ALL SCI-FI Forum Index ALL SCI-FI
The place to “find your people”.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies from 2001 to 2010
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17016
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:24 am    Post subject: Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) Reply with quote




Arnold said, "I'll be back."

The Govenator doesn't lie . . .

This third Terminator film is actually pretty good, although you do have to adjust your expectations just a little, because James Cameron set the bar so high with T2: Judgement Day!

However, all-in-all I like this sequel to Mr. Cameron's amazing movie, with new a kind of terminator robot trying once again to kill poor John Connor. The lovely Kristanna Loken deserves praise for being simultaneously smokin' hot and murderously cold.








The two young stars (Nick Stahl and Claire Danes) are fine actors and demonstrate all the stark terror any sane person would feel in their situation.





Arnold manages to be tough as nails (like he always is) and occasionally funny (like he sometimes is). And he still projects the powerful presence he did in the first two movies.





Terminator 3: Rise Of The Machines (2003) - Trailer


__________

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:09 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17016
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

This is an enjoyable movie, guys! Nobody wants to comment on it? Seriously?

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bogmeister
Galactic Fleet Vice Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Mon May 20, 2019 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

____________
______)______

The 2nd sequel to the original 1984 sci-fi thriller and follow-up to the 1991 sequel was a long time coming — perhaps a few years too long.

As we see, the Linda Hamilton character is missing. She was central to the success of the 1st 2 films, but was probably regarded as a bit too aged by this point to function in such an important role. She might have been included (in a reduced capacity), but no one found a way to make it work without it being hokey.

The early scenes mostly duplicate the 1991 sequel and there are minor homages and in-jokes for the fans (which sort of drops this film down a notch almost immediately), but there are also surprising twists as the story wears on.

The time: it's about another decade since the last film. Sarah Connor died some years before of leukemia. Her son, the now-legendary John Connor (Nick Stahl) — still waiting to become a legend — has been living off the grid, drifting from job to job and from town to town.

Once again, two terminators materialize from the future: the advanced TX in female form (Kristanna Loken) and another now very outmoded T-101 model (Arnold Schwarzenegger).

_______
___________________
__________
__________

One might quibble that Arnold looks quite a bit older than his previous versions of cyborgs, even though the much later sequel in 2015 establishes that the outer flesh on these borgs ages just like humans.

But he should still look just as he did in previous films, being a model from the exact same future time. He behaves in much the same way as he did in T2.

The one who behaves differently is the Connor character; where is the kid who could out-think most adults in the previous movie? Now a 20-year old, Connor seems to have given up; the loss of his mom must have been a harsh blow.
Arnold's terminator refers to his despair at one point.

Unfortunately, all the signs in T2 that pointed to Connor becoming a great leader are now gone. That being said, Stahl does a pretty good job of conveying the world weariness associated with someone too young to have so much baggage. You warm up to his character very quickly and are following along through his eyes most of the time.

Claire Danes is surprisingly energetic in a role she nabbedat the last minute, I hear, as Connor's sudden better half.

And what abouat Loken as the new Terminatrix? She sure has the look — differing from the cop look of the 2nd film and zipping about in a woman's red suit. I suppose it's interesting to see a female figure with so much power. It's not even a contest anymore between the two terminators — she has the upper hand by a wide margin.

_______________


The FX are consistently impressive. Jonathan Mostow is a very good director and this film could be a case study of seeing the difference between a very good director and a great director (James Cameron). It's fascinating to wonder how much more, if anything, Cameron could have done with the existing material.

As it was, Mostow seemingly tried to outdo Cameron with an early big action sequence involving controlled automobiles and trucks, but it just ends up being a longer and less exciting sequence than the ones in T2. To the film's credit, it only comes across as a duplicate of T2 in the first half. After Arnold's terminator mentions that Judgment Day can only be delayed — as had been done — not avoided, it suggests a darker, more nihilistic outcome than the previous film.

And, this is indeed the case as the script and the director steer a course towards some inevitable, gloomy doomsday, not the expected climax one may expect in a franchise stressing the heroics of humanity over the machine.

BoG's Score: 8 out of 10



BoG
Galaxy Overlord Galactus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17016
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

IMDB has 204 trivia items for this movie. Here’s a few of the ones I found the most interesting, in the blue text. Very Happy
________________________________

~ The studios had long wanted to make a sequel to the previous Terminator films, but for a long time Arnold Schwarzenegger refused to do it unless James Cameron was directing.

Cameron eventually told his friend to "Just do it and ask for a shit-load of money," reasoning that the character was as much Schwarzenegger's as it was his. Schwarzenegger confirmed this in a talk-show interview, saying that when he asked, Cameron told him to "take the money and run".


Note from me: Frankly this movie is not too bad. What makes it hard to fully embrace is the fact that Cameron's film's set such a high bar, films that are just "not too bad" tend to be disappointing. Sad

~ Arnold Schwarzenegger worked out for six months, about three hours a day, before shooting started, by which time he said he had the exact same body weight and muscle measurements as he had 12 years previously while shooting Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)

Note from me: I'd be pleasantly impressed by this remarkable achievement . . . if I weren't so damned unreasonably envious of him. Confused

~ The gas station at which the Terminator stops for refueling is the same gas station seen in all three Terminator movies. In The Terminator (1984) it was shown at the end where the pregnant Sarah stops before driving to the Mojave Desert. In Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) it is where Sarah camps in for the night after she escapes from the hospital.

Note from me: I can't find confirmation of this. Seems like somebody would have written an article about how fans frequently drop in and take pictures. This item might be false. Rolling Eyes

~ Edward Furlong was originally supposed to reprise his role as John Connor. However, in December 2001, it was reported that he had been dropped from the film, allegedly due to a substance abuse problem. He was replaced by Nick Stahl shortly before filming began in April 2002.

Note from me: If Mr. Furlong's acting talent had improved with age (as all actors should), his presence would have been a real plus for the movie.

~ Arnold Schwarzenegger put up $1.4 million of his salary to ensure that a key scene in which a construction crane smashes into a glass building was shot. The director, Jonathan Mostow, was apparently worried that the film was going to run behind schedule and over budget.

Note from me: I must admit, that scene with the wildly swinging crane going down the street was impressive.


__________________ The Chase: T-850 vs T-X


__________



~ Stan Winston and his team constructed flawless, life-size, fully-operational robotic replicas of Arnold Schwarzenegger and co-star Kristanna Loken because certain sequences involving fire and explosions were too dangerous for them to perform.

Note from me: I wonder what lucky guy got to take home the replica of Kristanna Loken . . . and what he did with it when he got there . . . and if he got hurt doing it? Shocked






~ This movie disregards T2 3-D: Battle Across Time (1996) as if it never happened.

Note from me: Behold! The event that never happened! Cool


__________Terminator 2-3D: Battle Across Time


__________



~ The "Sgt. Candy" scene, which was included in early prints of the film, explains why all the Terminators look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold's character (Sgt. Candy) has a Southern US accent. When one of the scientists questions it, another scientist replies (in an Arnold voice over), "We can fix it." The actor portraying this scientist is Jack Noseworthy. This scene is available as a special feature on the DVD version.

Note from me: If this doesn't crack you up, you have NO sense of humor!
Laughing

___________Terminator 3 Sergent Candy Scene


__________

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ralfy
Mission Specialist


Joined: 23 Sep 2014
Posts: 488

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2020 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a great ending.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17016
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2023 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

Today I watched a Netflix DVD of this movie, and I enjoyed it a helluva lot more than Cameron's disastrous sequel!

Hell, I couldn't even get through that damn thing! I sent it back to Netflix before I'd watched more than 30 minutes of it. Sad

But this non-Cameron film has much to praise . . . and not much to criticize. Rolling Eyes

Admittedly it doesn't have the Cameron touch, that brilliant quality which elevates his movies above many others — but it manages to stay true to the Terminator franchise in more ways than Cameron's own Terminator: Dark Fate.

Would I be wrong to suggest that James Cameron has gone the same route as George Lucas? He's no longer able to remain true to the brilliant franchise he created in his younger days? Confused

Wow . . . getting old really sucks! Shocked

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tmlindsey
Mission Specialist


Joined: 18 Jul 2022
Posts: 409
Location: NW Florida

PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I liked T3 when it came out and it certainly is better than every sequel that has followed it.

Cameron needs to get over the "all Terminators look like Arnold" crap. That's so incredibly stupid in the context of the films.

In the original movie, Reece talks about how they spotted the first (infiltrating) Terminators easily because they looked so artificial. Then they started growing human skin around them to make them harder to spot.....I GUESS MAKING THEM ALL LOOK IDENTICAL WASN'T A GIVEAWAY??? Confused

_________________
"Have you never wondered what it would be like to walk between the ticks and tocks of Time?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Morbius
Astral Engineer


Joined: 25 Oct 2014
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I could be mistaken on this but trying to keep up with the terminator series, am I correct to recall that there are various futures, depending on how trips to the past affect the future?

The first terminator was great
The first Rocky was great
The first Jaws was great.
The first Robocop was great.
The first Back to the Future was great.

Sometimes a one two or three etc. works but the first is usually the best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tmlindsey
Mission Specialist


Joined: 18 Jul 2022
Posts: 409
Location: NW Florida

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud Brewster wrote:
Would I be wrong to suggest that James Cameron has gone the same route as George Lucas? He's no longer able to remain true to the brilliant franchise he created in his younger days? Confused

IMO, Cameron was at his best with a limited budget and resources. Terminator is a great film, Aliens is a great film, both low-budget productions where ingenuity had to replace nearly unlimited money. The more money Cameron got the more he lost sight of the stories and characters and focused on the technology behind the films.

I thought T2: Judgement Day was fine, but not as good as the original, Cameron just wanted to showcase the new CGI effects he could do and rake in some $$ from the public with that movie pure and simple.

I never understood the adoration of Titanic, which I thought was a one-and-done movie. All of the praise for Avatar is just as confusing to me; technically spectacular visuals, yes, but nothing we haven't seen before story-wise or even design-wise.

I think Cameron, like Lucas, got high on himself (not hard for Cameron since he's a well-known a$$hole anyway) and sold out for the almighty dollar and stroking his own ego.

_________________
"Have you never wondered what it would be like to walk between the ticks and tocks of Time?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tmlindsey
Mission Specialist


Joined: 18 Jul 2022
Posts: 409
Location: NW Florida

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Morbius wrote:
I could be mistaken on this but trying to keep up with the terminator series, am I correct to recall that there are various futures, depending on how trips to the past affect the future?

You might be right...or you may be wrong...or you might be right! Who can tell with the convoluted mess of a timeline(s)/alternate universes the Terminator films created Laughing

Quote:
Sometimes a one two or three etc. works but the first is usually the best.

The only time I felt the original was inferior to a sequel was Alien. But I saw Aliens in the theater first and had already seen The Thing (which has a similar basic plot) several times before I saw Alien and I mostly felt it was just a bore-fest.
_________________
"Have you never wondered what it would be like to walk between the ticks and tocks of Time?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17016
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

__________________________________________________

It's strange how intelligent people can have very different opinions about the same movies.

For example, Tim thinks The Terminator is a great movie, but T2: Judgement Day is just "fine, but not as good as the original".

I've never been overly impressed with The Terminator, whereas T2: Judgement Day has a much more complex plot, much better FX, and more interesting characters.

Even Sarah Conner's character is a step up, story wise. In the original she's just a terrified young woman who spends all her time running scared.

But in T2 she's mature, intelligent, very admirable, and incredibly brave — a woman who is determined to save the world and protect her son from a killer robot.

In The Terminator she's fleeing from a robot. For her, nothing is at stake but her own life.

But in T2: Judgement Day she has to escape from an asylum, evade a shape-shifting machine who could look like anybody, find her son and keep him alive, and learn to trust a robot who looks like the one that tried to kill her. Shocked

It's all a mater or preferences, of course, but T2 gave me more surprises and more complexity. Very Happy

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tmlindsey
Mission Specialist


Joined: 18 Jul 2022
Posts: 409
Location: NW Florida

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud Brewster wrote:
Even Sarah Conner's character is a step up, story wise. In the original she's just a terrified young woman who spends all her time running scared.

But in T2 she's mature, intelligent, very admirable, and incredibly brave — a woman who is determined to save the world and protect her son from a killer robot.

Which, to me, makes perfect sense; her character progressed and evolved because of her experiences in the first film. The entire experience and concept is new and unbelievable to her. She didn't have a lot of down time in the first to process what was happening. There is no kick-ass T2 Sarah Conner without the frightened, (apparently bad) waitress from the first running for her life.

Quote:
It's all a mater or preferences, of course, but T2 gave me more surprises and more complexity. Very Happy

Yep. Toe-may-toe/toe-mah-toe Laughing
_________________
"Have you never wondered what it would be like to walk between the ticks and tocks of Time?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Krel
Space Ranger


Joined: 19 Feb 2023
Posts: 190

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tmlindsey wrote:
Morbius wrote:
I could be mistaken on this but trying to keep up with the terminator series, am I correct to recall that there are various futures, depending on how trips to the past affect the future?

You might be right...or you may be wrong...or you might be right! Who can tell with the convoluted mess of a timeline(s)/alternate universes the Terminator films created Laughing

That comes from the TV series, where there were three or four time travelers from different timelines asking each other what date their Dooms Day was. They were all different. My favorite scene from the show.

David.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17016
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tmlindsey wrote:
Bud Brewster wrote:
Even Sarah Conner's character is a step up, story wise. In the original she's just a terrified young woman who spends all her time running scared.

Which, to me, makes perfect sense; her character progressed and evolved because of her experiences in the first film.

Respectfully, Tim, I think you misunderstood. Very Happy

I'm not saying her character should have been any different in the first movie, I'm just saying she's much more interesting in the second one. She is, by design, a much more complex person, for the very reasons you described.

Ditto for the story, which is what a sequel should be . . . otherwise why make it? Confused

I realize that the first movie had to set up the sequel, but my point is that the sequel is better because it built on the foundation the original provided. Therefore it was even more interesting, exciting, complex, and intellectually challenging.

In my opinion, the original is merely "fine", and the sequel is the "great" movie.

With that in mind, the Directors Cut is much better than the theatrical version, because we get that great concept about how the Terminator was also given the ability to "progress and evolve because of his experiences", just like Sarah. Cool

Add the young John Connor to the mix and you've got an epic yarn!

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tmlindsey
Mission Specialist


Joined: 18 Jul 2022
Posts: 409
Location: NW Florida

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2023 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud Brewster wrote:
Respectfully, Tim, I think you misunderstood. Very Happy

I'm not saying her character should have been any different in the first movie, I'm just saying she's much more interesting in the second one. She is, by design, a much more complex person, for the very reasons you described.

Ah.

Quote:
Ditto for the story, which is what a sequel should be . . . otherwise why make it?

I guess that's ultimately it for me; I didn't think the original needed a sequel.

If they "had" to make another one I'd have preferred to have seen the future world Kyle lived in and the mission(s) he went on up to the time he made the trip back in time.

T2 and T3 were enjoyable enough, which I can't say for any of the films that followed, but I didn't see what I (and everyone I knew) wanted to see; the future war. So a prequel...that chronologically takes place after the events of the first film Wink

But, yeah, to each his own.

_________________
"Have you never wondered what it would be like to walk between the ticks and tocks of Time?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies from 2001 to 2010 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group