Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Terminator 3, Arnold's back


jbooma

Recommended Posts

I watched the making of the movie last night on HBO, and it looks awesome. I believe this could be the sleeper of the summer. Unlike the Hulk they have been very quiet about releasing information on it.

The one thing that is very good about this movie it isn't CGI'd to death like the Matrix. The actual terminator robots are real, they are not computer generated. If you have HBO check out the quick 15 minute preview about it. It opens this Wednesday :)

Oh did I mention Claire Danes and Kristanna Loken :tongue: are in it

:cheers::cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, at first I kind of rolled my eyes at it, but after reading more about it I now have tickets to go see it tomorrow night. I think it will be better than people expect because they are planning on staying true to the other movies instead of going off on a tanget and doing things that don't quite fit the mold of the Terminator. However, it's hard to call a movie that had a 170 million dollar budget a sleeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Golgo-13

However, it's hard to call a movie that had a 170 million dollar budget a sleeper.

Very true, one expensive sleeper, hehehaa.

I like how they haven't advertised it to the max like Hulk did. 3 months ago the Hulk hands were already at the toy stores and every other commerical was a hulk one :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the movie tonight and it was okay. They should've never made this movie. It doesn't have what the first two had. The only highlight is the Termanitrix played by Kristanna Loken. She steals the show. Actually, she's the only reason to see this movie, not Arnold.

Kristanna%20Loken%2005.jpg

photomaxim1.jpg

feb2003.gif

5.jpg

gfd_l2.jpg

gfd_l3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, I just got back from seeing it and I really liked it. No, it wasn't "Cameron's" Terminator, but it was a good movie, and it certainly was a Terminator movie. ...and I disagree with those who call it 'less cerebral' than the first two...if anything it is equal in this regard. The message at the end (I won't spoil it) gives you new food for thought regarding the message of the first two.

Overall, I would place this one on just about equal footing with the first film, just below "Judgement Day".

I did notice a few possible 'plot holes'.....I say 'possible' because they could very well be "shored up" in the DVD release (please, please), but this was a solid Terminator flick and a VERY solid action film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, sorry for ruining this thread with my incredibly inane posts, but the funniest thing just popped into my head.

Wouldn't it be hilarious is Arnold referred to himself in the 3rd person?

"Arnold is running for governer. Vote for Arnold, or Arnold kill you."

"Arnold will be back."

"Arnold say hasta la vista, baby."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I loved the movie, I always felt Cameron was a bit overrated, and this director did a heluva job making this movie.

BTW, I'm glad Eddie Furlong got busted for drugs and Nick Stahl got to take his place. Furlong, was a cute child actor, but in no way is he good enough to take on the role of an adult John Connor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest SkinsHokie Fan

I enjoyed the movie a lot. It also kind of made me think could something like that happen. Any military guys know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was pretty disappointing.

1. Arnold did look great for a 55 year old.

2. Ms. Lokken's nude scene needed to be expanded....just for artistic integrity. :>)

3. They probably should have hired a few actors.

4. a) Claire Danes ain't no Sarah Conner and this movie desparately needed a Sarah Conner.

5. The movie needed a Sarah Conner because John Conner is such a complete wienie. When we last saw him, John was a wise-cracking, courageous, street-savvy 13 year old. At 24, he's a sullen, inept, introverted whiner. It's not believable that he's to be a leader of any sort in the future.

6. I read of the fluff about how Christiana Lokken studied some Israeli martial arts for this film, but unless Israelis bash each other over the head with urinals a lot, I'm not sure what the benefit was.

Loser flick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arnold looked great for a 20 year old, who are you kidding?

I really like T3, and thought it a worthy continuation of the Terminator story. I especially like how the ending of T3 makes the 3 films look like a 6 hour 'Twilight Zone' episode: They think the future is saved (T1), then find out they inadvertantly 'sped up' development of Skynet due to the 'discovered' parts of the first Terminator, they destroy those and Cyberdyne, thinking they have NOW saved the future (T2)....only to discover that apparently they cannot 'stop' Judgement Day from happening, only delay it, so now the prime objective of Arnold's Terminator is simply to make sure Conner and Brewster live through Judgement Day so that humanity can one day defeat the machines. The ending of T3 is what, in my opinion, made it a really good film...as far as storyline is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've gone from expecting the absolute worst to being cautiously optimistic about T3.

Why is that, you ask?

Well, I must say that my interest has really been piqued by the response to the film on the internet. From those who were able to attend special test screenings to fanboy movie critics, like Harry Knowles of fanboy mecca AICN.com, who attended pre-release press screenings, the verdict on T3 is almost unanimously positive. Then the film was released for the general public on Wednesday and the lion's share of the responses that have been posted on IMDB.com's webpage for the film have been similarly upbeat. One moviegoer seemed to sum up the general consensus when he opined something to the effect of, "Who'da thunk it? T3 is actually pretty damn good! By the skin of its teeth, it manages to pull it off and be very entertaining."

The elite response to the film (which is to say the movie critic response to the film) has been good to lukewarm. Most critics seem to be giving it a B or a B-. Of course there were those who totally hated it, most notably Roger Ebert. However, amazingly, that paragon of stick-in-the-mud movie-critic @ssh*leyness, The L.A. Times' Kenneth "I Hate James Cameron and Titanic with Unyielding Passion" Turan, gave T3 its best grade by a major critic so far: an A-.

In a summer when a good portion of the supposedly "can't-miss" event movies (from Matrix: Reloaded [which I've heard was muddled and pretentious] to Hulk [which I've heard was overwrought and overly long]) misfired, T3, the movie that most everyone (from professional media watchers to the hordes of ultra-finicky fanboys, myself included) figured would suck massive donkey d*ck, might just prove to be the best movie of the entire season.

Then again, what the hell do I know? I haven't even seen the damn thing yet. :laugh:

--------------------

I must say that the most interesting review of T3 I've come across so far was written by the aforementioned Harry Knowles.

http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/display.cgi?id=15576

Tuesday, July 1, 2003

TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES review

By Harry Knowles

TERMINATOR 3 is a damn good film, borders on being something better than that and depending on how it holds up on multiple viewings and what they do with the ends they leave, if they do anything of all… it might become great.

It might have been my marginal expectations, my memories of walking into 3rd chapters of series like RETURN OF THE JEDI, SEARCH FOR SPOCK, THE CREATURE WALKS AMONG US, ALIEN 3, GODFATHER 3, LETHAL WEAPON 3, RAMBO 3 and BEVERLY HILLS COP 3… Those experiences can only be explained by the look on Stephen Rea’s face in THE CRYING GAME, when he too didn’t get what he expected.

In recent memory, only ROCKY III achieved debatable greatness, debatable… because some feel it is a cartoon… For me, Goddamn, I saw that film 20 times on first run in the theaters. EYE OF THE TIGER became an anthem and Mr. T became a nightmare ID monster. The death of Mickey, the transformation of the Apollo / Rocky dynamic and the fights… The fights became things of superhuman glory. Ok, must stop writing about ROCKY III, cuz I could talk about it for about 3000 words. With the exception of TARZAN ESCAPES, THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY and SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, it’s my favorite third film in a trilogy.

The production of TERMINATOR 3 has been filled with word of disaster, premonitions of doom, feelings of dread. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a film of this size have more negativity coming to me from sources within the Distribution company declaring the film to be beyond terrible… only to see a complete reversal from advance reviews. That just doesn’t happen. I’ve had sources inside studios say a movie is golden, and have it be a dud, but never masses of negativity, followed by cheering adoring reviews. Turns out the word was coming out of frustration due to being kept out of the loop. It seems impossible to imagine, but T3 is essentially a gigantic independent film. Almost all the financing from overseas. And Mostow had complete control and didn’t cherish showing everybody what he was up to. He had secrets he wanted preserved. Damn good ones. Ones you should be worried about having spoiled for you, so if I may… I suggest steering clear of reviews, talkbacks and chat rooms till you see the film for yourself. You don’t want the secrets spoiled.

Suffice to say, this film has the balls that none of the other big summer films have had in years, if ever.

How does it compare with the first two TERMINATOR films… I’ll do a quick breakdown for you folks.

1. Action -- On par, if not better. There has never been a Terminator film on this sort of scale. The action is hugely entertaining.

2. Characters -- Fully in third place. There are no characters on par with the work of Linda Hamilton or the coming of age of Edward Furlong or the determined sadness of Michael Biehn. Claire Danes is the best here, but her character just isn’t as strong as those others. Nick Stahl is complicated, but ultimately not as interesting… the great transformation was 10 more minutes of film away. I wanted to see those 10 minutes, unfortunately, we don’t get that.

3. Score – Greatest complaint. I’m not a Marco Beltrami fan. I’m not sure if Brad Fiedel didn’t do this out of fealty to Cameron, or if Mostow just prefers Beltrami, but not having him score, would be like not having Arnold in the film. I have always felt that Fiedel and Linda Hamilton were the soul of this series. Marco does what he does best, he creates a score that seems to not exist, a completely unobtrusive score that doesn’t weigh on the film… however, I could feel Fiedel missing.

4. Cinematography – Very nice, but the texture, framing and lighting of TERMINATOR 2 is a modern marvel. This has the look of a modern Action film, far less painterly. Far less classic. Far less beautiful. T2 was shot with an artist’s eye. T3 is shot aggressively as if the next shot was always more important than the one we were currently looking at.

5. Visual Effects – There’s a great deal of invisible perfect FX work in this film. Brutally realized and just an absolute delight to behold. There are sequences that you’ll just begin to nervously giggle by their intensity. Well, that’s how I manifested it, you might rip the arm off your seat, bruise the bicep of the fella next to ya or drop a load in your drawers… I don’t know, but if you can watch the chase scene in this…. Or the T-101 vs T-X fight in the johns and then think for a half a second that there is a chase scene or fight scene in MATRIX RELOADED worthy of even being a pimple on the ass of these… Then by golly, happy living on the funny farm. Just jaw droppingly wonderful.

6. Story -- Far better than I was expecting. Much better than the script I had read. Does it work within the existing Terminator storylines? Well, if you subscribe to the “butterfly effect” concept of time travel alteration as it is tied to a pre-ordained destiny… Yes. There is a fatalistic eventuality here that I love. When you think about “NO FATE BUT WHAT WE MAKE FOR OURSELVES” that was first put forth by John Connor to Kyle Reese to tell Sarah Connor in the first film, you have to realize… that isn’t a hard-lined fact of time travel reality… that is essentially the hope of the future. That we can alter the despair of the future by the choices we make today. John Connor believes “NO FATE BUT WHAT WE MAKE,” because… well that’s what the machines believe… that is why they sent the Terminators back to kill him, why they built a time machine… It was all done with the idea of changing the future. HOWEVER, the big question that we have always had about TIME TRAVEL is “Can You Change The Future or is it Set?” Ultimately, this is the big theme of this film. That’s a great theme to have, one that the first two TERMINATOR films were always avoiding, yet… think about it. The machines were never able to kill Connor (Sarah or John) – meaning, they were never able to really change that future eventuality that he would knock off SKYNET and lead the human revolt… Against all odds, he always survived. The Story of T3 is absolutely one that is worthy of being told.

OK – Now to get into more specific issues with the film.

John Connor as played by Nick Stahl

Remember how Sarah Connor was a complete and total wimp in the first TERMINATOR and came out to be a hardlined asskicker in T2? Remember in T2, how John Connor was a namby pamby brat boy that was touchy feely and didn’t want the Terminator killing people? Well, what’s happened to John Connor in the 12 years since we last saw him?

First, the date he’s known as Judgment Day, the day the machines took over and the bombs fell out of the sky and the human race was nearly eradicated. That day that he’s been raised his entire life being told was coming at this time on this day… That underlying feeling of doom he had as he looked at every mall, every city he ever lived in. That feeling that made him believe the world he lived in was an eventual crematorium. That day came and went without so much as a firecracker going off.

What do you do next?

So does this mean it isn’t going to happen? Does it mean he isn’t going to be a “great military leader”? That suddenly his life is like every body else’s? OR – could the machines have sent another Terminator to kill him, and that while he stopped Judgment Day from happening, the machines would have sent another back to get him, before that big time wave of change swept the nightmare away? So he lives with no connections, no bank statements, living odd jobs here and there. He can’t confide in anyone anymore, how would they believe some kid? He has no proof, there is no proof. It didn’t happen. With his mother dead, he has no support system. It is now 6 years past August 29th, 1997… the day 3 billion human lives were snuffed out. He’s fallen into a pattern, not unlike a lot of Vietnam Vets that didn’t want to remember what they went through… what they saw. He’s taken up drinking. He doesn’t form friendships, can’t risk anyone getting close to him.

Then, one night he crashes his bike to avoid hitting a deer on a road out in the middle of nowhere. He breaks into an animal clinic for some pain killers and suddenly… Suddenly, it is all back on.

Nick Stahl plays John Connor as a burnt out man that had given up on who he was supposed to be. Everything he ever believed in didn’t happen. He’s a burnt out early twenties alcoholic… he’s not the future of humanity. Who would follow him? THEN BAM! Here it is… Destiny… Your future coming to put you back on track, finding you and saying… Here it comes John, and the entire time he believes he can avoid it. He doesn’t want it. His only thought through this film is to stop Judgment Day, not survive it. He doesn’t want to be that Leader, if he’s that leader, that means 3 BILLION HUMANS ARE DEAD. He doesn’t want to lead a boy scout troop much less the surviving remnants of mankind.

For John Connor, Judgment Day can be stopped. The future can be changed. He’s done it before, he can do it again. Give the world back it’s rainbows and happy moments. Give it its forests and parks and future. But is that what John Connor can do? Can John Connor save the future or just lead it? And if he’s supposed to lead it, how the hell is he gonna do that?

That’s what I love about this movie. You find out. I just wish, that we had 10 more minutes of the film, picking up exactly where we were… I wanted to hear and see what happened in those next 10 minutes with John Connor. Those 10 minutes, that next 3 hours, 2 weeks, 10 years… This is where he finds his destiny. Where eventuality comes for him.

How are the Terminators in this film? They’re fine. Arnie is perfect, as great as he’s always been in this role. In fact he’s so damn perfect for this film that as you watch it, its like a big removal of all the **** he’s been stuck in for the past several years. I suppose it is odd that a man be born to play a machine… I suppose you’d have to ask Brent Spiner what he thinks of that, but Arnold’s TERMINATOR is as iconic as any role that any actor has ever played. Just one of those things that was simply meant to be. Honestly, I can’t say enough times how great it is seeing him in this movie. I swear to god, if Harrison Ford can step into Indiana Jones’ boots and be as perfect as Arnie is here… the feeling of good will that’ll spill out of me in the theater will just be tremendous. Same with Stallone. There’s something about those 80’s guys that makes me just root for them and cheer when they get it right. When you see Arnold arrive in his Time sphere thing… and you see that 1980’s Arnold physique stand up… It is as if for just that moment, if you can imagine… nothing has changed in twenty years. Everything is as it was. And as it should be. As for Terminator Barbie… She’s nothing but bad. Bad News, Bad Ass and Bad for the entire human race. Oh and she’s real easy on the eyes.

This TERMINATOR film is lean, too lean. It needed to be fleshed out a bit here and there. My wanting that extra 10 minutes, I really want that sequence. Earlier in the film, I really want more character development between John and Kate Brewster – or between Kate and her father.

The film works so much better than I was expecting, but I still wanted more. That’s probably a good thing. If you think about how the film ends, there’s a certain beauty to it, to the conversations you can have, to what it all means, to what John has to do next.

I had one friend that loves the first two Terminator films just hate John Connor and this story. He hated the dialogue, who John Connor had become since the last film. Why couldn’t he just accept his destiny, why is he fighting it? Why is he such a coward about it all?

For me, it is as clear as anything would ever be. At one point in the back of the truck as John and Kate are talking, and she doesn’t understand anything that is going on. He tells her to imagine that you know you have this destiny, this great thing you’re supposed to do, maybe the greatest thing that anyone anywhere has ever done, only the worst thing ever has to happen first… She doesn’t understand at the time what he’s talking about, but we do. At this point, he’s a Junior High School drop out. He doesn’t know history, military theory… He knows how to field strip a weapon, how to do everything in the Anarchist Cookbook… but he hasn’t been able to go to schools and get the information he is supposed to have. Not yet anyways.

I think some people are going to dismiss this film as being just a stupid action science fiction film with amazing set pieces. Actually, I believe it is damn smart. Really damn smart. Maybe at some future point I’ll go into everything I believe is about to happen, it’s all speculation of course… actually, it isn’t. Given where John is at the end of this film. It makes perfect sense. What is where he is? Who was supposed to be there? What is happening? It is beautifully horrible. And I like it. I like it a whole lot.

--------------------

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/ap/20030702/105717858000.html

'Terminator' Goes on Without Cameron

Wednesday July 2 1:43 PM ET

The audacity of it, a young upstart director commandeering a venerated science-fiction saga from a filmmaking idol.

Seventeen years ago, it was James Cameron with "Aliens," a rip-roaring action sequel to Ridley Scott's more quietly creepy "Alien." Cameron had come out of Roger Corman's B-movie factory and had just one notable credit to his name, writing and directing 1984's sci-fi sleeper hit "The Terminator"

Now it's Cameron, creator of "Terminator 2: Judgment Day," "True Lies" and the biggest modern blockbuster, "Titanic," who has an upstart in his wake.

Jonathan Mostow, who made the thriller "Breakdown" and the submarine adventure "U-571," gets his crack at directing a major franchise with "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines." Mostow was hired after Cameron decided against doing a third movie about a time-traveling cyborg soldier (Arnold Schwarzenegger) in a future war between humanity and machines.

"When I was first sent the script, my first response was, wow, somebody's making `Terminator 3,'" Mostow said. "And then my second response was, who'd be insane enough to take that job?"

Both as a young director and a fan of the "Terminator" flicks, Mostow hesitated, figuring Cameron was an impossible act to follow. Then Mostow got hooked on the story, which picks up 10 years after "Terminator 2."

The new movie has Schwarzenegger's killing machine sent back to the present day to once again protect John Connor (Nick Stahl), the future leader of the human resistance. The action pits Schwarzenegger against a far superior female terminator (Kristanna Loken) that's programmed to snuff Connor and his rebel lieutenants, one of them played by Claire Danes.

It was an adventure that Mostow, as a fan, would enjoy. He quickly decided other fans would like it, too.

"I'm a huge Jim Cameron fan, I'm a huge fan of the other movies. I just tried to make the movie that I would want to see. I can't make the movie that I thought Jim would make. I can only make the movie that I would make and hope that it fits in nicely to the trilogy. But that it's also it's own film, because if it's not, you might as well just go out and rent `T2.'"

While more and more directors stick around for one or more sequels nowadays, it remains common for studios to hire someone new to carry on a franchise if the original filmmaker does not return.

But "Terminator" is one of those cut-above franchises, indelibly associated with Cameron: imagine a "Star Wars" flick without George Lucas or an "Indiana Jones" sequel without Lucas and Steven Spielberg.

Schwarzenegger, who also starred in "True Lies," initially felt the same way.

"Not only because of his talent, but also, when you start something with somebody, you feel it's like your wife and you have created this baby," Schwarzenegger said. "Working together like this, then all of a sudden him not continuing, there were concerns."

Lacking Cameron, the franchise needed an up-and-coming director out to prove he could deliver on something really big, Schwarzenegger said. Mostow came on board intimately familiar with the "Terminator" world, and after watching the director marshal the crew in the first week of shooting, Schwarzenegger said any doubts vanished.

"It was a concern for everyone, but I think we fared pretty well," co-star Danes said. "I did sincerely trust Jonathan's capabilities as a director."

During shooting, Schwarzenegger gave his friend Cameron an occasional update on how "Terminator 3" was going. But "as for how good of a film it is, I have no idea," Cameron said. "We'll all find out about the same time."

Cameron had considered writing and directing another "Terminator" movie but dropped out in the late 1990s amid a tussle over sequel rights. His ex-wife and former producing partner, Gale Anne Hurd, owned half the rights, and the other half was being sold in a bankruptcy auction for Carolco, the production outfit that made "Terminator 2."

Carolco co-founders Mario Kassar and Andy Vajna, producers on the new movie, won the bidding for their former company's share and later acquired Hurd's half.

The first phone call they made was to Cameron, telling him, "James, we have acquired the rights and we would like for you to direct," Kassar said. "I don't think I heard a very happy man on the line. I think that was the last time we talked. He was not a happy man because he was trying to get the rights himself then."

If Cameron feels any bitterness, he keeps it hidden. He and Mostow met for the first time at a screening last spring of Cameron's Titanic documentary "Ghosts of the Abyss." Mostow said Cameron was gracious and supportive.

Cameron shrugs off "Terminator 3" questions, saying that like "Alien" director Scott, he has been in the position before where another filmmaker tinkered with his creation. The opening of "Alien 3," directed by David Fincher, derailed the happy ending of "Aliens" by killing off characters Cameron had invented.

"There's nothing they can do to me on `Terminator 3,'" Cameron said, "that's going to be as outrageous as that."

--------------------

http://www.starlog.com/fearful_feature.php?id=23

T3 SET VISIT PT. 3

By BILL WARREN

For some time after T2, Schwarzenegger firmly stated that he would not appear in any Terminator sequel unless Cameron was involved. And yet here he is, the Terminator—or rather a Terminator—again. Why?

Cameron had his own explanation, which he offered during interviews for Steven Soderbergh’s Solaris, which Cameron produced. “Arnold was a good, honorable friend in this,” Cameron said. “He kept thinking I would come to my senses [and direct the sequel]. He was holding out; he didn’t want to just run off and do it. Finally, we had this big kind of sitdown. I felt that I had been holding him back from something he should do. He has created a pop-culture icon, so why shouldn’t he continue in that character if they can come up with a good script? What I said was, ‘If they come up with a decent script that you like and think you can play, [where you] do something cool and they pay you an awful lot of money, you should just go do it and don’t feel like you’re betraying me.’ Arnold walked out of the office, and I think he made the deal that day or the next day, or sometime very soon after that.”

The journalist crowd is not permitted much time with the usually talkative Schwarzenegger. Asked what’s going on in this particular scene, the actor violates the kibosh on revealing the plot when he says, “The main thing I can tell you is that I’m carrying a coffin, obviously, out of the crypt here. And the coffin has other things in there than you would think, even though it says ‘Sarah Connor’ on it. She’s supposed to be inside the coffin, because she died a few years ago. Now I’m taking it away and putting it in one of these hearses, and then I’ll drive off. The female Terminator is then going to chase me down the road. It’s all part of the big chase sequence.”

The movie has only recently begun shooting, and Schwarzenegger admits, “We have only done two major action sequences, so I can’t tell you if this [is more physically challenging than the previous two], because the major stuff is still to come.”

Asked whether the big gun he’s carrying in the scene has a lot of kick, Schwarzenegger confirms that it does. “But it comes with a device that kicks it into your thigh. The idea is to make [the weapon] as steady as possible, so you can hit the target. But the gun keeps moving upward. When I was in the army, all the machine guns went—” he makes some “Brbrbrt!” noises, “so you stay on target.”

One of the journalists asks Schwarzenegger why he’s doing the film after repeatedly declaring he wouldn’t participate in a Cameronless sequel…

And if you wanna know the answer, you’ll just have to…

FIND OUT IN STARLOG ISSUE #312, ON NEWSSTANDS NOW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just saw it last night myself and I enjoyed it more so than I thought.

The chase scenes were great, the ending was pretty gloom but fitting for the movie and it was done any other way; I think I woulda enjoyed the movie less.

Arnold fit right back into his role and things seemed to flow for me... I dunno, I dont see why people disliked it so much.. I just found it really fun to watch. Craploads better than watching the Hulk or Charlie Angels this weekend.. :)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that even though I've become guardedly optimistic about T3, there are still things that I've heard about it that irk me.

For example, why is Arnold's character referred to as a T-101? The correct alphanumeric designation for Arnold's character is T-800 (as in Series 800), Model 101. This is not some closely-held state secret that Jonathan Mostow and Co. couldn't have known about. Kyle Reese in T1 refers to Arnold's character in this way. If memory serves, Arnold refers to himself in this way in T2. However, I know for a fact that James Cameron, William Wisher, Stan Winston, et al. referred to Arnold's character as the T-800 during the many interviews they gave during and after the making of T1 and T2.

Mostow and his screenwriters, John Brancato and Michael Ferris, have all said that they're big fans of the series. Well, if that's true, then why the hell did they get something as simple as this wrong?

However, more important than that (which admittedly, in the grand scheme of things, is the kind of thing that only a hardcore Terminator nerd like me would kvetch about ;)), they've gotten John Connor's age wrong in T3. Right now, in the year 2003, John should be 18 years old. He was conceived in May of 1984, right? Well, factor in the roughly nine months that Sarah Connor was pregnant with him, and John was born in either January or February of 1985. In T2 things get a little fuzzy because, although the film was released in 1991, the events of the film take place in either 1994, ten years after the events of T1, or in 1995, when John would've been 10 years old. This is something that many people got wrong, though, assuming that John was 10 years of age in 1991, when T2 was released, or even that John was 13, the age at the time of Eddie Furlong, the actor who played him in T2.

Either way, though, if Mostow and Co. had done their homework on T3, they would've figured all this out. If they wanted John to be in his twenties in T3, fine. Set the film during or after 2005. But from what I understand, the film is set in 2003 and John says during a piece of voice-over narration that opens T3 that the T-1000 (the liquid metal killing machine from T2) tried to kill him when he was 13, even though he would've actually been 9 (had T2 taken place during '94) or 10 (had it taken place during '95).

C'mon, Mostow and Co., is it really so hard to go back and watch and actually pay attention to the information provided in the prior two films?

The other thing that I'd like to know is what happened to Sarah Connor. I mean, I know that she's deceased in T3 (which was really a decision forced on the filmmakers by Linda Hamilton, who read various early drafts of the T3 screenplay, which featured her character, hated what she read, and said no thanks), but how did she end up that way? Did she get run over by a bus? Did she die of lung cancer? And when did she pass away? Was it after Judgment Day was supposed to have occurred, August 29, 1997? I've searched for this information on the internet, as I figure such info can't possibly be too big of a spoiler, but have been unable to find it.

And to be honest, that bothers me. It bothers me because I've already read about five or six reviews of T3 by professional, magazine- or newspaper-employed movie critics and several more by fanboy types like Harry Knowles, and only one or two of them even mentioned Sarah Connor's name. I would think that after the indelible impact she left on T1 and T2 that her character, even in death, would figure more prominently in T3 than it apparently does.

In addition, I hate it when I hear people say, "Here's the thing about T3: If you go into it with your expectations in check, you'll probably end up enjoying it. But if you go into it with sky-high expectations, you'll probably be let down." WTF is that? What, I have go into it expecting it to be mediocre to be able to like it? I'm sorry, but that's lame. I don't want that. I want a sequel that kicks ass, no matter what my expectations are.

I don't recall anyone saying at the time that T2 came out, "You gotta keep your expectations in check on T2. If you don't, you'll be disappointed." Instead, what happened was that most everyone, myself included, went into T2 with expectations in the stratosphere and not only were we all impressed, we were overwhelmed. T2 met and then exceeded every high expectation that I had of it. And I wasn't the only one who felt that way. Most people felt that way.

I recall walking out of a movie theater on July 3, 1991, after having seen T2 on opening day, and just being blown away. I'd never seen a movie like that. I'd never seen a film that was that action-packed yet also had ample amounts of pathos and even well-deployed moments of comic relief. I loved the characters. I loved Sarah Connor and how much of a hardened bad@ss she was. I loved how John Connor, the future savior of the human race, was a foul-mouthed yet essentially good-hearted juvenile delinquent. And I loved seeing the T-1000's morphing FX for the first time. I'd never seen anything like it, nor had anyone else. Not before or since can I recall a movie theater crowd being as shocked and amazed by a special visual effect -- ooohing and awwing again and again -- as they were every time that the T-1000 would put on his mystifying quicksilver show. I loved Cameron's clever series of role reversals in the film: ostensibly "bad" Terminator with shades, leather jacket, and a Harley as good guy; ostensibly "good," Everyman-looking police officer as bad guy; Sarah, the quiet, put-upon heroine of T1, as grizzled, slightly psychotic woman who takes on the mantle of the Terminator in trying to eliminate the man responsible for creating Skynet, computer whiz Miles Dyson.

In short, the experience of T2 was an utterly exhilarating one. I couldn't stop talking about it afterwards... and neither could any of my friends... nor could we wait to get in line and see it again.

And despite my new-found optimism for T3, the fact that, by all accounts, it's not going to be the kind of full-on, hits-all-the-bases moviegoing experience that T2 was p*sses me off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The film clearly explains Sarah Conners demise: She developed Leukemia in approx. 1995, was told she had six months to live, but held on until just after 'Judgement Day' was originally supposed to happen (1997). This information is given when Arnie, Stahl, and Danes go to the cemetary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skeletor, thanks for asking, but I'm going to give T3 till at least its 2nd or 3rd weekend of theatrical release before I decide whether or not I'll check it out. I remember running right out to see Alien 3, Alien Resurrection, Beverly Hills Cop III, and Lethal Weapon 4 on their opening weekends and feeling (a) massively disappointed and (B) really dumb for having not waited till I could adequately discern the popular responses to these films beforehand.

Leukemia, huh, Muskrat? Hmmm, I think I can deal with that.

I think.

I honestly figured that they'd have Sarah Connor expire in something ironic like a car accident that occurred after 8/29/97, after Judgment Day was supposed to have occurred (but did not occur as a result of T3's altered timeline), when one supposedly wouldn't have to worry about traffic jams and car collisions anymore.

Muskrat, do you recall the date listed on Sarah's tombstone? It was definitely after 8/29/97, though, right?

I recently heard (via a thread about T3 on the CPND board) that the adult John Connor of T3 explains that his mother held on during her battle with leukemia till 8/29/97 had passed, telling him: "We did it. We're free. Every day after this one is a gift." Interestingly, Sarah said something very similar to this in the Special (Extended) Edition of T2, where the ending is very different than the theatrical cut of T2, very upbeat. (I recall specifically that the line, "Every day after this one [8/29/97] is a gift," is something Sarah said in voice-over narration during T2's originally scripted ending.) However, Cameron felt -- and rightly so -- that T2's original ending was too upbeat and tonally out of step with the rest of the film... so he altered it, giving it a more restrained, guardedly optimistic tone.

I swear to Yahweh, I wish I could make up my mind about T3. One second, I want to really like it and for it to be really good. The next second, I wish that Cameron had just gone with his original, too-upbeat ending to T2, which would've precluded the possibility of another sequel ever being made.

As Yoda might say, Ambivalent, you are, yes. :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, she died AFTER the original 'Judgement Day' was supposed to happen. This allowed her to die in such a way that preserved her desire to make sure that she 'saved the future'. In fact, I beleive it was only a short while after that she died.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glenn,

I realize I'm not quite the Cameron buff you are, but I just saw the Terminator and I'd think you'd probably find it worth your while. It stays pretty close to how it should despite a few smaller problems. Not as good as No. 2 in my opinion, but, then again, Furlong was a complete moron so it may be twice as good :).

It also ends nicely and gives a little thought that more is to come :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Art, I hold your opinion in very high regard, so the fact that you liked T3 is certainly something I will factor into my decision-making process as to whether I will actually see the film or not.

Of course, the fact that you're not quite the Cameron buff that I am and that you think Furlong was moronic in T2 also count as major strikes against you. ;)

(For the record, I haven't really liked Furlong in anything I've seen him in since T2, and the only reason Furlong didn't get back the role of John Connor on T3 -- although Mostow will never say this publicly -- was because Furlong's drug-addicted @ss went on a righteous bender and then checked himself into Betty Ford right before T3 was set to go into preproduction. In replacing him, though, T3's makers made the right choice; much like Macauley Culkin, Eddie Furlong has gone from being a photogenic kid to being a gangly, awkward-looking adult. However, I certainly liked the hell out of him in T2, back when he was the perfect wise@ss juvenile delinquent. :))

As for T3's "nice" ending, Newsweek's David Ansen disagrees. "T3's only big mistake is its ending," Ansen opines, "a tonal shift as jarring as Clay Aiken's suddenly belting out Wagner." However, as the old saying goes, opinions are like @ssh*les, and T3's denouement is not something I care to delve into at all, lest I end up with something revealed to me that I don't want revealed in case I actually decide to go and see T3. :)

--------------------

After having just read this article on Cinescape.com, I was flabbergasted to learn (assuming that what T3 director Jon Mostow says is totally true) that Mostow could've hired T1 and T2 composer Brad Fiedel to do the music for T3, but opted for that master of the nondescript movie score, Marco Beltrami, instead! (I must say that I have a hard time believing this, that Mostow turned Fiedel down, as Fiedel, like so many of Jim Cameron's colleagues, is very loyal to Cameron and would've likely turned down, out of hand, a scoring gig on a Cameron-less Terminator sequel, effectively making himself unavailable from the get-go for Mostow.) However, two other things struck me in the article: (1) that Mostow, by his own admission, was so (inexplicably) high on the relatively unproven Beltrami that he pushed for him to score T3 over the proven Fiedel -- which makes no sense, as even a total schmo like director Fred Dekker was smart enough to hire original RoboCop composer Basil Poledouris to score (the otherwise horrendous) RoboCop 3; (2) that, according to Beltrami, the only time you'll hear Fiedel's signature Terminator theme music in T3 is during the very end of the movie, over T3's end credits.

WTF?!

Is this true? Does Beltrami only use Fiedel's Terminator theme once in T3, over the end credits?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a James Bond movie from the '70s that didn't feature Monty Norman's incomparable Bond theme music? (I think it was the one scored by pianist Marvin Hamlisch -- who was filling in for the series' usual composer, John Barry -- but I could be wrong.) If what Beltrami says is accurate, if he only used Fiedel's Terminator theme at the very f*cking end of T3, then that's as bad, in my book, as a James Bond movie without Norman's Bond theme!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...