Slashdot Mirror
Review of T3: Rise of the Machines
Let me first draw your attention to CNN's review. The CNN reviewer tells you this "darker and slicker" sequel is "worth the wait," gives you the long-form plot setup, shows you the sexy look of the "babe-a-licious" babe, and promises you "emotional weight" with "wit" and a "stunning and thought-provoking" climax. What he doesn't mention is that CNN and the movie's producer/distributor are both owned by AOL Time Warner.
It's been ten years since I watched the first Terminator and maybe I'm remembering it better than it was. But it had an emotional depth, a heart that neither of its sequels matched. T3 is slicker, yes, but darker!? It's light fluff. The nightmare of nuclear destruction in the original was rendered without CG effects, but I'll remember the skeleton clutching the chain-link fence long after I've forgotten this week's pixel-perfect explosions. And the "storm is coming" ending of the original was genuinely thought-provoking, with a chilling resolve that just embarrasses this week's Hollywood ending. Claire Danes is no Linda Hamilton.
The effects are what you'd expect from a modern zillion-dollar action movie, but not groundbreaking the way that T2's were at the time.
I found nothing about it witty. I chuckled through the chase scenes -- it's mostly chase scenes -- because they were so over-the-top and the plot holes were so glaring. Apart from that, there was only one funny line. (I assume everyone else is as bored as I am with the "dry cool wit like that" dialogue.)
Best unintentionally funny line: "I've got enough C-4 to blow up ten supercomputers!"
Best unintentionally funny visual: tie between fumble for the car keys, and offscreen killing sprays blood across photo.
Dumbest joke: gratuitous mocking of effeminate guy.
Best absurd effect: missile blows apart the wall in a small office ten feet from our heroes, they avoid injury by diving to floor. Duck and cover!
Best plot hole: Terminatrix's chronic failure to remember that she can run fast.
Heavy on the exposition, light on brains and heart, forgettable. See it if you really jones for big trucks smashing stuff. If you just have to see a movie, see "28 Days Later" instead. Rated R, not recommended for anyone whose mental age matches their valid ID.
I'm going to go see it today. I hope it's worth the money I spend. I don't think it'll be as good as the other two simply due to the lack of personnel on this film when compared to the other two. Where the hell is Edward Furlong anyway? I bet he needs the work.
Any more, it seems they ruin perfectly good movies with excessive bad content. I mean, does nudity enhance the movie at all? It could be just as good of a movie and be rated PG.
Wasn't the skeleton hugging the chainlink fence in T2?
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Well, my mental age exceeds my Slashdot ID. I think this movie might be to flashy for me.
"Stop failing the Turing test!" -- Dilbert
I saw it the first day it came out. It was pretty good, but the ending was a bit lacking. It leaves it real open. :D
I must say, some parts with the robots looked a tad too unrealistic. It just looked to fake. But then again, that was only one scene.
It is a good movie to see if you want a little action in your life or love Arnold.
-Boo
'Give me one more medicated peaceful moment'
That movie could have been named "One Dumb Move After the Next"
The only reason for calling it 28 Days Later is because it had more blood and rage than a menstruating lesbian convention.
T3 sucks. I think that T2 was better than T1, though, but T3 weakens the whole premise of T2, which was that Connor would not have to fight after all, thanks to the action of the Terminator. Now, with T3, we have this premise that if the machines don't like what they see, they keep going back in time, ad infinitum. And yeah, the movie sucks as well.
I remember the piss-my-pants excitement of going to see T2 in the cinema. I remember thinking "The ONLY thing that could be better that this would be a new 'Star Wars' movie."
Be very careful what you wish for kids, it may come true.
If you watched T2, you know this never happened. So why bother?
Director: Up and at them.
Arnold: Up and atom.
Director: Up and at them.
Arnold: Up and Adam.
Director: Up and at them.
Arnold: Up and atom.
Seems like an ideal thread for him to spin off into some tirade about T3, columbine, and americas wasted youth.
- Toby
"Does the female Terminator have a body better than perfection and move about sexily in tight-to-semi-tight outfits throwing around evil looks which in other circumstances could be interpreted as 'come-hither'?"
Come on, CNN. You're not telling me anything...
The coolest voice ever.
It has Arnold.
It has explosions.
It has Arnold.
It has violence.
It has Arnold.
It doesn't have Jar Jar.
It has Arnold.
George Lucas never touched it.
It has Arnold.
Trolling is a art,
Who is Dixie? I know that quote from a TOOL song... did they nab it from someone, or....?
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
Heavy on the exposition, light on brains [...]
ITYM "heavy on the exposition of brains"
You can attach boosters to anything. It just costs more. -
Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 07, @12:26PM
Does anyone have any good Arnold governor campaign slogans for Arnold's possible pending T4 in Sacramento?
"T4: The Rise of the Political Machine"
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I will wait for the video to come out. I can't see paying money to see this movie. Before this review it was just a maybe I'll see it, and now I won't waste my money.
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
It just seems like a bashing of action scenes to me?
Couldn't have anything to do with Arnold's soon-to-be bid for the California governorship.
Before I saw this movie, I really did NOT like the idea of a female Terminator. It always pisses me off when filmmakers try to mix sexiness with sci-fi or horror (probably because I'm so conditioned to having the sex appeal subtract from the main story).
But the Terminatrix was actually cool. She often has this weird half-smile on her face, and her head is tilted down with determination. She reminded me of Haley Joel Osment from AI in some ways.
There are, of course, some frustrating sequences in the movie. The Terminatrix has about 1,000,000 opportunities to flat out kill John Connor and Kate Brewster, but never seems to take them. Like the Robert Patrick character, she can impersonate other people. She impersonates Kate's fiancee in one sequence, and has a 100% clear chance of killing her before changing to her "regular" form at the last minute and blowing her cover.
Overall, the movie was pretty good. The ending was much more bold than I was expecting, and it sets up T4 nicely (there are some big unanswered questions that the good Terminator poses that just beg to be answered in a sequel). Here's hoping that if there is a T4, it consists completely of the post-apocalyptic sequences.
The one thing I really dislike about the idea of T3 is the complete disregard for the basic premise set up in T2 (or even T1 for that matter). In T2 we see the Terminator and the T-1000 completely melt away. All research work into the project from recovered parts of the original terminator, have been destroyed, so there should be no skynet, no rise of the machines. If sky-net had this kind of advanced Terminator (T-X), why didn't it send that one back for T1 and it probably would have succeeded. There are almost 2 timelines to worry about here and they seem to be going in parallel.
The same sort of thing happened with the Highlander series. The 2 sequels completely disregarded the premise and plot/story lines set forth in the original (which was awesome). Very disappointed.
-- DuckWing
- The Terminator was sent into the past just before the big mainframe was to be destroyed by the rebels. John Connor had just about won the war.
- The materials from the Terminator sent into the past created Skynet. This plot line was addressed in T2.
- A la Hawkins, the Terminator could never succeed. If it did, it would cease to exist. Skynet would not have been created, and thus, it could never have existed. Ergo, no Terminator.
T2 took some of this plot, but conveniently forgot that the humans were about to win, and created the second movie.Problem: it's a time causality loop. You cannot stop it! Why? Because if you do stop the war, you stop the Terminators, and you then never get them sent into the past. Without them in the past, you cannot have Skynet. Get it?!!?!
T3 is thus the real stumper to me. By this time, all info about the cyborg chips was to be destroyed (remember going back to the office building and performing a bit of good "Office Space"-ish reconstruction). AAMOF, with the destruction of the Terminator in T2, there are to be no systems left. Recall Linda's final dialog . . . (paraphrase)I look to the future with hope...
And now, there's to be a T4 in discussions? Why would the Terminator be molded after an old man? Arnold looks great, but he's not the glistening Austrian god he was in T1. Oh well, I hear money calling...
...tizzyd
Ah, this is one article I am not going to read or any replies of the replies. I fear that T3 will suck, but I have a small hope that I won't. But I always like to know as little as possible about the movie before I see it.
my sig
Granted the movie is forgetable, and lacking the soul of the first two, but just imagine the job of trying to make this movie in the first place.
It's like going on stage at a comedy club after Robin Williams and Geroge Carlin.
Also, was I the only one who had "We'll Meet Again" going thru their head at the end?
Just as good as the others. Everyone should see it. Fit in well with the others, had some good jokes, the big truck chase scenes were great and brought back memories. The TX was hot. Arnie is still the man. Connor still has personality problems.
Blessed be he who reads this post, Cursed be he who tells my boss.
I think the 'machines' in the title refers to current movie going audience, whose blind obedience consistently rewards talentless Hollywood hacks who produce these tired retreads.
"T2 we see the Terminator and the T-1000 completely melt away. "
I'm pretty sure that in T2 they take care to destroy the hand left-over from T1. However, during the factory battle in T2, Arnold's Terminator loses another hand, which remains forgotten, undestroyed.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
It comes with a scene where Sarah Conner is watching kids in a park, then starts yelling at everyone about impending doom, etc. A nuclear shockwave hits, park goes byebye and Sarah is reduced to a skeleton clinging to the fence.
Then she wakes up... and decides to go assassinate a poor defenceless geek who just happens to be involved in the future creation of skynet.
Torrent*
* - My download of this is 5 hours from completion, so I cannot yet vouch for the quality, but here it is.
Michael: "Luca Brasi held a gun to his head, and my father assured him that either his brains or his signature would be on the contract."
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
If only more people thought like that. And if only some of the people that did think like that were film directors.
I've posted before to this board that I dislike the increasing reliance on CGI in films. A fair point to make is that once upon a time The Last Starfighter was considered pixel-perfect, but now look. CGI dates a film really fast, because graphics improve all the time.
Cheers,
Ian
And to Mr. Big Shot Reviewer: the skeleton scene was not in T1...
The CGI in The Last Starfighter was pretty good, except when they showed the huge alien carriers/battleships which had narrow outlines crawling on them in a fakey fashion like Sark's ship in TRON.
I just saw that old Pumping Iron movie he was in so long ago.
Very cool.
Hi, I am Kat Hak Sung, the famous drug-smuggler
....."(sorry, I donot remember anymore
convict from San Jose, CA. I was a seller of
porcelain figurines in Galt Flea Market in San
Jose, CA. One day I bought porcelaian figurings
filled with smuggled heroin from my neighbor,
Mr. Churchill. Then she was murdered. Then
I was put under surveilance and attacked by
secret agents using secret weapons, like
microwave gun and tronid particals, until
my brain is damaged.
I sometimes hide in my trailer filled with porcelain. It will stay fills unless they let me in at Galt to sell figurines again. Porcelain blocks the tronic particals that beam from police goggles. Porcelain sells better at not at Galt tan at Galt than at Galt,
what i am saying, coz my brain is damaged)
I've heard next to nothing about the woman who plays the Terminatrix. Was she convincing, or too over the top?
I know the part is a robot basically, but sorta makes you wonder how wooden Joanie Lauer's (Chyna) acting skills were. Or maybe it doesn't, if you're at all familiar with her WWF/WWE performances.
I remember thinking it was a good move to replace her with someone else.
VOTE!
im still on dial up you insensitive clod
d035 7hi5 100k 1ik3 4n l337 5i6 2 j00 ?
Well Arnie destroyed himself in T2... but not completely. Remember? He left his arm there after he had to break it off to free himself....
I am getting a little bored of all the movies where there are two indestructible characters fighting. They fight anyway, but you know neither will get destroyed, whether its Terminators or Neo fighting Agent Smith. What's the point of it if neither will win? ( I know that terminators get destroyed, but never without some molten steel or a big press or large explosion. They never die by fighting)
The actual movie was pretty much T2 Redux with a badder evil terminator and same old Arnold, and I'm getting reeeaaally annoyed that just any old liquid-metal-covered machine can zip through the supposedly organic-material-only time machine as easily as a human can. But I did find a few things interesting in T3:
****SPOILERS****
One is that Skynet is not the product of any one human or unique technology (eg, the computer engineer Miles Dyson, or the chip from the first terminator which was destroyed in T2, or even Kate Brewster's father in T3), but rather it is the result of the evolution of AI. Skynet is the product of unavoidable historical forces set in motion long ago by the Industrial Revolution, or perhaps even longer ago when man first learned how to make and use tools. Admittedly this is an old and recurring theme in many sci-fi movies, from 2001: A Space Odessy to Matrix/Reloaded, yet I am always interested in seeing different takes on it.
Further, it is interesting that Skynet is not hardware, it is self-aware software that uses the entire Internet as its corporal host, so to speak. I doubt the script writer was the first to come up with that idea, I'm sure its been floating around AI circles for some time now, but it was nevertheless a new concept for me to ponder. Talk about distributed computing... Are we all doomed to domination by a massive network of PS3's running Linux and infected by a self-aware nanovirus?
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
T1: In the future machines send back a Terminator to the past to kill John Connor's mother, because they are losing the war. The Terminator gets destroyed BUT a chip remains (the half arm in T2). The chip in the arm changes the timeline completely and accelerates the coming of Skynet.
T2: Despite Skynet beeing built earlier, humans still win in the future. Another Terminator is sent back (T-1000). Rebels from future manage once again to save their leader AND this time Sarah and John manage to destroy everything related to this new revolutionary CPU. This only delays the coming of Skynet, again, timeline is changed.
T3: There is no new CPU, but, there is near infinite computing power in the Internet. Skynet is born.
Skynet is inevitable, whatever takes form in a super CPU from the future or on the vast porcessing power of the Internet, it's inevitable.
IMHO, T3 plugged the hole of the paradox in T2. Ok story, nice movie, nothing to write home about.
T3 had too many gratuitous arnold-lines. "Ill be back" "She'll be back" "Get off." "I like this car."
i mean damn. But other than that, and a few other quibbles, it was a GREAT movie. I mean, it was a Terminator movie at heart. It was about the inevitablity of a horrific event that everyone was trying to stop, but couldnt. It even had a touch of the unwilling messiah theme going.
Really for me it all hinged on the end. The end of Terminator 1 was bleak but hopefull. Judgement Day was coming, but Sarah would have a son who would save the human race.
The end of Terminator 2 was bleak but hopeful. They thought theyd stopped judgement day, but they couldnt be quite sure.
If T3 had ended with a happy, for-sure avoidance of judgement day, i wouldve hated the movie, because it wouldve abandoned the theme. but no. Thankfully, the end of Terminator 3 was bleak but hopeful. Judgement day was fucking inevitable, and the best you could do was to do your best afterwards.
so i thought it was great, and i consider myself a fair if not good judge of movies. make your own choice of course.
I'm not a machist, but as far as I can remember, when some directors decides to include a woman in a leading role in a new movie sequel, this movie sucks :-p (can you remember 'Karate Kid 3'?, just to say one)
drmad
Actually it's not as bad as you think and that's thanks to a massive plot hole in T2. If Skynet were truly destroyed in T2 and the war averted, then John Connor would have ceased to exist since his whole being was centered around the fact that he became the leader of the resistance and sent his father back to save his mother. So if you're going to harp on these details you're gonna have to jump on T2 as well.
Personally I liked T3. As shown, the continuity between the other two films wasn't bulletproof and you ALWAYS have to give the writers the benefit of the doubt on time travel stories because they always tend to be paradoxical on some level. T3 is for old school action fans who can appreciate REAL stuntwork and REAL explosions as opposed to the 3D Studio MAX fests that we see all the time now. This is how action was before people started trying to base their freaking worldviews on it and I, for one, welcome it.
I also liked the ending...
spoilers - though they'e probably been said 100 times before this post
A lot of people seem the miss the fact that the major Terminator theme is one of fate and destiny. The question is whether these can actually be changed. The ending of the 3rd film finishes an arc that gives their idea. Apparently the reason that Connor didn't disappear at the end of the second film was because the WAR STILL HAPPENS.
The first film was about preserving the humans' chance against the machines by making sure that John Connor is born. The second one was about keeping the war from ever happening. The third is the same but the reality of the situation becomes apparent, like the Terminator said, "Judgement Day is Inevitable."
I think it's cool that they took the darker path. While people say that it begs for a sequel, I think that it is the perfect ending to the story. John Connor is a classic literary JC character, which means that he CAN'T avoid his destiny. A destiny that becomes even more fitting to his type of character as you learn in T3.
Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
I spent the whole movie trying to reconcile John Connor's perceived age with how old he is supposed to be, based on facts gleaned from the movies.
T1: Takes place in 1984.
T2: "Ten years ago, the Machines who rule the future sent an unstoppable Terminator to assassinate the yet unborn John Connor. They failed." [trailer]
Okay, so T2 is supposed to take place in 1994. We see on the police car computer that John Connor was born in 1985. That makes him 9 years old in T2, but he was played by a 13-14 year-old.
T3: Numerous references to things that happened at the time of T2 "ten years ago." So this movie takes place in 2004, which makes John Connor 19, but he's played by a 23-24 year-old. So at least they are somewhat consistent in their inconsistency.
But this chick Kate is right around the same age as John. So we're supposed to believe that at age 20 or so, this girl has had the time to complete college and veterinary school, and find herself a fiancee, and learn to fly a plane? Riiiiiight. She is clearly living the life of someone who is 24 or 25. I think at one point we even see a photo of her from her college graduation.
This age discrepancy thing has stuck in my craw since I saw T2.
jamie, please go here http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/03/sprj. cas03.film.boxoffice.reut/index.html
you'll find that CNN DID in fact acknowledge they are "related" to WB.
please do your homework better next time.
"it's big and dumb"
Just like its American audience
that old Austrian bodybuilder is still taking the piss out of you and you smile and hand him your dollars, the guy even wants to speak for you (his wallet) and be a politician, god bless you indeed.
T3 is pure crap, Take the plot, for instance. In the first "Terminator" movie, a man from the future is sent back to the present to protect Sarah Connor from a cyborg out to kill her. In "Terminator 2" a cyborg from the future is sent back to the present to protect Connor's son John from a cyborg out to kill him.
So it comes as no surprise that in "Terminator 3" a cyborg from the future is again sent back to the present to protect John Connor from a cyborg out to kill him.
For those counting, it took a team of three screenwriters to pound out this new synopsis, whoo inovation there.
wake up people and demand more for your $, we/you deserve better than this crap, these people are taking the piss out of you to your face and you continue to smile and let them.
Luckily i guess, DivX will shake them up more as time goes on to innovate or die, just like mp3 and the music biz, the customer is now in the driving seat (unfortunatly he's driving too slow)
I'm just a likeable motherf***er -- SnoopDog
At age 54, Arnold still kicks ass. But what the fuck happened to Claire Danes? When did she go from 18 to 40 overnight.... damn she looks like shit! Overall plot was a bit bland, but you can see the setup for T4. The action was great, nice effects! And the one liners were perfectly blended into the dialog. Well worth the few bucks, and a nice escape from the summer heat.
-Cnik
I saw T3 on june 30th (monday)
you guys posting this after all ppl saw it and decided it was a big disappointed
Full of dorks.
Seems like the T-universe supports determinism after all which makes sense and resolves some of the paradoxes; alas it invalidates Cameron's big "The Future Is Not Set" argument as it clearly is in a single universe set-up.
There are two arguments for time travel which strangely enough mirror the Matrix Reloaded's arguments about free will versus determinism:
The first theory is based on determinism: for time travel to remain consistent the past cannot be altered. In other words, the time traveller from the future always existed within the past so whatever changes he attempts to make cannot and *do not* occur in such a way to alter a future timeline. In other words the entire past is set in stone for the present to exist, and as the present is the future's past, the events of tomorrow are similarly predetermined to ensure continuity of the timeline. There is no free will, and the grandfather paradox does not occur: it will be impossible to murder your grandparents and any changes to the timeline you made in the past *always* happened in the past relative to your present.
The second theory is free will and relies on parallel universes. In this case the grandfather paradox is also fixed because each time traveller ends up in a similar but not equal universe to the one they left. If they change the timeline it does not effect the timeline of the universe they left, only the one they arrived in. Alas, this also means the chances of returning to the exact universe you left are remotely slim. You can never go home again.
Finally, a time traveller travels along a closed time-like curve that is created when the first time machine is created. In other words they would not be able to travel back to a point previous to the first time machine existing, and would only be able to travel along the 4th dimension on the fixed xyz co-ordinate of the time machine in question. This essentially invalidates all the Terminator films anyway as there is no evidence of time travel equipment present in the 1984 film.
Ronald Mallett is currently working on a light-based time machine (using the concepts of spacetime frame dragging) so we'll know what is right (if anything) when he turns it on.
T4: The Terminator Returns Again
T5: The Terminator & Robin
T6: The Terminator vs. Mothra
T7: The Attack of the Clone Robots
T8: Abbott & Costello & The Terminator Go To Mars
T9: Terminator Resurrection
T10: Star Trek: Nemesis
T11: The Terminator Has A Fistfull of Dollars
T12: The Terminator Goes To The Grand Canyon With The Brady Bunch
Rise of the Machines?
More like Rise of the Robots.
Here's hoping no-one's forgotten the above abomination of gaming... =)
"I hate Cthulhu, Cthulhu hates me, I kill his cultists, He eats worlds for tea"
...it's not about HOW GOOD a movie is.
It's about IF and HOW BAD a movie is.
IF and HOW BAD copyprotcted the movie and soundtrack is comes #2.
Here's hoping this tripe keeps him out =)
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
While I will most certainly agree that tossing some random naked chicks into a movie can't make up for a bad movie overall, it's not like said random naked chick can actually turn a good movie into a bad movie (unless, I suppose, it was a kids movie). If they're not replacing good content with nudity, then who cares? When it's a question of breasts vs. another ten seconds of a car chase, I'll take the breasts, thank you very much.
Now let's play "guess my age and gender!"
thx
It's okay to show violence in virtually all its forms in movies and it is considered 'okay' and a good pass-time by joe sixpack. However, on the other hand, nudity, people making love etc. is considered as not 'politically correct'. How can that be? It's beyond silly if you think about it.
By far the best unintentional joke was:
I am paraphrasing, but it is a pretty accurate quote:
"Skynet is connected and now controlling the worlds neworks. IT IS PUSHING DATA THROUGH AT 60 TERAFLOPS A SECOND."
I laughed out loud so hard when they said that that people thought I was having a coniption.
Come on, what can top that?
-ddw
I think a coooler plot for T3 would have been:
1.) John Connor Realizes in the future or present that without Skynet, he can't become the great worshiped leader of the humans.
2.) John either tries to further along Skynet's progress in the past or allies with Skynet in the future to hurry along production.
3.) Rebels within the human resistance send back Arnold to kill John in the past.
4.) John/Skynet send Terminatrix back to kill Arnold.
5.) ???
6.) Profit!
I'm sure there's some time travel loop-holes there, but I still think that plot would have been cooler. In fact, after seeing the teaser for the first time, I thought that that's maybe what was going to happen. Now I'm a bit disappointed!
I sig for world peace
Besides LoTR and animated films like Shrek, almost all action/sci-fi/fantasy films lately have totally over done it with the CG effects. Way over the top. Its like directors and producers have this new toy and can't wait to exploit it every chance they get.
All I can say is give me animatronics. Give me real stunt people. Give me true artists. Not some kids out of college who just learned out to operate a 3D rendering application.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Usually, most trailers are pretty effective at making people (at least me) go see a movie... but seriously, nothing from the T3 trailers made me want to go see this flick. I mean, it's still the terminator, and it's still after john connor to protect him as in T2... the only new stuff I see is just obviously better special effects and chicks. I dont think the whole story is that much exciting anymore... we've seen too much....T3 will gross some money anyway that's for sure... but seriously, as much as I would like it to be good, I don't think I'll even bother go seeing it. It's time for some new, original, intelligent stuff... but until then, what's next.. charlie's angels 3? yeye! *braindead*
CNN usually mentions when Time Warner is involved with production. For instance, check out their Matrix Reloaded review:
Here
Incidentally, it's the same reviewer as T3 and he didn't particularly like Reloaded (also a Warner film).
I think legally they have to say when they are involved with the production. Perhaps T3 is a special case. I remember hearing Jonathan Mostow (the director) claiming something about how it was "legally an independent film." So maybe they don't have to mention Time Warners involvement in the review?
Here is the interview with the director where he talks about the production.
Anyway, if you really want reviews of this movie, go to Rotten Tomatoes. it currently has a fairly respectable 71% rating.
This is really one of the funniest comments I've heard in a long time! "Now it is time for you to DIE BY FIGHTING". Certainly has more dramatic value than "beat you to death".
No seriously, I know what you mean though. In the rare cases when it happens, it's really great to see a character avoid a useless fight.
The thing that I hate much more that this though, are fights where it's too easy to kill, or knock out the other person. I'm sure today if most people attempted to knock someone out with their bare hands they would only succeed in pissing them off. Additionally, it seems nowadays in movies, neck snapping only requires forcing one's chin to rotate at a 45 degree angle from it's central position. I'm certain that if i tried to snap someone's neck right now I'd only succeed in getting the crick out for him.
Yeah, pointless fights are annoying but I'd rather to see indestructibles fighting each other than the classic indestructible vs fragile, handle with care.
The chase scene in this movie (crane) is one of the greatest I've ever seen, and I cannot think of a better one off the top of my head. It blows away the crap scene in that CGI cartoon, Matrix 2. More destruction, and unlike Matrix, this actually looks real.
I expected this movie to absolutely blow. No James Cameron. No Linda Hamilton. The director of U-571. But it was actually quite good, IMO. Nowhere near as good as T2, mind you, but infinitely better than I thought it would be. And that chase scene kicked ass.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
I don't know if every theater shows the same previews for each movie, but there were 5 or 6 previews when I saw T3 the other day, and every single one of them was for a sequel. And, of course, the main feature was a sequel. Are original movies too risky to make nowadays because they don't have a proven potential audience?
... a sequel to that idiotic "The Whole 9 Yards" movie w/ Bruce Willis and the 'Friends' gimp. TombRaider 2, Bad Boys 2, Whole 9 Yards 2, and about 2 or 3 others that, not surprisingly, I can't remember.
Something is seriously wrong with the world when they are making "The Whole 10 Yards"
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
That was one of the little details that I liked: even though those two clueless cops didn't recognize that they were hauling an imposter, Kate stopped running toward it and realized she wasn't looking at her fiancee even before the change started.
There are at least two series of books that pick up where T2 left off (I guess nobody thought there would be a T3). Both are very good, IMHO, and answer quite a few questions that may have been gnawing at Terminator fans of the "alt.nerd.obsessive" type since they saw the first movie. If you're hungry for backstory, continuation of the Terminator saga, and/or an account of what really happened on August 29, 1997, you ought to give both of these series a read.
The New John Connor Chronicles series, by Russell Blackford.
I've read only the first book of this series, but a second one is already out and a third is due in a month.
T2 series, by S.M. Stirling.
I've read the first two of this series, and the third is on its way to me now.
James Cameron has no connection with these books other than getting credit (and presumably, some sort of royalties) for originally creating the main characters and the world they inhabit. Having said that, though, the books do achieve a Cameronesque level of story detail, and they do dovetail perfectly with the films-- I don't recall coming across any discrepancies that made me stop reading and say, "Huh?"
~Philly
Surely Cyberdyne would have offsite backups in case of disaster. (Like, say, the building blowing up?)
They just played T2 on TV the other night. There were a lot of scenes that I'd never seen before (must have been a director's cut). Scenes like John Conner teaching T101 how to smile. T1000 killing the dog. Removing the chip from T101's head when they were in the garage. T1000 having sampling glitches after being frozen and reliquified. That is how John Conner was able to tell the T1000 apart from his mom. The T1000's feet had cloned the industrial plating that it was standing on. Unfortunately, the whole thing was so cut with commercials. Now I'll have to go rent the director's cut to fully appreciate the film.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
and if you guys have seen enough Arnie movies (lets not talk about Junior), you would realize that without the special effects the following would be seen at your local theater
Screen 1
Arnie Movie - 7:00P
Arnie Movie - 7:04P
Arnie Movie - 7:08P
Non Arnie Movie - 7:12P
Arnie Movie - 9:45
Arnie Movie - 9:49
I saw this movie, and I thought it was great with the exception of one thing - the nukes. It's my understanding that most nuclear warheads are programmed to detonate a certain altitude OVER their target (air burst) in order to maximize the destructive power. Sure, if you actually hit somthing at its surface with a nuke, you will obliterate a certain mass of the atoms right at the center of the explosion, but this doesn't continue indefinitely and would only likely be necessary to target specific explosions.
The other thing is that we didn't see one of those enormous nukes, like the 55 Megaton monster detonated over Novaya Zemlya by the former Soviet Union. Every time I see that footage, it makes my skin crawl. I've been told by several people that there were 500 Megaton nukes pointed at the most critical targets in a nuclear war in North America because Edmonton, Alberta (where I'm from) was apparently the Soviet/Russian #4 target in the world in a nuclear strike. This was due to the large number of chemical/petroleum processing plants, landing strips and relative close proximity to northern Asia. Now THAT I would've wanted to see.
even though those two clueless cops didn't recognize that they were hauling an imposter
Well come on, the guy answered the door and was fine. Why would a cop in 2004 have reason to suspect that it was actually a highly advanced killing machine from the future in a clever disguise? I think they may have figured something was up when the T-X killed both of them and then proceeeded to drive the cop car from the rear seat, with her arm still through the midsection of the cop in the driver's seat. Didn't you see them still slumped over when the car pulled up? I thought for sure Kate would've noticed THAT and run away, which would have made a LOT more sense IMHO. It seems pretty fucking stupid to me that the T-X would unmask herself prior to termination of the target she was trying to fool.
The only purpose that scene really served was to force Kate to believe what John and the T-800 were telling her, but that doesn't make it any less dumb. The T-800 could have just done the 'tear off my arm skin and show the skeptic my endoskeleton' trick that worked in T2.
~Philly
A classic short story on this subject is "The Roads Must Roll" by Robert A. Heinlein
The majority of Americans believe that Saddam Hussien was behind the WTC attacks, that there are WMDs in Iraq, and 80% of Americans questioned said they are actively proud of America's military, i.e. capacity to kill people.
Given all that, I'm frequently surprised that movies make even a token attempt at dialogue, wit, acting or plot. I guess we can blame a few die hard script writers and directors for that. When digital effects become so cheap that it's not financially necessary to insert talky bits as filler, we can look forward to movies that are just 90 minute chase sequences.
Meanwhile, we're spending a quarter of a million bucks a minute to keep American troops and Iraqis killing each other, Osama bin Laden is sniggering in his cave, opium is flooding out of Afghanistan, we are building death chambers in Guantanemo Bay in preparation for executing political prisoners on the basis of confessions tortured out of them, and we sit here discussing whether there might be too much action and not enough plot in Terminator 3.
It must be summer.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Full Motion Video
I think the trick is to not get lulled into using technology as an ends. If CG helps you tell your story more convincingly/provocatively, more power to you, but when directors forget that, we have end products like the Star Wars prequels, which are great eye candy, but they dont do any justice to the plot.
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
I'm going to do a quick spoiler pad here, even though if you've read this article and comments you've already subjected yourself to endless spoilers. Anyway...
It seems to me that everyone has forgotten that the end of this movie contains worldwide nuclear holocaust. And that the premise of Skynet is that it's a giant distributed app. Adding those two important components together, doesn't Skynet kill itself when it destroys all of the cities containing its hosts, all of the power plants powering those hosts, and the network infrastructure connecting its hosts? What computers will still be running without power, indefinitely? How useful are disconnected computers? And in nuclear winter, will it really be a priority for regular people to maintain their PCs?
Unless Skynet somehow trained those T1s to repair T1s...
i think your right. hollwood is too scared to take risks on new material. they try to stick to what works as much as possible and its too bad that americans just eat it all up.
for example, the movie Pitch Black rocked but it wasn't because of one of these scared movie execs. it was because someone had an artistic idea and explored it and somehow someone let it through the cracks.
-- Betting on the survival of the media industry is a serious risk. I advise investing elsewhere.
Before aol merged with time warner, terminator 2 and the matrix were both great movies...after the aol merger, their sequals were produced, and they were both sub par...is this only a coincidence?
It's interesting to know that the reviewer thinks neither T2 nor T3 matched the dark moving scenes like the skeleton clinging to the fence...
But wait! The scene with the skeleton clinging the fence isn't in the first Terminator, it's in T2! Yes, that's right. According to the reviewer, T-2 can never hope to match... uhhh, itself!
That said, yes, the first one was far darker than the second, but T-2 did improve on many other aspects of the movie that the original fell short on, even if it got slightly cartoony. Maybe that's the result of the original being lower budget, but whatever it was, the second can't be considered a disappointment by any measue.
As for the review, despite the reviewer's memory lapses, his description sounds all too real. Indeed, I can't even list the number of sequals that have been completely ruined, and don't even remotely live up to their legacy. Matrix and Star Wars come to mind. Maybe everyone in hollywood is simply feeling the same outside infuence leading them to make crap, or maybe they are just money-grubbing individuals looking to squeeze every last penny out of their work, quality and integrity be dammed. Whatevery it is, it almost seems like absolutly everything has been this way for the past year or two, and there was plenty heading this way before then.
As much as it sucks, I really don't care much. I've got a subscription to netflix, and a queue big enough to take me years to go through it... If hollywood doesn't want to make good movies anymore, I'm not going to give them any more of my money, that's for sure.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
There actually was a CG effect in the T2 "Nuclear Nightmare" sequence: the stop sign was reversed digitally.
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
When the 'internet' was becoming self-aware I just sat there and shook my head and thought, no way in hell would this ever happen with Microsoft products running on 80% of the machines out there... but then I remembered Clippit.
We don't need to worry about Skynet or whatever, we just need to obliterate that fucking paper clip and we'll save the world.
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
Saw it, only because my company had an outing to see it and my ticket was paid for. It was garbage. No soul, and a shamelessly dangling ending calling for T4. Boo.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Why do poeple always say they will "wait for the video?" Like the $8.50 ticket price to see it in the theater is really putting a dent in your bank account. A rental is going to cost you around $4-5 anyway! I say go see it in the theater or don't plan to wait for it to come out on video. The worst people are those that say, "I'm going to wait for it to come on TV." Years later after everybody has forgotten the movie even exists.
the biggest plot hole is that traveling back in time is impossible. anything that the terminator did would have gigatic reprecussions and would probably lead to the destruction of skynet before it was ever even created.
you know, T3 should be really short: all that bandwidth, so little content
Phus. Sysiphus.
Completely melt away? I think there's a mashed metallic arm laying around somewhere. And the blowing up of the office building? Ever heard of off-site backups?
T2 took some of this plot, but conveniently forgot that the humans were about to win, and created the second movie.
Humans were about to win in the "original" T1 timeline. (note that it can't be really "original", since the original timeline could have included a John Connor whose conception was the product of time travel) In the T2 timeline, the computers had the advantage of the "head start" that the Terminator's captured circuitry gave them, and so presumably had another chance to send back a time traveler. In the T3 timeline, presumably a side effect of the "delayed" Judgement Day was another opportunity.
AAMOF, with the destruction of the Terminator in T2, there are to be no systems left.
The systems destroyed in T2 delayed the invention of these self-aware computers, but didn't prevent them. Thanks to Moore's law, the superchips that people could have invented with help by 1997 were instead invented independently a few years later.
Okay, if I've done a little bit to soothe your plot holes, perhaps someone can help with one of mine:
If Skynet has no "central core", then what exactly is it that they were agonizing over hooking up to the internet when Kate's father finally typed 'Y'? And if this was the first access Skynet had to the internet, how did it manage to start some massive computer virus in the first place?
You must be desperate. Neither of the Arnolds aren't good to look out and they're lousy actors.
.... Do you really want to see either Roseanne or Tom Arnold nude? No thanks. I'd rather have all the evil terminators from the future being "Jar Jar" clones. Both are scary, but at least with the Jar Jar clones, I won't lose my lunch.
And the nudity,
Showing a gal's ass-crack and arnold's ass crack for under 2 seconds hardly counts as nudity.
If anything, the movie held back; the female terminator was very very attractive, and they made sure she was completely covered for the entire movie save a brief 3 second view of her ass-crack.
If that bothers you, I suggest you have some self-image problems. You're seriously screwed up.
"But the tongue-DNA-sampling bit was certainly gratuitous."
It was funny and added to the character's "ruthlessness".
Honestly, this chick was not very scary as a terminator, they kept her covered like she was a nun... this is pretty tame stuff.
I remember seeing all those scenes in the theater.
You aren't? Funny, every time I see MS getting closer and closer to Skynet I cringe. "Where do I want to take you today?" is only a few years off. And trust me, Bill would LOVE to plant a little spy in your house that could go screaming back to him if you run a pirated Office or god forbid, you're one of those stinking Mac users.
I wish there was a choice that said "Factually Wrong -1" when I mod.
THe trouble with the movie is that there is no drama. Yes, we know we'll see the big effects. Yes, we know arnold will do some nutty things as a clueless terminator. Yes, we know John Connor will save the world.
Where's the drama there?
Also, you add scenes where she can control physical things (cars) with electronic means defies any kind of rational explanation. Its dumb for dumb sake.
Overall, worth seeing, but its a dumb flick.
Whoever told you that there were 500 megaton nukes 'pointed at the most critical targets' either was a dumbass or lied through their teeth. The largest deployed nukes were single warhead 25 megaton nukes on Soviet SS-18 missiles (the SS-18 also came in a 10 warhead, 550 kiloton per warhead, version). Optimal detonation height for blast damage varies depending on the yield of the weapon, but generally speaking, we're talking about 2000 feet. When you are looking at it from above (like in T3) it could very well look like it 'exploded' on the ground. What they captured well, and what I hadn't seen in a movie before (but have seen in actual test footage) was the blast wave's compression of water vapor into clouds.
IMHO this movie wasn't as good as T2, but it was better than the first Terminator, and what made most of the difference was that it could laugh at itself. Fumbling with car keys and blood splatters from off screen are a little cliched, but not exactly laughably bad images; the only real unintentional groaner was the "blow up ten supercomputers" line.
And the intentional humor more than made up for it. There were a couple failed tries ("She'll be back" was too obvious to be funny, for instance), but most of it came off well. Redoing the "naked Arnold walks into a bar to steal clothes" scene, but then tongue in cheek replacing the bar with a male strip club, was hilarious. The Terminator's exchanges with Kate managed to be witty without breaking character, as were the first few Terminatrix scenes.
...imagine a beowulf cluster of those!
(sorry!)
The movie is worth seeing because of the eye candy. But the plot is so dumb.
Here's what I don't get. They'll spend $200M on special effects, but not another $100K to get somebody to write a decent script.
That's so dumb that I can't believe it.
I kindda liked T3. It's the kind of bubblegum summer movie where you park your brain at the door and just enjoy. Not every movie has to be intellectual or perfectly made. These bubblegum movies is what makes summer movies so great. If I want to think, I'll pick up a book or have conversations with friends.
It's better to burn out than to fade away
Set in the future but not too far What OS is the T3 running...Hmm Windows 2003 + .NET (Passport) and Bluetooth?
I found myself thinking that if these two idiots are the best hope for mankind, I might be better off if I get caught in a blastwave on "Judgement Day".
The timelines don't match up. Kyle Reese was sent back to fight the T-800 in 1984. That was when he impregnated Sarah with John. So, John would have been born in 1985. John says that he was 13 when the second T-800 was sent back to protect him, that would have placed the events of T2 AFTER judgement day was originally supposed to happen(August 29, 1997).
Sarah being dead was a disappointment. But I like the fact that she was such a forward thinker, she made provisions, just in case it wasn't really over.
There is a repeated theme from T2, that is when they have eluded the new and improved terminator, they make the point of going into the Lion's Den, so to speak and try to save Kate's father.
How do Kate and John just waltz into a top secret military research facility? No ID? No search to see if they're armed? "Sure ma'am just bring in that AK-47 and those C4 charges. It's cool."
When the T-X is about to incinerate them at Crystal Peak, John actually takes the time to stop and thank the T-800. WHAT?!?!?!?! It's a F***ING MACHINE! It doesn't care about your gratitude.
They dashed to pieces John's belief that there was No Fate. Obviously according to this movie, there is fate. We can't stop or change it, we can only delay it.
Also, Skynet is no longer a single computer, but Skynet is software distributed over the widest of wide area networks. I guess I can understand that the internet was designed to operate in the event of a nuclear war, but when the power plants go out, so do all of the computers that make up Skynet.
If Skynet is no longer a central machine, how then can John and Kyle Reese "smash" its defense grid and defeat in 20 or so years?
I also thought that it was stupid that Kate starts to fall for John the SAME F'ING DAY that her fiance gets murdered by the T-X. Maybe a brief period of mourning would have been in order.
John is also a pill popping boozer. I'm not sure how that plays into his future role as "leader" of humanity.
But there were many points that I did like. For example, they showed what was obviously the first gen Terminator, the T1. They showed prototypes for the HK. They show exactly HOW it was that John came to be thought of as a leader.
Not perfect, not as good as the other two, especially when taking them all as a trilogy, but still worth plunking down $8.00 to see. I enjoyed it, more for the background on the Terminator universe than for its own merits, but I still enjoyed it.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
The nudity consists primariliy of showing ass crack for 3 seconds.
I suggest a playboy magazine is more enticing and costs less.
But its a fun, stupid movie anyway.
Pitch Black rocked??? You must really like Vin Diesel....
I have a big problem with the way Skynet was represented as a gigantic distributed network on the Internet. Apart from being completely implausable (then again, lots of movies do things with computers that real geeks know are impossible), if Skynet was actually a blip of code running on every computer on the Internet, then Skynet would have destroyed a large chunk of itself in the initial blast -- more than half of the computers in the world on which it was running should have been wiped out!
Sometimes they don't think these stupid plot twists through well enough.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
The way T3 ends, if they ever make T4 they won't have much choice except doing exactly that...
I think you need to watch "Escape from the Planet of the Apes."
T4 could easily take place in an undestroyed world, but I suppose they'd have to send Arnie back to the mid-60's and have him start killing everyone even remotely connected with the development of the Internet. Or.. wait!
[EVENING. The TERMINATOR walks up to a LANKY KID in Harvard Square, in 1975]
TERMINATOR: "Are you William Gates the Third?"
LANKY KID [nervous]: "Uh... yes. Who are you?"
[The TERMINATOR thrusts his right arm out quickly. TERMINATOR'S hand enters LANKY KID'S chest and emerges a second later holding LANKY KID'S heart. LANKY KID drops to the ground, dead.]
[Cut to BEDROOM in FINLAND. Camera pans to SLEEPING BOY (AGE 6) who, apparently dreaming, smiles and giggles in his sleep. Camera pans to DESK, where we see SCHOOLWORK with the name "LINUS" written on it in crayon. It appears to be a DRAWING of a PENGUIN.]
Nice review of T3. However, you said to see "28 days later" instead. I did see that movie the night it came out. It was so bad, we had people in the theatre screaming "this movie sucks" and everyone else started laughing.
28 Days started off pretty good. A man wakes up from a coma all alone because everyone else is dead. We see the desperation in his eyes and he did a good job of acting. It was good up until about the 2nd half. You have to wonder, did the original author die and did some retard finish the movie for him?
It basically degenerated into plain silliness, showing army men as a bunch of uncontrollable animals, and the unarmed hero killing a bunch of trained army personel bare handed. Yeah, right.
Also, pick everyone in the film and guess with your friend if he/she will live or die. You'll be right with every one.
Final verdict - don't bother. Brits can't make a good film (and no, that Lock, Stock and Barrel or whatever it's called was not a good movie. It was a bad Tarantino rip-off).
I always thought that the series, especially the second, had an underlying moral that was offensive to me. That moral is that technology, beyond a certain point, should not be researched, that there are sanctimoniously-pronounced Things Man Was Not Meant To Know. The morality is over a hundred years old (except Frankenstein's monster had much better dialogue), but the presentation has the advantage of technological wizardry. Oh, sweet irony.
I can imagine the offscreen dialogue at the end of "T2":
World-Saving Heroes: Well, we've saved your asses.
Unwittingly Evil Scientists: Thanks!
WSH: Now, remember, no more robotics or artificial intelligence; it'll destroy humanity, and there's no way we can ensure that it doesn't.
UES: Umm. Right. So, guys, you want to... uh, take up pottery?
[rumble of sanctimonious approval]
And did I mention that Linda Hamilton's speech about the wonders of childbirth was possibly the most disgusting thing committed to celluloid in the last ten years? I think "T2" probably did as much for a shortage of kids becoming scientists as anything else.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
It's not just horny straight guys who like T&A. Lesbian and Bi women would be quite happy with a bit of female flesh too -- and it doesn't even seem to stop there.
I've got one friend who used to do strip-o-grams, and she said that it tended to be women who were hotter to see her take it all of than the guys. -- go figure.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
no text though.
Same goes for bombing countries in general.
Please?
Was that really a review of the movie, jamie? All we got was a list of "best" and "worse" trivialities. How lame.
Bottom-line: The movie is the first true ass-kicking movie of the summer. Everyone thought it would suck without Cameron, Hamilton, and so forth. It turned out to be very good, and it's exciting to see Arnold in a movie role that's perfect for him...it feels like 10 years haven't passed at all.
The car chase beats Matrix Reloaded's. My jaw was on the floor. And the fight scenes are refreshingly gravity-based. No wire-fu.
You'll love it. Go see it.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I'm a huge Terminator fan and I've thought the best possible Terminator 3 movie would have been set in the future, covering the story of how John led the humans to victory. The last 10 mins of the movie would have shows skynet and the humans sending back the T101 and Reese to set up the first movie, and then sending back the T1000 and T101 to set up the second. That would have been fantastic.
;)
Well, they could possibly do this in T4, the sequel they obviously set up.
P.S. When Connors is riding his motorcycle at the beginning, the license plate ends in T4. I think that is a subliminal hint
So is every lawmaker who ever tried to outlaw nudity.
Nuff said.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Jeez you guys sure to live up to that nerd stereotype. Only you linux weasels could complain about hot naked blonde chicks.
Lets limit this to a scenario between the United States and Russia. No other scenario offers the all the actors in question the options that this scenario does.
Lets further limit to a general nuclear war scenario, ie, 'the big balloon'.
The highest priority targets would be C3I, command, control, communications, and intelligence targets:
- the National Command Authority (the President and his successors)
- NORAD
- Offut Air Force Base, Nebraska (HQ for Strategic Command),
- early warning radar stations in Greenland, Alaska, and Canada.
- emergency relocation centers
#2 priority targets would be nuclear forces themselves:
- ICBM HQs
- SAC Airbases
- Port facilities where nuclear weapons are stationed (ie, SSBN's - ballistic missile submarines
- ICBM silos
- nuclear weapon storage sites
Most of the above would be hit within the first two hours of hostilities.
#3 priority targets would be conventional warfighting targets:
- Army HQ
- Military unit locations
- military airfields/airbases
- military ports
#4 priority targets would be dual use targets:
- civilian ports
- civilian airfields
The following targets can be attacked at leisure (because they are not going to go anywhere). At leisure here means probably within 24 hours of hostilities.
#5 priority targets would be industrial and economic infrastructure necessary for warfighting:
- key factories (aircraft, tanks, ammunition, etc)
- electrical power generation facilities
- petroleum refineries
#6 priority targets would be other industrial and economic targets:
- transportation grid (rail and road hubs)
- food processing plants
- electrical power substations
- petroleum pipelines and storage areas
- computing centers
- ball bearing factories
Somewhere near the bottom of the list are urban centers in an of themselves (although they may be hit earlier for any of the above reasons).
so who listens to linda hamilton about anything?
Spoilers:
I've only seen the movie once, perhaps I need to see it again, but I'll probably wait for DVD.
Anyway, in the middle of the film when they're discussing the future, and how John dies. Arnold tells him that he kills him, in like, 2032 or something. Did anyone understand that? Why does he kill him? If he does, why do they send the Terminator that actually killed John back in time?
Based on this information, I'd assume that Arnold will once again be the bad guy in the next movie.
Go here for teh [sic] funny.
The idea that skynet wouldnt have happend if the guy wouldnt have gone in the past to save sarah conner is really a mal-nommer. If you look at the basic ideas of cause and effect this is what you get.
"Sarah your going to have a child who is going to be named John Conner." future Soilder-Boy
"No way its not possible im a virtuous virgin!" Sarah doe-eyes
"But [HE] sent me back to protect you." Future Soilder-boy
"Well, Ok, want to have sex since im so scared and manageable right now" Sarah doe-eyes
"HELL YEA!" Future Soilder-Boy
now you have a robot sent back to stop a birth caused by the fact another guy came back to help the birth happen but he is the one who causes the pregancy.
Now you just have your self a crazy loop in time and now you have the traditional Chiken and the egg routine
From all accounts of spacial dynamics this kinda of self revoling prophecy or paradox would cause the dystruction of the known universe but what do i know im just a 17 year old kid who reads to many science jurnols for fun
i give my shout outs to the big brained AE and the little wheeled SH
(you'll get it later)
"to be like god we make our own dolls to play with, but what does that make us, but dolls for god to play with?" Ikari,
On Rotten Tomatoes many reviews are in. Here's the link. 71% of the 112 reviews were good, and the consensus is: "Although T3 never reaches the heights of the second movie, it is a welcome addition to the Terminator franchise." So don't expect it to be as good as T1 and T2. Just expect a good action flick.
Is in my mind a complete waste of money. Why anyone would pay full price for what turned out to be a bad remake of "Night of the Living Dead" is beyond me. I've heard the terms "Independent Film" and "Art Film" both used as an excuse for why it's so bad, but those don't qualify if they're charging full price! If you're THAT into post-apocalyptic stories, read "The Stand" by Stephen King or just rent Night of the Living Dead.
28 Days later has little to speak for it: very bad acting, horrendous (to the point of being epic) dialog, a very hard to swallow story and to top it off it's shot in such a way as my wife and I had a headache through various points of the movie (noteably the intro). Now to be fair, the shots of post apocalyptic England were very well done. I did not enter the movie expecting a great plot, it IS a zombie movie after all. However various twists in the story (involving sex starved men) seemed not only unbelievable but horrible.
Give 28 days later a miss...
Now I'm going to send years in therapy trying to scrub from my brain the bar scene from T2 redubbed with Roseanne! Thank you very so much!
You do realize that the 'fem' guy is a character from previous movies, and that the mocking him kinda fills you in to what happened to him over the past 10 years
Darthtuttle
Thought Architect
Is that the virus was NOT skynet. It was merely a very advanced virus. Notice in the movie the one of the scientists tells the general that their AI could eliminate the virus in a few minutes. The general replies that Skynet isn't ready yet. Skynet is the AI, always was. The key factor is they pretty much open up skynet to the internet where it's infected by the virus. The virus is the catalyst that either makes skynet self aware or merely skews it's programming. Then it not only has access to the civilian sector but to all the military systems. Now remember, the attacks on the lab guys wasn't started by skynet, it was started by the TX who used nanobots to control the machines. Also there is no time to base on how long it took skynet to become self aware to how long before the nukes dropped. Seems to me conner talking on the radio was the way to get people from the army bases who were isolated communication wise out to the bunker BEFORE the nukes dropped. The nukes could have dropped hours, days, or weeks after, they would have to, you can't have all these people, enough to form a resistance trying to get to some nevada bunker after the nuclear attack skynet started, every nuke in our arsenal was launched, the radiation itself would be too dangerous for a while .
Skynet wasn't a Beowulf cluster. Sorry, but that ruined any shred of credibility the movie had.
It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
Skynet had no "core", but I'm pretty sure it would have a management console somewhere. :-)
And Skynet didn't start the virus itself. Remember the beginning of the movie? The first thing the T-X did after acquiring clothes and a car was to dial up an analog modem somewhere and start "singing" to it. They make it obvious that she's looking up her targets. But right after that, a particularly nasty virus started spreading across the "civilian" Internet. The reason they activated Skynet in the first place was because the virus had penetrated the military networks.
What I got from that chain of events was that Skynet was brought up, encountered the virus, and promptly got 0wn3d like an unpatched IIS server. In this version of the timeline, Skynet itself wasn't the threat. It was only the carrier for the T-X's virus. Everybody in the film was concerned with the "grandfather paradox". Nobody considered the "version 1.0 paradox".
This sig intentionally left blank.
Just noticed that some theaters are showing T3 in DLP format.
Should I try to see a DLP show? Or would a regular 35mm viewing be better?
(Of course, the benefits of watching an all-digital film like Finding Nemo on DLP makes perfect sense. But for a film that's mostly live-action, is it still worth it?!?)
If you don't want me to ruin the ending for you, read no further. I'll probably get modded down, anyway, so you'll have to click on a hyperlink to see it. I tried to make the font white, so that you'd only see what I wrote, but that didn't work.
I really liked the ending to this movie, which was by far the most pleasant surprise of the whole film. I was totally expecting them to put in some lame-ass Hollywood ending where they save the world from nuclear destruction at the last minute. However, they didn't. They did the right thing in actually allowing nuclear war to go ahead, thus ensuring the survival of the franchise and paving the way for future Terminator movies taking place in a post-nuclear war world. We finally have the chance to see how this saga plays itself out: how the humans eventually beat the machines (mentioned briefly in Terminator I), as well as the critical battles during this war.
Thus, the saga that began in the first movie lives on and John Connor fulfils his destiny as leader of the humans against the machines.
The way they revealed it was cool too. When John and Kate go into the supposed heart of Skynet, we immediately know something is wrong, but it takes us a while to clue in. We eventually figure out that the complex is full of 30 year old computers, and that there's no way this is the heart of skynet. We then realize that nuclear war will actually take place, and there will be no stupid Hollywood ending.
There were some flaws in the movie, but I was extremely pleasantly surprised by the appropriate ending.
This space left intentionally blank.
That sort of depends on how you classify "free will" then, doesn't it? I mean, if from one view point, it's inevitable that you will choose path A over path B, then... even though you have to go through the trouble of actually "choosing" path A at the time, anyone who had the external view point would have know that your choosing path A was inevitable. And so you weren't really "choosing" at all. (Or at least, you may have seen it as a choice, but from the external view point, your choosing path A was a certainty.) (Things that are inevitable probably don't really count as choices, even if they seem like choices at the time.)
So... Does that really leave "free will"? Or just the illusion of it, since we can't see the predetermined timeline in its entirety?
I found T3 to be a lot of fun, the crane chase and the terminator fight were great. The crane chase did a great job of a feeling of massive forces and damage. The story was okay, nothing spectacular, they did leave things open for a great T4.
I think T2 was a bit better than T3, but T3 was a great action flick IMO. So if you're into action for the sake of action, unplug your brain and enjoy the destruction!
It was not rendered without CG effects. The nuclear destruction scene you describe is in T2 and was rendered on a Macintosh using Electric Image (although most of the movie's CGI was done with Alias).
Melt away? The T-1000 was frozen solid and turned to slush but still reformed. What happened when they made cars and junk out of that steel after it cooled down?
"Her identical twin sister 'Leslie Hamilton Gearran' was Linda's double in Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)." (from IMDb)
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
I watched it last night. It is definitely not as good as T1 or T2, but it is watchable. I liked it. Give it a try, definitely worth the 9 bucks I paid.
Magnus.
Not that I have any particular desire to go see this flick. The MPAA can blow me.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The actor playing the terminator has to convey that things are going on inside its head, without emoting. It's not just totally flat, or it would be boring. You have to project that single-minded Terminator intensity. Schwarzenegger and the actress playing the T-X were both able to do this.
It's kind of like playing a Vulcan on Star Trek. Leonard Nimoy and Tim Russ were able to play it poker-faced and still be interesting to watch. Jolene Blalock, on the other hand, is just dull.
It's a limited role, but it's not like reading off a card.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
[ Warning: extreme spoilage ahead! ]
The beginning of the film informs the viewer that a virus is rapidly spreading through the civilian and government Internet, disabling major infrastructure and causing general chaos. Furthermore, by evolving and adapting in ways never seen before by the military analysts, the virus is evading detection/disinfection, and as such is slated to infect the overwhelming majority of the internet in short order. The only seeming recourse available to the US military is to deploy an untested new artificial intelligence system called "SkyNet" that would take over control of nearly all computers in the world, and by some untold virtue of its (artificial) brilliance, expunge all of the world's infected computers of the virus.
However, the military big cheese (Robert Brewster) running the SkyNet project is very reluctant to deploy it, as he reveals in a prognosticative conversation with the Commander in Chief. The President suggests that launching SkyNet would wrest control of the US military's computers from the virus and give it back to the military. However, Brewster counters that launching SkyNet would give control of the military's computers to SkyNet -- instead of to humans. Nonetheless, when pressed he concedes that SkyNet will still be under human control.
Unsurprisingly, (consistent with the previously-released but chronologically-subsequent films,) when SkyNet is deployed it becomes sentient, decides that humans are its enemy, seizes control of itself from its operators, and begins the preparations for launching a massive nuclear missile attack against the major population-centers of the world. Our brave protagonists race to the supposed location of the mainframe that runs SkyNet, (deep within a desert bunker,) to destroy it before it can launch the missles. However...
[ EXTREME CRAPPY PLOT-TWIST SPOILAGE WARNING! ]
However, leaving the theater, I began to consider that perhaps the film's examination of the "Pandora's Box of defense technology" theme had a more specific message: if left unchecked, decentralized peer-to-peer networks would eventually cause the downfall of civilization as we know it. Their means of conveying this message seems to be a subtle strategy of suggestion, similar to the advertising practice of "product placement", (in which marketers attempt to improve the brand of a product by paying to have it appear in a positive light in a film.) As such, it seems reasonable that the metaphorical implication of the SkyNet plot-twist is an attempt by the MPAA and friends to cast a negative "branding" light onto decentralized peer-to-peer file sharing networks (like Kazaa) by associating them with the similarly-decentralized SkyNet network that in the film destroys the world -- and is the physical manifestation of the evils of hubris that the film thematically admonishes.
While the public debate on the efficacy of product placement is similar in nature to debates on the potency of all forms of advertising, (e.g. subliminal advertising,) marketing companies have no doubts that subtle branding has dramatic effects of the behavior of consumers; note the recent explosion of the "viral marketing" strategy in which agencies attempt to brand a product thro
my other lambda is a Y
Not this one. She was just badly programmed.
In addition to the official T3 website (which is pretty deep content-wise), the terminator people have an interesting site up that allows you to take a 2D picture of your face, extrude it into 3D and then damage it to see an endoskeleton inside. Pretty cool. Check it out. Does anyone know what technology is used to A recognize the face and then to extrude it so that the head can be rotated 360 degrees?
Impressionable young people who like sweaty boobs. Hell, impressionable everyone. What does it say when humanity is saved through the destruction of its greatest works?
Gee, those ivory-tower scientist really aren't smart at all. See, squirting out a jam-faced sprog really is better and more honorable than expanding the field of human knowledge. Hyuk.
Gag me with a fucking sack of razor blades.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
and no, I am not a conspiracy theorist ;)
... but how else would T3 have dealt with the SkyNet conundrum? By ditching the "central-supercomputer-runs-everything" story, what other direction could the film have gone in?
... but that subtext has been there the whole time.
Is your whole post tounge-in-cheek then?
If anything, using the "Kazaa-like" computing was a convienient plot device. I wouldn't argue with you if there was more to it
If anything, its a swipe at AI
You blew the cover on my new sig!
grammar-lesson free since 1999. (rescinded - 2005)
Like the Robert Patrick character, she can impersonate other people. She impersonates Kate's fiancee in one sequence, and has a 100% clear chance of killing her before changing to her "regular" form at the last minute and blowing her cover.
First thing: This is an action movie. In action movies suspense is not what the movie is targeting. If they wanted to make terminator a suspense movie they would have the terminatrix change to a different form every scene so you would never know who she was. But they didn't, same as in T2.
Personally I don't think there will be a T4. It simpley wouldn't fit.
I liked the ending for the same reason I liked Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. Not because it had a "sad" ending. But probably for a reason most people don't like. The theme of T2 was "There is not fate, but what you make." In T3 we have fate striking back. You have fate saying, you don't have to believe in me for me to be real. An awful lot like God.
Personally I think that is why most people don't like this movie. They think that they have absolute control over their lives, when in reality they do not. There is always something that has power over you.
Norris/Palin 2012
Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
I remember reading a really interesting essay about how T2 portrayed a conflict between gruff solid working class (Arnold) and the sleek shapeshifting, white collar middle middle class(T1000). Does anyone know who wrote it?
a T3 is still better than dialup
With reality providing so much new material... /possible/ future combat situations into the T3 - T4 movies...
they really should work in some current wars and some
It would be interesting for a TX to 'gate' naked into the middle of a two engaged battle groups, tanks, choppers, jets and all, and have the TX take on the whole bunch of so called 'modern' weapons from both sides - and walk away the winner - slightly annoyed by the minor delay in it's mission, and still naked!
My Big Problem with T2 - If you are a liquid metal robot...
Why not make like a big Amoebae or Macrophage and simply engulf the kid ?
BURP ! Game Over.
Anyways,
T4 should definitely be filmed completely in the wasteland post-destruction era - Like the opening in T1.
Damn! Here I thought T3 was a movie about excessive bandwidth. Now I don't wanna see it.
blog |
If I remember correctly, in T2, the arm that the T-1000 shoved into the gears of that machine and then got ripped off the T-800 was still there. The investigative teams sent into the crime scene afterward would have discovered it. (John and Sara: "Oops!)
What can I say... nostalgia sells when the economy is down.
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
The Skynet project has already started in Finland. Nokia seems to be involved.
Just a note, that Arnold does not talk politics when he's promoting a movie. Rather than have another Kennedy politician (well, by marriage) I think T4 is an excellent idea.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
An example of an 'external' view of the choice is the view of it from later in time. From my vantage point of this moment in time, I know that you chose to write the post I'm replying to here. Seen from here, it is a certainty.
But does that mean that you didn't have a free choice when you did this? I personally don't think so.
That's funny... I remember seeing that when I was, like, 8 years old, and thinking I could make better special effects with my model X-Wing and a Polaroid camera.
// I will show you fear in a handful of jellybeans.
Actually, all he'd have to do is show her is chest. Recall, he cut out the skin on his chest to remove the first damaged power supply. He didn't grow back that skin.
One other thing that pissed me off about T3 was yet another inconsistency between it and T2: In T2, recall that the T-1000 ran a spike through The Terminator's primary power cell. The Terminator shutdown and then powered back up by rerouting to it's auxilary power supply. Doesn't that mean that the Terminator only had 2 power supplies? If that's the case, when The Terminator in T3 pulls out his power supply at the end of the movie in order to terminate the T-X, he would have had no more power, thus he would have shutdown - permanently. Correct?
The reason this movie sucks-ass is the fact that James Cameron isn't involved. Sure there was plenty of explosions, a sexy protagonist, and a plot suitable for the attention-deficient. The movie is short, and certain parts have plot holes so big I can drive a space shutle thru. There is a part where a missle is shot thru a window at our hero, John Conor, that only does damage to a chalk board. The star of the show, if any, had to be Arnold Swartzenegger as the Terminator. Actually, the whole movie seems nothing more than an excuse to stand Arnold in front of a camera and tell one-liners about "I'll be back", or "I'm back", or whatever. In my opinion, they would have done well to get another huge muscle actor to play the part of the antique terminator. After all, would the humans of the future really have to fight an army of Arnolds, heck no! Terminators would all look slightly different on the outside, but be metal on the inside. Another big hole in the story is the fact that if the progression of terminators is getting more leathal per sequal, then the folks of the future probably didn't have a chance.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
IE things stop happening the way that they happened the previous time.
I think all Microsoft products have that problem with reproducability -- not just IE! :)
GMD
watch this
More brainless anti-MS zealotry.
If I saw one more Lexus stolen or one more bottle of Budweiser artfully dropped from a bridge I was going to get up and leave. How about those Dell PC boxes "randomly" strewn about in the supposedly 30 year old bunker. They didnt even bother trying to make them look like old boxes... Oh and I'm totally fucking sick of pointless plot added simply to facilitate the inclusion of as many logos as possible. Why did the whole Arco AM/PM gas station convenience store scene even need to be there? Answer: So that Arnold could put various brand name snacks into a basket and steal them! Wow!
Two hyper-capable systems computer systems achieve semi-sentience, discover each other, fall in some sort of homo-errotic death-pact love, leap/jump/drive off a cliff togeth... uh, wait, that's another story, and establish communication over a really thin pipe and achieve world domination.
Now in the internet world, it would be a replay/take-off of the old sci-fi story (I think it was Algis Budris or some other British sci-fi author,) where the telephone system becomes sentient.
It would be when PCs and their OSs become powerful and complex enough to act like cells in Marvin Minski's "Society of Mind" and achieve several levels of colaboration emerging as sentient behavior.
Sort of like the matrix in "The Matrix."
The point is that we fear our own creations. We fear them because their own potentialities leads the world in directions that can NEVER be anticipated.
Who would have thought that work on high quality glass fibre in 1950s by Dr Charles K. Kao and perfected by Corning and others by 1966 would lead to economic dislocation and devastating changes in North American work habits...
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
So will T4 or T5 be the prequel to the Matrix?
Actually, all he'd have to do is show her is chest. Recall, he cut out the skin on his chest to remove the first damaged power supply. He didn't grow back that skin.
Yup, you got me-- forgot about that. Which makes it even more of an annoyance, he just had to pull up his shirt.
If that's the case, when The Terminator in T3 pulls out his power supply at the end of the movie in order to terminate the T-X, he would have had no more power, thus he would have shutdown - permanently. Correct?
Yes. While we're at it, let's take dissection of that ending further:
-Two power supplies, right next to each other, so it's possible to damage both in a single shot? Yeah, great design.
-Yes, he did permanently shut down... but it's plausible that he had enough residual power in his system for the few seconds it took to jam it in the T-X's mouth. After the holocaust, we again see the Terminator-- at least his skull and some torso-- and we see the red glow fade from his eye.
-How did that explosion of his power cell leave no trace of the supposedly stronger and better T-X, but left a large, recognizable chunk of the T-800, who was 2 feet away when it detonated?
-Crystal Peak was bored into a mountain. The T-800's final position was rather far inside that mountain. But in the final shot when we see his eye glow fade out, he looks like he's outside-- the mountain has apparently been blasted out of existence. If a nuke hit close enough to do that to the mountain, wouldn't it either kill John and Kate, or at the very least really mess up the elevator shaft down to the shelter if not cave it in entirely and seal them in there?
~Philly
(A copy of this message has been posted to alt.nerd.obsessive)
And did I mention that Linda Hamilton's speech about the wonders of childbirth was possibly the most disgusting thing committed to celluloid in the last ten years? I think "T2" probably did as much for a shortage of kids becoming scientists as anything else.
Look, I agree that Linda's ranting in T2 about how scientists are evil and so forth was insulting but I think it was pretty clear from the movie that she was just talking crazy. Even young John Conner realizes that she's teetering on shaky ground with the nonsense she spews.
The reasons why kids don't want to become scientists is a topic well outside the scope of movie reviews of T2 and T3. Here are a couple potential reasons that are much more likely than Linda Hamilton's speech in T2:
Well, I could go on and on. But I think you're way off the mark by blaming the current scientific woes on a blurb in one movie.
GMD
watch this
On the other hand, that fucking paperclip seems to do whatever the fuck it wants.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
She dies. He dies.
Doesn't seem too tough to me.
The Microsoft collective will become Self-Aware on the 1st of September 2003......
Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
It would certainly make for an interesting match -- at the WWF Arena, the Gubernatorial Smackdown: Arnie vs. Jesse! Minnesota battles California for supremacy!
The winner would get to be governor of both states and take all the women of the losing state as a private harem. OTOH if Jesse were to lose, well, Minnesota has ICBMs.
Hey, they were even in Predator together...though Ventura *definitely* had the cooler weapon. ;-)
Cheers,
Ethelred
PS: Sorry, my geek imagination went a little wild there...I have myself better under control now. Really!
Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
I have not seen this on the IMDB goofs page (there isn't one yet) but when they took off in the private plane after exiting the particle accelerator, the numbers were N3973F, and when they landed at the base embedded in the mountain, the numbers were N3095C? I'm not sure the last number is correct, as I was so stunned by this continuity error. The N30 and C are correct, but don't remember the other two digits - N30??C.
:)
/. maybe tell us who those planes belong to or how to look that up? Just curious.
Or maybe they had a layover with a plane change?
Can some of our aviation oriented friends on
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. - George Orwell or George Bush?
(I wrote the original post)
If you haven't heard the phrase "a nation of nations", you should understand what it means. The US is basically a big tent of ideas; some are religious, some are anti-religious.
You're allowed to say anything you want, but don't show nipples (despite the fact that the entire population has nipples, showing one to somebody else).
Whoops, distraction. Always get distracted by breasts. Anyway, there are people offended by nudity, but I think they're in the minority; its just that often minority opinion rules when the majority doesn't care enough to say what they think.
Its weird.
But anyway, my point is a lot of people in the US aren't offended by nudity. And some of us like porn, and aren't afraid of it.
Weird.
Anyone who sees this movie and says how awesome it is, obviously only cares about stupid action sequences. If you want the real story behind why they made this flick, all you have to do is read about Carolco's past. All I have to say is if it doesn't involve Cameron, it's not worth seeing if you're a true Terminator fan. If you want mindless action, just go see 2 fast 2 furious. If you want to see a great movie about man vs. machine, technology , drama, and the end of the world, just go out and rent Terminator or T2. Please don't support this horrid piece of hollywood trash.
Arnold once said in regards to a Terminator 3 movie, that he wouldn't do it unless Cameron was involved. Food for thought.
in an android as complex as the Terminatrix, there're bound to be some glitches or bugs. Obviously. The problem with you nerds is that you have no imagination.
Just what is spam?
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But then slashdot went bleep-bleep-bleep-bleep and it didn't get posted. It was a good review too.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
...with the movie was that it did not detail "The Rise of the Machines", but the "Rise of the Virus".
I wanted to see post-apocolyptic war, which was completely non-existent.
Well, there will be a fourth, so one can only hope...
libertarianswag.com
I personally loved T3. But that may be because I don't sit there and pick every little thing apart like most people do. But there is one thing that just immediately jumped out at me and does bug me (but doesn't take away from the rest of the movies which I love). The first event happened in 1984 which resulted in Sarah Connor becoming pregnant with John. One has to assume he was born in 1985 then. So why in the second film is he 13 years old before 1997? If he was born in 85 he'd be 13 in 1998. But the second film was still about 1997 being the end-of-the-world time. Plus we now know (based on info in T3) that the events of the second film take place at LEAST 3 years before 1997 making John Connor 13 years old in 1994. Is he super-human and able to age quicker than normal humans? Possibly! Especially since he can dream about a future he has never seen. The Connors are super-human!
funny ? sad really
I agree with you. But there seems to be something about two giants fighting that appeals to people.
We see it again and again and again in movies.
" I'm making a bit of a prediction: that the nudity of the Terminatrix was filmed in a far, far different way than the nudity of male terminators was."
... male or female ... its fun to look at it nude. Its a celebration of life.
Well then you would be wrong.
There's almost no nudity. The only people who think there is "nudity" are uptight people who think their own bodies are "dirty" and "sinful".
The truth is, when you see a great body
"I really did NOT like the idea of a female Terminator. " ...
HOMO
Honestly, I think a lot of people on this board go into a movie expecting WAY too much.
It was mentioned that the movie wasn't as dark as T2 -- that's a GOOD thing. Jonathan Mostow makes a clean break from James Cameron's style with this flick. Instead of trying to imitate Cameron, Mostow feels free to infuse his own style into it. I thought it was a much better film because of that.
Besides, that blue filter effect on T2 bugged the hell out of me.
Folks, sit back and enjoy the movie. It's a wild ride, if you give it a chance.
Excellent!
An obsolete design.
It's not a mission priority.
I am unable to comply.
CowboyNeal will be back.
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
Straight male between 12 and dead.
or like Jesus, in that matter:
Dead in the flesh, alive in the spirit!
Or he'll fall on you, and you'll drown in his pooling of blood.
True Lies
Arnold is the only guy that is compliant with the first law of thermodynamics. Arnold is living truth. Geeks are only living truth in their own minds and not in their flesh. Wait a minute...Austrian accent, huge muscles slowly shrinking with age, attitude to smash somthing... Why is Arnold running for office? C'mon, someone tell him to stop before he ruins his image of being a Good(TM) role model for children.
I think not. T2 had a far more
refined and polished look.
The first two were also had better
dialogue and a greater sense of urgency.
Jonathan Mostow is a fine director,
but not in James Cameron's league.
edward furlong played a neo-nazi in american history x and did an incredible job at it. do yourself a favor and rent it if you have yet to see it. i believe it rated pretty high on imdb and as we all know, they are never wrong. i just don't picture him as the role of john conner anymore. after seeing detroit rock city, he just does seem like he was matured enough for being the run down, always moving, hiding from everything adult the character required.
If you preferred Judgment Day to this movie, you are a marketing slave, probably like Microsoft software, and I hope you are one of the first to die in the coming nuclear war. Thank you for your time.
You can still do drugs and make a movie. Look at robert downey jr. Or most of hollywood for that matter.
"Weather you suffer from glaucoma, or you just rented the matrix, marijuana can make things fabulous... medically." --Homer J. Simpson
-makoffee
*SPOILER WARNING - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED*
While it does leave room for a sequl, you should also remember that this terminator killed John Conner in the future, so, from John's perspective, they will meet again.
"Signs Arnold Schwarzenegger is Getting Older"
From THE LATE SHOW with DAVID LETTERMAN
10. He's been triggering explosions with The Clapper
9. After day of shooting action scenes, entire set smells like Ben Gay
8. Over two dozen times in T3, he says, "You'll have to speak up".
7. Instead of shooting bad guys, challenges them to $10 game of shuffleboard
6. For "Terminator 4," he's been replaced by Don Knotts
5. Recently switched from steroids to Metamucil
4. Special effects in latest movie provided by Sy Sperling
3. Bulging chest muscles really just a Wonderbra
2. Catch phrase changed from "I'll be back" to "Oh, my back!"
1. His stunt double: Bob Dole
Ken http://keneckert.byus.net
I was completely disappointed by this movie. I could not believe the lack of the entire badass theme that the previous two movies had. Both T1 and T2 had you actually involved in the movie. You were on the edge of your seat. You felt for the characters. And there was no badass music. This peice of crap was just another attempt to awe people at special effects. And the "humor"! What the hell is this!? The last thing I want to see while watching a terminator film is fricken humor. The star sunglasses that he puts on, talk to the hand? WHAT THE HELL? The thing that made Terminator 2 great was that the Terminator went through an experience with them. He learned, and there was the whole thing about him now understanding why people cry. This one was just... stupid. There was no point to it. There was no deeper meaning to it. When the movie is over, it's over. It didn't make me feel anything when it ended, like the previous two, other than relief that I could leave the theater. My summary: Terminator 3 is like diarrhea. The longer it lasts, the more irritated you get.
--
Matt Keeler
ODP Editor - http://dmoz.org
http://elysium.org
Someone actually let Arnold make this movie, and god did it stink. However, this is probably the same person who will actually agree to let Arny run for any political office of any kind.....
"Love is like pi - natural, irrational, and very important." (Lisa Hoffman)
"I'll be old."
Every body gets old, but he is supposed to be a machine.
Properly done, they could play it off that he has been around for a while and the flesh around the machine just ages faster.
Now, if they could only explain why they don't wrap stuff in the flesh so he can put together a decent weapon.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Everybody will see so much nudity, that it would no longer matter, then we can think about other things instead of whose nipples seem the biggest.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Godel believed it was possible, much to the frustration of Einstien. Godel used Eistiens theroy in such a way that time travel fit, however it required a rotating universe. Einstien counterd that the universe expands, not spins therefore Godel was wrong. Not very scientific, but then, Einstien wasn't a sientist.
Michio Kaku believes time travel is possible, and can point to some lab esperiments that impy he s right.
In the ast 5 years or so, Hawking has changed his point of view on time travell due to some new eveidence.
So the top scientist in the world(within this field) believe that time travel is possible, just not practical.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
As far as I know the only time travel idea that could actually work is to slow down time in a specific area so that when you travel to that area it is still in the same or a similar time to whent he machine was turned on.
See, think of your life time as a string, with one end representing your birth, and the other end your death. Put the ends together, and ball up the string, and the days of your life touch each other out of sequence...
--Mythos
OK, yeah maybe "Judgement Day is Inevitable," or maybe Cyberdyne got their mitts on the arm that was left behind in T2. The chip and arm from T1 was destroyed, and the T1000 and 101 was destroyed, but one of the machines in the factory tore off one of the 101 unit's arms. Sure, it was mangled, but hey, the chip Cyberdyne initially found was smashed too...
--Mythos
I think the burning skeleton was not in the original but in part two and was therefore prolly rendering with CG.
-- Please put this in your sig if you think
Heck, I knew the world was on a death spiral when "Mannequin II" was announced.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
who dont follow youre philosophy to make you feel better. At least the dimwit Reagon as you call him somehow got to be president.
Not much people can say about youre lame ass though.
If I were you, I would rent a gun and buy a bullet.
aim at yourself and fire!
shiznit.
*Doing* drugs is one thing, but when your life practically revolves around them, that's a whole different animal. Robert Downey, Jr. is just about the worst example you could give. His drug problems were threatening the production schedule of Ally McBeal, so he immediately got the boot:
"Arrested for being under the influence of a controlled substance in Los Angeles after he was found wandering in an alley. He was fired from the TV series "Ally McBeal" (1997) by producer David E. Kelley after the arrest. [24 April 2001]"
He was also subject to daily drug tests while filming "Two Girls and a Guy," says the IMDB bio page on him.
I think it was smart for the makers of T3 to not gamble on Furlong.
~Philly
That's pre-determinism, not absence of free-will. If you believe in Christianity's God, you believe in free-will - but you also believe that God knows the future. Hence, we have pre-determinism - God knows what choice you're going to make, but *you* are still making the choice.
The Beowulf Klustor of Doom!!!
Watch when the hydrogen cell goes off -- it blows a big hole out of the top of the mountain in the external shot. Dunno if that would have caved the whole damn mountain in, but it probably did a fair bit to the structure. Considering the bunker is designed to withstand nuclear attacks, that's not very strong.
Warning: Spoilers.
Many of the points people are raising in these threads seem to be born of 1. Unrealistic expectations, and 2. a fanboy attitude too easily changed to desire the Next Best Thing.
My opinion: T3 is light-years ahead of T2, and in fact does *much* to undo the damage that T2 did to the story line. T3 is also rated "R" both for the violence (which is extreme at times) and the *MINOR* nudity in the first few scenes. T3 harkens back to what made T1 such a success, and those people who think T2 was anything other than a kiddie flick that ruined the story arc first presented in T1 are wowed only by stupid advances in special effects and not a good storyline.
And now, ladies and gentlemen (and useless trolls too) I shall address those negative points made in this review and put straight what's wrong.
First off, I'd like to talk about the nudity in this film. In T1, you could actually see Arnie's noodle flapping around when he was walking up to those gang members to steal some clothing. I don't know if you noticed, but go back and check it again. If you have a remastered DVD version, good for you. If not, try to find the oldest VHS tape you have, and pay attention. Full frontal nudity. If your tape or DVD doesn't have it, either it's been edited out, or you've watched it too much to actually see what's going on.
In T3, there is no full frontal nudity. There are fuzzy, darkened boobs. Big fucking deal. You get to see her ass. And the problem with this is...? It's a nice ass, and she's not doing anything gratuitous, so it's extremely tastefully done. It's not "pandering" to adolescents. If it were, it'd be far more like Tomb Raider and wouldn't be rated "R".
Second, the reviewer seems to think that the review on CNN is part of some corporate conspiracy to present the Truth, according to AOL/Time Warner. My points: 1. Does this make the movie itself bad? No. 2. The CNN review is far more accurate than this reviewer's points.
Still, what's the reviewer's point? That every single thing that comes out of CNN's authors is necessarily biased? No, of course not. jamie makes that implication, however. I find that disingenuous.
jamie doesn't think T3 is darker than T2?! COME ON! In T2, when Arnie went into that bar, kicked everyone's ass, stabbed two or three guys (one with the guy's own knife) threatens a guy with his own shotgun, what plays when he climbs onto his "cool" stolen motorbike? "Bad to the Bone." Not a single person died in that fight. Tell me that and the stupid music isn't downplaying violence. T2 has no significant violence and that's why it wasn't even rated "R". The original T1 has Arnie punching his hand *right through* some street punk. T2 has nothing on that level of simple, horrific violence. NOTHING. And that was on purpose, because Arnie didn't want to scare his children. It was one of the only stipulations Arnie had before he agreed to do the sequel.
People, in T1 when he pulls his hand back out, there's blood and some other, darker fluid *all over his arm.*
In T2, just about the most horrific scene was the bad guy stabbing some janitor through the head. Big deal.
In T3, it's back to horrific slaughter.
In T2, the ending was happy, up-beat. There was a sense that the armageddon mentioned in T1 wasn't going to come after all, that John Connor wouldn't need to become a "big military leader."
It was a movie aimed at young kids, and the sense of a fated doom in T1 was erased. Completely.
In T3, that sense is back, that hopelessness, that despair. Oh, T3 is a darker movie alright. And the bitch terminator doesn't hold back. She *murders children*. In COLD FUCKING BLOOD.
Is this not "dark" for you jamie?! What the hell crack are *you* smoking?
And, *duh,* the scene with the skeleton clutching the chain-link fence wasn't in the original. That scene was popularized in T2. Did you honestly find that more disturbing than the two infiltrators coming into the human hideout and gunning
...that believes if you special effects are 100% digital, they are 100% soulless. Digital effects are useful and can add a lot, but they cannot stand by themselves unless the effects are the center piece (as in Shrek and Nemo, etc). You still need natural, real, organic elements in a scene to make it feel natural, real, and organic. FotR and especially TTT did this very well. Think of the Black Gates of Mordor. The gates and walls were models with humans superimposed on them. The giganic trolls doing the grunt work were computer graphics. The scene has such excellent balance that you feel almost overwhelmed emotionally by their daunting presence. You aren't even thinking about special effects when you watch the scene.
Join Tor today!
This Sunday's cartoon :^)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Waitaminute... The first batch of terminators that the Terminatrix let loose, the flyers and the ED-209-like rovers ... these predated Skynet's activation, and were built by the U.S. military. So who was the U.S. planning to use them against?
And if Skynet exists in distributed computing space, wouldn't its nuking all those cities/dorm rooms fiber optics etc. pretty much have been suicide?
Are they true to the movie plots?
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Nudity is offensive for people with religions.
I think it was a good idea to have the bad character be a women. It changes things up a little and of course makes things equal.
What do you all expect? Terminator is supposed to be all about the fights, blow ups, and special effects. I think even if nothing was good about the movie people would still go see it just because it is Terminator!!! I thought it rocked!
I haven't seen the film yet, but if I'm understanding correctly, the cell detonated inside the bunker. Speaking as someone that's trained on explosives a fair bit, there's a significant difference between a bomb hitting the outside of a structure and one detonating inside of it.
when an explosion occurs within a building, the shockwave will rebound around until it runs out of kinetic energy, crushing or cutting everything in its path, depending on the type of charge used.
when it goes off outside, much of the energy is lost to the air. even a shaped charge will lose a good deal of force without some sort of tamping.
The World's Worst Webcomic!
Yeah, but it goes off in her mouth...
#6495ED - cornflower blue