Darth Avlectus Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I want to see it but then again I want a lot of stuff. :dozey: Just somebody tell me if it;ll be worth renting when it hits DVD...PLZ Well it is out now anyone seen it yet? Here is a pic to celebrate: I'm thinking I'll wait another week or two for the crowds to thin out a bit. Racist comments don't fly here. --Jae (ordained) EDIT: Ehh...I have a little jew blood in me? well, I guess self-deprecation doesn't always work... SORRY! My bad... I saw it at the midnight screening last night, and I enjoyed it. Bale and Yelchin were very good. Worthington was great. The action was amazing, but I didn't care much for McG's editing. Overall, it doesn't hold a candle to the original two, but it's a hundred times better than T3. I don't why it's getting so much crap from critics. Oh, and the Arnie cameo was absolutely badass. I thought T3 was great from an action and stunts standpoint... Left me a little confused about the story until I saw the scenes that were cut out. So this one would be worth it, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanius Anglesmith Posted May 22, 2009 Author Share Posted May 22, 2009 I thought T3 was great from an action and stunts standpoint... Left me a little confused about the story until I saw the scenes that were cut out. The last scene was the only good part of that movie. The music was phenomenal. So this one would be worth it, then? I think it's definitely worth a theater viewing. Go during matinee hours for a cheaper ticket if you're unsure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK-42 Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I saw it at the midnight screening last night, and I enjoyed it. Bale and Yelchin were very good. Worthington was great. The action was amazing, but I didn't care much for McG's editing. Overall, it doesn't hold a candle to the original two, but it's a hundred times better than T3. I don't why it's getting so much crap from critics. Hey I liked T3 I dont believe much in critics now a days they focus too much on how actors acted in the past, and seem to believe thats all they can do. Though I dread the fact that there wont be much Arnold in this movie, he was the real comedy parts of the other 3 movies. Also is the TV series any good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Anyone else notice that Bale can't act? Something to think about. *snotlaugh* He cant... his acting in Dark Knight was hilarious... even if I did like the movie. Its no wonder Ledger upstaged Batman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted May 23, 2009 Share Posted May 23, 2009 Just got back from this movie... it was meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Obi-Wan Posted May 23, 2009 Share Posted May 23, 2009 I thought it started off slow, but I like the last half. Not as good as T2 though. Liked it better than T1 and T3. Christian Bale's acting in this one was up and down. Though, I wouldn't say his acting is bad. He was great in The Prestige, The Machinist, Rescue Dawn, Equilibrium, etc. I didn't have a problem with either of the Batman movies either. Other than that, Sam Worthington was great. And so was everybody else. I did get a laugh with the cameo and "I'll be back". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Liked it better than T1 Blasphemy! Of course you might not have been around when it was made, or just a wee little one at the time, I was in my very early teens and it was uber on the big screen... Remember we didn't have no fancy-schmancy toys all you young-ins get today. Internet? What's that? Something net-like to catch something? Colds maybe? Cell phones? Oh them big boxy things you have in your car. Blogs? I'll get you a tissue for that! Windows? Open them for air silly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanir Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 A lot of people had never even heard of The Terminator when someone brought it around on video once and I remember when things like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark were at the cinemas. It was a low budget movie, like Blair Witch Project or something. Not your typical highly popular Hollywood blockbuster or anything. Arnie was known from the Conan movies but it's not like we're talking about Steve McQueen or Harrison Ford here. Must say I was quite impressed with it as a fun movie with sci-fi overtones and some really classic action scenes (the whole stunned police thing was just great, "PCP" says one, "Broke every bone in his hand and didn't feel a thing," he speculates...oh no, later he learns it wasn't PCP and the incredible is true). So the second sort of cameos these elements and creates a new story around John Conner, the unseen subject of the first movie. It was well done, even though the kid was an annoying little twerp you just wanted to smack. Kinda needs a Terminator big brother to get by, that one. Mom had turned ultra sexy though, not that she wasn't half bad in the first. The third was great in every scene John Conner wasn't in. Whiney and beyond annoying. Just kill him off already, please. Kinda worth it to have a perv at Kristanna Loken, not sure if her being very bi is a plus or a negative but she is a handsome woman and rather aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Christian Bale was brilliant in the Machinist and Equilibrium. He does have a thoughtful look about him which is very good in a sci-fi/action genre or films about social conscience. We must recognise half of acting is all about appearances alone (so-called photogenics). I'll definitely see it actually only because he's in it. I think it'd just annoy me otherwise but Christian Bale will bring it back to within tolerances. The series is crap but Summer Glau is totally stunning, I really like that girl in sci-fi. I watch it just for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK-42 Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 ^I have a completely different opinion. Even if it was a low-budget movie, it was a box office hit. And on the T2, John Connor acted like a normal kid who lived with foster parents or on the street, not very much like a little twerp in my opinion. He did a good job not acting like he went to a private school and lived more on the street. The rest just makes you sound like you watch movies just because of the girl who is in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 she is a handsome woman and rather aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Naw...ya think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 "A handsom woman" lol Are you from the 1800s? xD "Handsome" is a polite way of saying a woman isnt all that hot... Unless you meant that, then carry on. Any pics of her grimey and dirty..? >.> <.< What? Sometimes filthy is sexier than pristine.. ok so Im a bit strange. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordOfTheFish Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Saw it last Friday. I thought it was pretty good, but I've seen better. Seeing Arnold make a surprise appearance was great, just like Nimoy in Star Trek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Was he pudgy like he is now, or did they CGI him to remove signs of age and the growth of a spare-tire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderQ Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 They probably used CGI to create...a mechanical spare tire, without a doubt:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordOfTheFish Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Because he is Governor of California, he cant act. So yes, he was completely CGI, and very built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderQ Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 The Governator can still kick some political....rear-end. He's awesome. Besides when he retires....well...this says it all. "I'll be back." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanir Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 ^I have a completely different opinion. Even if it was a low-budget movie, it was a box office hit. And on the T2, John Connor acted like a normal kid who lived with foster parents or on the street, not very much like a little twerp in my opinion. He did a good job not acting like he went to a private school and lived more on the street. The rest just makes you sound like you watch movies just because of the girl who is in it. I'm forced to ask, do you remember when it was first released? Terminator opened taking $4m and $78m to date. Less than half of Raiders on the first weekend and about a fifth overall of its return. T2 opened at $34m and T3 at $44m and have roughly the same final gross as Raiders to date. As for why I watch movies, I told you I'd see it for Christian Bale. Personally I don't find him very feminine. The television series however I do watch for Summer Glau. Quite simply there's no other possible reason to. I do appreciate your opinon about the character John Connor being authentic as a street urchin but having been in homeless youth shelters and on the streets personally as a kid I find the write up of this character (not the actor who portrayed him, who I think is a fine actor), is precisely like a spoiled little private school brat rather than the opposite as you said. Real streetkids are much dirtier and have much less anxt, they have much less of anything, and most of their crime is based on the personal need to get themselves killed off rather than some kind of rebel youth fashion statement of going against the system, they couldn't care less about the system one way or the other, if any system even existed they wouldn't be streetkids. They don't steal because it's easy money, it's because they've got no choice about it and then that makes them a criminal so yeah, they hate you for that big time. The older John Conner in T3 was a better character write up of a young streetkid, kinda torn and still human but very alone...but him being older then just makes him whiney and childish, by that age former streetkids are different again, quite a bit more zeroed (emoteless). Let's just say they grow up fast, where the John Conner characters are written as a normal person living the life for a day, like some tourist doing a university study just before they go back home to a nice warm bed and get tucked in by mommy. That works for the mass commercial market of course, but it wouldn't be arthouse. No European producer/director would let such a thing get by him unless it was a satirical comedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Personally I don't find him very feminine. What an odd thing to say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Seeker Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Sorry to disappoint guys, but that weren't Arnold. Was Roland Kickinger http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0452199/ I totally nerded out till I saw the credits though. Worked for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 Atleast hes from the right area, and he does look an awful lot like Ahnold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanius Anglesmith Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share Posted May 25, 2009 Sorry to disappoint guys, but that weren't Arnold. Was Roland Kickinger http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0452199/ I totally nerded out till I saw the credits though. Worked for me. Clearly it wasn't actually Arnold, the actor, considering he doesn't look like that any more. The CGI was incredible, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Hunger Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 I disagree with those that don't think Bale and Reeves can act. IMO, they simply have less empathic, dry characters. I think Bale is going to do great for the following reason: Remember the Sarah Connor Chronicles? That got killed by focusing on character development and the actors' ability to act rather than action. A show or movie about killer robots needs to be more action than acting based or it'll get killed. Why did T3 get killed? It covered the acting and action perfectly, but frankly the plot was pointless. Nothing was resolved. T: Salvation obviously won't have that problem, which is why I'm hopeful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 "A handsom woman" lol Are you from the 1800s? xD "Handsome" is a polite way of saying a woman isnt all that hot... Unless you meant that, then carry on. Any pics of her grimey and dirty..? >.> <.< What? Sometimes filthy is sexier than pristine.. ok so Im a bit strange. lol . .. ... .... ..... Well dirty and grimy turned up nothing on a google image search but I did get for you what I perceived to be the closest I could find and get. There you go...Sorry I could not find her any filthier. She sure does look different when she smiles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 I disagree with those that don't think Bale and Reeves can act. IMO, they simply have less empathic, dry characters. Bale isn't nearly as bad as Reeves, but srsly: Reeves is the worst actor in Hollywood by a considerable margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderQ Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 I think Keanu Reeves lost his ability to act seriously after filming Bill and Ted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.