What's new

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) (1 Viewer)

Patrick Sun

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1999
Messages
39,660
Holy moly! This film was rated R? I guess my tolerance to outlandish violence is growing more and more...
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
The first 2 films tell us that we are in charge of our destiny. Fate is what we make of it.

This 3rd film tells us it's all pre-destined, no matter how hard we try.
Well, the second tells us that. The first implies predestination - it's a classic ouroborus time-travel story where, even with time travel, you can't change what's already happened.

Just because John Connor isn't able to outrun destiny in T3 doesn't mean it can't be done - the events of Terminator 2 did change some things, and the T-X knocking out some of John's lieutenants will certainly change the future.

Just because John was standing near a microphone doesn't mean he's going to be humanity's savior... He'll later earn that position, and I have no doubt that along the way he will have allies who demand he prove himself.
 

Bhagi Katbamna

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
870
Really enjoyed T3. As someone pointed out before, my view on the story was that there are certain things that can be changed but some things about the future cannot.
 

BertFalasco

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 14, 2001
Messages
839
Nothing would change in front of everyone. It never would have happened in the first place to be changed. The future changes starting now, not some magically point in time 30 years from now.
But in the movie, the future is predetermined, and it is occurring. The terminator came from the future, so if anything played out differently, there'd certainly be a change. I just think of this as time zones: past, present, and future. So in the present zone, the path to the future could be changed, but the future zone is already taking place. So what is nagging me is how would a metamorphesis occur.

Thanks Dennis.
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
So what is nagging me is how would a metamorphesis occur.
Divergent realities. Look at history as a rope that is solid on one end (the past) and unravels as you go forward. Your life follows one of the strands, but others can break off. In the Terminator movies, one strand loops back and connects to another. That second strand is no longer on the "main line", but it does affect the others. Plays hell with causality and conservation of matter, but that's part of what makes time travel both a fun and irritating plot device.
 

Dennis Pagoulatos

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 3, 1999
Messages
868
Location
CA
Real Name
Dennis
Bert: No problemo. :)

One thing a friend of mine brought up last night is about "expectations" and "baggage" going into a film series sequel like this, basically this is what his point was:

We've all seen T1 a billion times, T2 several billion more, and have by now excused any inconsistencies; even problems with the films story, acting, pacing, effects have been glossed over in a wave of nostalgia at this point (which always seems to happen as films age). Now with a 12 year gap between films, the fact that so many people are giving very positive reviews (and many "cautiously positive") for T3 after only 1 vewing is EXTREMELY impressive given these feelings of nostalgia that many of us have for the first 2 films. Now imagine after seeing it 3 or 4 more times, sitting with it for a while...then, how do you think it will it fit into the Terminator legacy 5 or 10 years from now?

Well, he seemed to think that it fits in just fine, and that a lot of folks may end up discovering this movie much later on that won't give it a chance now theatrically, because it really is a more than worthy entry.

It was an interesting point, and I just thought I'd mention it. :) (and one that I completely agree with)

-Dennis
 

Tino

Taken As Ballast
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
23,571
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
I definitely plan on seeing it again and will probably enjoy it more too. BTW, T3 made $12.4 million yesterday. A bit low, no?
 

Nelson Au

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 16, 1999
Messages
19,040
My impression of the film was sort of like seeing Planet of the Apes or Alien and Aliens, then seeing Beneath The Planet of the Apes and Alien3, they were slightly jarring sequels. In the case of Apes, the sequel's ending like T3 was a bit of a downer. Not that it was bad, but all three sequels I mentioned end with a down note.

T3's ending was the best of the sequels I mentioned. While I liked T3 a lot from the one viewing last night, it did jar. The things that took me out were the score, the cinematography, and the over usage of some jokes like the glasses. The thing that is jarring is it feels like the hand of someone else "driving" the film. The vision is not the same as the originals. Of course, Cameron was not driving this one.

It would be interesting to see what Cameron thought of T3. He felt the story was closed at the end of T2. T3 is saying no, T2's story was a nice try, but you can't change things.

Nelson
 

Dennis Pagoulatos

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 3, 1999
Messages
868
Location
CA
Real Name
Dennis
I personally have cooled significantly to T2 since my initial WOW! (which lasted a solid 5 years I might add!) I now love T1 much more than T2, but what T2 has is some of the most perfectly directed, photographed, and edited action sequences ever put to film. Cameron is an editing genius in my book.

Some of the sequences in T3 come very close, and maybe surpass T2 in terms of pure spectacle, but T2 is STILL a blueprint for how to put together an action sequence. Mostow obviously watched both films before delving into T3, because he pays many a homage to both films, and happily (to me), mostly to the superior original. :)

-Dennis
 

Patrick Sun

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1999
Messages
39,660
I see Dennis is now coming to understand my misgivings on the accessibility of the action sequences in T3, given its T2 pedigree.
 

Dennis Pagoulatos

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 3, 1999
Messages
868
Location
CA
Real Name
Dennis
Well...I thought the action scenes were spectacular in T3...but shot and edited differently than the stuff in T2, not poorly by any stretch, just different than how Cameron would have done them. I also think that being able to watch the T2 and T1 action for years (memorizing every frame in my case!) gives those films an unfair advantage. Example: At first, I felt that a lot the action was haphazardly, sloppily shot and edited in the LOTR films, but have since warmed to the "chaotic" effect PJ went for after seeing them multiple times...similarly, only time will really tell how T3 truly holds up to the original 2 films.

After rewatching the truck chase in T2 again, yes it's great, but I'd be damned if the chase in T3 doesn't just murder it (and just about every other car chase ever done maybe even including Matrix Reloaded) for pure visceral impact. It's truly astounding to watch.

I think having all 3 at home on DVD in a few months will make it much easier to really compare them! :)

-Dennis
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
Yes, but Dennis, my big problem with the action wasn't that it wasn't better, but that it was ALL based on previous moments in the first 2 films. In my review I even compared it to a fanboy script, a good one mind you, but one of those scripts that instead of really going someplace new with the scenes instead brings them all back.

In T2 there are moments in which scenes from T1 are harshly contrasted (come with me if you want to live), but much of the film has totally different action.

But here we have:

1) Bar to get clothes including leather jacket (fun joke with it though)

2) Big truck chasing pickup with HOUSE :) on back.

3) Arnold coming to rescue on a motorcycle against a truck, not to mention the reference to the same type of cop motorcycle we saw used in T2.

4) Running off to the desert, then making a decision to go back and get the guy who "built" Skynet.

5) Digging up a cache of weapons that Sarah hid (or had hidden for her).

6) Mix of T1 and T2 to have a metal skeleton TX with the liquid exterior of T2. This includes of course a stabbing through the chest scene somewhat like T2.

7) Cops lob in gas cannisters to where they are holed up and of course Arnold comes out blowing cop cars away, also taking time to note that he apparently was programmed to cause no casualties though in T2 this programming wasn't done until he came back.

8) Helicopter crashing into a doorway, though not the back of a truck this time, but still it had a similar feel.

9) A first generation Terminator goes through the military offices shooting them up in a scene that is very reminiscent of T1 when Arnold comes to the cop station.

10) Arnold being turned off and then coming back online again, including visual POV to depict it.

11) TX ends up torn up and in half, just like Arnold in T1. Upper torso goes crawling after them, just like T1. And just like T1 TX is destroyed by sticking a bomb in the skeletal form.

12) Of course John Connor also has nuke war dreams just like his mom did in T2.

13) The builder of Skynet is shot and must be left behind, but not before he helps save them with his dying breath.

Etc, etc.

It's not that any one of these moments is bad or that the film is bad because of any of them. It's more about the fact that when you go scene by scene through T3, EVERY scene comes from the previous films. Sometimes they have taken it up a notch in impressive fashion, but when you compare T1 to T2 you see Cameron going with MANY very different moments between the two.

Heck, right off the bat his has done a 180 with Arnold moving to the hero role. He made a totally different type of evil Terminator with totally new methods. I mean T2 was just a much different experience than T1 in what things were actually happening.


T3 had many interesting story ideas in terms of the whats and whys, and I loved the idea that this time the Arnold they sent back had just killed John in the future. It's just that I thought the relied way too much on the first 2 films for the jumping off point for every scene.

Let's be honest, when that semi bursts off the bridge in T2 you said "holy shit, I've never seen that" (or at the very least when Patrick came walking out of the fire), but when the TX starts destroying the city with the crane truck you say "Wow, this is like the semi chase in T2 but bigger".

That's great for entertaining me in the summer, but in the end it feels a lot more like so much puffed up fluff that wastes a pretty good base story idea that could have matched T2 in the right hands (ahem, Cameron for one).


Also, I thought the score was terrible, it almost never sold the scenes like the scores of the first 2 films did.


I had fun, I would tell others that its a good time and a fun popcorn flick (more fun than Hulk or CA2), but I just might skip buying the DVD and just stick to rewatching the first 2 films instead.
 

Matt Stone

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2000
Messages
9,063
Real Name
Matt Stone
Let's be honest, when that semi bursts off the bridge in T2 you said "holy shit, I've never seen that" (or at the very least when Patrick came walking out of the fire), but when the TX starts destroying the city with the crane truck you say "Wow, this is like the semi chase in T2 but bigger".
I see where you're coming from, but my initial reaction was "I've never seen so much destruction in a film before." I wasn't in the mood to comment on whether it was new or not...and upon reflection, I still don't care.

On the whole though, I agree completely that this film took what worked in T1/T2, tweaked it a bit, and re-did it. But, all-in-all I feel it's still better than most action flicks out there, due to the strong story. The action is just icing.
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
I enjoyed T2 tremendously, but it didn't bring anything new to the table, either.
Er, what? Yeah, because I remember in T1 how Arnold was liquid metal, or in T1 when John Connor was around and trying to understand why his mother was a nutjob, or in T1 when Sarah was in a mental ward and a ass-kicking bulked up bitch, or when Arnold was the good guy and 2 terminators had to fight each other, or when they decided that they could stop judgement day rather than just stop the terminator, or how Arnold didn't kill anyone in T1, or a helicopter crash scene...

Sheesh, to me T1 and T2 are as different as Alien and Aliens, and those weren't the same director even.
 

Luis S

Supporting Actor
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
637
It was an ok film. Nothing more nothing less. Thankfully it wasn't the disaster many thought it would/could be. But as good as its predecessors or better than any film this summer? No way,not even close. A good popcorn flick thats all. Like Seth basically says "been there done that" If I had to point out one thing that really bothered me,it was the lack of a score. IMHO its so necessary to enhance a scene. It sets the mood,danger,heroics,whatever. T2 had great moments like this. T3 was just smashing,explosions,and gunfire without any music for dramatic effect. And man did I notice the lack of "Cameronism". Other than that I dug it.Just not enough to see it again.:D


Just my 2 cents,

Luis S
 

Brad Porter

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 8, 1999
Messages
1,757
My compact, soundbite worthy appraisal of the film:

There are so many recycled story elements from T2 that I feel like this is the "dance remix" version of that film. I got my money's worth from the big action sequences, but the few new things that were brought to the table are, IMHO, a detriment to the series.

Other comments:
• Brad Fiedel's Terminator score is played at the end of the closing credits, almost as an afterthought. There's also a credit that references that the Terminator was a licensed character (someone asked about this earlier in the thread).
• John Connor seems to make a stunning realization when he finds out who Kate's father is. After John & Kate first "hooked up" in the T2 timeframe, the T1000 travelled back and killed John's foster parents and pretty much ended John's social life. John (in T3) seems to realize that he was destined to stop Skynet by getting involved with Kate back then. Since all he did in T2 was destroy Cyberdyne, the major revelation in T3 is that Judgment Day was merely delayed. So are we, the loyal viewer, to believe that John was already predestined to stop Skynet before the events of T2? Did the T1000 inadvertently preserve Judgement Day by appearing when he did? Was there any significance to the time that the T1000 appeared in T2?
• Hey John Connor, I've got an idea. If you don't want the machines of the future be able to find you, then there's a less painful way than dropping completely out of society. You could use a false identity. Maybe call yourself "Joe Notjohnconnor" or something like that.
• How much did Sarah Connor's casket weigh?
• If I had final script edit, I would have made the initial appearance of the T-X and the killings of the "lieutenants" happen offscreen, thus protecting the identity of the T-X. I'd open with Ahnuld being sent back to stop the killing of Kate and the others, but have him arrive at the scene too late, wherein he is caught on camera briefly. John Connor would see this and move in to stop the T101, presuming that it is doing the killing. John, in my script, would have continued vigilant training in the past ten years and would have been prepared to confront a Terminator (at least the versions he'd previously dealt with). John would have followed Ahnuld to Kate's location, joining the current film at the animal hospital. The existing arrival of the T-X was too much like the T1000's appearance in T2, as was the T101's. The whole first portion of the film felt rehashed. I also wasn't really pleased that John is still the reluctant hero in this film. He obviously felt that Skynet could still happen because he was living "underground". Why wasn't he still preparing for "the rise of the machines" and his role in their downfall?
• "Human casualties = 000" at the graveyard. A.) His scanner isn't working right. There were dead bodies all over the place. :) B.) Who programmed him to not kill humans this time? Would you really send a Terminator back to Judgement Day itself and instruct it not to harm any humans during its mission? They're all going to be dead in a few hours anyway.
• In the bunker at the end, does John Connor have radio contact with all of the missile silos? Are we to presume that missile firing has been placed in the control of networked machines without a human in the loop? Couldn't John just have ordered the silos to stand down? Sure, the US would have gotten nuked to pieces, but there would have been several billion other humans left alive to defend against Skynet.

Those are my thoughts a few hours after having seen the film. If I hadn't gotten a decent adrenaline rush out of the crane chase I would have really been disappointed.

Brad
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
or the particle accelerator fires up or etc. etc
I would have to disagree with this a bit. Clearly he turns it on knowing what sort of effect it will have on the TX when it follows them. He knows its only a matter of time before it charges and fires.

And of course T1 and T2 also relied upon the "nick of time" arrival of the hero to stop the terminator, so that didn't bother me this time either.

I did think it was kinda silly that he BOUNCES the truck over Daines when he first enters. Um, terminator or not, isn't that awfully risky for saving the person you are programmed to save? I mean he can control the truck to some degree, but I don't buy the lucky bounce right over her. I quickly let it go because it is cool for him to come tearing in that way, but jeez how reckless could he get (and lucky).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,765
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top