Why's The Terminator so popular?

[GarfieldLeChat]

I think you are losing me there. What is a "modern film review board" ?. By todays poor standarts of commercial filmmaking the characterisation in the first two films is very effective. It's not supposed to be Ingmar Bergam after all.

really where was the charchter with as much menace as say Xavier in no country...

or even for that matter Kurt Russell's death proof charchter...

today's poor standards my arse there's still the same level of amnufactured shite that there's always been around today and it's just as banial and teidious plodding as it always has been look at the entire career of will farrell for refference...

however, good decent big budget films have also been made in that time as are made now to a much higher stnadard and effects have moved forward considerably from the original or the second film if you don't beleive me watch it... again now...

terminator was in 1984 and they didn't really do CGI at that time...

as for low budget i think you need to look at that phrase carefully it was $6.5 million in the 80's ... that's not a low budget ... comparitively it might be... but it's still not low budget.

The first film was a low budget film which was a surprise success and turrned Schwarzenegger into a big action star. befroe that his acting career was floundering.[/QUOTE]

no it didn't and no it wasn't this film was delayed for over a year because he was optioned on a number of other films and they couldn't get him to do terminator; he came literally straight off the set from conan to this...

Ray Harrihausens effects for Jason and the Argonauts is still magical to watch, but the stop frame animation wouldn't cut it in todays multiplexes.

better tell that to nick park....

 

[Structaural]

I think you are losing me there. What is a "modern film review board" ?. By todays poor standarts of commercial filmmaking the characterisation in the first two films is very effective. It's not supposed to be Ingmar Bergam after all.

The first film was a low budget film which was a surprise success and turrned Schwarzenegger into a big action star. befroe that his acting career was floundering.

Ray Harrihausens effects for Jason and the Argonauts is still magical to watch, but the stop frame animation wouldn't cut it in todays multiplexes.

I prefer that to the super-sleek shitty unrealistic camera work and bad character movement of CGI fests like Beowulf.

Terminator owes more to B-movie horror flicks and low budget chase movies like Duel. A Director/writer, a low-budget of 6 million, special effects done the old fashioned way, tapping into the 'chopper'/hells angel fashion of the US and plot-wise dealing with the paranoia of where all these spectrums and commodore 64s will take us in the future... which loads of films keep on doing... For what it is, it's perfect, it's a B-movie that was as popular as a so-called A-movie.

On the downside it helped create the modern block-buster, brought us the Titanic, gave Cameron the impression he was more than a b-movie writer/director and a decade of Swarzernegger thinking he could act.

I remember 12 of my mates squashing into anothers mates living room to watch it in the 80s- he was the only one with a video. We were about 15. Shit us right up. I guess you had to be there. So nostalgia fuels my like of it.

I watched them both at the weekend (my gf is away and T2 has dated much more than T1.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

I really don't think the third Terminator film is that bad by modern blockbuster standards. Sure it's a retreat of the first two films, but then T2 was almost a remake of the first film in many ways. It's fluff, but it has some decent action sequences and the ending is great.

It's not in same the league of truly disgraceful sequels like Matrix2, Alien4 or The Phantom Menace.

. . . . I aggree, it's not 'that' bad. Not Matrix 2&3 crazy bad.

But then I think Alien 4 is OK as well. I have only pure hatred for Alien 3, but I'm pretty sure I thought 4 was jolly good fun.

 

[Melinda]

....and a decade of Swarzernegger thinking he could act.

Er... what about Twins?!

 

[Reno]

really where was the charchter with as much menace as say Xavier in no country...

or even for that matter Kurt Russell's death proof charchter...

today's poor standards my arse there's still the same level of amnufactured shite that there's always been around today and it's just as banial and teidious plodding as it always has been look at the entire career of will farrell for refference...

however, good decent big budget films have also been made in that time as are made now to a much higher stnadard and effects have moved forward considerably from the original or the second film if you don't beleive me watch it... again now...

terminator was in 1984 and they didn't really do CGI at that time...

as for low budget i think you need to look at that phrase carefully it was $6.5 million in the 80's ... that's not a low budget ... comparitively it might be... but it's still not low budget.

The first film was a low budget film which was a surprise success and turrned Schwarzenegger into a big action star. befroe that his acting career was floundering.

no it didn't and no it wasn't this film was delayed for over a year because he was optioned on a number of other films and they couldn't get him to do terminator; he came literally straight off the set from conan to this...


better tell that to nick park....

I know Nick Park and I've worked with him so I'll tell him. I was a stop frame animator for years till CG took. I'm just being realistic rather than sentimental. Btw, Nick Park doesn't work in special effects, he makes his own animation films, which is completely different thing. He'd be the first one to agree that his plasticine animation would not be appropriate for the likes of T2 or Jurassic Park.

As to the rest, most people would disagree with you that the original Terminator wasn't a memorably menacing villain. He has achived iconic status that Kurt Russels character in Death Proof will never have.

 

[elevendayempire]

. . . . I aggree, it's not 'that' bad. Not Matrix 2&3 crazy bad.

But then I think Alien 4 is OK as well. I have only pure hatred for Alien 3, but I'm pretty sure I thought 4 was jolly good fun.

Have you seen the Alien3 extended cut? It does a lot to redeem the film's flaws.

I take issue with Terminator 3 because it completely undermines the point of the first two films:

T1 - The future is fixed, and there's nothing we can do to change it - but the Indomitable Will of Humans will win out in the end, thanks to humanity's saviour John "ooh, look at my initials" Connor.

T2 - "The future is not set", and John Connor proves to be the true saviour of humanity by averting the future war before it happens.

T3 - Fuck all that, we need a franchise here. Um, how can we ensure that there's a Future War from which Terminators can be sent back? Oh, I know, "Judgment Day was merely delayed".

Well done there Mostow, you completely destroyed the underlying message of the first two films. And those who applaud the "bleak" ending of T3... you do realise it's only there so they could make the piece-of-shit Future War movie that the fanboys have been clamouring for for the last decade? Despite the fact that the cinematic potential of the Future War basically amounts to the ten minutes' worth of flashback sequences we've already seen, and fundamentally misses the point of what the Terminator films are. They're basically slasher movies with a robot.

 

[jæd]

. . . . I aggree, it's not 'that' bad. Not Matrix 2&3 crazy bad.

Heh... I always like Matrix 2 & 3... I found that they make quite a bit of sense if you willing to put the effort in.

But then I think Alien 4 is OK as well. I have only pure hatred for Alien 3, but I'm pretty sure I thought 4 was jolly good fun.

I can never produce such strong emotions for a film. Alien 3 was a bit weak, but not sure how you can get so worked up about a film...

 

[jæd]

...and fundamentally misses the point of what the Terminator films are. They're basically slasher movies with a robot.

Nope. They're slasher movies with a robot, big guns, and the hint of sex.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Have you seen the Alien3 extended cut? It does a lot to redeem the film's flaws.

I take issue with Terminator 3 because it completely undermines the point of the first two films:
].

Hey I never said it was great, it's not even that good, just not as bad as people say IMO.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

I can never produce such strong emotions for a film. Alien 3 was a bit weak, but not sure how you can get so worked up about a film...

Maybe I am still sore because I paid to see it at the cinema. It ruined all the good work for aliens and the comic books (nuit growing up).

Maybe pure hate was a bit strong, I might just be able to muster up a three minute disapproving pub conversation at best.

 

[d.a.s.h]

the point of what the Terminator films are. They're basically slasher movies with a robot.

The only really decent bits in the TV series so far have that element. Good creepy scene in episode 3 iirc where a skeletal terminator gets a scientist to fill a bath full of synthetic blood and other gunk so it can regrow its skin, echoes of Hellraiser.

 

[stdPikachu]

Just to echo everyone else with an ounce of common sense (i.e. people who agree with me); the first two Terminator movies were brilliant. Apocolyptic storylines, well developed characters, great direction, good pace, thunderously menacing soundtracks, groundbreaking special effects. As has been pointed out, the first film especially was fucking scary.

3rd movie? None of these things. Threw away most of the detail the first two films had developed, along with namby pamby characterisation (I can see why Linda Hamilton turned down a part in it), crappy CGI and a script seemingly devoid of all human emotion. Direction was particularly drab - Nick Stahl (guy who plays John Connor) can be a pretty decent actor IMHO, but in T3 he was completely dull and two-dimensional. I pretend T3 never happened.

First esipode of Sarah Connor Chronicles was similarly balls. It's obvious they were going to turn the female terminator into a love interest of some sort (Oh John! You've reprogrammed me to understand love!). And then probably have terminator babies or some such bollocks, and a kindergarten shoot-out to coincide with the release Arnie's "Kindergarten Cop IV".

Complex stories involving humans turned into nothing but a wanking ground for cheap sci-fi writers with a hard-on for CGI robots. Lame.

 

[N_igma]

I think the next film will be the true judge of the Terminator franchise, I refuse to watch the Cronicles cos I know it's a load of bollocks.

 

[Reno]

I refuse to watch the Cronicles cos I know it's a load of bollocks.

That's always the best way to judge something.

 

[nightowl]

first terminator - excellent
second terminator - special effects were absolutely mind blowing at the time which made up for the 'good terminator arnie' plot bollox and the obnoxious american brat
third terminator - had it's moments, especially the ending, but arnie looking a bit old
sarah connor chronicles - still waiting to see when babe terminator nails john connor. it's definitely going to happen

 

[jæd]

first terminator - refreshingly new sci-fi based action flick. Some plot-holes.

second terminator - sci-fi based action flick. more plot-holes. good action sequences. a bit preachy

third terminator - yet-another sci-fi based action movie. yet more plot-holes. even better action sequences

sarah connor chronicles - fairly obvious plot-points but good mindless viewing

 

[elevendayempire]

I think the next film will be the true judge of the Terminator franchise, I refuse to watch the Cronicles cos I know it's a load of bollocks.

Actually, it's pretty good, and certainly vastly superior to T3. Ironically, it even looks more cinematic than T3, which always had a bit of a TV movie look to it...

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

the first two films are toliet not just some toilet but utter toilet aways were always will be.

What made them so popular wasn't that they were good sotries but that the specail effects were light years ahead of anything else which was around at the time...

they have like the scene from judgement day of the white hose beig blown up or like water world or any other big specail effects movie dated really really badly, and that's before we ever go near the monolithic acting skills of govern arnold...

Utter nonsense. I watched the first one again quite recently and it's still a great film. It's not even remotely comparable to a piece of dung like Waterworld.

 

[Poi E]

I really don't think the third Terminator film is that bad by modern blockbuster standards. Sure it's a retreat of the first two films, but then T2 was almost a remake of the first film in many ways. It's fluff, but it has some decent action sequences and the ending is great.

It's not in same the league of truly disgraceful sequels like Matrix2, Alien4 or The Phantom Menace.

Agree with this. T3 only really gets slammed by geeks who think T1&2 are the be-all and end-all of sci-fi/action. Average action film, good ending.

 

[scifisam]

One of the main reasons it's so successful is that it has a very strong female protagonist that most women can identify with: ordinary job, bad eighties hair, 'can't even balance my chequebook.' Yet she's strong, too, and smart, and absolutely determined. Most of us can identify with that, too, or would like to.

But there is unrelenting menace in the first one and desperation. It isnt over inflated IMO, it accomplishes what it sets out to do- a chase movie.
The pursuit is relentless and there is fear and desperation, stuff of nightmares.

The second one had cracking action scenes but eased up totally on the fear quotient. Third one, well *shrugs* A man's got to eat and I guess it laid the groundwork for a CGI laden dystopian war film to come.

Yup. The first film actually did give me nightmares: it was extremely simple in its idea, that there is this unstoppable thing which will not stop until you are dead, but it got that sensation across much better than most other horror movies or action movies. I think that was partly Linda Hamilton's acting, and partly, odd as it may sound, Arnie's acting: he was made to play an unstoppable robot that looks barely human!

 

[Gingerman]

1st is one of the great low budget sci-fi classics of all time, grips from start to finish,the 2nd one was prob made in order to have Arnie as the good guy,he was a much bigger star when it was made compared to the original,amazing to think how it woulda turned out if the original choice for the part of the Terminator OJ Simpson had played it

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

1st is one of the great low budget sci-fi classics of all time, grips from start to finish,the 2nd one was prob made in order to have Arnie as the good guy,he was a much bigger star when it was made compared to the original,amazing to think how it woulda turned out if the original choice for the part of the Terminator OJ Simpson had played it

Jesus, that doesn't bear thinking about It's like if burt reynolds had played han solo

 

[nightowl]

wasn't there some story about OJ Simpson not getting the part because the director couldn't imagine him killing anyone?

 

[Reno]

wasn't there some story about OJ Simpson not getting the part because the director couldn't imagine him killing anyone?

Yes, apparently that's true. He did mostly play nice guys in films.

Lance Hendriksen who ended up playing the detective was also considered, which I think would have been quite interesting.

 

[soulman]

The books are better than the films. Can't comment on the new series, I haven't seen it.

 

[Reno]

The books are better than the films. Can't comment on the new series, I haven't seen it.

What books ?

 

[bouncer_the_dog]

I fyou have to ask why Terminator is so popular I doubt you'll ever know




ITS A KILLER ROBOT FROM THE FUTURE!!!!

 

[soulman]

What books ?

Stirling's T2 books.

 

[T & P]

One thing I've never understood with the films is why they kept sending a terminator with the same face and physical appearance. Specially in T2. Are they really suggesting the t-800 series only comes with one face? And if not, why send someone to protect John Connor who looks exactly like the one who tried to kill his mother?

I know the answer is obvious: so Arnie could play the role. Still a big plot hole, unless I'm missing something...

 

[MooChild]

One thing I've never understood with the films is why they kept sending a terminator with the same face and physical appearance. Specially in T2. Are they really suggesting the t-800 series only comes with one face? And if not, why send someone to protect John Connor who looks exactly like the one who tried to kill his mother?

I know the answer is obvious: so Arnie could play the role. Still a big plot hole, unless I'm missing something...

maybe in the 2nd film, they only had one face mold, as it was the resistance who sent the arnie terminator back