T4 Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins

BlitzKrieg

how so

I think the most damning bit of *subjective intelligence* is

the clever plot to get btoh kyle reese and john connor inside skynet, works like a charm, use an infiltrator who deosnt know he's an infiltrator la deda de da...Then when you have him in your grip...you set a T-800 on him...On John Connor...

one single t-800.

just one

unarmed and naked.

hmmmmmmmm

If you consider how skynet got to this point they required to know at least two things

1) That Kyle Reese is John Connor's dad and that he will go back in time

2) That the T-800 that will be sent back to the past will be defeated.

You could go as far to assume that they might also know that John Connor was involved in the defeat of a t-1000 and a T-X


I really think that Skynet could have thought of doing something a bit more then a naked arnie...

SirLemonhead

At least the kid was mute :pac:

The terminators mostly come at night....mostly

iMax

Of course the thing that tears the whole plot apart is that skynet can't kill John Connor, because he sends Kyle Reese back in time, & if he doesn't go back in time, he doesn't knock up Sarah Connor & they can't send back a terminator to kill her, which means the chip & arm never get discovered, so skynet never exists...

Whoah this is heavy... (wrong film, but the same principles of time travel apply)

Fysh

MooseJam wrote: »

I don't see why oral hygiene has to go out the window after judgement day, it's just brushing your teeth like whats the big deal

If the infrastructure of the world is so screwed that getting food/water/general supplies is so difficult, it's not going to be as easy as popping to the corner shop for a new tube of Colgate. This is a post-nuclear-holocaust world we're talking about.

MooseJam wrote: »

They weren't in the resistance and they weren't fighting the machines, they were hiding - the machines only came across them when marcus shouts at the teminator

That doesn't make any sense if they have all the contrived traps they were using to destroy terminators. I interpreted it as the kids trying to be part of the resistance and inexplicably not getting killed within minutes of first deciding to do so.

MooseJam wrote: »

How so?

If they knew enough to know how important Kyle Reese was, why bring him back to Skynet City? Why not kill him as soon as they find him? Why have Marcus as a sleeper agent who, after being activated, can remove the control chip in the back of his head?
Why use so few units to attack John Connor despite his history in relation to fighting Terminators and Skynet as a whole?

MooseJam wrote: »

It did target his heart hence he needed a new one, I guess his aim wasn't perfect he was wearing a jacket - hardly something to get hung up on

A machine that can apparently carry out multiple-frequency scanning (as demonstrated by the Terminator's identification of Marcus's heart as his vulnerable spot) has its aim thrown off by a jacket? I call crap. Even aside from that, this is just one small part of the bigger problem this film had, which was the emasculation of the Terminators as a whole. They were scary in the first two films because they were ruthless, efficient killers. None of this WWE fighting technique nonsense - a Terminator in the first film who got their hands on an unarmed John Connor would've snapped his neck or crushed his skull or punched a hole straight through his heart, not just piced him up and bounced him around the place.

You can say that we shouldn't get hung up on these things, but they're not minor details - they are the kind of thing that makes or breaks the suspension of disbelief by establishing or going against whatever internal consistency the film works with. I was reasonably entertained by this film mostly due to the earlier action sequences, but I wouldn't pay to see it again and I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to watch a sequel. Your mileage may vary, but to me this film is a flop in terms of relaunching a franchise.

SoupyNorman

MooseJam wrote: »

I don't see why oral hygiene has to go out the window after judgement day, it's just brushing your teeth like whats the big deal

Im not against oral hygiene, but whiter then white veneers....!

MooseJam wrote: »

They weren't in the resistance and they weren't fighting the machines, they were hiding - the machines only came across them when marcus shouts at the teminator

All humans are the resistance, you dont have pockets of people saying "oh those robots, I dont mind them at all"

In this instance Marcus gives away the position...but on a longer term, its just ridiculous and it is only compounded by the intricate 'Home Alone' style traps.

MooseJam wrote: »

how so

Various examples, one of which is the point already raised about the terminators throwing people around the room rather then just pulling their head off.

MooseJam wrote: »

It did target his heart hence he needed a new one, I guess his aim wasn't perfect he was wearing a jacket - hardly something to get hung up on

No, no, no....clothing is no obstacle for the terminator, teh x-ray and all that. And furthermore, the injury was not directly to the heart (he'd of been killed instantly), the injury caused too much strain on his body and his heart. could not cope. Also, after Marcus offered his heart the movie went off the ruddy cheese-o-meter

MooseJam

Fysh wrote: »

You can say that we shouldn't get hung up on these things, but they're not minor details - they are the kind of thing that makes or breaks the suspension of disbelief by establishing or going against whatever internal consistency the film works with. I was reasonably entertained by this film mostly due to the earlier action sequences, but I wouldn't pay to see it again and I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to watch a sequel. Your mileage may vary, but to me this film is a flop in terms of relaunching a franchise.

STAR TREK SPOILERS FOLLOW



I'm not going to reply to the other replies to my reply as it's too much effort with all the spoilers lol but I'll reply to your general point above.

Perhaps some of the points raised aren't minor but a lot of them are. I'm just going to make a comparison with Star Trek

The baddies were going around drilling holes into the cores of planets to drop red matter in to create a black hole to destroy said planets. They could have just fired the stuff at the surface and destroyed the planets, how does that compare to throwing john connors about, and Star Trek is brilliant and T4 is rubbish ? all actions carried out by the antagonists in Star Trek were pointless and merely exist to wrap a story around but do not stand as logical actions by themselves. The whole film is nonsensical - we're not talking about the fighting styles of individuals - the whole film is nonsensical, and everyone thinks it's fantastic.

T4 is being held up to standards far far above anything I've seen with other recent films.

Captain Kirk was running around with big cartoony hands lulz Star Trek is brill.

BlitzKrieg

SPOILERS FOR BOTH STAR TREK, TITANIC, T4 AND THE MEANING OF LIFE FOLLOW...

The baddies were going around drilling holes into the cores of planets to drop red matter in to create a black hole to destroy said planets. They could have just fired the stuff at the surface and destroyed the planets,
how does that compare to throwing john connors about, and Star Trek is brilliant and T4 is rubbish ? all actions carried out by the antagonists in Star Trek were pointless and merely exist to wrap a story around but do not stand as logical actions by themselves. The whole film is nonsensical - we're not talking about the fighting styles of individuals - the whole film is nonsensical, and everyone thinks it's fantastic.

Well I would agree that star trek is nonsensical...but it was fun (cartoon hands lulz!) terminator was nonsensical and it was uncomfortable boring and unentertaining. Why these films have to be directly compared to each othner only I dont know, there were plenty of other crap films this year and we still got transformers 2 on the way which can be just as crap as the rest of them.

On the issue of the baddies not making sense in star trek, yes I'd give you that easily, in fact if we go back to the star trek thread you will find I said the same thing. Though digging to the centre of the earth part made sense to me in that it was to allow the black hole to have more powerful effect. What didnt make sense to me was why they blamed Spock for *being late* seems to be the most pathetic two dimensional motive I have seen in a while.

as for

box office doesn't say much - titanic ftw

I never said anything about the quality of films in relation to box office, just that star trek was not a film that nobody was interested in. There was alot of interest in Titanic, if it was a good film in the end is fully open to debate (above average in my opinion, exploitive and simple but technically good and well paced spectacle).

nyarlothothep

iMax wrote: »

Not the metal skelatons walking around with guns ?

I can't work out what part "Star" has to play, (I'm assuming something in Episode 2 or 3), otherwise there's absolutely no point in that character.

Good sci fi depends on you entering into a contract with it to believe the currently implausible. It achieves this by creating a logically consistent world which takes scientific ideas and theories and exploring their implication in real life. Bad sci fi is when it takes a ridiculous notion with no basis in reality and tries to pass it off as real. Hence an armed robot skeleton is believable because we already have the technological precedents to one day make it happen. Jump starting a heart with electric wires is impossible and shatters the illusion of reality which is presented to us.

Fysh

MooseJam wrote: »

T4 is being held up to standards far far above anything I've seen with other recent films.

Captain Kirk was running around with big cartoony hands lulz Star Trek is brill.

I know full well that Star Trek was chock full of equally large plot holes and all sorts of plot silliness; in that regard I'd say the two films are more or less comparable.

For me the differences were:

• A better cast - I wasn't too keen on Chris Pine's Kirk, but the rest of the cast were mostly pretty good and at least entertaining, rather than the badly-delivered one-note performances that almost everyone in T4 delivered (Anton Yelchin's Kyle Reese was about the only exception, IMO)
• A better-paced story - it was complete gubbins, with plot holes all over the place, but as excuses for big set pieces go it beat Terminator hands down. The best parts of T4 were in the first hour, and even then they weren't that good.
• The promise of better stories to come - Star Trek to me seemed like a film that wanted to establish a basis on which to launch further films; T4 felt like an episode of an interminable TV show where nothing of note ever really changes. I felt no interest or excitement about what might happen in future films.

It's also worth noting that Star Trek was fun - that counts for a lot in a popcorn action flick. T4 felt like it expected to be taken far more seriously than the crappy plot and dialogue merited, whereas at least with Star Trek even with the stupid gags like the big hands you knew the filmmakers had their tongues in their cheeks...

nyarlothothep

Fysh wrote: »

I know full well that Star Trek was chock full of equally large plot holes and all sorts of plot silliness; in that regard I'd say the two films are more or less comparable.

For me the differences were:

• A better cast - I wasn't too keen on Chris Pine's Kirk, but the rest of the cast were mostly pretty good and at least entertaining, rather than the badly-delivered one-note performances that almost everyone in T4 delivered (Anton Yelchin's Kyle Reese was about the only exception, IMO)
• A better-paced story - it was complete gubbins, with plot holes all over the place, but as excuses for big set pieces go it beat Terminator hands down. The best parts of T4 were in the first hour, and even then they weren't that good.
• The promise of better stories to come - Star Trek to me seemed like a film that wanted to establish a basis on which to launch further films; T4 felt like an episode of an interminable TV show where nothing of note ever really changes. I felt no interest or excitement about what might happen in future films.

It's also worth noting that Star Trek was fun - that counts for a lot in a popcorn action flick. T4 felt like it expected to be taken far more seriously than the crappy plot and dialogue merited, whereas at least with Star Trek even with the stupid gags like the big hands you knew the filmmakers had their tongues in their cheeks...

He's Chekov in Star Trek

MooseJam

SPOILERS on T4 & Star Trek follow !!!

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Well I would agree that star trek is nonsensical...but it was fun (cartoon hands lulz!) terminator was nonsensical and it was uncomfortable boring and unentertaining.

In your opinion, I wasn't bored and I was entertained , so were the people I went with

Why these films have to be directly compared to each other only I dont know, there were plenty of other crap films this year and we still got transformers 2 on the way which can be just as crap as the rest of them.

I took it upon myself to compare them as Star trek has the same type of failings as T4 only much much worse yet is universally being lauded as brilliant while the other is being panned

Though digging to the centre of the earth part made sense to me in that it was to allow the black hole to have more powerful effect.

Black holes don't mix with planets, on the surface or in the center the planet will be just as dead, don't take my word for it though look into it if you are in any way interested. Definately doesn't make sense.

BlitzKrieg

MORE SPOILERS on T4 & Star Trek follow !!!

In your opinion, I wasn't bored and I was entertained , so were the people I went with

Yes alot of this is opinion. Funnily enough the people I was with were also not entertained.

I took it upon myself to compare them as Star trek has the same type of failings as T4 only much much worse yet is universally being lauded as brilliant while the other is being panned

I would consider they both have awful failings, but personnally I would put forward that star trek covered its failings in plot consistency with entertainment while in my OPINION terminator failed to cover any of its failings and they stuck out and also that the failings in terminator are just as bad .

Black holes don't mix with planets, on the surface or in the center the planet will be just as dead, don't take my word for it though look into it if you are in any way interested. Definately doesn't make sense.

Artificially created black holes which require imense energy to create. As seen at the end of the film, where despite using all of the *red goo* the black hole created that cut the ship in half was nowhere near the size of the one created in Vulcan. Therefore to *save ammo* and have the greatest ratio of damage to resources, they opted to mine to the planets centre to take advantage of the natural energy located there and the conveniant central location to boost the artificial black hole's power.

Again I stress I didnt think much of the plot of star trek but the techno babble flaws of the film are far overshadowed by the basic plot progression involving the intense hatred towards Spock.

Roar

SPOILERS ON DENTAL HYGIENE FOLLOW!




nuclear holocaust survivors won't be eating anything sugary (unless there's a twinkie factory nearby ), so their teeth won't get all rotted and stuff.

Hence pearly white teeth. in fact, I think it's a nice touch by the film makers, and obviously shows the care and attention to detail that went into the film at the planning stage.

:pac:

monkeyfudge

I'm more concerned about how a vet can perform a human heart transplant in the middle of the desert.

BlitzKrieg

monkeyfudge wrote: »

I'm more concerned about how a vet can perform a human heart transplant in the middle of the desert.

pregnant people have superpowers.



Look at Arnie.

monkeyfudge

Twins was on yesterday. It had a better plot than Terminator 4.

And it had a VERY poor plot.

nyarlothothep

monkeyfudge wrote: »

I'm more concerned about how a vet can perform a human heart transplant in the middle of the desert.

where will John Connor get his medication now?

BlitzKrieg

monkeyfudge wrote: »

Twins was on yesterday. It had a better plot than Terminator 4.

It was Junior where he was pregnant though right?


Maybe skynet should have let Turboman have a go at john connor instead.

MooseJam

Spoilers on Star Trek follow

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Therefore to *save ammo* and have the greatest ratio of damage to resources, they opted to mine to the planets centre to take advantage of the natural energy located there and the conveniant central location to boost the artificial black hole's power.

As they have not done it before they don't know what would *have the greatest ratio of damage to resources* in order to know this they would have to have done both before - center of planet and surface, maybe surface would actually be more catastrophic - perhaps some unknown reason would see a center black hole unsuccessful. The correct course of action would be to create a surface black hole first because it is the easiest thing to do by far and if that fails for whatever reason then you can start drilling. But under no circumstances do you start the long labourious task of drilling to the center of the planet - leaving yourself terribly exposed for all and sundry to spoil your wonderful plans without first trying the far simpler and faster option.

If you have a task to complete and there are two options, one takes 60 seconds the other takes hours of pain in the ass labour which would you choose ?

BlitzKrieg

As they have not done it before they don't know what would *have the greatest ratio of damage to resources* in order to know this they would have to have done both before - center of planet and surface, maybe surface would actually be more catastrophic - perhaps some unknown reason would see a center black hole unsuccessful. The correct course of action would be to create a surface black hole first because it is the easiest thing to do by far and if that fails for whatever reason then you can start drilling. But under no circumstances do you start the long labourious task of drilling to the center of the planet - leaving yourself terribly exposed for all and sundry to spoil your wonderful plans without first trying the far simpler and faster option.

and now we know what they have been doing for the 18 years they were supposable sitting around waiting for spock I tend to find in Star Trek that while a physical test is recommended, to save time in an episode/movie they tend to opt for a computer simulation instead and use that for justification for delivering payloads in specific manners. Saves screen time normally.


and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifZMp1k5wbI

MooseJam

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

and now we know what they have been doing for the 18 years they were supposable sitting around waiting for spock I tend to find in Star Trek that while a physical test is recommended, to save time in an episode/movie they tend to opt for a computer simulation instead and use that for justification for delivering payloads in specific manners. Saves screen time normally.


and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifZMp1k5wbI

Of course wouldn't it be funny if a center of planet black hole was actually required for the destruction of a planet and the only Romulan survivors were

drum roll please ........

A mining ship and her crew !

BlitzKrieg

Of course wouldn't it be funny if a center of planet black hole was actually required for the destruction of a planet and the only Romulan survivors were

drum roll please ........

A mining ship and her crew !

Isnt Hollywood great with its coincidences and so on Just like how Marcus stumbles onto Kyle Reese of all people when he is set free.

IF they werent a mining ship I wonder what evil plan they would have instead? A Romulan Warbird would rip apart anything the federation had back then...

might have been a better plot, kick outsmarting a bigger opponent with the little enterprise.

Shacklebolt

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

It was Junior where he was pregnant though right?


Maybe skynet should have let Turboman have a go at john connor instead.

Or get Troy McClure to come onto his wife?

BlitzKrieg

PUT THE COOKIE DOWN!

MooseJam

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Isnt Hollywood great with its coincidences and so on Just like how Marcus stumbles onto Kyle Reese of all people when he is set free.

Well it is a small world isn't it - it's not like they could have been anywhere in the universe and still bumped into each other - like Kirk meeting Spoc and Scotty

SoupyNorman

Roar wrote: »

SPOILERS ON DENTAL HYGIENE FOLLOW!




nuclear holocaust survivors won't be eating anything sugary (unless there's a twinkie factory nearby ), so their teeth won't get all rotted and stuff.

Hence pearly white teeth. in fact, I think it's a nice touch by the film makers, and obviously shows the care and attention to detail that went into the film at the planning stage.

:pac:

When they were looking for fuel and came across the mama figure who offered them food, the little annoying girl was eating a carrot but I do believe Kyle was eating a twinkie!!!

BlitzKrieg

yes yes he was.

DaveyGem

iv just seen it, and spent the last few hours or so going over the events of the 4 films and trying to come up with a reasonable time-line, ive discovered its impossible i just kept getting stuck on the whole Reese/Connor anomoly thing.


The movie itself was not all that bad, it was never going to be a futuristic Saving Private Ryan type thing, but it worked ok.

The one thing that pissed me off was the way

the prisoners all escaped at the end! WTF was a helicopter doin in Skynetville, I know Wright turned off one of the exterior defences but what about the T600's wandering around the place?

I knew going in that the reese thing was going to be addressed so i just decided to accept what was in front of me, without thinking about it to much.

Funnily, my gf who hasn seen any terminator flicks turned to me when reese first appeared and said "How can he Connor's dad he only looks twelve?" Too fcukin right!

TinCool

I've been keeping up with this thread to see the various opinions given. I was disappointed to see so many negative comments but I went to see the movie on Saturday night regardless. I learnt my lesson with Indy IV, where I had built it up in my head and was bitterly disappointed mostly with the whole alien ending. Admittedly, on subsequent re-watches it isn't all that bad if you just switch off and watch it.

I enjoyed T4. I thought the special effects were pretty cool story line was plausible. For example, there was mention of special infiltration units in T1 if I'm not mistaken. There were a couple of other lose tie backs to the first 2 flicks, photo of Sarah for example. There were no major contradictions in previous story lines so I think it worked quite well.

I don't see why everyone is getting so anal about it. Everyone is knocking Bale for a monotone performance. Well what do you expect, the human race has been pretty much obliterated and this poor sod has to some how keep it all together. Yes there were OTT moments like kick starting Marcus with power cables, but nothing that'd sway me in to thinking that the movie was crap.

Just my two cents.

nyarlothothep

This is based on Voyager Threshold but a lot of it applies to the new star trek and terminator.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCKXTOaZmx0