Review: Terminator Salvation

So I watched it on Film Four tonight. It's deeply, deeply flawed and the action scenes are lacking in any kind of excitement. I don't think it'll ever be considered worth anybody's time even in a so bad it's good way.

I think this is one of those movies that will become so bad it's good - Planet Of The Apes, Wicker Man, National Treasure, The Happening etc. It's so sure of its own brilliance and so po-faced, but it's so dreadful at the same time.

I need to see it again because there were shitty bits I missed, like John Connor shooting a random pipe and having liquid nitrogen shoot out of it, then shooting another one that contained red hot lava. Durrrr.

I watched this again last night at a friends house. I didn't have any choice in the matter.

It's dreadful. Absolutely dreadful. Awful script, awful performances, awful photography, awful direction.

Awful awful awful. Bleh.

And did I miss something - why were there only about 5 robots guarding SkyNet HQ?

In fact, a lot of it is unintentionally funny. We laughed at most of the scenes where the humans are in mild peril. It was like Naked Gun at points.

It's got two scowly gruff-voiced people shouting rubbish words at each other quite a lot. And also Michael Ironside, but he hardly says or does anything.

Does Batman scowl a lot and use his angry voice?

I gave up after Terminator 3, it was like somebody told the plot of the 1st film to a retarded 8yr old and then asked him to repeat it, and filmed that word for word.

Well I finally got around to watching this today. Should have spent 2 and a half hours slowly crushing my head in a vice instead; much the same effect.

Retarded from top to toe.

There could be a scene where an angry mob throw Rob Schneider on a fire but he's a robot and you see his skin melting away whilst he buzzes "Do eet doo eet doooo eetnghghgn"

You have me sold on Adam Sandler and robots. It could be like a post-apocalyptic Bicentennial Man.

I had an idea for a film once where robots took over Earth and needed our bodies as some sort of battery juice, but we were dying-off and they couldn't sustain us. So, the logical thing for the robots to do was to send the last remaining humans back in time to re-populate the Earth for the Nth coming of the robots, thus creating the Dawn of Mankind again and again.

I'm sure it's flawless. Anyone from Hollywood on here? I have about 3 ideas for films per day - Adam Sandler fits into any of them.

I've never been clear on the logic of the machines in the Terminator flicks. Why do they keep sending killer robots back to a time AFTER they have already failed, ie when Sarah and John Connor are already older and wiser? Why not harness the full potential of time-travel technology and try to kill off Grandpappy Connor instead? He wouldn't stand a chance against a Terminator - the most 'new-fangled' thing he knows is the recently-imported banana.

I still haven't seen this, even though it sounds incredibly rubbish.

Although I would argue that in Terminator 3, they robots do kinda win.

That's exactly it. Once you fuck up and you come back, you only get stupider and stupider. There are so many plot holes in all four movies (and TV series) that the Terminators don't look like an all-powerful, soul-crushing force... they're panto villains, doomed to be foiled in the last act AGAIN.

I've just read an article on the PC game "System Shock 2", that sums up almost perfectly why I don't like many Terminator movies past the first one (T2 is ok, but marks the slide into kiddie friendly territory) or the Sara Conner Chronicles

"There's never going to be a System Shock 3. We really should be glad.

...

If there's never a System Shock 3, Shodan, in a suitably perverse way, gets the immortality she's chased so desperately through both games. As she is, she's unforgettable. If there was another game… well, Shodan is a villain and villains are entirely unlike heroes. Heroes save the world repeatedly, and each repetition increases their status.

Every time a villain fails to destroy the world, it lessens them."

Those terminators have to be running some pretty shitty software to fail the amount of times they have.

Some good bits, but ... So. Many. Plot. Holes.

My favourite was the nuclear explosion at the end that didn't emit an electromagnetic pulse, allowing the helicopter to carry on flying.

Going to see this tomorrow night.

"I'd rather go to work"

That's possibly the most damning criticism of a movie ever.

I'd rather go to work than see this movie again. it sucks balls. And not in the nice way.

Terminator 3 was dreadful, I mean really really awful and the idea of McG (you cunt, get a proper name) making anything watcheable was sadly none existent.
No desire to watch this at all

This says everything I wanted to say about Terminator Salvation:
http://io9.com/5263019/terminator-salvations-terrible-shortfall

And as if by magic...

http://www.play.com/Gadgets/Gadgets/4-/9593408/Terminator-Salvation-Children-Terminator-Voice-Changing-Mask/Product.html

Empire mag gave this four stars. Tongue... so far... up... arse...

I was literally blue in the face from swearing when I read some of the dialogue and a few of the scenes.

Not interested, although I do look forward to the day they put Terminator toys in cereal packets. Gotta monetize the envelope.

I wasn't that bothered about this being good to be honest as I've never been a huge fan, but I had secretly hoped that it would silence the nay-sayers.

I'd like to go see it anyway.

Damnit! I was looking forward to this and was even willing to sit through the so-far unseen, Terminator 3. Screw it though. Unless I find a credible, positive review I won't bother.