They should include Bale's rant as an extra on the DVD/Blu-Ray.

So, he is making "a war movie" but avoided gratuitous violence?

I don't think McG gets it. A genre film like Star Trek s perfectly fine in a PG setting. A Terminator story needs that gritty, bloody, dirty, gory realism. Humans need to bleed and suffer a lot to juxtapose the seemingly unstopable nature of the machines. The machines perform cosmetic surgery on themselves without flinching and stroll around naked without any sense of modesty to show how un-human they are.

Did McG seriously compare himself to Kubrick and Copola instead of admitting he did not have control of his set?

Also, why does it take 4 tries to post a comment with this captcha system?

to bad that this guy will destroy the terminator franchise.
i won't be going to this as this is now a kids movie and i am in my 50's.

I don't think age needs to come into watching a film (unless you're a minor and the film is rated over your head--even then, it seems the rules don't matter much anymore to a lot of parents, judging by the number of them toting way-under-17-yo kids at R rated movies).

I watch films as a fan of the story and/or the participants :)

I love how everyone can crap all over a film that isnt even out yet, much less they have seen.

I think this movie could go either way. On the one hand we have McG's history of nothing special and on the other we have reasonable actors and a series of trailers that look pretty good. However a good trailer does obviously not mean a good film unless the movie is 2 and a half minutes long. I also agree the PG-13 rating is putting a lot of fans off and it isn't what we Terminator fans expect. To say Dark Knight worked because it was that level is ridiculous as that film seemed very tame when it came to depicting violence and not real enough for most. McG also contradicts himself by stating (in another interview) that this is supposed to be a REAL war movie and will be depicted as such in it's realism. Can't really think of any war that was rated PG-13 can you? The last Rambo movie was perhaps the truest depiction of what really happens to bodies during wartime and although I wouldn't want this film to be that excessive it does kinda shot his interviews/comments down in flames.

Kerreth, what do you think of McG's Dark Knight rationalization? It's like you want the movie to be bad and not paying attention to the argument for the movie's PG-13 move.

Well Mr. McG confirmed that he did in fact compromise this "terminator" movie just to get children in the theater so he can make a few extra dollars. What a shame.

I'm fine with the pg-13 rating. So you'll get a little less violence and gore, and one less topless shot. Usually these scenes are released on an unrated DVD. Take a look at Live Free or Die Hard. It was released with a PG-13 rating. Still was a good movie to view in theaters, and I was not hesitant to buy the unrated DVD when it was released. As long as the characters and story are good, the movie should be an engaging, entertaining piece of film. As he said, The Dark Knight was a great film without the addition of gratuitous violence or gore. So, I for one will view the movie and make my decision based on the merits of its actors and story.

"if we just cut back one shot of the Marcus character stabbing a screwdriver through the shoulder"

Didn't Jack Bauer just do that on 24? Maybe we could call up Kiefer and ask him to throw in some topless scenes too.

I think it's sad that people are more interested in the gore than in the story. The reason that I love TSCC is because it has a great story line. I'm not going to watch this film for the gore; I'm going to watch so I can get the story of how John Connor builds the resistance. I also read the book that takes place just prior to this film. Great book.

And my 13 y/o son, who also loves TSCC, can't wait to see the film (would've taken him whether it was rated R anyway). In fact, this Saturday we're having a 'Terminator' day so he can see all of the films. We've already re-watched TSCC 3 times.

Jeez, when did it come to being about the gore and not the awesome story of John Connor saving humanity from Skynet?

Of course this movie needs gratuitous violence and gore its a WAR movie and for Gods sake stop using The Dark Knight as an example as to why PG-13 movies can be "edgy". That was a comic book movie. I agree it was a very intense film but Terminator Salvation shouldve been hardcore with no restrictions..PJAvenger, you're absolutely right, most shows on network TV is just downright gory....but good.

Moon Bloodgood topless, can't wait for the DVD.

I don't get it. Terminator: Salvation gets a PG-13 because they drop a screwdriver to the shoulder stabbing? What about the Joker's disappearing pencil trick in Dark Knight and that got a PG-13? That must have been one heck of a screwdriver.

Marty B.,

I don't think the Dark Knight rationalization holds up. The Dark Knight was dark in tone but it still avoided showing blood and the consequences of "real" violence. I love The Dark Knight but it is telling a very different kind of story. Its a character driven deconstruction of the vigilante superhero/arch villain dynamic. The setting is a city with law and order but one that is slowly slipping into anarchy. They are questioning should Batman exist and are his methods justified in a civilized society?

Terminator, on the other hand, is about the uncompromising fight for survival of the human race in a war against seemingly unstopable killing machines. The frailty of the human condition and the strength of the human spirit is depicted in the James Cameron films by having the lead characters grievously wounded, perform battlefield first aid on themselves and still fight on while bleeding all over the place.

My primary concern is that a sanitized version of the Terminator setting will just be a fun but forgettable effects driven sci-fi action flick instead of a serious and dark exploration of the human condition.

Finally, this is supposed to be in the middle of the war between the machines and the remnants of humanity, before the humans get the upper hand. They are desperate and fighting a "total war". No war movie, even a sci-fi action flick, should ever attempt to portray war with a PG-13 rating. It is dishonest and glorifies war rather than shows the actual consequences and horrific violence of combat.

Betty Sue,

Sorry for the double post but I didn't read your post before placing my last post.

It isn't about the gore but what purpose the gore serves. It shows that the main characters are not typical action movie heroes impervious to pain and injury while the machines are. The original Terminator would have been far less powerful if they didn't have iconic scenes like Arnie performing very bloody surgery on himself in the mirror. It demonstrated just how inhuman he was. Juxtapose that scene with Kyle Reese having a nightmare about the war and being burned alive, or he and Sarah having to patch up their own very painful wounds. Or Sarah limping and bleeding through the climax. This demonstrated consequences to the violence and showed how frail they are compared to the T-800.

Also consider the graphic slaughter in the police station or the scene in T2 where Arnie nonchalantly cuts his own skin off of his metal skeleton. These were iconic scenes and images that stuck with the audience long after watching the films. If these were compromised or watered down, I don't think the films would have been as good or as lasting as they have been.

Whatever, McG. You began this project by going out of your way to APPEAR to please the geeks, but your position on the PG-13 issue proves you have no integrity. I have nothing against directors who care only about money, and not about art. I just want you to admit that you're one of the $$ directors McG. But I guess you want that cash so you're going to lie your way through opening weekend . . . too bad, I was almost becoming hopeful about this project.

"i won't be going to this as this is now a kids movie and i am in my 50's."

WHAT. I feel just the opposite. What does the rating have to do with how good the movie is. If the movie needs fan service (boobs) so it can get an R rating that doesn't make it a better movie. I don't need to see someone get disemboweled to know that war can be bloody and violent. Nor do I want to. How would this increase my enjoyment? Would Romeo and Juliet for example be better with a little faces of death thrown in? I think not. Your entitled of course to your own opinion but I prefer my movies without it and I don't think that makes it a kids movie in the least.

TERMINATOR+PG-13=SUCK

This will be just another run of the mill FX explosion fest summer action flick....It will be about as intense and "real" as My Little Pony..just without the ponies..

There's a lot of freaky people out there, and I'm glad they won't be in the theater. I've got no problem seeing this movie PG-13 style and I'm in my 40's.

A lot of movies I've liked have done just fine PG-13; Hancock, Get Smart, The Dark Knight, all 3 Spiderman films, and I never felt like I was watching "kiddie" movies, either.

The thing with the PG-13 rating is that society's standards have changed. What was considered R rated in 1984 is different from what is considered R rated today. I just don't get what the big deal is from die hard fans.

I have to side with Betty on this one. I have seen way too many movies that threw in gore just for gore's sake and I find that sadistic and repulsive. Sure, if there is a point to the gore that furthers the story then fine, but most of the time, it actually works better to suggest it rather than show it. The great film makers understood this. Ever see Psycho? I for one am glad that McG decided to stick to his guns and did what he thought best for the movie rather than pandering to the sadistic cries for blood from some members of the audience. Besides, a PG-13 is practically guaranteed to make more money than an R, which makes a sequel much more likely.

Biph made a very good point. what was an R in 1984 would only make a PG-13 movie now. They let a lot more violenceand blood at that level than they used to.

No, a movie doesn't have to be 'extreme' to be good in my opinion. Some of my favorite movies of all time are PG, PG-13, and yes, even G (Pixar anyone?)

And yes, I do get annoyed with the endless barrage of movies that try too hard to be gratuitous just to 'shock' the audience (how many 'torture porn' movies can they make anyway-we get it already, you hate the world and want to die).

However, I have to agree with what Kerrith said about 'war movies'. And this certainly is (or should be) a war movie in the truest sense, albeit a science fiction one. The best war movies I have seen didn't sugarcoat the realities of war. And I don't believe that necessarily makes a war movie 'gratuitious'. To me it helps the tone of the film. Yes, we all know that war is gruesome, bloody, and horrific. Well, it doesn't hurt for adults to be reminded of it once in awhile.

I want to be moved and involved in a movie, regardless of the rating, and not just 'entertained'. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that the greedy hands of Hollywood might have ruined what could have been a great film. And I'm not just talking about what violence was taken out to garner the PG-13 rating, but also what probably was left out in the first place. Oh, and I wish McG would just admit to the fact that it is all about the money.
Pity.

I cant wait simply because usually any movies thats all about machines and war is usually low budget straight to dvd if any. We only have transformers, BSG is gone, Caprica is all about cyber sex. So you know im happy, and if this becomes a huge success then all the better.

I just read a review on Aint It Cool News from someone who watched the advanced screening...He said basically it's definitely a PG-13 movie..ugh

@Captain Jack Harkness
"A lot of movies I've liked have done just fine PG-13; Hancock, Get Smart, The Dark Knight, all 3 Spiderman films, and I never felt like I was watching "kiddie" movies, either."

Are you even reading the other posts? Listen to Kerrith and Paradox.

They are talking about war movies. The movies you listed aren't war movies.

Would you want to wacth platoon, Apocalypse Now, Saving Private Ryan, and countless other war movies with no violence? Of course not, because it would take away from what the movie is about. Hell, even Forrest Gump had violence.

Terminator is a movie about the human race fighting off extinction. It is a WAR movie.

There are times when violence, action and nudity, fit the bill. In this case they were taken out for a rating. McG, said himself that the nudity scene fit the movie.

I'm going to see it, despite this, but I'm going into it not especting much, and hopfully I'll be surprised.

Oh wow, McG sure has sucked corporate here, this is gonna suck like the biggest a** hoover in history...Just as I was getting over T3s Wonderbra moment. Man I'm devastated, really. Trailers looked so good too...Shoulda known better; No wonder Arnies gone for CGI. Damn you Bale, damn your eyes. How can I get out of seeing this tomorrow...

I just watched the movie. It gives nothing new, nothing special. The film has really good special effects. However, that is all you got. There is no soul in the movie. It is just a kids movie, as McG wanted so.

After watching it, I liked it on it's own, but as a lead up to the first movie (in a sense), it was lacking something. In the first movie, we heard vivid descriptions from Kyle Reese about how humanity was "this close" to going out. As a child watching the first film, I had no idea of the parallel to the holocaust or any attempted genocide such as the holodomor or the killing fields in Cambodia, and that was what made the film truly horrific in hindsight when I matured, and it made the film go beyond a simple-minded sci-fi/action vehicle. I got none of that in this film, sure there were burnt out and uninhabited cities, and the ragtag bands of surviving humans, but it didn't seem all that bleak. Where were the extermination camps, where in this film were the machines actively seeking the total annihilation of humanity, where was the darkness? Perhaps it was the PG-13 rating, and a desire to make the film accessible to children and increase the box office take, while the concepts behind the franchise aren't really for the consumption of the immature or weak-minded.