This post was written many moons ago, back in 2008, at least.
A lot has changed since then and this page is definitely no longer updated – but since you’re here, you might as well read…
The original “Terminator 5” article:
In Hollywood, the word “franchise” is the new goal for every single film made.
Well Hollywood, listen up, because today we’re going to look at the honest PROBLEMS you’ve made with the Terminator franchise, and then we’re going to review SOLUTIONS to these problems, so you can make a profitable, intelligent, and worthy standalone Terminator sequel.
And this one is easy. Really easy.
Incompetent director = shitty movie.
|IMDB User Rating|
|The Terminator (1984)||100% critics rating
8.5 average rating
|Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)||97% critics rating
8.4 average rating
|Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)||70% critics rating
6.6 average rating
|Terminator Salvation (2009)||32% critics
5.0 average rating
|* All ratings as of of 12/10/2009.|
Hollywood, this is what we call a downward trend in quality control. It’s obvious that you’ve taken the series down the wrong path.
Joseph McGinty Nichol is a man that chooses goes by the name “McG”, rather than by his own name like a grown up.
The “best” movie he’s done to date? Charlie’s Angels. And they gave him the Terminator.
The thing about McG is that he talks a mean game. He says all the right things, he knows what you want to hear. Take for example, his name. His argument is something like this: his buddies have called him McG for a long time, and “McGinty” isn’t exactly much more masculine. And that argument makes sense for about 2 seconds, until you think about it and say: “fuck you, you’re a grown man, use your real name”.
And that, in a nutshell, is what McG’s career has been all about: bullshit your way through, but don’t really stop to think about anything, or do what’s right or good.
As far as I’m concerned, that’s all they really need to do: fire McG, and hire any director with a track record of competent filmmaking. Ed Wood could have made a better Terminator film than McG did.
On Terminator Genisys (2015):
Terminator Genisys is a great, worthy sequel. There’s a lot to like here: great action, original and interesting plot developments, and some great philosophical questions (especially those involving time-travel).
What I don’t understand is why critics ravaged this movie. Currently, the movie holds a 27% Tomatometer score, but a 66% audience score. That’s quite a divide, but here’s where it gets fishy: Most of the reviews say this is the third-best Terminator movie, yet the critic score for this film is below even the universally derided Terminator Salvation. Something is amiss at Rotten Tomatoes, maybe?
Much of the critical pan stems from supposed plot holes:
Why would the protagonists chose to travel forward in time to the day before Skynet goes active, when they could just take their time and dismantle it by traveling to an earlier point? The movie does throw out some philosophy on this, that time itself tends to want certain events to happen. Dimantling Skynet ahead of time would have only allowed it to come back in some other form after that.
How does Kyle Reese still exist if the events of the first film and second film were rendered inert? The bad John Connor of this film postulates that time travelers are “marooned in time”, and hence can do whatever they want – kill their own parents and still exist. Kyle Reese had already begun to travel in time once the timeline events were reset. There ya go.
Why not time travel back further to kill their distant ancestors? Again, time itself wants certain events to happen.
They’re not all perfect answers, but when we’re talking about something as preposterous as time travel, I think a certain amount of leeway can be given toward suspending disbelief.
Was it lazy not to explain how Skynet infiltrated John’s group and infected him in the first place? Sure. But I can let it slide in a movie about time travel.
The only real criticism I have for this movie is the fact that Arnold should have worked with a speech coach to learn to correctly pronounce the word “cellular”, which he bungles twice in 5 seconds or so.
So yeah. They did a good job here. When James Cameron praises the movie and says he considers it to be the third film, there’s nothing really wrong with it. Maybe Arnold burned Hollywood somehow during his governor stint, I don’t know.