• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Terminator 3 - Just terrible...

There are a lot of little retarded things about the movie but I can forgive 99 percent of them. The biggest hurdle for me is that guy who played John Connor. What a terrible casting choice. He was a complete douchebag on every level. He ruined it for me.
 
I liked T3, especially the ending. I thought some of the acting was a little wanting, but it was a cool romp and nicely tied everything up. More importantly, it set the stage for telling the story that REALLY needs to be told - that of the war against the machines.
 
The big crane truck chase through Los Angeles is one of my favorite action scenes of recent memory and I fucking love the ending, I will give the movie those two props.
I agree on both points. Action scenes are usually boring and derivative to me but this one was quite good. My biggest beef with the movie was the overuse of humour. Terminator is supposed to be about as dark as movies get. I don't want to see Arnold in star-shaped pink sunglasses.
 
True, but the whole scene is just an excuse for her to react that way.

What is odd about the film is that despite being machines I would think that the laws of physics would still apply. If a robot is significantly smaller than another robot (like the T-X versus Arnie) then how is it possible that she would be stronger than that robot? I mean Kristanna Loken is not only hot, but though she's petite in frame she's definitely strong .. certainly stronger than me and I'm a guy who has almost 10 years on her. but wouldn't the size of the robot affect their strength? Comapred to arnold, she's pint sized.

What's stronger; a small piston or your larger muscles?

You'll find it's the piston.

Total strength isn't just size; it's also strength per size unit, and total weight. If the T-X is built with more powerful, and especially HEAVIER materials, better power distribution, and better strength distribution in her limbs and range of movement, she can indeed be smaller yet much more powerful then Arnie.

In fact, this is rather shown. Remember when Arnie gets hit by a shotgun blast he's actually launched backward? When T-X got hit by a shotgun blast nothing happened and simply continued moving forward, she didn't even need to take a step back to brace herself. Therefor she's heavier, and very possibly much more so (remember, she's heavily fortified battle chassis, essentially a walking tank even by the future's standards) and thus indeed stronger than Arnie.

Her "stregnth" isn't built on the size of her muscles but on the strength of her hydraulics and frame. There's no reason why a machine would have to be as "big" as the Ahnold Droid was. He was only that big to *look* intimidating. But their physical size wasn't an indicator of strength.

Well, size does matter, if the same technology is used. A bigger version of the essentially the same endo-skeleton would be more powerful than the smaller one. And I think the T-800 was big because it was Skynet's main battle chassis endo-skeleton. Remember, we see T-800 Terminators unskinned taking part in the battles. It was thus the biggest most powerful Terminator that could be built without losing maneuverability and go for human - and thus used as the main battle terminator.

The reason the resistance used dogs, and Kyle had to take the risk of letting the Terminator get to Sarah instead of him just taking her right away, was because they and he had no way of recognizing a Terminator. Hence, there would have been smaller Terminators, female Terminators, and I'd bet even child Terminators - how irresistible is it to save the sweet crying child? And once it is inside a shelter it'll snap your neck, take your gun and start killing.

Hence why Kyle did not talk of THE T-800 TERMINATOR, but the T-800 SERIES. There'd be an whole range of different sized, different gendered endo skeletons made to have human flesh grafted onto them, each having their own Cyberdyne Systems Model number, but ALL of them being part of the T-800 series of terminators.
 
Last edited:
Remember when Arnie gets hit by a shotgun blast he's actually launched backward?

This really isn't "proof" of anything since that type of physics-defying nonsense happens all of the time in the movies. For a shotgun blast to launch Arnie backwards he'd have to weigh less than the shotgun shells and/or the shotgun blast would launch the SHOOTER backwards just as much.
 
Does he kill Connor before or after Skynet is defeated? I don't remember T3 all that well.

Connor was killed prior to Skynet's defeat. The timeline had been changed.

The Terminator: War ends in 2029.
Terminator 2: The War is ongoing in 2029 (opening scenes believed to be final battle).
Terminator 3: The War is ongoing in 2032.
 
The big crane truck chase through Los Angeles is one of my favorite action scenes of recent memory and I fucking love the ending, I will give the movie those two props.

Agreed. I didn't expect the ending ... it took me by surprise ... I mean, Skynet actually succeeding in launching Judgment Day. Wow.

Gatekeeper
 
^Well, we just don't know, because John Connor has never yet been killed.

What we do know is that, under his leadership, the human resistance succeeds, and Skynet and the machines are defeated.

So, while someone else might be able to do it better, John Connor is a sure thing.

Suppose a doctor told you that you had flesh-eating disease in your leg. He can either amputate your leg, and save your life for sure--or he can try an experimental treatment, which will save your leg, but which gives you just a 50/50 chance of surviving.

I don't know about you, but at that point, I would say: "Why is my leg still attached? What's the hold-up with that amputation?"

I've actually considered a fanfic where John connor realizes the only way to stop skynet is to kill himself.


j/k.
 
It wasn't as good as the first two, but I think the ending saved T3 for me. There was a definite lightweight feeling about it. Which is a shame because I thought Kristianna Loken did a good job with the material she was given.
 
There are a lot of little retarded things about the movie but I can forgive 99 percent of them. The biggest hurdle for me is that guy who played John Connor. What a terrible casting choice. He was a complete douchebag on every level. He ruined it for me.

Yeah they could have gotten someone who at least vaguely looked like Furlong. I just had a really hard time buying that it was the same character.
 
Remember when Arnie gets hit by a shotgun blast he's actually launched backward?

This really isn't "proof" of anything since that type of physics-defying nonsense happens all of the time in the movies. For a shotgun blast to launch Arnie backwards he'd have to weigh less than the shotgun shells and/or the shotgun blast would launch the SHOOTER backwards just as much.

Lol, yeah, a shotgun blast wouldn't even launch a little kid back, let alone a metal cyborg who supposedly weighs a ton.
 
The Terminator's behaviour in T2 was explained and incorporated into not only the plot of the film, but it's overriding themes. The humour, while maybe cheesy, played out of the themes and character arc and therefore worked.

I dont think the humour in T2 worked any better, or fitted the story any more than in it did T3.

T3 also didnt have the very annoying kid playing John Connor, which is a definite plus. Sure the guy who played him wasnt great, but he was still better.
 
...or fitted the story any more than in it did T3.

I can understand someone not liking the humour, but the second point, you're just plain wrong.

T3 also didnt have the very annoying kid playing John Connor, which is a definite plus.

Edward Furlong was supposed to be a little annoying in T2. He was a brat kid with shades of brilliance, but whiny and whipped nonetheless. Our fates and our role in them and whether we become what a future dictates was one of the main themes of the film. John not matching up to his future self, and being quite the opposite of it, was one of the ways this was played out.
 
I just watched T3 for the first time since I saw it in the theatre, and I find it sad to say that I found it just as terrible, if not worse, than the first time I saw it.

The style is horrible, bad transitions, lame expositional dialogue explaining exactly what you're currently seeing (hence, not needed), lame humour like the gay stereotypes, sunglasses (really, three times!?!), the T-X grabbing his crotch and inflating her breasts and somehow controlling mechanical things like gas pedals and clutches by remote control, piss poor acting from Claire Danes (who I normally love) and mediocre acting from Nick Stahl, ridiculously stupid and non-sensical "nod to the fans" moments like Silberman!?! It was mostly just a terrible movie. The humour is just horrendous.

If it wasn't for the very end, the movie would be a complete write off.

I disagree, both the original movie and T3 were superior to T2, which was actually a fairly simple story with a few big set pieces. T3 took the future to another level, and actually had some bigger ideas than the other movies, which paid off well at the climax, which to me was a bit of a shocker...that there WAS to be no happy ending. Highly underrated!

RAMA
 
I like bits and pieces of the first half of T3, mainly the Future War sequence and the crane chase. The Elton John sunglasses I could have done without, but I admit the "Talk to da hand" part made me chuckle.

For me, the movie took off after the cemetery. When John Connor realizes how close Judgment Day really is to happening. Then, the movie really starts getting good. I can understand they needed to make the first half of the movie light to balance out how dark the second half is. But, maybe they should've darkened up the beginning a tad.

Nick Stahl did a decent John Connor. He didn't look like Edward Furlong, but he did look a lot like Kyle Reese.
 
I like how judgment day was happening in hours. I also like how the ending played out exactly as Arnold explained, and there was no preventing it. I hated all the exposition in the back of the van and at the RV camper site
 
I remember thinking that Terminator 3 was pretty disappointing except for the ending which I thought was pretty cool. The film's basic concept that there is a destiny for everyone and the future is set...the ending with John on the microphone trying to reach out to the rest of the world and start building his resistance. The introduction of Kate Brewster as his wife, I agree that Claire Danes did not perform very well in this movie, and I also agree with all the bad bits that people have pointed out already. I very much am a big fan of what the Sarah Conner Chronicles are doing as an alternate Terminator 3. Looking forward to seeing Terminator Salvation though.
 
I can understand someone not liking the humour, but the second point, you're just plain wrong.

Because I dont think the humour in T2 particularly fitted into the tone or context of the story any better than the humour in T3 did?

Edward Furlong was supposed to be a little annoying in T2.
I know he was supposed to be annoying, but regardless, there is "annoying but you know he's supposed to be like that and you dont mind" and "annoying period". I found him to be the latter.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top