Terminator 3 and Terminator Salvation discussion refugee camp

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Terminator 3 and Terminator Salvation discussion refugee camp

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

zVxTeflon posted:

To be fair the actress is saddled with arguably the worst character in GoT (and definitely the worst plot) so I don't really hold that against her.

# ¿ Dec 5, 2014 23:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 17, 2024 00:11

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

MechaStalin posted:

Wait, if Skynet is a distributed computing system why would it nuke almost all of its own brainpower?

It uses the Internet of Things to distribute independently capable copies of itself? I mean it's already cloud computing software that thinks on a collective level.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2014 01:56

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

There is absolutely nothing plausible about robot skeletons from the future. That's why Sarah Connor is institutionalized.

The minute you try to explain it in terms of efficient use of a time machine by a logical military AI with vast technological resources, the film breaks down completely.

Skynet could put a nuclear bomb in a pig carcass.

Listen we're having our 5,000th CD discussion of Time Travel Science and Accompanying Laws, there's no time to sit back and realize this is all fantasy.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 01:24

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Caros posted:

Opposition to militarisim, or even to the military industrial complex, is not by definition opposition to capitalism. Anarcho-Capitalists for example love them some capitalism while simultaneously hating the military.

SMG makes contrarian contemporary Marxist readings of films, it's really that simple and if this thread could be about anything else in addition to what he thinks that would be cool too.

I would suggest further reading, but he will just quote the relevant Zizek passages to you and you will probably just get even more mad trying to read Armond White, who is fond of also making personal attacks on filmmakers.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2014 03:23

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Milky Moor posted:

Yeah, it comes from the Terminator Vault book that came out recently. It only works when you consider T1 and T2. T3, T4 and TSCC all don't work with that premise. I personally like it.

It's pretty amusing, actually, and I wish they would use it in a movie.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2014 06:34

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

I was confused as to why they were still using conventional firearms in Salvation. Pretty much everything the movies teach us about terminators is that contemporary firearms do nothing to them. It would have been nice to see some lasergun designs or really anything that looked like James Cameron's 40K-style future war.

# ¿ Dec 15, 2014 19:18

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Sasquatch! posted:

It's interesting that Christian Bale attempted the same thing (wanting a different role that what was offered him), but while it completely worked for T1, it completely hosed Salvation up. I'm guessing it's because Bale wanted to be John Connor AND he wanted the character and the plot completely re-written to pump up his ego?

It could be that the script sucked and he wanted rewrites, which lots of big name actors do. It doesn't always have to be a malevolent plot by a petty ego.

# ¿ Dec 17, 2014 05:26

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

He's deliberately written as a brat, which honestly doesn't help.

# ¿ Dec 17, 2014 17:27

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Neo Rasa posted:

All of them. The base and frame for Afterburner and Super Hang-On were so versatile that basically any cabinet you ever see like that is actually Afterburner, Thunderblade, or Hang-On but with a different game's board and marquee stuff in it, with Afterburner briefly filling in in between new stuff or replacement games.

Man my wife and I watched Terminator: Salvation: The End Begins today thanks to Rifftrax. I love how everyone I show this movie too is like "Oh hey is THAT Terry Crews I thought I heard he was in this, uh, huh okay then." Everything about that movie makes no sense. Like I still can't believe how poor that movie is and how much wasted potential is in it. The disjointedness is legit hilarious though. I love that Bryce Dallas Howard seems like she's constantly about to have more than half a word of dialogue but then we cut to a different character or scene.

McG seriously had no idea what he was doing at all. Christian Bale is as "fantastic" as I remember too. I love the "WHAT ARE YOU!!" so much as Marcus is trundling off into a lake and how the resistance firebombs their own base twice over to capture one dude. The movie's worship of the human heart is an overly simple joke compared to how the other movies were about machines learning to be more than just a tool. It really is a fascinatingly awful film in how it goes for the lowest hanging fruit in every situation and yet still fails to delivery anything interesting to me.

The topless scene that McG was fighting to keep in because it was so important dramatically and for characterization purposes is really bizarre too like everyone else's performance in the movie. Moon Bloodgood removes her top, and notices that Marcus is not paying any attention to her, so she covers herself and turns around and stares at him awkwardly, this is like a minute long and both actors look visibly confused/embarrassed to even be alive knowing that they're in this movie. It's incredible. Look at it on Youtube.

I love how Christian Bale is a psychotically driven prophet for like, five seconds when they're testing the kill switch program on one of those snake robots with his delivery of "Destroy this thing." and such, like this was the only footage of the movie where he almost gave a poo poo.

Skynet still having an office complex, face on a monitor and so on will always be hilarious. Same with Marcus and "Helena Bonhma Carter's" first meeting in the prison prologue. The line about knowing what death tastes like

Anton Yelchin is great but again the script makes him look like a mega-chump. I love his lecture about the resistance coats and how he hasn't earn his yet and such.

Which brings to the best thing about Terminator: Salvation: the only thing from this prequel/sequel/reboot that actually carries over into any of the other films is that Kyle Reese learned how to tie a shotgun to his arm for when he does this in Terminator 1.

If it's any consolation it looks like Salvation killed McG's directing career.

# ¿ Dec 28, 2014 12:43

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Yeah completely mediocre movies like Terminator 3 and 4 aren't nearly as fun as outright awful stuff where no one can tell what they were thinking.

# ¿ Dec 29, 2014 23:18

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Sasquatch! posted:

I agree that getting bogged down in the details of time travel is where it turns into tedium, but the concept (and I guess the act?) of time travel is pretty fundamental to the story and is interesting as long as people don't start to sperg out with picking it apart. The big question for now is if Genisys is able to leverage the time travel as a cool concept that moves the story along and raises some potentially interesting questions or not.

There is seemingly a base assumption throughout CD that any time travel plot point has to be examined for its grounding in science, and outside of time travel movies where that's what the plot is actually about (relatively few of them) this is about as exciting as figuring out why Superman's clothes don't vaporize whenever he does anything.

# ¿ Jan 6, 2015 05:59

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4zhBQfqVCc

It's a Super Bowl ad, not much of anything new.

# ¿ Jan 30, 2015 06:07

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

True Lies is pretty much the last good Schwarzenegger movie. It's also next-level super-misogynist and probably couldn't get made today.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2015 19:50

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

I think what's most surprising about Arnold's story is how unlikely a star he was. 99 times out of 100, bodybuilders with thick accents go nowhere in the industry, and the 1980's and early 90's are littered with Arnold clones who were one and done. Then he turned around and invested all that money, so that he hasn't really made a good movie in 20 years but is still worth about a billion dollars.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2015 17:37

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Electromax posted:

I enjoyed when a friend brought over that Last Stand movie from a couple years ago, even. "I'M DA SHERIFF." Arnold just seems fun to watch.

Saw True Lies for the first time a few years ago after being shocked I had missed a post-T2 Arnold/Cameron team-up, but I didn't like it all that much. The bits about him forcing his wife to seduce some guy and generally humiliating her and others was pretty cringe-inducing (any scene with Paxton), suppose that was the point but it turned me off the movie a bit. Hated all the characters and the setpieces weren't as amazing 20 years later as they were been at the time.

Would choose T2, heck even Total Recall over that one any day. Didn't pick up a copy for the Arnold Action collection.

Even with all the stuff Schwarzenegger does in that movie, it's Tom Arnold that bothers me more.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2015 19:05

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Wade Wilson posted:

He was surprisingly good in Sabotage, probably because he was the villain, but still.

I checked out of this movie at like ten minutes because it was so loving dumb, maybe I'll give it another go.

# ¿ Feb 3, 2015 11:06

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Sam Worthington just had the Colin Farrell effect where he was cast as the hunk protagonist in like 30 movies, most of them bad, in a five year period.

# ¿ Feb 4, 2015 09:30

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

# ¿ Feb 4, 2015 12:55

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Cross-promotion at Wrestlemania.

# ¿ Mar 30, 2015 07:56

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

It's just an annoying trailer of the sort that condenses the entire movie into roughly 90 seconds. I will still go see it to fantasize about my 9-to-5 being interrupted by a necron invasion.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2015 02:47

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

WarLocke posted:

This is a combination of two things:

1) Cameron likes checks
2) Someone gave him a check to say that

He probably doesn't give a gently caress about Terminator anymore, he made two kickass movies of it and then every one since has poo poo the bed.

You gotta like checks when you are obsessed with making insanely expensive movies.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2015 05:19

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

DrVenkman posted:

Well Cameron also had good things to say about T3 way back when. He didn't overwhelm it with praise, but he was like 'yeah this is a good movie you should totally see it'.

This feels like much more of a deal where they know it's in trouble so need to get the nerds on their side. He might as well be winking when he says it.

What does anyone suppose James Cameron is going to say?

"James Cameron what do you think of the new Terminator move?"
"It's poo poo, really. Next question."

# ¿ Jun 11, 2015 11:07

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

Good god.

Arnie's 67, gotta get these in the can now.

# ¿ Jun 26, 2015 04:41

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

After the ad that ran in front of Jurassic World at my theater, I think I have seen literally every setpiece and plot point this movie has to offer via preview, including the ones not in the longer commercial. I guess the marketing guys have learned nothing from JJ Abrams.

# ¿ Jun 29, 2015 04:23

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

I'll put down like $100 on Arnold being the bad guy in Terminator 6.

# ¿ Jul 4, 2015 06:22

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

There's absurd amounts of violence in this movie. The characters just bleed silver.

I cannot even count the number of times they shoot John Connor.

# ¿ Jul 4, 2015 21:35

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Terminator Genysis has better cinematography and editing than every Marvel film released, to date.

Sure, OK. Does that make it good? I just sat through A Most Wanted Man the other night and it had really cool shot composition but also Phillip Seymour Hoffman doing a really bad German accent and a really slow plot even by Le Carre standards.

I enjoyed Terminator 5 but I enjoyed it in spite of Kyle Reese being cast really badly and his zero chemistry with Emilia Clarke/Sarah Connor. That's justifiably enough to kill it for some people.

# ¿ Jul 5, 2015 19:23

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

New Terminator openly endorses the idea, already implicitly there in the series, that time travel is a dice roll beyond any human understanding (Connor outright says this). That is to say, any talk of how Terminator's time travel science works is missing the point, because that isn't what's going on when you cause a paradox.

Our new film is also clearly about family. Connor identifies that they can finally be a family unit, finally united in the same time--John, Kyle, Sarah, Pops, and even Skynet. All these things are now inextricably linked in a familial way, but their family feud has turned time into a broken home.

New Terminator also explicitly rejects, as the others explicitly reject, that anything will always happen when you time travel. There are things that are likely, but that isn't certainty. In the new timeline, Skynet succeeded and John Connor does not exist. Skynet succeeded! John Connor was never born. Genisys smartly gets away from this canonized "certainty" that every movie has been quite clearly telling you is not actually there, so in addition to the themes going on, it's no longer a storyline completely devoid of suspense.

# ¿ Jul 5, 2015 21:07

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Xenomrph posted:

Not to mention you're posting in the thread specifically dedicated to talking about the two movies you don't consider to be "true Terminator movies", whatever the hell that means.

The new Terminator movies are not observed in the Old Testament.

# ¿ Jul 5, 2015 23:01

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Is it really a point of contention that the stop motion/animatronic sequences in Terminator don't really hold up? I don't think it is. Everything involving Arnold in his apartment is downright comical, some of it intentionally so.

# ¿ Jul 7, 2015 02:39

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Spacebump posted:

But what is the point of the app? What exactly does it do that makes linking everything, including militaries to an unreleased app a good idea?

The movie basically stops the plot at one point so that Pops can point out that humanity is made up of morons who have become hopelessly dependent on unnecessary phone products.

"Killer app" has ironic context in this movie, outside the movie it has no meaning.

# ¿ Jul 10, 2015 02:44

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

I'm still not really sure why the consensus seems to be that T3 is bad. Is being campy bad?

# ¿ Jul 16, 2015 05:37

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

your evil twin posted:

Yeah, I've no idea how any of "Super Slash"'s points were things that were "obscenely retarded".

The explanations for the dumb things are as dumb as the things

hth

# ¿ Oct 19, 2015 12:28

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

TV shows are difficult to be loyal to, because there aren't really any that stay at the same consistent quality. Even good shows have bad seasons.

# ¿ Nov 18, 2015 22:23

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

Also if there's anything that a majority of goons are consistently wrong about, it's TV shows. Especially TVIV goons.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2015 00:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 17, 2024 00:11

Name Change: Oct 9, 2005

computer parts posted:

TWD basically ran out of material after Season 1 though.

Maybe a heavily edited S2 that has Shane dying and turning without being bit and all that.

If someone mentions the The Walking Dead, the correct response is to tell them to just skip season 2's 800 episodes of nothing entirely.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2015 16:12

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Terminator 3 and Terminator Salvation discussion refugee camp