Let's go.........RANDOM!

The place to hang out and talk about totally anything general.
martin
level5
level5
Posts: 3210
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:37 pm

Postby martin » Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:59 pm

NeatNit wrote:IE AHM ROBOX


... is a great song ;)
GENERATION 22:The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
User avatar
jelco
level5
level5
Posts: 6018
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:45 am
Location: Cygnus X-1
Contact:

Postby jelco » Thu Jun 11, 2009 3:51 pm

ynbniar wrote:I think T1 and T2 were both identical movies in terms of plot and character development – of course the style was different because of the time between the movies.

1. A terminator and a protector are sent back in time.
2. The terminator just misses the target allowing the protector the chance to perform their role.
3. Family and friends are killed by the terminator in an attempt to find the target.
4. The target tries to find out more about their protector.
5. The terminator tracks down the target but can't quite make the kill.
6. When all looks lost, there is a significant event, resulting in the destruction of the terminator.
7. The protector doesn't make it.
8. The target lives.

Now which film am I talking about T1 or T2 :?:

The plot and character development are the exact things that I think differ so greatly between the movies. The original focuses a lot on introducing the setting and the titular machine, and is rather passive on the side of target and protector (they're hunted down while not really hunting the Terminator themselves). T2 is rather active on the side of the protagonists, who actively hunt down the future creator of Skynet and sort of hunt down the T-1000 themselves as well (although not really). In T1, the character development is mostly about Sarah turning from a naive teenager into a hardened character while facing this world, and Kyle turning into a less militaristic person. In the sequel, most of the development is about the friendship between John and Arnie, which carries some symbolism (machine turning human), and the depiction of Sarah's changed attitude after years in a mental institution. T1 is more of a standard action movie with an interesting setting to drive it, while T2 has a genuinely interesting plot and clearly puts action on a lower priority than its predecessor.

As for your point-by-point list, let's see...
1. Difference between T1 and T2 is of course that the protector is human in one and machine in the other
2. No change there
3. T2 made a point of depicting the T-1000 as a much more efficient terminator than the T-800 from T1, which I think is a significant difference. (For example, in T1 a lot of Sarah Connors are killed before it gets to the correct one - the T-1000 tracks properly and doesn't kill as much to keep the heat low.)
4. See above.
5. Pretty unchanged indeed.
6. Hardly applicable to T2, since it was obvious Arnie was 'alive' again at the end - the drama of the moment seemed more like a the fight would just go on than an 'all hope is lost' scenario.
7. Also not really true for T2 since he sacrificed himself after the fight with the T-1000 was over.
8. Well duh. :P

I think the important part that these points don't mention is that while T2 also has an antagonistic Terminator, the antagonist-vs-protagonist part is a side-plot in T2 and only serves to provide a good starting and ending point to the film (first and third acts, although admittedly the first act is more about rescuing Sarah from Prescadero than it is about saving John) - most of the second act is about Cyberdyne, not the T-1000 (he only makes occasional appearances throughout most of the movie).

Jelco
"The ships hung in the sky much the same way that bricks don't."
- Douglas Adams
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:14 pm

Next you are going to tell me that you didn't like Alien 3. :(

xander
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:29 pm

Humm... jelco, what exactly is your point?

Of course T1 and T2 are significantly different: One is a low budget action movie (around 6 million US$) by an upcoming director and the other is a big budget blockbuster (around 100 million US$) made by a director at the top of his career. Not only that as T2 had a lot more leg room since the background had been set in T1, as well as being roughly 30-40 minutes longer.

In many ways T2 feels like a natural expansion of T1. T3 and TS don't.
User avatar
jelco
level5
level5
Posts: 6018
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:45 am
Location: Cygnus X-1
Contact:

Postby jelco » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:37 pm

My point, like I explicitly stated a few posts back, is that I think the first two movies are different enough from each other as is, and hence referring to them collectively in comparison to RotM and Salvation seems awkward. People criticize T3 and T4 simply for being 'different' from 'the first two movies' which confuses me because in my opinion that would also make T2 a weird movie because it's so different from the original.

I'm not saying that T2 is a bad extension of the franchise, it's definitely a good addition (I think it's the greatest part of the franchise and I'm pretty sure I'll still say that after having seen Salvation). I'm not criticizing the movie, I'm criticizing the people who make vague and badly founded arguments against anything post-Judgment Day. In that mind, I for example love SCC, while many people criticize it for deviating too much - of course it deviates, but as far as I'm concerned it deviates in a good and well-executed way.

xander: I saw Alien3 before any of the other movies due to a childhood friend who was more into watching the newest movies than into watching franchise entries in order. :P I liked it, but not as much as Aliens. (And Resurrection was atrocious. And Paul Anderson should be painfully executed for his AvP film.)

Jelco

PS: Nicely on topic in all senses of this post - did you know there's an Alien vs Predator vs Terminator comic? :P
"The ships hung in the sky much the same way that bricks don't."

- Douglas Adams
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:44 pm

jelco wrote:People criticize T3 and T4 simply for being 'different' from 'the first two movies'

You definitely frequent places very different from me :P

I do not recall people criticizing the movies because they deviated from the first two (except, maybe, for salvation. And even so I do not recall that.). T3 in particular tried to follow the originals almost to the word. Admittedly they do not feel like Terminator movies, but that's mostly because they lack the emotional impact (T3 even tried to be goofy at points).

T3 and TS are not liked because they are Bad. Or at the very best, watchable popcorn fare.
Last edited by Xocrates on Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ynbniar
level5
level5
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: Home again...

Postby ynbniar » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:45 pm

jelco wrote:T1 is more of a standard action movie with an interesting setting to drive it, while T2 has a genuinely interesting plot and clearly puts action on a lower priority than its predecessor.


Sorry, I'm off to Rock Ness soon so I'll just use this snip to reply.

T1 wasn't a standard action movie...the "hero" if you like, Kyle, is pretty hopeless, running around in a dirty vest, scared shitless, not really knowing what to do or where to go. He is hardly a standard action hero...

Also, the sequence under the bridge is way out of place in an action film...it's overly long and kills the pace of the film (there is nothing similar in T2), but it's absolutely necessary.

As for T2 putting action as a lower priority I'm not following...there are 4 or 5 separate exciting chase sequences in T2 alone, never mind the other action sequences...Sarah's breakout, Arnie's bar fight, the attack on Dyson's house, the stand off at Cyberdyne...
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:47 pm

jelco wrote:Alien vs Predator vs Terminator comic? :P

I knew of a Robocop Vs Terminator written by Frank miller :P
User avatar
jelco
level5
level5
Posts: 6018
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:45 am
Location: Cygnus X-1
Contact:

Postby jelco » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:55 pm

Xocrates wrote:You definitely frequent places very different from me :P

I do not recall people criticizing the movies because they deviated from the first two (except, maybe, for salvation. And even so I do not recall that.). T3 in particular tried to follow the originals almost to the word. Admittedly they do not feel like Terminator movies, but that's mostly because they lack the emotional impact (T3 even tried to be goofy at points).

T3 and TS are not liked because they are Bad. Or at the very best, watchable popcorn fare.

All of the opinions on Terminator I know of are from the interwebs. ;)

ynbniar wrote:T1 wasn't a standard action movie...the "hero" if you like, Kyle, is pretty hopeless, running around in a dirty vest, scared shitless, not really knowing what to do or where to go. He is hardly a standard action hero...

Also, the sequence under the bridge is way out of place in an action film...it's overly long and kills the pace of the film (there is nothing similar in T2), but it's absolutely necessary.

As for T2 putting action as a lower priority I'm not following...there are 4 or 5 separate exciting chase sequences in T2 alone, never mind the other action sequences...Sarah's breakout, Arnie's bar fight, the attack on Dyson's house, the stand off at Cyberdyne...

True, T1 featured quite some non-standard action film scenes, but in my mind it doesn't really have any special status amongst action movies - it's just one of the many action movies doing something a little different. Of course, this is one of those parts heavily influenced by opinion, but to me it wasn't enough to set it apart from the average product of its genre.

Action in T2 is still very prevalent, but it doesn't drive the movie as much as it did T1 - that job is left to the plot mostly. You could call the finale (at the metalworks plant) all about action, but I found it to contain many slightly symbolic scenes (the machine going on until the very end, Sarah's refusal to shout for John, etc). And let's not forget about the absolutely sublime ending. T1 was all about Sarah being chased (with and without Kyle) - T2 is about doing what has to be done* by any means necessary, which 'happens to' include a lot of standoffs. (Of course this is intentional, but at least they motivate the scenes properly.)

*I almost typed What Has Tobe Done there. >_>

Jelco
"The ships hung in the sky much the same way that bricks don't."

- Douglas Adams
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:59 pm

jelco wrote:All of the opinions on Terminator I know of are from the interwebs. ;)

I recommend you start visiting some more sensible parts of it then :wink: Otherwise you can get the same mental landscape by going to the zoo and giving some LSD to the monkeys.
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:04 pm

Am I the only one around here that doesn't have to dissect a movie as though I'm a paid critic, in order to enjoy it? :P

T1 = good
T2 = great
T3 = mediocre
TS = (haven't seen it all yet)

See how easy that is? :P
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
User avatar
ynbniar
level5
level5
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: Home again...

Postby ynbniar » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:05 pm

Maybe Jelco's just trying to make fun of us older forum members...slagging off Star Wars, dismissing Terminator...it will be Back to the Future next mark my words. :P

:wink:
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:06 pm

Back to the Future (original) is one of the greatest movies of the 80's, period.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
User avatar
jelco
level5
level5
Posts: 6018
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:45 am
Location: Cygnus X-1
Contact:

Postby jelco » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:07 pm

Look, I was just making a comment that obviously wasn't as clear as it was meant to be, so I explain it. Something wrong with that? ;)

Ace Rimmer: You forgot SCC! Only slightly inferior to T2 albeit on a different level.

ynbniar: I think I actually am pretty much on the same level with regards to Star Wars and Terminator - and I love Back to the Future. ;) (The first movie mostly, the sequels were okay.) Name another few franchises though and I might start disagreeing (or I simply haven't seen them). :P

Also, *me pushes the pseudo-random button*: My bots in #lounge now encompass four games: UNO, Hearts, Poker and Battleship. Currently I'm planning to create a Yahtzee bot next, though I'm not sure how soon that will be. So, if you've got time to waste, come visit. ;)

Jelco
"The ships hung in the sky much the same way that bricks don't."

- Douglas Adams
User avatar
jelco
level5
level5
Posts: 6018
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:45 am
Location: Cygnus X-1
Contact:

Postby jelco » Thu Jun 11, 2009 9:11 pm

Wow.

I just downloaded the leaked version of Common Dreads, the next Enter Shikari album. Listening to it now, and it's more epic than I expected it to be, and that's saying something.

Good thing my parents aren't home tonight, if they knew the volume it's currently playing at I'd have my speakers taken from me immediately. :roll:

Jelco
"The ships hung in the sky much the same way that bricks don't."

- Douglas Adams

Return to “Introversion Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests