Terminator Salvation

[MKSheppard]

Ebert can go to hell, along with Harry Knowles.

[Thanas]

Ebert can go to hell, along with Harry Knowles.

Why? Because he didn't like the movie?

[MKSheppard]

Why? Because he didn't like the movie?

Because they're pompous shitcocks who hate good movies.

Box Office Mojo
As: 136 65.1%
Bs: 40 19.1%
Cs: 16 7.7%
Ds: 5 2.4%
Fs: 12 5.7%

IMDB:

2,686 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 8.3 / 10

Demographic breakdowns are shown below.

Votes Percentage Rating
1,810 67.4% 10
188 7.0% 9
127 4.7% 8
90 3.4% 7
66 2.5% 6
54 2.0% 5
26 1.0% 4
30 1.1% 3
51 1.9% 2
244 9.1% 1

[Thanas]

Why? Because he didn't like the movie?

Because they're pompous shitcocks who hate good movies.

In all my life, I found Ebert to be a better indicator than any IMDB poll.

[MKSheppard]

Though I am wondering a few things that Shep liked.

Spoiler

Where to start, where to start where to start?

1.) The fact that this takes place entirely in the future.

2.) The fact that we don't do the hackneyed "two people sent back in time to fight in past!" plot of the last three movies.

3.) The fact that the resistance has SOME technological base -- they can keep A-10s and V-22s flying fifteen years after Judgement day; which makes the future war scenes of T1/T2, with their plasma weapons more sane; since it means that there's enough of a manufacturing base to make the damn things.

4.) Did I mention the A-10s? A-10s! Air Support bitches!

5.) We see precursor terminator models, like the T-600s, which are wrapped in cloth rags to deaden sound and to make them slightly pass for humans at a distance as silhoulettes. I'd have liked to see a rubber-skin infiltrator, like Reese says in T1, but we can't be picky.

6.) We see skynet's varied hunter-killer models; like the silver "snakes", mototerminators, harvesters, etc. Shows creativity, rather than just producing T-600s and T-800s and sending them in huge waves, like we've seen in the last two films.

7.) We get to see the very first T-800s come off the line, and YOUNG ARNOLD! YAY!.

8.) We see the Skynet Death Camps that reese mentions in T1; and we see some of Skynet's main base.

9.) We get a nice tie in with Terminator 3, with Katherine "Kate" Brewster being pregnant with John's kid, and explains why the T-850's fuel cells went kaboom in T3; they're nuclear fuel cells.

10). Perhaps Marcus' rebellion against Skynet is why the T-800s are set to "Read-only" as mentioned by Arnold in T2 Special Edition?

More will come as I think of them.

EDIT.

11.) I like how the movie didn't end with Skynet smashed, and the resistance victorious. This was only one battle in the war against the machines. A major one to be sure, but still only a battle. The war remains unwon.

12.) It also explains how Connor got his cred and rose up as leader of the Resistance -- all the pre-war military leaders who were in charge of the resistance are iced in this one, leaving the floor open for John to move up. And let's be honest -- in the aftermath of Judgement Day, who are you going to listen to? A guy on the radio from Crystal Peak calling himself John Connor, or a Colonel in charge of a military unit?

EDIT II:

13.) As my brother explained to me, he thought the "kill signal" was bullshit storywise at first, and then later on it was revealed as being a sham by Skynet to trick the resistance into attacking Skynet's main bases all around the world to get slaughtered -- plus as a way to get the Resistance's primary HQ to reveal it's location -- shows more creativity than just "kill john connor or kyle reese, and I win the war automatically". That was fucking awesome.

[Bilbo]

Did Ebert just admit to reviewing the movie before he saw the movie?

[SylasGaunt]

5.) We see precursor terminator models, like the T-600s, which are wrapped in cloth rags to deaden sound and to make them slightly pass for humans at a distance as silhoulettes. I'd have liked to see a rubber-skin infiltrator, like Reese says in T1, but we can't be picky.

You can actually see scraps of rubber on the one in LA and the one in the Camp along with their ragged clothes. From what I gather reading the interviews and such beforehand at this point in the war it's after the T-600 has been found to be ineffective at infiltration and just generally not all that great so they're being left to wander around picking off whatever survivors they locate while the rubber and clothing rots off of them.

[MKSheppard]

Oh screw spoilerizing stuff at this point.

I liked how bipedal terminators didn't appear a few months after Judgement Day in this one -- in several Terminator books or Comics; Skynet immediately deploys analogues of T-800s relatively shortly after J-Day; while in Salvation, you see that Skynet actually has a development process going on, with upgraded T-1 models from T3 appearing in the Death Camps, T-600s walking around, and a whole host of non-bipedal Terminator models, like the snakes, Mototerminators, etc.

[Thanas]

Did Ebert just admit to reviewing the movie before he saw the movie?

Psst.

There is such a thing as an advanced screener sent out to critics.

[MKSheppard]

From production notes on the Salvation Site:

“We are in an interim period,” says Christian Bale, “In the flash forwards to 2029 that we’ve seen in previous movies, Skynet has absolute dominance of all the armies of T-800s and Hunter-Killers. But what we’re seeing here is the genesis of the T-800. In the present, we’ve got a lot of T-600s, which are more primitive versions of the T-800, and a phenomenal array of machines.”

Skynet’s preeminent foot soldier is the T-600, which McG describes as “bigger and nastier” than the T-800, “a `57 Buick compared to a 2009 Mercedes Benz.”

A hulking seven-foot-three, rudimentary version of what would eventually become the T-800, with a simplistic rubber skin pulled over the face and rag-tag clothing to hide the endoskeleton, the T-600 “prowls the badlands looking for anything with a heartbeat, an unrelenting machine with a singular focus of killing,” McG continues.

They carry a mini-gun, an M203 lower unit, capable of anywhere from 3,000 to 6,000 rounds per minute, and a backpack full of ammunition. The filmmakers wanted to design the T-600s as machines that are no longer manufactured but maintain their patrols in the field, battered and weathered, their camouflage mostly lost, damaged in battle, or eaten away by the elements. As Kyle Reese said in “The Terminator,” “The first ones were easy to spot.”

[Anguirus]

Oh, the production design and VFX are absolutely beautiful in this movie. It really succeeds at creating a post-apocalyptic atmosphere, and verges on horror-movie squick a couple times. But as for everything else...well, let's just say I found io9's review to be pretty astute.

One more nitpicky question: a Harvester is a gigantic bipedal robot that periodically emits loud blasts of sound for no apparent reason, combined with a four-engine jet VTOL aircraft. So how is it so goddamn sneaky? The Harvester system should be much louder than, say, a helicopter, and it totally blindsides everyone in that 7-11.

[SylasGaunt]

Now that particular bit of nitpicking I agree with Sylas. Especially in light of what the entire movie was setting up. But in the end, it didn't detract much.

It's dodgy as hell I'll admit, of course if I'm remembering right they changed the ending at some point so it could be the current ending is the ending they had that let them change the least footage.
Spoiler

Who needs dogs? Magnetic mines seem to work fine for picking out Marcus. So why would the Resistance fear infiltrators? you just lay a bunch around base, or use bog standard metal detectors on anyone who comes in. Though its possible that equipment becomes harder and harder to come by as the war progresses.

Remember that in the time Reese is speaking about the T-800 is common-place, and given how much better it is materials wise it's entirely possible that whatever metal they use for them doesn't respond to magnets.

[AMT]

One more nitpicky question: a Harvester is a gigantic bipedal robot that periodically emits loud blasts of sound for no apparent reason, combined with a four-engine jet VTOL aircraft. So how is it so goddamn sneaky? The Harvester system should be much louder than, say, a helicopter, and it totally blindsides everyone in that 7-11.

Maybe it actually has a stealth mode that, when its catching humans, changes to "intimidate" mode, complete with ear shattering foghorn action?

[Zor]

Having just seen it (and liked it for being a very good science fiction action film and being the Terminator Film that i wanted to see (One set in the future with the Skynet war and all that)), although i would bring up a few quibbles involving the Cyborg Terminator and the heart transplant.

Mind you there was an interesting backroung thing with the officers alongside Admiral Ironside, with what i am pretty sure were some foreign officers, bringing the Terminator series outside of America. As some idle speculation, i could see things such as industrial bases in, oh say China or Germany turning out parts and munitions for the resistance. On the same note, the movie basically stated that there are in fact areas even on North America, in which skynet does not have any presence (given the large, exposed airforce bases and so-forth).

Finally, i am wondering how much in the line of pre-war naval warships survived judgement day and fall into resistance hands and does skynet have its own fleet?

Maybe it actually has a stealth mode that, when its catching humans, changes to "intimidate" mode, complete with ear shattering foghorn action?

Unless skynet has cloaking technology, how would that work?

Zor

[Bilbo]

Did Ebert just admit to reviewing the movie before he saw the movie?

Psst.

There is such a thing as an advanced screener sent out to critics.

Well if the advanced screener is the entire movie then what he said makes no sense. If the screener is just a really long preview then he is basing his review on only a partial of the movie. But his exact words as you quoted them were

They also will charge me with not seeing the movie before I reviewed it.

Which sounds to me like he is writing a review without seeing the full product. In my opinion that is bullshit and not doing your job when your job is to be a movie critic.

[SylasGaunt]

One more nitpicky question: a Harvester is a gigantic bipedal robot that periodically emits loud blasts of sound for no apparent reason, combined with a four-engine jet VTOL aircraft. So how is it so goddamn sneaky? The Harvester system should be much louder than, say, a helicopter, and it totally blindsides everyone in that 7-11.

Maybe it actually has a stealth mode that, when its catching humans, changes to "intimidate" mode, complete with ear shattering foghorn action?

There's actually as I recall a lot of loud rumbling and jet noise right before the thing busts through the roof.

[Bilbo]

One small plot hole that comes to mind. Cyberdyne Systems arranged for the acquisition of a deathrow inmate. This seems to me like something John Connor who even in hiding I would expect would be tracking every bit of news on them he can find would know about. So when this guy shows up again Connor should have had some idea, at least the guys name should have struck him.

Now a long period of time has passed but Connor had al of his mothers old tapes so it would make sense that he also had a Cyberdyne folder of information he has gathered.

[Erik von Nein]

Which sounds to me like he is writing a review without seeing the full product. In my opinion that is bullshit and not doing your job when your job is to be a movie critic.

Considering he follows that sentence with this one:

Believe me, I would have enjoyed traveling forward through time for two hours, starting just before I saw the movie.

I think you can take your righteous indignation and shove off.

[Guardsman Bass]

I liked the movie, although I do have one question for those with more Terminator-knowledge -

Skynet seemed to have a lot of high-tech shit, like the Terminators themselves, the giant bipedal machines, the H-Ks (with their engines), and the compact nuclear power cells. I understand that it is probably a brilliant designer, but shouldn't it be under some major resource limitations, particularly with those pesky humans constantly attacking it? Or is what we're seeing the movie unrepresentative - i.e., Skynet's got those robot fighters while the humans have A-10s, but the humans have a lot more A-10s than Skynet has robot fighters? Mind you, I'm not saying that the latter are more effective, considering that that A-10s tore them up - just that the latter are probably much more complex, since you have the AI in them in addition to the fighter itself.

[Schuyler Colfax]

IMDB:

2,686 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 8.3 / 10

Demographic breakdowns are shown below.

Votes Percentage Rating
1,810 67.4% 10
188 7.0% 9
127 4.7% 8
90 3.4% 7
66 2.5% 6
54 2.0% 5
26 1.0% 4
30 1.1% 3
51 1.9% 2
244 9.1% 1

Did you just credit IMDB for its ratings system? I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. I haven't seen the movie, but right now you're just crying that someone didn't like the movie you liked.

You use boxoffice mojo to see if a movie is good or not? Goddamn.

[Superman]

I liked it, although I wouldn't put it into the same ballpark as T-2, or maybe even the first movie. Spoiler

One more nitpicky question: a Harvester is a gigantic bipedal robot that periodically emits loud blasts of sound for no apparent reason, combined with a four-engine jet VTOL aircraft. So how is it so goddamn sneaky? The Harvester system should be much louder than, say, a helicopter, and it totally blindsides everyone in that 7-11.

I was wondering this very same thing, but if you really think about it, there's really no good reason to build an enormous building sized robot in general. It's one hell of a target, and the resources needed for its construction would be immense. Skynet must think they just look cool or something.

The other nitpick I was wondering about was the hybrid/Terminator guy. If Skynet is already capable of that level of cybernetic technology, the T-800's don't really seem too advanced, especially given the fact that they're supposed to be used for infiltration.

[Terralthra]

The problem with time travel stories that occur between other time travel stories is that somewhere along the way, someone always messes something up, but it's not easy to tell.

For example, in this one, Skynet HQ's computer voice refers to "many previous attempts to kill John Connor," who it picks out as the leader of the resistance. How many? This movie occurs before JC becomes the leader of the resistance, and given that the T-800s start coming off the line in this movie, it occurs before T1's future era.

Oi.

[Shroom Man 777]

Then again, Ebert didn't give favorable reviews to Gladiator and he could not understand why the Predator chose to hunt American soldiers in the South American jungle with blades and spears, rather than rayguns and shit.

"the action moves so quickly that we overlook questions such as why would an alien species go to all the effort to send a creature to earth, just so that it could swing from the trees and skin American soldiers? Or, why would a creature so technologically advanced need to bother with hand-to-hand combat, when it could just zap Arnold with a ray gun"

Sometimes the guy just can't see the Big Picture.

[Thanas]

Then again, Ebert didn't give favorable reviews to Gladiator and he could not understand why the Predator chose to hunt American soldiers in the South American jungle with blades and spears, rather than rayguns and shit.

"the action moves so quickly that we overlook questions such as why would an alien species go to all the effort to send a creature to earth, just so that it could swing from the trees and skin American soldiers? Or, why would a creature so technologically advanced need to bother with hand-to-hand combat, when it could just zap Arnold with a ray gun"

Sometimes the guy just can't see the Big Picture.

Meh. Gladiotor does not deserve favorable reviews IMO although it is one of the better movies.

Did Ebert just admit to reviewing the movie before he saw the movie?

Psst.

There is such a thing as an advanced screener sent out to critics.

Well if the advanced screener is the entire movie then what he said makes no sense.

It is the exact movie.

If the screener is just a really long preview then he is basing his review on only a partial of the movie. But his exact words as you quoted them were

They also will charge me with not seeing the movie before I reviewed it.

Which sounds to me like he is writing a review without seeing the full product. In my opinion that is bullshit and not doing your job when your job is to be a movie critic.

As Ebert is one of the most respected critics out there, I very much doubt he didn't get to see the full movie.

Also, io9 is slamming the movie as well. Are you going to charge them with making no sense and not having seen the movie as well?

[Dooey Jo]

Well if the advanced screener is the entire movie then what he said makes no sense. If the screener is just a really long preview then he is basing his review on only a partial of the movie. But his exact words as you quoted them were

They also will charge me with not seeing the movie before I reviewed it.

Which sounds to me like he is writing a review without seeing the full product. In my opinion that is bullshit and not doing your job when your job is to be a movie critic.

It means he expects nerds will write things like this to him:
"Did you even see the movie? Blah blah blah, and also even more backstory that you needed to know in order to understand these things."