Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    rec.arts.sf.movies    |    Discussing SF motion pictures    |    28,343 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 26,881 of 28,343    |
|    Tim Bruening to Mark Leeper    |
|    Re: TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINE    |
|    05 Dec 14 22:19:08    |
      From: tsbrueni@dcn.davis.ca.us              On Wednesday, July 9, 2003 2:37:17 PM UTC-7, Mark Leeper wrote:       > TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINE       > (a film review by Mark R. Leeper)       >        >        > I should note what I thought were problems with the script.       >        > TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY was not a favorite with me, but the       > writing was more intelligent than in this film. In this film the       > technology is inconsistent. I notice that both future factions       > know how to send back in time whatever sort of ticky-tacky these       > robots are made of, but they cannot get the hang of sending back       > cloth so both robots arrive looking just like naked humans. At       > least guys get equal time since this is the first time a female       > robot is sent.       >        > We are told that the T-X is more advanced technically and much       > smarter than the previous model, but we are expected to take it on       > faith. Words are cheap. The problem is that the T-X appears to       > be a giant step backward from the shape-shifting robot of the       > previous film. Where the last robot could morph into a silent       > sword, this one unimaginatively pulls out a gun and starts       > blasting. She can morph to look like another human, but just when       > it is about to do her some good, she stupidly morphs back to give       > herself away. This is just poor writing. By the way, who is       > doing all the computer science so that there are more advanced       > Terminators coming off the assembly line?       >        > Late in the film good guys suddenly turn up inside a highly secure       > military area. How did they get past the security? A shape-       > shifter might, but none of the others could.       >        > The film cannot make up its mind what is fated and what isn't.       > Supposedly August 29, 1997, was to be the nuclear war and it was       > inescapable. Now the war is still inevitable but it just will be       > a later date. This film has the feel of a quick knockoff intended       > to do little more than capitalize on the Terminator franchise.              Another problem: At the end of the movie, John Conner's voice over says that       Skynet (the computer program that caused the nuclear war) had spread       throughout the Internet. The nuclear war would have wiped out most computers       via EMP and destruction of        power supplies if not the nuclear explosions themselves. Therefore, Skynet       should have perished!              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca