T3

[Guest Randleman]

Just came back from seeing T3. In my opinon, it wasn't as good as the others. The special effects were of coarse better, but the story wasn't all that good. I mean [spoiler]all that fighting to prevent judgement day just to let it happen again? I think they could have came up with something better.[/spoiler] Usually when I come out of movies, I am usually thinking "that was a good movie" or "the plot rocked". When I am out of this one, I thought "At least the TX girl was hot." See it if you got money to spend.

[The Vampire: Ed]

Well, I personally thought it was a great movie. The action was incredible, and practically nonstop. The plot--well of course it wasn't all that great in T3. But that's only because it's basically the same exact plot from the first two movies, except for the fact [spoiler]they actually delayed Judgment Day.[/spoiler] Seriously, did you expect it change that much at all? It's all about a future where humans almost become extinct because of the computers taking over, and John Conner is working to stop it from ever coming. But even then it still throws in a lot of plot that I wouldn't have expected, especially [spoiler] the plot twist in the end where it turns out that they could never really prevent it from happening, but only delay it. That was genius. Why? Because it wasn't the crappy happy ending most people probably expected.[/spoiler]

I thought it was a really good movie, and the fight scenes were awesome as well. I can easily see this as the best Terminator movie of the three. I don't know why anyone would dislike it.

[Charles]

Oh, I agree. Considering that this series has such an incredible following and this sequal has been a decade in the making, I think that it lived up to its predecessors effectively. It could be argued whether or not it's [i]as good[/i] as the others or whether it introduces anything as revolutionary as they did. But, in the end, it kept its sci-fi colors and did what it was meant to do.

The action sequences were a [b]blast[/b]. It's definitely a perfect summer movie. That's for sure. These scenes (which constitute most of the film) are probably the best I've seen since [i]Matrix Reloaded[/i].

The actual plot is interesting, at least. It doesn't offer much of anything new. A lot of the concepts are borrowed from the earlier [i]Terminator[/i] films. It's a cat-and-mouse chase sprinkled with themes like predetermination, the apocalypse, the threat of relying too heavily on technology, etc. None of this is so deep that it knocks your socks off--but I don't think it's supposed to be. It's all sort of handed to you in transitional scenes between the action sequences.

I enjoyed it though. It certainly could have been worse. Fans should be happy.

[DuoMax]

Well, personally, I found it quite entertaining and a very fullfilling movie. One question though: [spoiler]Why does John think it's the [i]same[/i] Terminator/ He saw it get destroyed in the 2nd movie![/spoiler]

[Charles]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DuoMax [/i]
[B]Well, personally, I found it quite entertaining and a very fullfilling movie. One question though: [spoiler]Why does John think it's the [i]same[/i] Terminator/ He saw it get destroyed in the 2nd movie![/spoiler] [/B][/QUOTE]

[spoiler]You know, that's a good question.

I can only assume that he was disoriented--and with time travel obviously being a focal point in the [i]Terminator[/i] movies, you never can tell. As you're probably well aware, they've always mentioned that the Terminator is the closest thing John's had to a father. So, I'm assuming that when he asked him it was one of those questions that he knew the answer to, but just had to ask anyway for hope's sake.[/spoiler]

[Amorphous]

The on thing that got me on that movie... was that there wasn't much of a plotline at all. The whole movie was based on killing her and saving John Conner, which was the same thing in the last movie. But I'm sure this movie will lay way to another movie though, considering how it all worked out. Sadly, I was disappointed in the over all movie, though it had its entertaining points. T2 wiped the floor with this movie. Though it was still not that bad, I guess... Well actually it sucked and I'm a big fan of the Terminator series, I was so let down. :twitch:

[Brasil]

OK.

At risk of sounding totally outrageous, here goes.

I LOVE THE TERMINATOR MOVIES. Let's get that clear. lol. What I'm about to say in no way disrespects James Cameron.

Now, he screwed over the series from the get-go. He screwed over the series in the very first movie. Here's why.

There are approximately two known schools of thought surrounding time travel. I'm unsure of the actual terms, so bear with me.

1) Is called Linear. This treats time as a straight line, and as an unchangeable force. If something happens in the past that drastically alters the future, then a time traveler (like Marty McFly) would begin to disappear from existence. The future is set, it cannot be changed. Any attempts to change it by altering the past results in paradoxes that can destroy the universe.

2) Is called Branching Paths. This theorem states that there are multiple futures we can take. If you cross the street at the crosswalk, you will cross safely; if you jaywalk, then you'll be hit by a car. Multiple paths. No risk of paradox.

This is where movie logic gets really fuzzy.

Back to the Future 1 used Linear school of thought, but then immediately switched to Branching Paths in Part 2.

Terminator led us to believe they used Branching Paths in the first one...and the 2nd, come to think of it. Sarah Conner's narration at the end when they're driving on the dark highway to the future is hopeful they changed it. But the problem is, they can't stop Judgement Day. On top of that, the Terminator series doesn't use a Branching Path; it uses Linear. The future can't be changed, because if Skynet was never created, then terminators wouldn't have been created, and thus Reese wouldn't have been sent back to protect Sarah Conner...because there was no Judgement Day to prevent. [spoiler]we all know that the first T-800 is the reason that Skynet is created. The last scene in the robotics lab takes place at Cyberdyne. The first T-800's CPU chip is found by a lab technician and is sent to Research and Development "first thing Monday morning."[/spoiler]

So, preventing Judgement Day results in a paradox that would destroy everything in the Terminator universe.

Sarah Conner knows our confusion. Remember her end monologue in the first? [spoiler]"Will you send him back, knowing he is your father? But if you don't send him back, then you can never be. God, someone could go crazy thinking about this."[/spoiler]

Also, in T2 [spoiler]Cyberdyne has countless off-site data back-ups. Just destroying Dyson's data and the Cyberdyne building wasn't enough.[/spoiler]

The only way we can fully appreciate Terminator is to willingly suspend our disbelief (which means I have to turn myself off).

I hope that helped somebody. lol.

Later.

[Manic Webb]

I was thinking about it, and while [spoiler]they couldn't stop Judgement Day[/spoiler] at the end of the movie, there's still a small chance that they still can. Let's reflect...

[spoiler]Toward the beginning of the movie, T-800 (or whatever model Arnold plays) stated that while they didn't stop Judgement Day, they delayed it. This proves that they can alter the future. If they can alter the future to delay Judgement Day, then they should be able to stop it.

At the end of the movie, they couldn't stop Judgement Day because they didn't know how. They delayed it, so there must be a way they could've stopped it. Unfortunately, there was no central computer to shut down, and John & Kate figured everything out only a few hours before Skynet went insane and killed everyone.

Obviously, whatever they did during T2 wasn't enough. In fact, I'm not so sure they knew what exactly they were doing. If they had known in T2 what they figured out in T3, I'm guessing that they could've stop J-Day.

So here's my theory: Send a robot back in time to stop Judgement Day.

I know what you're thinking ("they did that in T2 and T3!"), but it's never actually been done. Think about it.
They sent robots back in time to protect John Conner. Those robots were never actually programmed to stop Judgement Day. The human characters were the ones trying to stop Judgement Day, not the robots.[/spoiler]

They should send a robot back in time whose primary mission is to stop Judgement Day. Things would probably be done a lot more efficiently, and the job would finally get done.

[The Vampire: Ed]

I'm not exacly sure if there are any major spoilers in here, but I'll use the spoiler tag anyway. [b]DO NOT[/b] read this message if you do not wish to read any spoilers about any of the Terminator movies.

[spoiler]Here's the truth Judgment Day is inevitable. Going back in time and stopping Judgment Day is impossible. I believe Terminator follows a single path, not branching paths. That alternate ending in T2: Ultimate Edition is nothing more than an extra, an idea for an ending they were thinking about using. What that ending contains has nothing to do with the current plot since it was not used, and thus is only a deleted scene. However, think about what would happen if it was possible to stop Judgment Day. If Judgment Day never came, John Conner would not exist to send his father back in time to impregnate his mother with him, which is another thing that makes no sense since John should have never existed in the first place, not to mention if Judgment Day never came then there would not be any sort of time travel.

How could they use a time machine created to kill John Conner/stop Judgment Day when it wouldn't even exist if they did so? It's an inescapable loop, the future cannot be altered so drastically that Judgment Day could never come.[/spoiler]

[Charles]

I'm not quite sure that's accurate per the film's theme, Manic. It's an interesting point, but from what I gather, fate would always readjust itself so that Judgment Day may occur.

[spoiler]I think that the overlying message of the movie was that we can't escape our fate. This is personified in John Connor. He did everything he could to run away from his ultimate purpose--but despite his precautions and constant denial, he found his fate. Or, rather, it found him. He tried living in secrecy, but he couldn't hide from who he was or what he was meant to do.

Fate adjusted itself accordingly so that he and his intended mate would still meet. It thrusted them together, so to speak, by eliminating possible threats, such as her fiance, along the way. Despite the fact that the past was altered due to the consequences of the events in T2, fate made the pieces fit. The final destination was still the same. John Connor and Kate Brooster ended up coming together and accepting their predestined roles in the movement against the machines.

The theme is almost religious really. We all must face Judgment Day at one time or another for the consequences of our actions. Sure, it can be prolonged--but never completely avoided because men are not Gods--they are merely the likeness of God. By the same token, machines are only a likeness of man and have even less control, less free will. So, I don't see how man could rely on a machine to alter fate when man doesn't even have that power.

We all have a purpose to serve--and we can try to run from it, but eventually it must be fulfilled. It explains why Connor couldn't kill himself, why the Terminator couldn't kill Connor, why it was able to defeat a vastly superior model and why the movie ended the way it did. The trip might not have been made how it was originally inteded due to tampering with time travel, but the characters still had to get from point A-Z nonetheless.[/spoiler]

[Brasil]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Chou Long Kai [/i]
[B]I haven't seen T3,but I've been really hyped about it.
Mostly I came here to argue about the time travel technique.

The Terminator movies use the "branching paths" theory of time travel.
This is proven if you know the alternate ending,that is contained in the T2:Ultimate Edition DVD and another DVD,I can't remember its name though.

[spoiler]In the alternate ending it shows the date of Judgement Day,but instead of death and destruction,it has John Connor and Sarah Connor at the park playing with John's daughter.Sarah then talks about how the future really can be changed.Then she repeats the line of the Terminators learning the value of human life.It then fades.[/spoiler]

If that isn't proof enough,I dunno what is.Poison,I didn't see any proof of the Linear theory being used,could you please point it out?Anyways,I'm gonna double check my facts around the web,and edit this post as need be.

(I love theorizing about physics and time travel.)
*Continues trying to get his parents to take him to T3* [/B][/QUOTE]

Chou Long, thanks for replying. You're the first person to debate with me who actually knows what they're talking about. Thanks very much.

I am aware of the deleted scene. But it's a deleted scene, like Rob said, something that Cameron was toying with, but decided it didn't fit the theme of the series, hence included as an extra.

[spoiler]The fact that Judgment Day ultimately happens is the biggest sign that the series is Linear. No matter what the protagonists did, they couldn't prevent it...in fact, in certain cases, they caused Judgment Day. For instance, T1. The first Terminator is destroyed in the Cyberdyne robotics lab.

The entire series is an example of a singular stream of time. It's entirely Fate or predetermination. Branching Path is evidenced in an alternate ending, which wasn't included as the "official" version, the version that Cameron wanted us to see.

I use a Shakespearean comparison. Some argue that Shakespeare suppored the feminist movement and wanted women to have the same freedoms as men. In my Shakespeare course, a student brought up that Shakespeare did support feminism, because his plays are populated with strong female characters. The instructor then asked him, "But what happened to those strong female characters?" They died.

So, basically, no matter what happens in a film or story, the ending will ultimately define what it is. Strong female characters were killed off in Shakespeare's plays, so he obviously did not believe feminism was a good idea, and Judgment Day still happens, despite the efforts of the protagonists over a period of...about 25-30 years, so there is only one outcome to the series. That is most certainly not Branching Paths. It's very Linear.[/spoiler]

[Brasil]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Chou Long Kai [/i]
[B]Urgh-ness.Vampire,in reply to your post.
(man the spoiler tag sure is prospuring.)

[spoiler]The alternate ending should NOT be passed off as a deleted scene.I quote from James Cameron,answering to why the alternate ending was cut from the original:"But there was a sense that, why tie it up with a bow? If the future is changeable, then the battle is something that has to be fought continuously. And you can't do it with a single stroke. That it's the dualism, the dynamic between good and evil that's eternal.".But infact do to such interest,in the T2:Ultimate Editon cut,they took out the ending as an extra,and put it in there as originally itended.Then,in the T2:Extreme DVD,they took it out all together...I wish they would make up their minds.

It would seem that Judgement Day is indeed avoidable,but it can't be prevented with one action,as James Cameron said.So,it isn't inevitable,but it isn't easy to prevent.And in reply to "How could John exist if there was no Judgement Day?".When Reese went back in T1,it created a branched path,he existed in our time and impregnated Sarah,then died.Then,in T2 the T-1000 is sent back to kill John and the T-800 to protect John.This here created another branched path.The 2 paths that could've occured is that one,things could've turned out the way they did,and John would've had to repeat the process.But,if Judgement Day was prevented,John would still exist and not fade out of existance,as would happen in a staight path.He would live his life as normal.Urgh,I might not have made my point as clearly as I wanted,but hell,Time Travel is complicated.If you don't understand,I don't know how I can explain it more.0_o;
Let me think it over again.

I think the message of the Terminator films is the exact opposite of Charles idea.I think the message is that we have "No Fate but what we make for ourselfs."[/spoiler]
Meh.
*Plays Terminator Theme* [/B][/QUOTE]

You're missing the point. Judgment Day DID happen. It can't be changed. The future is the past, and the past is the future. There is no gray area, hell, there is no other side. Judgment Day did happen, it will always happen, and yes, the battle will be fought continuously but because Judgment Day did happen and will always happen.

And the quote does not support your idea at all, because preventing Judgment Day is tying it up with a neat little bow, isn't it? You're taking Cameron's quote totally out of context. He was giving the reason for NOT showing the scene.

EDIT: And I take back my previous compliment. You can spew definitions, but you do not demonstrate deep thought to understand what you're talking about.

[The Vampire: Ed]

Here's my response, Chou Long Kai. Once again spoiler tags have been implemented just in case it's needed.

[spoiler]All right, let's get down to it. First of all, James Cameron never said it was branching paths. All he basically said was that he didn't want to end the Terminator series like that, and he thought that there should be much more of a struggle rather that simply preventing Judgment Day after a single try. That's it. Also, in the first movie Reese said it himself, [b]John Conner[/b] sent him back in time to protect his mother. Reese didn't go back and change history by impregnating Sarah Conner, it was always ment to be somehow, even though technically the first Terminator could have never happened to begin with. Now, John Conner could not exist to send Reese back in time if he had not all ready impregnated his mother. Thus is why John Conner could not exist. He wouldn't have been alive to send anyone back to protect his mother, also if John Conner never existed than no Terminator would have had to be sent back to kill his mother. Not to mention that the machines, in the future, built the time machine to travel into the past to assainate John Conner. So [b]ONCE AGAIN[/b], How could the time machine be used to prevent Judgment Day? It would not exist to do so, and it would not exist for Reese to travel back and create John Conner.

It's all a huge loop. Judgment Day happens whether you try to stop it, or not.

And another thing, neither side, human or machine, could ever accomplish their goal. The humans could not prevent Judgment Day, by doing so means that they would never need to try to prevent it. That is one of the loops I speak of, by doing something like that you would automatically cancel your action out. Same can be said if the machine actually succeeded in killing John Conner using the time machine. It's just not possible. It is not possible to eliminate what the time machine was created for, by doing so would result in the time machine never being needed and thus it would unmake all of the changes they made by killing their target. John Conner is the primary target, that is why it was possible to kill the other people in T3 because the reason the time machine was built, John Conner, was still alive. Had John Conner been killed, it would have unmade the thing the machines had done.

Also, if it was branching paths in time, then that means it would only change one path by altering the future. However, the future that all ready existed would remain the same. By going back in time to alter the future you would only create a new branch, you would not edit the existing path. So what could the machines, or humans gain by going back and making a new branch that they would never see. Ultimately the future is inalterable to them. It has to be a single time line for them to want to go back to alter it. They want to alter their destiny, but the fact of the matter is, no matter what way you look at it, it is impossible.[/spoiler]

Whew, that was long...well, I hope it's fully understandable.

[Manic Webb]

[spoiler]When I gave my theory of going back in time and stopping J-Day, I said so under the assumption that anyone who goes back in time exists outside of the normal rules of causality (ie. I go back in time, stop my parents from meeting, I still exist physically in the past, and will vanish from existance once I return to the future.) Think of Biff in Back to the Future 2. He changed the pass, but it didn't effect him until he returned to his own time.

However, now that I think about it (after reading a couple of your posts), far too many things loop around themselves in the Terminator movies. While they might be able to change the past in minor ways, like Charles said, it's fate. The events of all of the movies had to happen. The only way for John Conner to exist is if Judgement Day occurs; linear. And time travel can't switch between linear and branching-paths.[/spoiler]

I get it. I wish I didn't just read it 77 times in a row, but I still get it.

[Transtic Nerve]

It sucked.... almost felt like I was watching T2 over again, which was a good movie.... but i've seen it enough, no need to see it again.

[Semjaza]

You can't really use Back to the Future as a comparison because the writers have admitted that what they did would theoretically be impossible. They did it just for the sake of making a decent movie... Which I can agree with lol.

I thought it was decent. I liked some of the comparions to T2 honestly. The bar scene, which was flipped around. The big truck against a small bike chase scene, and so on. The Terminatrix even ran the same as the T-100 (right?) in the last film.

I was glad it was rather short though, because if it cleared two hours, I would have been bored out of my mind.

The main problems I had with the film where the lame narrations (like in T2, but not nearly as insane sounding) and the lack of music in scenes I think really would have benefited from it, such as the chase scene with the crane.

I heard some scene in the movie was so expensive that Arnold used $40 million of his own money to cover it. I figure it's that crane scene, but I'm not sure.

Last thing... I was glad the hits actually looked hard in this movie. They're machines, so they don't really react to the blows... but they were done hard enough that you know they would hurt. Unlike Matrix Reloaded, for example, where the fights looked like ballerinas tapping eachother. That was my main problem with that movie.

[James]

[color=#707875]Well, I've just seen it.

Initially, I was afraid that it'd be like Jurassic Park III. Or, in other words, a [i]highly[/i] lame excuse for a sequel. Thankfully, I was wrong.

Let's face it, the Terminator movies aren't comparable to The Matrix. Where The Matrix is more like chess, Terminator is like kicking an empty can around an alleyway. You know? lol

It's always been a pretty hollow, basic storyline. I'm not faulting it for that -- it's always been designed that way deliberately. It's an action movie.

So, given that, I was hoping that T3 would at least be plausible when compared to its predecessors. And thankfully it was...at least, it kept things in-line and didn't try to do something bizarre and nonsensical with what already existed.

At the beginning of the movie, things seemed to be a bit...I don't know...pointless. I can't explain it. During the first twenty minutes, my impression was kinda like "Oh, okay...it's definitely a lame excuse for a sequel, like JPIII". lol

But as the movie continued, I changed my opinion.

In terms of the effects...I was very impressed generally. You know that scene in The Matrix Reloaded where Neo swings that pole around and hits all the Agent Smiths? Where the entire scene is done in CGI?

It was blatantly obvious that CGI was used. It looked sloppy. And I didn't like it. It was too jarring.

T3 is a movie that [i]gets it right[/i] in regard to CGI. Well, mostly.

They don't do large parts of scenes in CGI, as far as characters go. Instead, they splice a handful of CGI frames in with live action...they use CGI in a more careful and finely tuned manner. And you can really tell the difference.

For instance, look at that part where Arnie pushes TX through the wall (when they have their huge fight at the military installation). The action of TX going through the wall was entirely CGI...but they spliced it with live action [i]very[/i] carefully. The end result? It was utterly seamless.

Tony's right about the impact of physical strikes, as well. The Matrix Reloaded was far more "ballerina-like" than the first movie, I thought (particularly toward the end...most of it was fine, it was just a few minor areas that I had problems with). But look at T3...the sense of force and weight was conveyed very well.

[spoiler]Remember that bit where Arnold smashed the urinal over TX's head and she immediately looked back up at him? That part was done SO well, because it [i]looked[/i] heavy...and it didn't look jarring when she looked back up at him. I can't explain it well...but it was very, very well done.[/spoiler]

So, obviously, the effects are the main part of the movie. I was very impressed with the CGI character/live action character integration. I've not seen any movie do it so well. Harry Potter had some awfully jarring CGI/live action character movements...and The Matrix Reloaded is another movie that did it somewhat poorly (though much better than most others).

T3 got it right. That makes me happy, moreso than the story or anything else. lol[/color]

[Arkadyz]

[color=orangered][font=times new roman]Well I saw it last week...It was alright nothing more then popcorn fun fare and thats about it...

It was fun to see arnold kick some butt again :p And T-X was luciously evil...

My favorite part had to be the whole crane chase scene...I mean talk about needless destruction :D

Im actually looking forward to there being a fourth film...I wanna see the war between man and machines damnit :D

Just the thought of thousands of exo skeletons and H-Ks fighting the human army...ohhh.... :devil: [/color][/font]

[Guest QuickSilver]

The film just came out over here today and i just been to see it and i have to say i love it. The effects are brilliant, the action is great and they have thrown in some comedy to top it off. The only problem is i think the film should not have been rated a 12a