Images from the new terminator

[Imran Siddiqui]

Why wouldn't John Connor be the main character? That doesn't make any sense.

I think the point was that Wright would be the main character of the movie and John Connor would be more removed. Obviously a very important figure, but this story is not about him.

[Patroklos]

Wrights whole character is stupid anyway, nothing was harmed by moving the story away from him, though moving it to Connor didn't help either.

[Serb]

Just back from the theater. Yeah, I know the end has begun at May 21, but only not in Russia and a couple of dozens other European countries where the end begins at June 4.

Damn, Wiglaf, Asher, you guys are just morons, no doubt. That was a great movie.
And I tell you that as a terminator expert.
I've seen all three previous movies more times than any normal human can withstand (I'm talking about hundreds of times, really. Any Star Wars fan pales in comparison with my love for the terminator series).

Rice of the ma's chins was a complete DISASTER, god damn it. But Tea for: Salvation is indeed a new beginning. They have resurrected the franchise. No more, no less. After the complete f*ck-up of the third movie, T:4 is like a breath of fresh air.
When I saw the third Terminator I had an impression: damn, I have already seen that before (I mean the entire flows of events and nearly the every exact episode) - it's a god damn poor-made re-make of the Judgment day. Every main scene, every action was a poor-made copy/paste of the T:2 JD. And John Connor was a joke (as well as Arnie, to be honest).
Watching T-4: Salvation, I catch myself at thought that the guys who made it really LOVED two previous (the REAL terminator movies) and they made this new movie with admiration of the series (I mean the two first original films made by James Cameroon). The movie is full of Easter eggs (references to the first two movies). But they are indeed just Easter eggs (to show admiration for the first two JC's terminator movies), not a DUMB, blatant copy/paste as it was in the third movie. Once again - watching the third movie was like: oh sh!t - they just re-make the second part - almost nothing new, I've seen that before and that was a thousand times better made action and story. Watching T-4 is like: damn! I have seen something like that before, and now I get it why I saw it back then (I mean for example the episode which explains how John Connor got scars on his face (shown in JD and RotM), etc. And the final battle with Arnie was just a "Hello, the true and the only original terminator made in 1984". The scene had nearly identical choreography to the original terminator movie and that was GREAT, 'cause that was made FOR PURPOSE (just like in case of many other Easter eggs of that movie), not because of the lack of ideas the dumb director of the third movie Jonathan Mostoff had obviously experienced.

Christian was good, Sam was good, but my special prize goes for Anton. That Russian guy Anton Yeltchin made a hell of work to look like Michael Biehn of 1984, to walk like Kyle Reese and to act like Kyle Reese. That was a great acting Anton, absolutely great - I had an impression that it is the same Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn character from the first terminator) just 11 years younger.

Wiglaf, to fully understand the perfection of this movie - you have to be an expert, you have to be a fan boy, you have to know the every single second of the previous movies, then you'll understand that Salvation was indeed a salvation for the series.
And hell yeah - I'm a fan boy of the terminator series, and you know what? I’m going to see it tomorrow again. Because in comparison with T-3, Salvation is a true terminator movie. And I applaud to MCG And three for dedicating this movie to the memory of Stan Winston. I'm sure he wouldn’t have been ashamed after watching Salvation.

So the story continues. I look forward to 2011, and tomorrow. When I’ll enjoy the come back of terminator series again.

[Serb]

The reason why the plot was bad and the dialog, etc was so ****ty was because it was quickly written to appease Bale.

http://www.movieweb.com/news/NE88ZfcgxZs7bb

That is bullsh!t, Asher.


John Connor was ALWAYS a main character (even before his birth). The action of the entire series was always revolved around him. You kick John Connor out - and say good bye to the series. Like it or not - he is the main character of the story. And if Bale insisted on rewriting of the screenplay to make John Connor a main character again - then for Bale. In this case he has a thousand times better understanding of what the terminator series is about than you do.

[Riesstiu IV]

T4 sucked donkey testicles and completely sh*t all over T1 and T2.

Massive plot holes:

1. How in the world does Skynet know that Kyle Reese was John Connor's father?

2. Why did Skynet even need to lure John Connor to the factory/base after they captured Kyle Reese? They could have immediately killed him right then and there which would have presumably altered the timeline so that John was never born.

3. Why would Skynet not place some kind of programming controls so that Marcus Wright would bot be able to rebel. If they can alter his perception of the world, why not place safeguards to ensure his loyalty? Makes no f*cking sense.

4. Why does Skynet's military base have key pads and other human friendly features which would be completely unnecessary for cyborgs?

5. Why does skynet conveniently store nuclear power cells on a table out in the open?

Remember those awesome battle scenes at the beginning of T2 where robotic tanks supported by dozens of T-800s and cyborg fighter planes fought humans who were forced live underground like animals? They completely threw that out the window in T4. Instead humans have their own military instillations and most of the fighting scenes had 3 cyborgs at most. Not only that these military bases are supposedly hidden despite the resistance's constant use of radios. There were no armies of cyborgs or massive battles. Instead we see a single T-600 with a do-rag (seriously, why?) patrolling all of LA.

T4 was utter crap like the Mi-26 and is only further another example of Hollywood running a classic franchise into the ground.

[Serb]

T4 sucked donkey testicles and completely sh*t all over T1 and T2.

No sh!t Sherlock, but comparing to T3, T4 is a huge leap foreward.

T4 was utter crap like the Mi-26 and is only further another example of Hollywood running a classic franchise into the ground.

It's great that you have remembered the name of world's best cargo chopper, what was your French "wonnabe a choppper too" thing name again?

As for Hollywood running a classic franchise into the ground - damn, who do you think created that classic franchise? Martians?

[Dis]

that's what I thought. Doesn't look good. I was tempted to see it after Serb's liking of it. But then I realize I almost never agree with him, so his judgement is in question.

Where has all the good writing gone now days? Is someone killing off all the writers? Writers don't have to worry about being too old to perform like actors. The same writers who used to write good scripts can't be all dead, can they? Write a good script dammit!

[Asher]

That is bullsh!t, Asher.


John Connor was ALWAYS a main character (even before his birth).

You're a Russian liar!

It's a fact the script was written with John Connor as a minor role. The production team and director have confirmed this.

[Serb]

Massive plot holes:

Do you really want me to start with a plot holes in T:1 and T:2?

The terminator series was always a fairytale, if you still don't get it.

[Riesstiu IV]

No sh!t Sherlock, but comparing to T3, T4 is a huge leap foreward.

If you take the ridiculous plot holes into consideration, I would say that T4 is just as bad as T3 if not worse. Its not a leap forward at all.

Do you really want me to start with a plot holes in T:1 and T:2?

And you call yourself a Terminator fan? You should be exiled to Siberia for your crimes.

[Dis]

I just want to say one thing about time travel (I am an expert after all). Killing Kyle in the future would have no impact on what happened in the past. John Connor would still exist. If changing the future would alter the past, why not just kill Kyle before the events of T1? But as mentioned, how would they even know Kyle was the father. This point alone is enough for me not to watch the movie.

The past can only be changed by going into the past (not altering the future)

[Kuciwalker]

T4 didn't make any ****ing sense. The stated purpose of the Terminators was as infiltrators; that's the only reason they were human-form. IT MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER to build your army out of human-form metal skeleton with METAL TEETH.

[Jon Miller]

Rule of Cool

JM

[Serb]

that's what I thought. Doesn't look good. I was tempted to see it after Serb's liking of it. But then I realize I almost never agree with him, so his judgement is in question.

Oh, come on. I've expected better from you. To make your opinion on the movie based on others judgements - is You just need to see it and make your own opinion. Besides, this movie is a must see for any fallout fan, 'cause we had not see any post-apocalyptic movies of that scale for well -20 years or something. It's a sort of Mad Max in a Terminator universe. Absolutely must see.

By the way, playing Fallout or Fallout-2, have you ever dreamed about to play it with thousands other players online (and new quests, new storyline, new npc, new items, etc, etc)?

I'm asking because you'll have such opportunity thanks to the "backward" Russians enthusiasts who made Fallout-online that will be avalible at August (for free of course). I've participated at open beta-test and must say that was the most addictive online RPG I've ever played - it's an old good Fallout-2(same engine and graphics), but just better). Line Age-II and the same crap just pales in comparison. Fallout online was pure adrenaline and anarchy.

[Serb]

This point alone is enough for me not to watch the movie.

And that would be stupid. Honestly.

The past can only be changed by going into the past (not altering the future)

Well, that is a common misconception.
I have a theory that past can be changed by present when in present you are changing the future that changes your present where you were changing your past. And in your past you were changing your future of course, not your present. Get it?