|
ruby idiot railed posted:Weren't they drumming to the beat? Kind of showing, along with the Sarah Conner pictures on the wall, how Pops had gradually become more human? I think the beat drumming was a way of saying "This one's done". Like how you take a shot. Slam that poo poo down hard.
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:02 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:No joke, it actually is an incredibly surreal fuckin movie. There's so much shape-changing, and the effects are fantastic. Surreal was the word I was looking for. CelticPredator posted:I think the beat drumming was a way of saying "This one's done". Like how you take a shot. Slam that poo poo down hard. Right, I was trying to decide if I could skip the first part of act 3 there because I needed to go to the bathroom, but I thought they weren't racing so much as doing the clips to the beat off Sarah's boombox. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I think The Matrix's tentacle Sentinels and Interstellar's TARS/CASE bush robots are another counterpoint. Getting stuck on human morphology in an ever-adapting world is just romanticism. Right, it's more a characterization of Skynet that it doesn't use totally machine robots, and is partly why Salvation misses the whole point a hell of a lot (excepting the Helena Bonham Carter bits, that was paradoxically on point). Basically, this movie gets it that Skynet would itself have a "Borg queen" as it were. e: what's the most consistent characterization that is used to describe terminators in 1 and 2? It's not "efficient". It's more like "relentless". quote:Kyle: Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. quote:Kyle Reese: You still don't get it, do you? He'll find her! That's what he does! That's ALL he does! You can't stop him! He'll wade through you, reach down her throat and pull her fuckin' heart out! quote:Sarah Connor: [voiceover] Watching John with the machine, it was suddenly so clear. The terminator, would never stop. It would never leave him, and it would never hurt him, never shout at him, or get drunk and hit him, or say it was too busy to spend time with him. It would always be there. And it would die, to protect him. Of all the would-be fathers who came and went over the years, this thing, this machine, was the only one who measured up. In an insane world, it was the sanest choice. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:35
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:Weren't they drumming to the beat? Kind of showing, along with the Sarah Conner pictures on the wall, how Pops had gradually become more human? i was really surprised that despite the issues with pops' arm and leg, they didn't come into play in the final fight. i thought, y'know, he'd grab the nano-terminator but his hand would fail at a crucial moment or something like that.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I rewatched salvation this weekend, that movie still fits in for me. It shows the war, just what needed to be seen. The prologue retcons how Kyle and John meet. CelticPredator posted:That was weird, but the weirdest scene was the bullet loading race thing. I didn't understand why that was funny. I guess the Terminator's hand locking up was kind of funny, but it just didn't feel right. It starts off as a comedy scene, but then transitions to the real thematic point: Arnold's real-life mortality. Note how he lives on in the eyes of a little girl. ruby idiot railed posted:Surreal was the word I was looking for. There's a shot - not a scene - where the baddie turns his body into a cloud of nanomachine rail-guns and tries to shred Arnold. Compare that to how uncreative the evil dinosaur's powers are in Jurassic World. I don't know how anyone could be unhappy with this. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:There's a shot - not a scene - where the baddie turns his body into a cloud of nanomachine rail-guns and tries to shred Arnold. Compare that to how uncreative the evil dinosaur's powers are in Jurassic World. As an aside, what did you think of the John Connor characterization from the second act where it almost seems like they were taking all the leftover bits from Salvation that you thought were so interesting?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:Right, it's more a characterization of Skynet that it doesn't use totally machine robots, and is partly why Salvation misses the whole point a hell of a lot (excepting the Helena Bonham Carter bits, that was paradoxically on point). I haven't seen this one yet but did they abandon the flying hunter-killers and the big tank terminator robots in the future war? From the earlier movies I got the assumption that 'terminators' came in all sorts of shapes and sizes, the humanoid ones were just the infiltration units.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
No amount of reading can take away the callbacks dawg.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:No amount of reading can take away the callbacks dawg. Callbacks are a feature, not a bug, of the Terminator franchise. WarLocke posted:I haven't seen this one yet but did they abandon the flying hunter-killers and the big tank terminator robots in the future war? They have flying hunter killers and walker tanks, did not see any of the big treaded tanks. You can probably assume those are there somewhere though, the only bits of the future war we see is kind of a small action on the sidelines of the main assault on Cheyenne. Salvation had all the extra poo poo like the huge bipedal harvester, the motorcycle bots, the tentacle bots, the train bots, etc. As far as the future war in 1 and 2 were concerned, you also saw disproportionately a LOT of t-800 endoskeletons, so they were absolutely mass produced and used everywhere, not just for infiltration. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:Salvation had all the extra poo poo like the huge bipedal harvester, the motorcycle bots, the tentacle bots, the train bots, etc. What are you talking about, T3 didn't have any future war scenes 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:What are you talking about, T3 didn't have any future war scenes
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:There's a shot - not a scene - where the baddie turns his body into a cloud of nanomachine rail-guns and tries to shred Arnold. Compare that to how uncreative the evil dinosaur's powers are in Jurassic World. I don't know how anyone could be unhappy with this. Was that the part right after the Terminator game theory scene?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:
Goddamn does this make me sad. Can't we just clone Arnold forever and forever?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:I haven't seen this one yet but did they abandon the flying hunter-killers and the big tank terminator robots in the future war? There's big spidery looking killer bots that mow down 35 people in the future war part. It sweeps it's laser gun and a whole squad of soldiers turns to loving ash.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:As far as the future war in 1 and 2 were concerned, you also saw disproportionately a LOT of t-800 endoskeletons, so they were absolutely mass produced and used everywhere, not just for infiltration. I remember reading something recently that the damage in Judgement Day was largely done to the northern hemisphere, which made me think that I'd like to see a Terminator Future War film set in South America, Africa, or the Middle East. Would everyone think that it was America invading countries or would they realize it was something worse? Firstborn posted:Goddamn does this make me sad. Can't we just clone Arnold forever and forever? The Terminator franchise arguably presents the idea that if we could, we shouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Bullshit. Arnold is too cool to die. A true icon. I hope in the year 3027 he has a religion based around his worship.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:Bullshit. Arnold is too cool to die. A true icon. I hope in the year 3027 he has a religion based around his worship. Unltil the schism between Arnoldians and Ahnoldians, at least
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:09
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The prologue retcons how Kyle and John meet. I agree with all of this. But yeah, the nanomachine terminator blasting Arnold with his 'afterimages' was incredibly cool as is the way he, like, ate the flesh off his arm. That's the sort of thing that really differentiated it from the T-1000.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
I hope that we get a prequel to this instead for the next movieI just want 2 hours of a single parent Terminator. I spent the entire movie wanting to know more about the 1973 attack on Sarah at her parent's cottage. T-1000 canoe. Ridiculous fun. It was so refreshing to walk out of this movie not hating it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
I want that movie, too, but I don't think we should do a Roger Rabbit with 1984 CGI Arnold the entire movie. It also means you have to attach a child actress, which is bleaghyp.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Safe Driver posted:I just want 2 hours of a single parent Terminator. I spent the entire movie wanting to know more about the 1973 attack on Sarah at her parent's cottage. T-1000 canoe. Ridiculous fun. I liked that there were little lines that hinted that the Terminator had really learned how to be a parent figure over time. Saying "that is a very immature response" or "Sarah Conner, seat belt" felt like poo poo he's said a dozen times to her growing up. I know this likely unintentional, but if you take the Bad Terminators from 1/2/Genesis, you get a shift. The T-800 is Rock/Earth (solid, concrete), the T-1000 is Water (duh), the ConnorBot is Air/Wind (freeform, flowing but not water-like, capable of losing all solidity)
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:As an aside, what did you think of the John Connor characterization from the second act where it almost seems like they were taking all the leftover bits from Salvation that you thought were so interesting? It was initially tough to accept that they retconned Salvation, because I love that characterization of Connor. But I got over it quickly because Mecha-Connor is the best new character since Marcus. He's so weird. Really, the heart of the film is the conflict between these two father figures over the fate of their dumb kids, which is why I didn't really care that Kyle and Sarah are allegedly worst actors ever. They're perfectly fine, and the robots are the actual protagonists. I'm not sure exactly which aspects of Salvation you're referring to, though. Do you mean the idea that John is a loser who's 'just cheating' and falls apart once he has to make his own decisions? Firstborn posted:Goddamn does this make me sad. Can't we just clone Arnold forever and forever? The entire point of this movie is that we've already accomplished this. Arnold will live forever now. That's part of what makes the ending so dark. Remember how, in T2, it was necessary to melt Arnold in order to save the future? In this one, he melts and comes back a flawless digital copy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
WarLocke posted:I haven't seen this one yet but did they abandon the flying hunter-killers and the big tank terminator robots in the future war? The future war part, hell the entire first half, are exactly what you would've expected Terminator 3 to be in 1995. I'd completely forgotten the Terminator: 2029/Rampage/Future Shock/Skynet games existed until seeing the future war sequence and having memories about all the early/mid-90s terminator merchandising.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
So that was.... a legitimately good film. I went in with my expectations in the gutter and came out saying that I thought it was a terminator film that is honestly on par with either of the originals. Weird.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
I can't be the only one that, for a moment, thought that JK Simmons was going to play the recasted character of Dr. Silberman.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Justin Godscock posted:I can't be the only one that, for a moment, thought that JK Simmons was going to play the recasted character of Dr. Silberman. I seriously thought that was the role. For as good as Simmons did, he was completely wasted. Same with Matt Smith, really.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:I seriously thought that was the role. For as good as Simmons did, he was completely wasted. Same with Matt Smith, really. I'm sure we'll see them again. JK Simmons was criminally underused, but he's such a drat good actor that his few scenes were so enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 07:40
|
|
|
Loved this film. It had a few stumbles for sure, but overall I'd certainly put it in the same camp as the first two. Arnold was the best thing in it and the Nanomachine Terminator was a brilliant idea for upgrading the T1000 without entirely retreading that territory. I still don't get why they felt the need to use John Conner for it (maybe someone can explain that to me) but it was still mesmerizing to watch and sufficiently weird and terrifying. Did John Conner actually switch sides, or was he brainwashed? I really couldn't tell. Though Skynet's line about the Terminators destroyed by the resistance just being slaves seems to imply John wasn't in control of himself. Am I the only one who feels that they're using this film to distance themselves from the Sarah/John/Kyle part of the story and are steering it into an AI versus AI story? It seemed to me that the biggest subplot of the film was the T-800 seemingly becoming self-aware due to his time spent raising Sarah. He certainly seemed to be acting out of actual devotion and not just programming. And as such it was really the story of a self-aware T-800 fighting to protect a humanity that he had grown fond of from his evil counterpart, Skynet. I also liked how they finally got around to implying that Sarah's "no fate" monologue was bullshit. No matter what either side does, the major characters are stuck in a loop and the broad strokes of the major events will always happen in some form or another. Even if the details are changed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 07:42
|
|
|
Esroc posted:I still don't get why they felt the need to use John Conner for it (maybe someone can explain that to me) but it was still mesmerizing to watch and sufficiently weird and terrifying. Did John Conner actually switch sides, or was he brainwashed? I really couldn't tell. Though Skynet's line about the Terminators destroyed by the resistance just being slaves seems to imply John wasn't in control of himself. I think it's important to look at exactly what's going on. The basic thesis of the film is in the scene where the young guy says "yeah I'm going to be connected 24/7" or whatever, and Sarah replies with "connected to what?" This idea has little or nothing to do with the nukes in the opening scene. That future has been successfully prevented. The nuclear war is over. Rather, the threat is embodied by the villain: Mecha-Connor himself - an augmented human who is explicitly not a robot a slave. Matt Smith explains that the nanomachine bodies are something different. Mecha-Connor is not connected to Skynet. So, he's connected to... what? Put simply, Mecha-Connor is a human being acting of his own free will. And while the heroes are fighting against his Microsoft-like monopoly, they are fighting for - based on the old logic of the 1980s - 'freedom of choice' against vague totalitarianism. And that means they're falling right into the enemy's hands. If the enemy is the capitalist system, 'freedom of choice' is not going to fix anything. This film is a direct attack on the 'blow up one bad corporation' ending of Terminator 2, but goes further: the resistance were too successful at restoring society. They're the bad guys too, and this Sarah doesn't realize that she's headed down the same path. The claim that 'Genisys is Skynet' is something that Kyle invented, because there's actually little clear basis for that. The holograms of Matt Smith at the end are based on Connor's memories of what the computer program 'should look like', but there's no reason to assume that Genisys will blow up the world like Skynet did. Instead, the point seems to be that, in 2017, Genisys doesn't need to. This is a film where the heroes win the battle but explicitly lose the war - and the only source of hope is the idea that they are "old, but not obsolete." That's Arnold as working-class hero, appearing from a plot hole and empowered by the fact that he has no free will. The ultimate twist, I wager, is that a benevolent Skynet sent Arnold back - to kill Matt Smith. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 08:04 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 08:00
|
|
|
Completely figured it was Silberman as well. Firstborn posted:Same with Matt Smith, really. I dunno, I think Matt Smith showed that he's capable of (for lack of a better term) dry menace that I like for a Skynet. Esroc posted:I still don't get why they felt the need to use john Conner for it (maybe someone can explain that to me) but it was still mesmerizing to watch and sufficiently weird and terrifying. From a thematic perspective, the reason was shock/surprise for the audience (I heard the director is mildly annoyed that the twist got into all the ads) and symbolic of how hosed up and changed the general arithmetic is now. In universe, I treat it as 80% AI dickery/spite/hate (Fucker keeps trying to kill me and avoids dying every time I try? gently caress you, you're getting nanobotted and sent back in time to personally stop your mom from preventing my birth) and 20% knowledge. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 08:51 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 08:39
|
|
Esroc posted:Loved this film. It had a few stumbles for sure, but overall I'd certainly put it in the same camp as the first two. Arnold was the best thing in it and the Nanomachine Terminator was a brilliant idea for upgrading the T1000 without entirely retreading that territory. I still don't get why they felt the need to use John Conner for it (maybe someone can explain that to me) but it was still mesmerizing to watch and sufficiently weird and terrifying. Did John Conner actually switch sides, or was he brainwashed? I really couldn't tell. Though Skynet's line about the Terminators destroyed by the resistance just being slaves seems to imply John wasn't in control of himself. The nanomachines replicated him perfectly, converted his flesh and blood into metal stuff down to the cellular level Ship of Theseus style. Essentially, he was a Terminator with John's memories - as we see by him knowing where to find Sarah's hideout. If you're going to use someone to stop Sarah, why not use her son who knows the most about her? That's just how it seemed to me.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
Sorry, hit post when planned on adding this to earlier post
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
Seen a few people saying how good the effects are in the film. I take it they've been cleaned up immensley from the trailers then? Because they looked awful. What got me was the T-1000's tiny, bity little spike arms. Like they just CGI'd his arms to go to a point instead of in T2 where I presume Patrick had prostetics which made them longer and more menacing/effective.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
BBC radio review said E. Clark did well, the plot was very complicated and contradictory and that the basic menace of T1 and T2 was absent because Linda and Pops were already a team prepared for battle and therefore didn't seem in danger. Haven't seen the film myself so I don't know if these are fair comments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
ChogsEnhour posted:Seen a few people saying how good the effects are in the film. I take it they've been cleaned up immensley from the trailers then? Because they looked awful. Seems like they were. But the trailers also show the effects shots at their flashiest (like the bus launching into the air). What they fail to convey is A) the sheer amount of effects work and B) the fact that most of it is fairly subdued. In context, the T-1000 launching its arm into the air, catching it, and then tossing it like a spear is just a minor beat in a lengthy action/chase scene full of weird poo poo. It's not obnoxious 'comin at ya' stuff. It barely even registers. Josef K. Sourdust posted:BBC radio review said E. Clark did well, the plot was very complicated and contradictory and that the basic menace of T1 and T2 was absent because Linda and Pops were already a team prepared for battle and therefore didn't seem in danger. Haven't seen the film myself so I don't know if these are fair comments. The plot is probably confusing if you're trying to figure out how time travel works, but makes perfect sense as presented visually. The only thing to get is that the 'future war' in the prologue - and, by extension, the previous films - exist only as a memory in the minds of a few characters. Once Kyle goes back in time, the entire series reboots. Also, I'd say that the question of whether the characters might die isn't interesting in the first place. The real question in the film is what they'll do with immortality.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:... From a thematic perspective, the reason was shock/surprise for the audience (I heard the director is mildly annoyed that the twist got into all the ads) and symbolic of how hosed up and changed the general arithmetic is now. ... He was only annoyed with the trailer? The twist is spoiled in the loving movie poster. Maybe you have a different one in the US, but the Nordic poster has the new terminator smack in the middle. Attack on Princess fucked around with this message at 10:24 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 10:21
|
|
|
The FX in the film is definitely better than in the trailers. Compare the Arnold VS Arnold fight.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
Yeah, they really should've kept John a secret. It's sad because there is quite a lot of time devoted to Reese and Sarah trusting John. It's kind of like the T2 fakeout where we think the T100 is a good guy because he's a cop and Arnold was the antagonist in the first.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:the T2 fakeout Unfortunately that was also revealed straight up in the advertising.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:02 |
|
|
I didn't realize until I took a sci-fi lit/film class that it was even supposed to be a fakeout because it was always just "ARNOLD IS THE GOOD GUY THIS TIME" It's a shame because in hindsight it works super well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 15:50
|
|
