Doesn't anybody want to talk about this movie? I saw it this afternoon, and was very impressed. Only thing I didn't like was the score, they didn't have the Terminator theme until the end credits. Oh yes, I should have been longer, I imagine we're looking at a 'Nemesis' scenerio where a whole wack of scenes were removed to appeal to the fast-action/no character moments crowd. But otherwise, it's a fantastic movie, nearly on par with X2.
Comments?
Posted by ZARDOZ (Member # 1064) on :
I saw it today. I really had no interest, but my friends convinced me. I was quite surprised! While I can't say I thought it was as good as the first two, I think most fans won't be dissapointed.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
I saw the movie myself... and I won't be surprised if Arnold runs for the California Governor's position if and when the current one gets voted out.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What has T3 got to do with him being Governer? I've seen a few articles tieing the two together.
HTF do you spell tie-ing?
Oh Vorlon - do you mean T2?
Posted by Cartmaniac (Member # 256) on :
I may not be Tim, the GRAND MASTAR of all Knowledge, but:
"Tying".
[ July 07, 2003, 06:34 AM: Message edited by: Cartmaniac ]
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
thanks! Posted by Proteus (Member # 212) on :
Saw it, loved it. On par with T2. Loved the ending.
The TX had a nice ass too.
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
Well, you were it's target audience +1.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I'm not quite sure I liked the ending. I didn't think it would end like that...
Posted by leuckinc (Member # 729) on :
I liked the ending. To me it was the best part (Not that the movie was over, but what the ending was about.)
Posted by ZARDOZ (Member # 1064) on :
I think the most troubling thing about the ending was the feeling that more sequels are coming I think they should quit while the franchise is ahead.
You know who would have been a great TX ??
Jessica Alba! ooo baby!
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Would she have done nudity?
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Did anyone notice there was alot of puns/jokes in this movie. To the best of my knowledge there are hardly any funny scenes in the first two movies.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
There's nudity? I'll go see it then! 8)
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
To the best of my knowledge there are hardly any funny scenes in the first two movies.
"He'll live."
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Another thing that bothered me is if TX is truly a superior Terminator model, how did she lose to the Terminator? She has the same programming as he does, and is a terminator-terminator. She should know how to deal with the Terminator even with the prgramming to protect.
All she has shown is have poly-alloy skin, built in weapons and superior damage control. It took Terminator far longer to get up after being knocked down. He even regained control after shutting himself down.
To me she doesn't seem that impressive.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
If she blew him into oblivion, then there wouldn't be much of a movie now would there...
So they made the TX a hot blonde model babe that has inflatable boobs, a skin tight outfit, and enough power to go head to head with Arnold and the rest of the humans she encountered. But Arnold still has to win or some studio exec will be eating at a homeless shelter. Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I haven't even seen it but I am still anticipating a spectacular Deus Ex Machina to get Arnold off the hook. "Vell, fr�uelin, you forgot you ahr standing on a MEAT-GRINDAH! *click-vrrrr*"
Like in X-Men 2. The Comic Logan has been kicking Deathstrike's ass in practically every encounter for the last 15 years, any day of the week and twice on fundays. For him to be resorting to hairgel squirt-guns to win...pleh. It's insulting to a mature audience.
Posted by CaptainMike20X6 (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by Matrix: Another thing that bothered me is if TX is truly a superior Terminator model, how did she lose to the Terminator? She has the same programming as he does, and is a terminator-terminator. She should know how to deal with the Terminator even with the prgramming to protect.
All she has shown is have poly-alloy skin, built in weapons and superior damage control. It took Terminator far longer to get up after being knocked down. He even regained control after shutting himself down.
To me she doesn't seem that impressive.
But she had probably previously killed 6,337 of Arnie's model.. with the exception of this one multimillion summer blockbuster fluke where she loses, she's probably iced more old model terminators than Connor did back in '09
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Vell, fr�uelin, you forgot you ahr standing on a MEAT-GRINDAH! *click-vrrrr*"
"Vrrrr"? Is that the meat grinder whirring w/ an Austrian accent?
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Too lazy to spell "with"?
So, if "vrrr" is an Australian accent, is "whirr" an American accent, then?
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
F-Why-I, *vrrr* is the sound the grinder would make. "Whirr" is the verb itself, I didn't feel it was appropriate, see. Like if I had described the sound of me closing a booze cabinet door, I would write *click!*, not *close!*.
I would also help myself to an Elmer Fudpucker.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
You've only just noticed that I almost always abbreviate "with"?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Yes, why is that? Is it one of the words the Knights of Nix cannot hear?
Given it's supposed to be one of the summer's big SF films, it's surprising how little mention there has been of T3 round here. I suspect it's partly a generational thing - many of you hadn't even been born when T1 came out, and probably weren't even old enough to go see T2 in the cinema. Of course, by that logic TPM and AotC were both flops as well.
For what's supposed to be a spoiler-free thread there were quite a few little giveaways, so I guess I'll just chuck in a few. . .
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
. . . before I go any further.
When I was watching T3, I kept thinking how much better it might have been if Cameron'd been doing it. But then I asked myself, how? How much better a film could he have made from this script? He might have preferred to use a better, different script, but then he might not: after all, he's no judge of script quality if Titanic is anything to go by.
The big problem was always going to be, the T2 Arnie couldn't come back. So you have in effect a new character. Really, they didn't need Arnie to do this film - he seemed more like a guest actor in it a lot of the time. He was different, but you can chalk that up to him being programmed not by John but his wife.
The TX. . . pleh. Interesting idea, robotic endoskeleton with handy plasma weapons, flamethrowers, etc. - the Skynet Army Knife, with gadget to remove stones from horses' hooves, from the neck down! - with a mimetic pollyalloy covering, plus some nanotech nonsense I didn't quite follow chucked in. James Cameron would have done more with it than they did, though. . . gotta stop thinking that!
Kristanna Loken, yum. Sort of. I expected someone better known to play a female Terminator, but then Schwarzenegger and Robert Patrick were near-unknowns when they played the first two.
Boy, General Brewster's top-secret computer research facility sure is easy to get in to. Was Skynet the AI also the source of the virus? Is Skynet, being software, in effect now a worldwide virus? You'd think worldwide EMP from the blasts would mess that up a bit.
I'm guessing that the future is now rather different from how it's been shown in the past two films.
Lastly, I loved that late-60's decor in the bomb shelter!
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
quote: Boy, General Brewster's top-secret computer research facility sure is easy to get in to. Was Skynet the AI also the source of the virus? Is Skynet, being software, in effect now a worldwide virus? You'd think worldwide EMP from the blasts would mess that up a bit.
Yeah; I got the impression that Skynet was the virus (mainly because John Conner effectively says so to Gen Brewster...); I think it was supposed to be downloading itself into the world's computers in order to get maximum processing power. Sort of like SETI@home with attitude. Although bearing in mind most computers are probably located in or near cities it must have taken a hell of a knock to it's processing power on Judgement Day. Still, I suppose some military and commercial supercomputers are probably well protected in out of the way areas.
quote: I'm guessing that the future is now rather different from how it's been shown in the past two films
I'm guessing not too different; maybe a little later in time (both Judgement day and the defeat of the machines). The main differences would be that some of Conner's Leiutenants were killed which I guess would change things somewhat. I think it would be interesting if they did do a T4 about the war; i'd quite like to see the scene they intended to shoot for the future war sequence in T2 with the defeat of Skynet and the humans discovering the time displacement stuff and sending Reese back. And seeing the rows of inactive Terminators.
I quite liked T3 overall; perhaps not as good as the others but still pretty good.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
"Top secret" pleh... I have top secret clearance which is kind of cool actually.
I haven't seen this movie yet, I really want to. It premiered in Dubai, UAE the day I had duty so I couldn't leave the ship and the next day we left. Currently I'm in Bahrain, but I didn't see a poster for it so I doubt they have it. Unforunately I still have 2.5 months left in the gulf until the Enterprise Strike Group relieves the Nimitz Strike Group.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
$$$$ no doubt...
I thought the humor was pretty bad. The scene where he takes the sunglasses out and then realizes they're fruity and throws them away? Not good.
Also, they point out that Arnie was a different unit than the one from T2, then they go out of their way to show us he knows things that the 101 from T2 learned.
What I don't understand is this (and this will cause headaches):
In the future of T1, the resistance has won and Skynet's *last ditch effort* is to send a Terminator back in time to try and assassinate Sarah. After they do that, the resistance sends Reese back and destroys the time equipment.
In T2, we learn that in the revised timeline, the one in which Sarah knows of Judgement Day and tells her son about Reese, Skynet was also able to send an advanced prototype, the T-1000, back before the resistance *destoyed the time equipment*.
So... in all the various timelines, the resistance still wins and crushes Skynet. My question is, how can Skynet keep sending more advanced Terminators back in time?
The only thing I can come up with is, the changes to the time line in T2 significantly messed with the timeline. It pushed back Judgement Day and probably even changed the way that Skynet came into being. So, it's possible that the final battle between Skynet and the resistance happened differently. But not so differently that the events of the first two movies didn't happen.
My head hurts again.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Each trip to the past creates a new timeline with a new Judgement Day, a new Skynet, and a new incident with the time portal. Timeline a was the original, which we never saw. Skynet-a was defeated, sent a t-800 back in time, creating timeline b. Skynet-b was defeated, sent a t-1000 back in time, creating timeline c. Skynet-c was defeated, sending a T-X back in time and creating timeline d. It wasn't the same Skynet sending the terminators each time.
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
The whole overriding Terminator storyline was as planned as a head cheerleader's baby after a night of elbowy, pale necking on Makeout Mountain in High School All-American Quarterbackstar Chad Kurk's 1969 Pontiac GTO GO GO Flamerbirdersupercar.
It's like taking a piece of lego, a tinkertot wheel and a linking log and trying to make a castle fort.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Also, wouldn't that mean that John would likely be a completely different person in the original timeline, since Reese wouldn't have been his father?
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Yup. Which means that he didn't send his own father back in time, he sent a man back in time that wiped out his existence and created a totally different John Connor that just happened to serve the same historical purpose.
Posted by CaptainMike20X6 (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ultra Magnus: The whole overriding Terminator storyline was as planned as a head cheerleader's baby after a night of elbowy, pale necking on Makeout Mountain in High School All-American Quarterbackstar Chad Kurk's 1969 Pontiac GTO GO GO Flamerbirdersupercar.
It's like taking a piece of lego, a tinkertot wheel and a linking log and trying to make a castle fort.
will you marry me?
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Makes sense. I would guess that the original John Conner from Timeline A was still Sarah's son, just by a different man. When Reese came back had his night of naughty with Sarah, it wiped out the original John Connor and created a new child. Sarah, of course, named him John because that's what Reese told her that her son would be named.
Oh... one more thing... what was the rational behind making T3's model 101 a T-850 instead of a T-800 like the other 2?
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
Nah, John Connor is the result of a pre-destination paradox. He had to send Reese back to ensure his own existance.
I admit it gets confusing because things keep getting changed. The timeline stays the same, so far in T1 & T2 attempts to altered in fact caused it to happen.
For example: John sends Reese back in time to protect his mother. Sarah would eventually tell John the truth about his father which is why he was chosen. Reese and Sarah destroy the Terminator, but its technology is discovered by Cyberdyne who would eventually develope Skynet. In a sense, Reese was sent back to create John and the Terminator was sent back which lead to Skynet and its own creation. Furthermore, John only exists because of the war. If Judgement Day and the war were truely stopped John would cease to exist. There would be no war, no Terminator ever built to kill Sarah and Reese would have never been sent back.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: Oh... one more thing... what was the rational behind making T3's model 101 a T-850 instead of a T-800 like the other 2?
Where was that mentioned?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Mmm. But can you have a timeline that includes both a predestination paradox and an alternate universe? Because the latter is certainly created when JC (heh) sends the Terminator back in T2. JC knew that "the future is not set" so, while he could send Reese back in the safe assumption that he would end up shagging Sarah, he couldn't know what effect the Terminator's interaction with his teenage self and his other would have. Otherwise he oculd have programmed in the info about the silent alarm being triggered at Cyberdyne and they wouldn't have nearly gotten cornered by the SWAT guys.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
John Connor's existence may be a pre-destination paradox, but the thing about PDPs is that, while they're possible, there has to be an original timeline to get things started. Timeline A, John Connor-A wins, sends Reese back in time. Timeline B, John Connor-B wins and sends Reese back in time. He's responsible for his own existence, but someone else started the loop.
Similarly, Skynet sent the Terminator back, and that terminator caused Skynet's existence, which is also a PDP. However, in the meta-original timeline A, Skynet-A was developed in the natural course of technological evolution, just as John Connor-A was born without temporal interference. Skynet sent the Terminator back in time, and caused its own existence EARLIER than it would have otherwise occured.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Time travel is really very confusing, isn't it?
I would be interested to hear why exactly everything seems to happen in and around LA. I mean John Conner and at least however many additional targets the T-X have all live in and around LA (based on the presumption that the T-X knew it only had a limited amount of time before Judgement Day to hunt and kill those people). And they're just the important ones who live in the area.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Time travel is really very confusing, isn't it?
I would be interested to hear why exactly everything seems to happen in and around LA. I mean John Conner and at least however many additional targets the T-X have all live in and around LA (based on the presumption that the T-X knew it only had a limited amount of time before Judgement Day to hunt and kill those people). And they're just the important ones who live in the area.
Posted by Cartmaniac (Member # 256) on :
Which year was T1 set in, again? According to Reese, the T-800s start rolling of the assembly lines forty years later... if Skynet really pushed back its own inception date by sending Evil Ahnuld to kill Sarah, the model 101 Terminators (including Good Ahnuld) should also appear earlier in the alternate (T2) timeline, no?
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
The Model 101 Terminator from T3 is referred to as a T-850 in all the publicity materials as well as on the toys packaging made by McFarlane.
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
But that does not make him any less of a penis sausage.
I'd buy a Miracleman figure with my own kidneys, though.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
And he calls himself a T-101 in the film.
MAYBE PEOPLE WERE CONFUSED!!!
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartmaniac: Which year was T1 set in, again? According to Reese, the T-800s start rolling of the assembly lines forty years later... if Skynet really pushed back its own inception date by sending Evil Ahnuld to kill Sarah, the model 101 Terminators (including Good Ahnuld) should also appear earlier in the alternate (T2) timeline, no?
1984, I think (not sure whether that was just because that was the year it was released or if it was a reference to Orwell). BTW, I was looking at the special features disk for T1 and early '80s trailers were realy bad.
According to the T3 website, the T-800 is the all metal one seen in the future war sequences.
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: Mmm. But can you have a timeline that includes both a predestination paradox and an alternate universe?
I would say hell no. Either 1)the changes you make in the past have already happened�they are your history before you actually travel�and you cannot alter the past, or 2) you can change time, creating an alternate timeline different from the one that existed before you messed with time. Therefore I agree with the opinion that the original John Connor was a different man (had a different father) and fortunately the John Connor that replaced him (Reese�s son) followed in his predecessor�s footsteps (or rather was pushed in them by his mom and Skynet�the original JC may have been the sort of individual who�d have ended up a great leader no matter what situation he ended up in, whereas Reese�s son was made the leader of the resistance by Skynet�s own actions).
The original flick obviously subscribed to the �you can�t change time� school. They meant JC�s conception to be the result of a predestination paradox. I don�t believe there was anything in the original Terminator that deviates from this. It was the second movie that screwed things up by confirming that by traveling though time, one did change the past (create a new timeline�thus there had to be a starting point, a clean timeline preceding the altered timelines that replaced it.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I'm not sure T2 actually showed that anything had changed. What if Skynet sent the t-800 to '84 and the t-1000 to 90-whenever-t2-took-place at the same time, from the same timeline, as a back-up measure?
The resistance would've then sent Reese and the reprogrammed t-800 also at the same time.
From the future Sarah's and John's point of view in that timeline, the events of the first and second movie would've already happened (assuming Sarah was still alive).
The real change, then, would come after the destruction of Cyberdyne Systems, when the military began work on Skynet.
However, I believe you're right that the creators of T1 were going for the idea of a predestination paradox and never meant for the remains of the t-800 to factor into anything. At the end of the movie, we're presented with the idea that things will happen just as Reese told Sarah they did and that nothing had changed. T2 changes that.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote: However, I believe you're right that the creators of T1 were going for the idea of a predestination paradox and never meant for the remains of the t-800 to factor into anything. At the end of the movie, we're presented with the idea that things will happen just as Reese told Sarah they did and that nothing had changed. T2 changes that.
...And then T3 changes it again by saying that there the timeline can be changed buy there are some things (in this case Judgment Day) that are inevitable.
Incidentally, some scenes that were cut from the original movie set up the second, with Sarah Conner finding out Cyberdynes's address and trying to persuade Reese to let her attack it.
...and an alternate ending for T2 showed an elderly Sarah Conner sitting in Washington in 2029 talking about the war that never happened. (Thank god for DVD extras )
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I think they should quit while the franchise is ahead. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)