May 24, 2009

Terminator: Salvation - SPOILER ALERT

UPDATE - Spoilers in the comment section, so beware.

No, I'm not going to give you any spoilers for this film. I don't have to.

The studio did it for me.

If you've seen a commercial, an online trailer for it or a preview in the theater than you have already seen the major spoiler in the film. I had seen it, many times, and I thought it was odd that they would give away such a major plot point in the trailer. But I also didn't really care. I figured the movie was gonna suck and that it probably wasn't going to be a big deal in the film anyway.

I was wrong on both counts.

The film was highly enjoyable. It stayed true to the Terminator mythology. The actors all did outstanding jobs. Everything about the film was kinda cool. In my opinion, of course. I've seen a bunch of negative reviews, and I could see some of their points. But I also loved the The Sarah Connor Chronicles, and a lot of Terminator purists hated that as well.

I tend to be a little more flexible when it comes to source material that uses time travel, killer robots and a war against the machines as plot points. As long as it's fun. But that's just me.

Oh, and that spoiler I was talking about? It was handled really well in the film. In fact, tt was handled so well that I began to get pissed about that trailer. REALLY pissed!

Even more so a day after seeing it with Slyde. He felt the same way, I think.

So, if you've seen the trailer and you are planning on seeing the film I think you may be disappointed. If you are planning on seeing the film and you haven't seen the trailer, try to avoid it at all costs.

I probably would have figured it all out before the great reveal, in fact I'm sure I would have. But I like to have that option for myself. And for some unfathomable reason, the studio fucked that shit up. Feh!


Note: Remember to play the Bug-Eyed Trivia Challenge every day. There's no fate but what we make for ourselves.


Avitable said...

I'm glad you gave a spoiler alert because I'm going to talk about a few things here.

First of all, they spoiled that plot point about Marcus because it was obvious from the very beginning. You'd have to be a drooling retard not to know that he was a Terminator of some type.

Secondly, the plot holes were way too big for me to ignore:

1. Heart transplant? In the middle of the desert? With sand blowing into the OPEN CAVITY IN HIS CHEST?

2. The machines needed to plant a signal for the resistance to use so they could trace it, but they couldn't trace the constant radio transmission between the huge fucking airbase with tons of helicopters and jets out in the open and the submarine?

3. Where were all the machines at Skynet? They showed tons of them herding the prisoners, shooting and killing the guy who tried to escape. But once the North Gun Turret was turned off and John called for support, apparently all of the machines protecting Skynet decided to go on break. It should have been a warzone but it was a leisurely departure.

The rest of the gaffes, mistakes, and plot holes were minor enough to be overlooked, but those were just ridiculous. The only thing that could have redeemed that movie for me would have been this ending:

John Connor actually dies. However, since the role he played was essential in striking a major blow to Skynet, his life was still in danger as a child, so they sent a Terminator back. Kyle Reese went back to save him, but couldn't tell his mother that he died, so he lied.

Then, in a future film, they could have had the body of John Connor turned into a Terminator that the resistance would have had to fight. That would have been a well-written ending that would have made up for an otherwise amateurish movie.

Verdant Earl said...

I just would have liked the opportunity to not be a drooling retard. Yes it was obvious, but no need to give it away in the trailer. Movie studios have apparently forgotten the use of a teaser trailer.

We laughed as well about the radio transmissions and the lack of resistance by the machines at the end (I guess they figured one Terminator would be enough). And they probably didn't do the transplant right there in the open, but at that point you probably hated the film so much that you weren't willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

(Speaking of plot holes, you would think that Skynet would have built a fail-safe in Marcus that would prevent him from ripping it out of his skull, but I digress)

But I didn't mind most of the gaffes. I had extremely low expectations, but I wound up having fun with the film.

Doesn't sound like you did.

Dr Zibbs said...

I saw it and it was pretty good but did have many flaws.


Am I missing something though? Why were they taking prisoners to skynet instead of killing them on the spot?

Avitable said...

After films like Iron Man and Star Trek showed that you can have smart writing and good action, I just expect more, I think.

Zibbs, it was either to start using them to make more Marcuses or some unknown purpose that will be explored in one of two sequels. This was part of a planned trilogy.

Avitable said...

Oh yeah, Earl. At the end of the movie, they showed Marcus laying down in that tent in the middle of the desert to prep for the surgery, so I'd say that they very likely did it right there.

Verdant Earl said...

Avitable - maybe they were using super-advanced future sand-blocking technology. ;)

That doesn't bother me at all. And I thought Star Trek had much larger plot holes than this film. The film was built on one mighty coincidence after another. It was like those video games that only have one outcome for every situation. You just follow along the path and eventually all will work out well.

The scenes on the ice planet alone are enough to ruin the effectiveness of the film, but there were so much more. And yet I still enjoyed it. Not as much as Terminator, but I did like it. Sometimes popcorn action flicks can get away with being not-so-smart.

Avitable said...

Other than the ice planet scene, which you could just see as fate and/or destiny reasserting itself, I don't remember any real coincidences or plotholes. And I'm pretty critical about this stuff.

You liked T:S more than Star Trek??

Verdant Earl said...

Adam - Yeah, I did. I enjoyed both, but I liked Terminator more. As for one glaring plot hole in ST, how about how easy it was to stop the space drill using small arms fire and, later, fire from Spock's ship. Shouldn't ground crews or just about any advanced weapon on Vulcan and Earth have been able to do the same thing? How about a small ship ship with lasers? Any small ship with lasers? It was just so easy for them to stop this drill that someone, anyone on the planets should have been able to do it first. It wasn't a military weapon, as pointed out by Nero. It was a mining tool. C'mon!

I see the fate/destiny thing as well, but when Kirk is beamed to an isolated planet in the vicinity of the one person in the universe capable of explaining the events of the past/future and then they remarkably run into Scotty manning an isolated space station, suspended disbelief begins to crumble.

Avitable said...

Your first point would be a plot hole, but my assumption was that the Vulcans, as the peaceful counterparts to the Romulans, don't have weapons. And with regards to Earth, they probably could have sent a ship up there, but Spock stopped it pretty quickly. Remember, Capt. Pike had given the codes to shut down Earth's defenses. Secondly, the only weapons that worked to shut down the drill were small arms fire from the future Romulans' weapons and laser fire from Spock's future ship. Who knows what present-day weapons could have done, if anything?

And with your second point - I agree that they needed some coincidence for that whole part, but coincidence happens. It's not really what I'd consider a plothole, just fantastical.

Verdant Earl said...

Adam - Good point about the future weapons, but it was a point they didn't make in the film and the drill just looked like a clunky mechanical, um, machine (me not speak so well). They didn't appear to need exotic weapons to destroy it.

And I don't remember Pike giving that order, but I'm sure you are right.

I know the studio wanted to reboot the franchise to set up the sequels with the younger cast. I just think they could have respected the original and stayed away from a storyline that needed such an extreme and absurd series of coincidences.

Oh, and on a scientific note: I'm pretty sure that the science behind the black holes and the supernova were completely wrong. Smarter people than I make the case for it out there on the Web. I am pretty sure that the Star Trek franchise has, in the past, disproved the use of black holes for time travel.

One "plot hole" I've read about that I don't agree with is some fans saying that Nero didn't need to destroy Vulcan or Earth to save Romulus. In fact, some fans believe that by doing so he was ensuring the destruction of his home planet. This isn't a plot hole. The man has been driven mad by grief. There is no logical thought here. He is acting out of pure emotion, even though it makes no sense at all.

Heff said...

Never had an interest in these movies. I guess that's for the best, though.

savannah said...

dude, all i want to know is: where are the flying cars we were promised in BLADERUNNER xoxoxo

Verdant Earl said...

Heff - it's a weakness of mine.

Savannah - remember, they had replicants in BLADERUNNER too? Evil fucking robots!

teeni said...

I'm not gonna read the other comments because I haven't seen the trailer and don't want it spoiled for me but after reading yours and Slyde's reviews I still want to see this one.