|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: T3: Rise of the Machines
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Beres
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 606
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 07-08-2003 02:32 PM
I, too, went in with low expectations and came out pleasantly surprised. Yes, it did lack character development, but am I the only one that found Edward Furlong's performance and thus the John Connor character in T2 to be annoying? Linda Hamilton made T2, but the original is still the best, in my opinion. Anyway, T3 is a very good action movie, and certainly does not disappoint if it is an action move you are looking for.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 07-08-2003 10:11 PM
Carmike 8, Lawton, 10:00pm show 7/7, Screen 4, THX-DTS. Awesome surround sound on this one and the bass packs a whallop. Too bad the cinematography looked like crap. You could tell Adam Greenberg, ASC sure didn't lens this one! I suspect Don Burgess wasn't given any time at all to choose proper lights, lenses and film stocks to make the Super35 movie look decent at all. But they'll probably try to "clean everything up" for the DVD.
Did anyone else notice some odd motion jumping problems on the crane chase sequence? It looked like frames were dropping out on a few camera setups, almost like they were filmed at 30fps and then converted down to 24fps but with chunks taken out.
I have to give this movie a "split-decision." I can't give it a thumbs-down since the flick had some pretty impressive action set pieces that filled out the film. If that is all you want then you'll like this movie. However, the film also had some bad problems that threated to ruin the show for me. Overall, many folks will find the film pretty entertaining. But this sequel will be quickly forgotten as well.
Jonathan Mostow is no James Cameron. His timing, the way he frames shots and a lot of other little things added up to make me think the platoon-size contingent of producers actually did the writing and directing on this film. In fact, I'm really suspicious this is in fact the case, given the fact so many writers have worked on it. Sure, the action sequences were entertaining. But the movie on the whole is very very derivative. Too damned many cooks in the kitchen.
James Cameron has been "missing in action" for several years now and has never been a prolific filmmaker. But he is commanding enough to make a movie HIS vision rather than it come from a committee of producers.
And then for the visual stuff, I thought a lot of the CG work really stank. The H-bomb explosions looked "tiny" through errors in speed of movement to scale. The CG chrome terminators in an early scene were fake as hell. And the fruity "disco-laser" sound of their guns made me fully aware Gary Rydstrom was not signed onto this project for more hyper-reality sound. Those early terminator prototypes with the miniguns looked really stupid. I was expecting one of them to shout, "danger, Will Robinson!"
***Spoilers Ahead***
There were errors in logic regarding the T-X character. Sure, I liked how she could adjust her breast size. It was clever how she could log into the Internet by speaking bits into a cellphone. And I liked how she could verify DNA by tasting a victim's blood. However, if she can morph herself into different metal shapes why in the hell does she need a metal endoskeleton? Isn't that less advanced? I guess the producers wanted her to tear off her legs so she could crawl around after the protagonists in the same manner as the first terminator. Remember the legless terminator scurrying after Sarah Connor, crawling through the hydraulic press?
Remember this logical rule Arnold gave about the advanced "mimetic polyalloy" type of terminator in "T2"?: quote: It can't form complex machines. Guns and explosives have chemicals, moving parts. It doesn't work that way. But it can form solid metal shapes. ...Like knives and stabbing weapons.
With that memorable rule in mind (and it should be memorable from all the versions of "T2" we now have floating around on DVD) I have a hard time grasping why the T-X terminatrix can change her plasma cannon into a flame thrower. Where is her fuel source for that thing?
If the Terminator in this film uses two miniature fusion cells for power sources, why didn't he just suicide bomb Sarah Connor in the first Terminator film?
Early in the film, the T-X is about to kill Kate Brewster when out of nowhere Arnold comes to the rescue. How did he know what was happening at the vet clinic? It sounds kind of like Roger Ebert's "Fallacy of the Predictable Tree." Of all the vet clinics in Los Angeles, how did Arnold know which vet clinic to choose?
Even though the crane sequence was really pretty cool, how could the T-X "see" where to remote drive those police cruisers and ambulance when they were out of sight blocks ahead? Sure cars have internal computers, but those computers don't control steering, braking and acceleration. And they don't come with CCD cameras.
How come John Connor and Kate Brewster don't get crushed when Arnold sets off that mini H-bomb inside the mountain? I mean, they show the mountain caving in and all. Better yet, how do John and Kate get out? I guess they're leaving that one up for the sequel.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 07-08-2003 10:28 PM
Sam, most movie producers don't care about logical stuff like that Skynet in cyberspace thing. They just say, "wouldn't it be cool if we worked an Internet angle in on this Skynet thing?" And then when the screenwriter responds, "that doesn't make any sense," the producer shouts back, "you're fired," and hires yet another script doctor.
You do make a very good point about that one though.
I didn't buy the Skynet in cyberspace thing either. I really didn't buy a high security military developmental team actually having computer systems accessible to the outside world, much less allow the team to be stupid enough to let it get infected by an exterior rouge virus in cyberspace.
I have some knowledge of military purpose computing. Telos here in Lawton writes all the Army's ballastics software, such as the targeting software for Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS). The Army is big into "networking" the battlefield. But highly critical systems, such as computers that support an ICBM missile silo or any other system holding highly classified data is going to be locked down in a very NOT-networked-at-all "standalone" setup. That, in and of itself, makes the very concept of Skynet somewhat implausible.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|