Friday, May 22, 2009

Terminator Salvation @ The Escapist

Major website inexplicably continues to give me a platform:


Jabrwock said...

Overall I think a much better review, stylistically. The toning down of the swearing made the rants more effective, because you can use much more descriptive yet still biting terms.

Anonymous said...

I disagree with your opinion on the movie. I thought the action was standard, high budget stuff. The script was inexcusably horrible. All the actors phoned it in in my opinion. I don't know, I respect your opinion but mostly disagree.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you MovieBob, I had a good time despite the glaring problems of the script. It doesn't quite erase the bad taste left over from T3 though.

Very true, the whole Kyle Reese thing was kinda confusing. I mean, if Skynet knew that he was JC's dad all it would have to do is "not" build a time machine in the first place.

Even the fact that Connor was the "big target" didn't quite work because according to Kyle in T1 Connor only became a target after he destroyed the defence grid.

"Their defence grid was smashed.
We'd won. Taking out Connor then would make no difference.
Skynet had to wipe out his entire existence."

Oh also you forgot to mention the ripping off of the truck chase from "The Road Warrior".

Even though I disagree with you on Star Trek, I love dissenters in general so keep up the great reviews.


Bob said...

Thing is, I'm more-or-less willing to ignore stuff in this future diverging in terms of who did what to who when from Reese's account in the first film since the events of T2 (to say nothing of T3) mean that the timeline has already been reshaped, the biggest difference being that Judgement Day happened well AFTER 1997.

NobleBear said...

Good, solid analysis, Bob.

This is somewhat better than I anticipated from the feature. (incidentally, why does that Catwoman douche keep getting work? God alone knows, I guess)

In the interest in my learning something I would like to ask:
What separates a film laden with references and a film that's a hodgepodge of past works? I'm working my way backwards from your UP review and there you identify the classic references that are made in the course of that feature while here you identify the influences you see present but as a pejorative, whats the difference?

Great stuff. :)