Credit that to good casting. It's hard not to imagine Arnold as anything other than a robot.
That was definitely the best possible role for Arnold, that's for sure. Except for Mr Freeze, that is.
What's so bad about T4, and what makes T3 so much better?
I thought T4 was better than T3 and a decent movie. It's no T2, but nothing could be T2.
There are many bad things about T4.
Firstly, there's the utter selfishness of John Connor in the film, by requesting the troops not attack Skynet in order to save his own existence. After all, while killing Kyle Reese would kill him in the past, if Skyney had been destroyed at that point, then John Connor's survival would be unnecessary. Michael Ironside -
- would have taken care of Skynet without Connor's help. He also put the entire resistance at risk by breaking orders to infiltrate Skynet HQ and potentially giving away the resistance HQ by demanding to meet them when he did.
Connor was also far from a military genius. He was shown to be little more than a low-ranking officer (I don't recall his exact rank). While he'd undoubtedly be placed in that position at the start of the war, if he displayed the talents his mother had trained him for he'd have risen through the ranks much faster. Cream rises to the top, especially in a battle for survival. he failed to see through Skynet's plan to wipe out the resistance, and while he lucked out and kept the resistance from being destroyed - though he succeeded in compromising HQ by using his perceived religious status to convince the rank and file to disobey orders - it wasn't through skill.
Christian Bale's performance was the laziest I've ever seen from him, and very disappointing. ,The new Terminator (Sam Worthington?), was very good in his role, as was Michael Ironside, but Bale was the lead, and should have performed better.
Then there's the post-apocalyptic cliches, such as Moon Youngblood(?) being all alone, surrounded by three guys trying to rape her, when Worthington comes to the rescue. Firstly, if Youngblood is a member of the resistance, she can probably take three scruffy, malnourished hobos with ease. Secondly, did we really need that to establish Worthington as a good guy? Weren't his efforts to save Reese and the little girl enough? Did we really need a rape scene, or hadn't the landscape ripped off
Mad Max enough, so more was needed? Long walks through the desert are another cliche, as is the clothing. Wouldn't tattered rags be more appropriate than sweet leather jackets? Hilariously, the Terminators seemed to think so, as several of them wore human clothing, despite being machines making no attempt at camouflage.
You've also got Skynet's speech where it reveals that it committed the murder in the parlour with the candlestick. Skynet correctly calculates that Worthington would coax Connor - and somehow, Reese - into its lair, in a feat worthy of Grand Admiral Thrawn, then wakes up its unwitting pawn -
before the plan to kill Connor has been completed! - and tells him; "Here is the step-by-step manner in which I have used you against your will to destroy the human species. Now that you know this, I'm giving you the choice of assisting me in the future, even though I can easily just use someone else for the same purpose, or possibly even erase your memory and do it with you again. So, what do you say?"
That's not even mentioning such corniness as Bale informing his wife to tell his men: "I'll be back." It was a poorly,
poorly written film. It would have beeneven cornier if Youngblood had gotten topless as originally planned, but hey, if I'm watching a bad action flick, I don't mind a little gratuitous nudity. I might as well get some enjoyment out of the film, and she was well worth enjoying.
As for
T3, it was nowhere near as good as
T2, though that's not surprising, as it's one of the greatest action films of all time. I don't even think it was as good as
T1. But it was still a pretty good film. Arnie's desperate attempts to keep Connor alive, Connor proving himself to not be a selfish douche like in
T4 by risking his own life to stop Judgement Day, the mention early in the film of how Arnie was powered which set up his triumph over the chick-Terminator at the end of the film; it was a pretty good action film. Not great, by any means, but far superior to the sequel. It also had a fair few good comedic moments, and the story cleverly re-wove Judgement Day into the picture, since it had apparently been averted in the previous film. Not bad at all.
It would be awesome if the film writers made that true. I'd absolutely love the nitpicking.
It would make the uproar over Star Trek and Alien vs Predator pale in comparison.
I dont recall the order in which is saw them. I was aware of Arnie's other films and always saw him as the good guy yes.
That's why my friends are always shocked on seeing
The Terminator. They always ask; "Why is Arnie the bad guy?"
P.S. Predator and Aliens are awsome too.
Agree on all accounts.
It's good to know at least
someone actually noticed the stories that the Blizzard peeps made for Starcraft and Warcraft ; not just WOO MULTIPLAYER. I didnt count anything from WoW btw, anything from there doesnt count.
I hate the modern focus on multiplayer. If I want to play something in multiplayer, I'll get out a goddamn board game. Computer games are designed to play at home at any time. Single player is the way to go. The only advantage of multiplayer would be that it can get boring to defeat the computer all the time, once you've worked out it's strategies. People are more devious, but they also don't blatantly cheat as effectviely as most computer games -
Civ's incredible knack for 'randomly' deciding that the hut three squares from your capital will sprout barbarians, for example - but I'd rather play against something where I can quit at any time. Another person means a commitment to not quit until an agreed-upon time, and commitment is annoying. Let's just hope my girlfriend doesn't read this.
Blizzard writes great stories for their games. I also don't count
WoW; it may be fun to play - I doubt it - but the stories in it by no means match the awesomeness of the earlier stories. And the characters are no match for Gul'dan or Illidan on the side of evil, or Uther Lightbringer and Anduin Lothar on the side of good. Even if Arthas' fall to the dark side was oddly reminiscent of a series of films I saw once...
The Matrix. Both "revolutions" took place in the 1990s. Skynet has had only 40 or so years at best to secure its place and develop new technology. Matrix AI, on the other hand, has had a few centuries. They are surely far more advanced and more thoroughly spread throughout the world.
Actually, both revolutions took place in the 21st century. Skynet took over in 2002, and "A.I." was invented sometime in the 21st century, not turning on humanity until later. Also, The Matrix has fallen into predictable patterns, and is on the verge of being overthrown by its own creations. Skynet never had that problem, being very adaptable. Skynet's only problem was that it panicked, unleashing it's nukes to protect itself from humanity before it fully realised the consequences. The Matrix had far longer to think and plan, and still didn't get things done right.
I think the most plausible means of time travel is supposed to use wormholes and specific relativity. If a wormhole can be maintained for a significant length of time and one end can be made to travel through space at a high velocity while the other stays still/moves slowly, then because time travels slower at high speeds it could be used as a bridge between two times. Each instant would however be connected only to one other instant, and it could never allow travel to a time before the time machine was made. (I vaguely recall reading somewhere that that if the wormhole was to be large enough to be useful then keeping it open for a single second would consume about as much energy as could be gleaned from converting the entire mass of the planet Jupiter to pure energy, so keeping one open long enough to allow significant time dilation is an absurd proposition.)
Thanks.
That's something of a known issue. In the original script, the machines didn't use the humans for energy, but for computations (
80 million years of testing gets you some effective if inefficient and overspecialized brain architecture) and the power for the machines was, in fact, from fusion. Some maroon along the way thought that this would be too complicated or confusing and dumbed it down. However, the concept eventually worked its way back in, in the form of a statement that the machines use fusion power to supplement the human power.
Which is still silly.
I didn't know that, it does make far more sense to use humans for computation than power. I bet that maroon wa some idiot from the studio that couldn't understand it himself, and decided that since he was too stupid to work it everyone must be too stupid to work it out. Because yor average person wasn't able to keep up with
Star Trek,
Stargate, or
Babylon 5 when they started getting technical.
I remember that throwaway line "combined with a form of fusion power," which made me think - wouldn't fusion power alone be more than enough? Idiots.
considering I meant more along the lines of discussing anything regarding my posts - signature/avatars/etc... and you didn't take the chance to post something ridiculous yet funny - but that offer is over now. And, what I meant is more like an analogy I've also maybe said before - Stargate of course is not the same as CSI, but the various series are the CSI of science fiction
