthy sequel to T2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Like "Skynet learns the value of human life" is uninteresting to me because the horror of Skynet is there's never any direct interaction with it and it's like some unseen force. The cycle of violence that creates the time travel cycle that is eventually broken by humanity taking fate into its own hands was far more interesting than any of the explorations the show made. The films said most of what the show tried to say better. Skynet really (edit whoops) didn't learn the value of human life in the show. Skynet was always Skynet, the thing was, just like humans birthed Skynet, Skynet birthed A.I.s that ALSO became self aware who were attempting similar to Skynet. It became a circular loop in more ways than one, and something none of the movies really explored. Darko fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Let me preface this by saying that I love Terminator 2. Like, "consider it a foundational aspect of my childhood" love it. Okay. Now that being said, I've always been curious how different (and possibly more effective) the film might have been if it were played a little more ambiguous in the beginning as to who the villain was. Now, I know we're talking about an early-nineties Arnie flick (where he can do no wrong), and I know the trailers gave away the twist of the T-800 being a protector right out of the gate, but it still makes me wonder. The thing is, the foundational stuff to play it more unclear is there: you see the T-800 inflict violence upon the bikers, whilst the T-1000 killing the patrol cop happens off screen (though I believe there's a metallic shanking sound heard). Imagine if the T-800 had flat-out murdered the bikers though, like it did the punks in the first film. Imagine if it was made completely unclear if the T-1000 was a Terminator, or another resistant fighter sent back in time like Kyle Reese. Imagine if you didn't know what the good/bad dynamic of dynamic was until the shootout at the mall scene. I'll also go step one further: I think one of the major flaws in the film, as it is, is that there's this whole morality play where John teaches the T-800 not to kill. But it's essentially rendered impotent by the fact that the T-800 hasn't killed anybody in the movie by that point. Even the dude caught in the crossfire at the mall more-or-less gets taken out by the T-1000. If the T-800 had been tearing through civilians at the biker joint and the mall with reckless abandon, there would be some legitimate tension as to whether or not the T-800 would slip up and defy it's no command each time it came across a perceived threat. I wonder if that kind of tone was ever considered. Cameron strikes me as too smart (and too relentless) of a writer not to have at least given it some thought. But I do wonder if either the studio or Schwarzenegger pushed him into painting the T-800 as more boldly heroic right from the start, rather than as an actual, unfeeling killing machine, which slowly gains morality as the story progresses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
There is that one scene after Arnold and John get away from the T-1000 when he is about the just execute some guy and John steps in and stops him. That somewhat accomplishes what you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:14
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Hmm I don't think it counts for much once you've wiped out billions of people. Fortunately this is a franchise with, y'know, time travel, where "right before Skynet gets activated" is probably one of the buttons on the machine.  e: Also, the whole thing with John teaching the T-800 not to kill works even though he hasn't killed anyone yet, because we know the T-800 from the first movie as being a relentless killer. In case we forgot about that, the inciting incident is the T-800 just casually talking about killing people like it's not a big deal. SALT CURES HAM fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Sef! posted:I wonder if that kind of tone was ever considered. Cameron strikes me as too smart (and too relentless) of a writer not to have at least given it some thought. But I do wonder if either the studio or Schwarzenegger pushed him into painting the T-800 as more boldly heroic right from the start, rather than as an actual, unfeeling killing machine, which slowly gains morality as the story progresses. I absolutely think Arnold had something to do with that. Also, (R-rating be damned) the movie is clearly trying to appeal to a younger audience. I don't think you make your main character a teenager to rope in the adults. That seems to have worked perfectly for a lot of us - T2 was the single greatest thing I had ever encountered when I first saw it at an impressionable age, and to this day I still have a hard time objectively thinking of it as Just A Movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
I find it weird that people think the Terminator in T2 should kill, like, a dozen people when it would be trying to maintain as low a profile as possible in the interest of protecting John Connor. It doesn't help the mission if he runs the risk of getting all the cops in the LA area after him because he cut a swath of destruction across the city getting there. I showed the first two films to my girlfriend, one after the other. She had no knowledge of Terminator whatsoever. She thought the T-800 was the bad guy (or working with the T-1000 'because the film is about two Terminators') up until he told John to get down. The fact that he wasn't killing people didn't enter her mind, because he was still stabbing people and giving that one guy pretty severe burns. It works really well as-is and having the T-800 tear through civilians in the mall with "reckless abandon" and "defy it's no command" demonstrates a surprising lack of understanding the character of the Terminator. It is not a person. It follows orders to the point of tearing off its own limbs. Even when given the ability to think for itself, it is still beholden by coded commands that render it unable to self-terminate. "I know now why you cry, but it is something I can never do" is the key phrase and the whole trick of the film is that it puts the audience and John in the same POV, of seeing the killing machine as an ideal father.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:I find it weird that people think the Terminator in T2 should kill, like, a dozen people when it would be trying to maintain as low a profile as possible in the interest of protecting John Connor. It doesn't help the mission if he runs the risk of getting all the cops in the LA area after him because he cut a swath of destruction across the city getting there. Well that was the thing, Cameron intended that the T-800 being on the "good guys side" was going to be a surprise. He was super pissed off when the trailers made it obvious the T-800 was fighting for Conner.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
Sef! posted:I wonder if that kind of tone was ever considered. Cameron strikes me as too smart (and too relentless) of a writer not to have at least given it some thought. But I do wonder if either the studio or Schwarzenegger pushed him into painting the T-800 as more boldly heroic right from the start, rather than as an actual, unfeeling killing machine, which slowly gains morality as the story progresses. When I look at making of materials for T2, "NO ARNOLD DON'T PLAY A VILLAIN AGAIN DON'T DO IT!" is definitely a major principle behind T2's entire production, like his being a good guy instead of the monster is why he even chose to be in it, so I'm sure in general it's why he beats people up in the bar instead of just gutting them with his bare hands. That said, it's not like he's exactly gentle with anyone that gives him trouble. The Terminator as a concept was already pretty iconic at that point so I think audiences got the point even if he doesn't necessarily kill anyone outright. I forget in the extended version if he specifies how he was reprogrammed by the resistance though. Like maybe he's only supposed to kill humans if they're a threat to John Connor himself, he was more than happy to let John's mom die if it meant they could get some distance instead. And again, in T1 he had to kill the gun shop owner because how else was he going to roll out with all those guns immediately. He guts Bill Paxton because they mess with him. When he takes the shotgun and glasses from the bartender the guy's no longer a threat because everyone there clearly just got owned. The bartender's only concern was about the Terminator taking that guy's bike, so the situation to their eyes was still "man this dude just beat the poo poo out some of my drunk regulars" like it was a typical barroom brawl. It would have made it much more difficult for him to track John down if the situation was "dude just rolled into this truck stop and massacred everyone." Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Sef! posted:Let me preface this by saying that I love Terminator 2. Like, "consider it a foundational aspect of my childhood" love it. It would have been unclear. T2 was JUST on, so I am clear on this. The opening of T2 kind of matched T1. Arnold approaches the punks/biker bar, the "resistance guy" confronts cops and gets clothes. It's practically exactly the same. Arnold doesn't kill anyone, but neither does Patrick; without the commercials/trailers, you assume he's just a more badass resistance guy than Reese and just punches the cop out. And it's a clean punch as opposed to Arnold breaking limbs and stuff. Then Patrick approaches John's family relatively nicely and acts like a human being! A little off and creepy, but still much more personable than the Terminator we saw in the first movie, while he acts almost exactly the same. He smiles, he reacts, he's almost normal. He just seems like a more trained soldier. The contrast is about as clear as it is in the first movie; it's just Patrick's more capable resistance soldier against Arnold's stiff Terminator that doesn't punch through people and just breaks them apart, this time. It's about as ambiguous as it needs to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
And speaking of the sheer amount of violence in T2, don't forget to pick up your action figures, kids!  The endo skeleton was the best one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
That T-1000 doesn't look like the character in the movie at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 04:38
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:And speaking of the sheer amount of violence in T2, don't forget to pick up your action figures, kids! I had all 4 of those, and I was 5 when this movie came out. Purple shirt T-800 was my favorite. I also had this:  It tasted terrible
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
For most movie licensed ones they'd just use already existing molds for the body so a resemblance wouldn't happen often. Plus surely it's cheaper in some way if they made what are technically "toys based on the movie" and not "Arnold action figure," etc. That's how we got the Jeff Goldlum figure for Jurassic Park that looks like he could tear someone's head off with his thumb and index finger.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:It works really well as-is and having the T-800 tear through civilians in the mall with "reckless abandon" and "defy it's no command" demonstrates a surprising lack of understanding the character of the Terminator. It is not a person. It follows orders to the point of tearing off its own limbs. Even when given the ability to think for itself, it is still beholden by coded commands that render it unable to self-terminate. "I know now why you cry, but it is something I can never do" is the key phrase and the whole trick of the film is that it puts the audience and John in the same POV, of seeing the killing machine as an ideal father. I think you're missing my original point. I'm not saying that the T-800 should kill without purpose, but by creating arbitrary circumstances where it doesn't do what it is literally designed to do throughout the film feels forced, and undercuts some of the main themes that the film strives to achieve. Do you not remember the Technoir scene from the first film? When it comes to achieving its goals, the question of collateral damage is not a factor for the Terminators - and that's the whole point. John Conner's order to the Terminator "not to kill" should, narratively speaking, be a major first step in making it "more human." In practice, since there has been no precedent for that behavior, it feels like kind of a non-starter (other than to establish that, yes, Arnie is the good guy, and yes, he will not be killing innocent people in this film). If you consider the T-800 to be the exact same machine at the beginning of both of the first two films (albeit with different missions), than the point where John gives that order should act as the point of divergence in separating those two machines as two distinct characters. And, going with that logic, it would have made more sense for the T-800 to kill the bikers in its opening scene. I mean, one of them puts a lit cigar out on the Terminator's chest. The punks in the first flick do less to antagonize it, and one of them gets a hole through the chest for it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
I'd hardly call it arbitrary though. Even if we remove external issues regarding the production, Arnold's marketability as a hero, etc. on a base level OF COURSE The Terminator punches a dude's gut open and is described as tearing someone's heart out because The Terminator was very deliberately being made to be evocative of noir and slasher cinema. This obviously isn't what Terminator 2, as a movie, is going for in any way. It doesn't really matter much in the big scheme of things if the bikers literally just handed Arnold their clothes and motorcycle and said have a nice day or if he skinned them all alive and arranged their internal organs in alphabetical order. The scene just exists so that the movie can establish quickly that the T-800 is present and has transportation and a gun already already because he's real strong compared to an average human. Some dark comedy relief before things really get rolling (especially when viewed right after T1).
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I'd hardly call it arbitrary though. Even if we remove external issues regarding the production, Arnold's marketability as a hero, etc. on a base level OF COURSE The Terminator punches a dude's gut open and is described as tearing someone's heart out because The Terminator was very deliberately being made to be evocative of noir and slasher cinema. This obviously isn't what Terminator 2, as a movie, is going for in any way. It doesn't really matter much in the big scheme of things if the bikers literally just handed Arnold their clothes and motorcycle and said have a nice day or if he skinned them all alive and arranged their internal organs in alphabetical order. The scene just exists so that the movie can establish quickly that the T-800 is present and has transportation and a gun already already because he's real strong compared to an average human. Some dark comedy relief before things really get rolling (especially when viewed right after T1). That's a fair point. Given that the plots of the first two films are to intrinsically linked together, it's easy to forget that they basically belong to two completely different film genres, each of which plays by drastically different rules of structure. Still, within the actual narrative of the in-movie universe itself, there are some noticeable inconsistencies in the behaviors of the Terminators. I'm not advocating for an absurdly, over-the-top increase in violence or anything; I just think that the plot point of Conner ordering the T-800 not to kill feels somewhat toothless without any sense of stakes being established in Terminator 2, if taken as a singular text.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 06:46 |
|
|
I'm not missing your original point because your original point is stupid. The Terminators in the first two films are completely different with a completely different set of objectives. Maybe you can tell me why a super-logical machine given a mission to defend a young child for what seems to be an indefinite period of time would risk attracting significant amounts of police attention by killing people in a biker bar and in a shopping mall? These are public places and while it isn't the age of smartphones and Internet, a six foot dude in black leather on a motorcycle probably wouldn't get too far if he was leaving a trail of bodies in his wake with "reckless abandon". I'm not even going to mention that a Terminator is not a character that should be associated with the term "reckless". Terminators are exacting and precise. You act like the Uncle Bob Terminator should be offended by people putting out a cigarette on its chest when the action can't do anything to hurt it - and the act of ignoring it might even be more helpful to its goals! The Terminator is designed to kill, yes, but while Terminators are extremely single-minded they are not stupid. In the first film, the Terminator is there to kill every Sarah Connor in the city and there is little that the police can do to stop it. In T2, the Terminator is there to protect and how can it protect John Connor if the police are hounding it? All it would take is one bullet hitting John to change the future. It maintains as low a profile as possible. Your original point would create a completely different film. The fact that the Terminator has a different mission is what completely alters its character. This should not be hard to understand. John gives the Terminator the order not to kill because he - and we, the audience - know what Arnold might start doing at the drop of a hat. We don't need to see something in the film we already know and which the characters already have reason to believe. There is precedent for that behaviour. It's called the entire first film and the fact that it approaches violence without a care in the world in the second film.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:13
|
|