Related Sections: Movies Reviews Top Stories
Review: Terminator: Salvation fulfills expectations—but is that enough?
If you're an action junkie, it's easy to like a lot of what happens in Terminator: Salvation. Director McG engineers one set piece after another with style and expertise, and generally keeps the story moving along at a brisk enough pace that you're seldom bored or confused. But this is the fourth installment in a franchise whose ideas were thoroughly explored by the time the second was finished, and it's hard to get too excited about yet another extension of the series' fairly joyless mythology, even if it qualifies as an otherwise well-executed and engaging summer blockbuster.
Christian Bale (The Dark Knight) stars as John Connor, a lieutenant in the resistance army of 2018 who is struggling not only to realize his destiny as the leader and future savior of humanity, but simply to stay alive while Skynet decimates Earth's population. Simultaneously, a death-row convict named Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington) awakens to find himself very much alive but in a completely unfamiliar time and place. Meeting a young foot soldier named Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin), his silent, pre-teen companion Star (Jadagrace) and a tough-as-nails pilot named Blair Williams (Moon Bloodgood), Marcus makes his way toward resistance headquarters to meet Connor, put together the pieces of his forgotten past and discover what part he plays in the future of the human race.
Though he's motor-mouthed and a little manic, McG really does have the potential to be a great director, or at least a good one. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that Terminator: Salvation is going to be the film that catapults him from the ranks of fanboy punching bags like Michael Bay and Brett Ratner into the company of A-listers like Christopher Nolan. The reason is not that he can't truly create something memorable and meaningful; his 2006 film We Are Marshall remains criminally underrated. Rather, it's that he hasn't yet achieved the clarity of vision that is required to define himself as a true auteur, which is why helming something with so many fan expectations—as any Terminator film will have—works at cross purposes with him distinguishing himself as different or separate from the rest of the action-filmmaking throng.
Because Rise of the Machines was so forgettable, Terminator Salvation conceivably has to accomplish two things in order to be considered "successful": have a lot of great, inventive action sequences and stay directly true to the mythology of the first two films. As if understanding these challenges but not knowing how to combine them, McG front-loads the film with some breakneck set pieces and then devotes the film's ending to exploring how this film connects to the previous ones. The only problem with this is that the first half to two-thirds of Salvation progresses smoothly forward because it feels like its own film, and then the last 45 minutes or so gets extremely busy revealing and explaining who is supposed to do what, why this happens to that, and most dreadfully, What It All Means. (Imagine the condensed origin-story opening of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade tacked on to the end of a film, with even more of those desperately cute references to familiar character details and lines of dialogue, and you have a good understanding what the film's finale feels like.)
Again, however, there are some enormously successful sequences in the film, if only because McG treats the melancholy mythology of Terminator's future world with deadly gravitas. An early battle scene features a continuous shot in which Connor races to a helicopter, gets it airborne, gets shot out of the sky and lands "safely" upside down, only to be promptly attacked by a Terminator. In another sequence, a massive Harvester descends upon a dilapidated refuge for fugitive humans, and the race to escape turns into a thrilling highway chase between a lumbering tow truck and several Ducati-style moto-terminators. Best of all, the film feels truly "big," with a real scope that many films—even blockbusters—seem to lack these days, and credit goes to McG for lending the story appropriately epic proportions.
Not unlike Gavin Hood's Wolverine, however, there seems to be a certain sense of obligation, rather than true inspiration, that drives this film, even if it (also like Wolverine) nevertheless manages to accomplish most of its modest goals. Credible casting choices? Check. Impressive action sequences? They're here. References to key scenes and lines of dialogue from the previous movies? You got 'em. But ultimately, for a film about the struggle between humanity and technology, Terminator Salvation seems willing to grant a temporary victory to the machines in the service of winning the box-office war: Whether it's the machinelike turnover of the franchise, an assembly line of script conventions or just the necessary summer-movie triumph of spectacle and special effects over real ideas and sincere emotion, its impact on history may be revealed with the possibility of future installments rather than the momentary thrill of the present one.
By kyle747 at 10:52 AM ON 05/20/09
I can believe the reviewer used the word 'auteur' in his review. Isn't there an editor for this crud ?
How do you let this clown review anything without going over the review with a fine-toothed comb ?
The review itself reads like part of it was written by a studio marketing exec.
The original Terminator was an intelligent high-energy sci-fi thriller with a story that stood up and has no real flaws in story or plot.
At the end of the day this is a movie with giant go-bots. Because that's what an intelligent AI would build. Giant go-bots. I can almost hear Kevin Smith talking about the giant spider right now :-)
To the reviewer - you are entitled to your own view and it would be a poorer world if everyone agreed with me. But you need to grow up a little and stop trying to dazzle people with your diction.
By Peter at 10:56 AM ON 05/20/09
What's really sad is that the Terminator TV series had writers who would come up with smarter, more original and thought-provoking stories every week. Too bad Warner Brothers handed over the franchise to the generic action & VFX hacks.
By xxgatorxx at 11:02 AM ON 05/20/09
still mad at those monkeys that run FOX
for firefly TSCC and dollhouse
make no mistake they have set it up to fail on fridays
with 2 comedy shows as a lead in
one being underpreformer til death..
just postponing the inevitable
By Kerrith at 11:12 AM ON 05/20/09
Peter,
I was a fan of TSCC too butI wouldn't credit the writers too much. As the budget got slshed, the show fell into a predictable routine where every episode had multiple scene of 2-4 characters standing around and exchanging ridiculously obvious expository dialogue. The writing was so wooden and fake it often took me out of the story. Second, Derek, Sarah and John often acted like idiots for no apparent reason. They have a virtually indestructible killing machine at their disposal. Yet how many times did one of them risk their own lives rather than just send Cameron in or let her take point?
That aside, I am really sad to hear a Terminator movie compared to Wolverine. I was worried when McG seemed to contradict himself or lie every time he opened his mouth about this movie. I was really worried when in got the PG-13 rating. I will reserve judgment until I see it but my high hopes when Bale was cast are pretty much gone.
If this directing gig doesn't work out for him, McG should consider writing a book titled "How to Confuse and Alienate Fans".
By PadrePedro at 11:38 AM ON 05/20/09
A question for fellow fans of TSCC: Should the strategy be to boycot this film in protest for letting the TV show die- or make sure this film is a blockbuster so that the franchises success leads someone to resurrect the show on another channel? I am honestly looking for input.
By Marty B. at 12:03 PM ON 05/20/09
Padre, "punishing" this film because of a television decision, if you could produce economically significant numbers, would only kill the franchise entirely. No one's going to say, "Our movie flopped because of that show." Rather it'll be "Our movie's flopped, I guess it's time to bury Terminator entirely."
As for the success of the movie revitalizing the show, tv and film are very different businesses, which is why you have very few properties successful in both media.
In short see the move based on your interest in the movie. There's no point trying to see yourself as an overestimated economic agent with the power to affect television programming through ticket sales. Your numbers just won't be there unless you make Terminator the most successful movie in a decade. Based on this review, that's not going to happen.
By Russell22 at 12:20 PM ON 05/20/09
Can't believe peter said The sarah connor chronicles had better ideas etc.!!! The whole series was a massive failure from the start. Little action..stupid plots that advanced very little and bar summer glau an average cast. The 2nd season was a snoozeathon almost from the start and it didnt suprprise me that ratings nosedived. Clearly fox dint give the show a good budget which so desperatly needed!! This will be much better but i doubt will be as good as the first 2 movies.
By scififreak at 12:21 PM ON 05/20/09
All Fans of the TV show should go see this movie and send the ticket stubs to Warner Bros instead of Fox with a note stating that they saw this movie because of the TV show. The studio can then shop it around to another network.
It would ineffectual to send them to Fox as they have no $$ stake in the franchise.
By mahatmacanejeeves at 1:23 PM ON 05/20/09
kyle747,
>>I can believe the reviewer used the word 'auteur' in his review. Isn't there an editor for this crud ?
Would probably make more sense if you wrote "I can't" instead of "I can."
I can.
I can't.
See the difference? But nice try there, brain boy.
By Stoptheplanet at 1:29 PM ON 05/20/09
TSCC suck. I was shocked when I found out it was renewd a second season and cheered when is was cancelled. My hope is for this movie is to show what a true a piece of garbage TSCC is and always shall be. To put Frefly in this catagory is damn near blasphemos Fox did something right for once and aborted its mistake.
By new at 2:12 PM ON 05/20/09
Stoptheplanet, you are action junkie! It's so stupid to watching only action. T4 is like transformers. I don't know, but Marcus looks like Alison from 2x04 of TSCC. Who was first? I suppose Josh Friedman was first
By Muldfeld at 2:42 PM ON 05/20/09
I didn't read too much of the review but I got enough of a sense to know that this just proves how special "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" was, being far better than the films with fantastic acting and writers who were brave enough to do heavy drama, if not always successful. I loved the Riley arc!
By radiodaze at 3:09 PM ON 05/20/09
Listen guys, I understand being upset about TSCC. I liked it too, despite the fact that it was getting bogged down in it's own gravitas there at the end. What you need to be aware of, before boycotting the new movie, is that the movie is one of the only reasons we got a second season of TSCC in the first place! The show was doing ok, but not well enough considering it's high cost and in order to use it as a built in promo for the movie, Warner's slashed it's licensing fees to make it possible for FOX to keep it on. Now that the movie is out, WB's licensing fees are going back to what they were before and FOX can't afford to keep the show. SF shows are expensive guys, we all know that and the nets don't give a damn about what we like and what we don't like. If a show doesn't expand enough past it's own core fan base to make some bucks for the net, it's gone, pure and simple. When you think about it, a network is just like a Terminator. No loyalty, no emotions, just simple survival of the fittest. As for T Salvation, it sounds pretty much like what I expected. I'll see it, but I'm not expecting Citizen Kane or anything.
By Jred at 4:27 PM ON 05/20/09
For those who enjoy TSCC go see the movie. I'm not expecting anything miraculous to happen but the only way anything's going to happen is if the bean counters at WB see some potential in bringing back the TV Show. Doubtful I know but they may shop it to other channels if the movie does well enough. Otherwise just see it if you want to.
By wowwie at 4:28 PM ON 05/20/09
Got a chance to see this at a prescreening and unfortunately I have to agree with the reviewer. Actually he was being way too nice..I will not! This movie sucked. The plot was so ridiculous it would make your head spin. The action is what you would expect, just the usual explosions. The FX was great of course..other than that it was very forgettable. The only reaction it recieved from the audience was the big "surprise" that I'm sure everyone knows about already. I will say however it did suck alittle less then T3...Oh and to all the idiots crying about the PG-13 rating..I really don't think an R rating would've helped one bit.
By Muldfeld at 4:45 PM ON 05/20/09
I tried to avoid the spoilers, but, based on the analysis and what the reviewer felt such a film should have done to be great, I thought it was a very well written review. I'd love to know what this guy thinks of that piece of crap Star Trek film; that would really prove to me whether he's a smart and insightful reviewer.
As soon as I heard McG was involved, I knew this couldn't be that good.
By gorehound696 at 5:01 PM ON 05/20/09
I liked TSCC and although some episodes were slow or not great still I was pissed that they cancelled it on a cliffhanger type ending.I would like to see this film but I am also pissed over the PG13 and intended non-shooting of extra gore/adult type stuff for a later DVD release.I would of loved to support T4 but being PG13 I am making a stand and not paying to see this.
I really wanted to see adult curses,blood,and a little comical nudity.
By Marcus at 5:18 PM ON 05/20/09
By Son of a Maui Portagee at 5:18 PM ON 05/20/09
Muldfeld,
You mean?:
"The result of their labor is Star Trek, a spectacular opus, space opera, mythmaking science fiction story that condenses the sum total of its source of inspiration and reintroduces the series' mythology to viewers both old and new." - Todd Gilchrist, CINEMATICAL
cinematical.com/2009/05/07/interview-star-trek-writers-alex-kurtzman-and-roberto-orci/
By Al at 6:19 PM ON 05/20/09
Well, here's another backhanded compliment to a successful movie sequal.
The fans like it, a new generation of moviegoers like it, but hey, let's not bore them with saying how much it deserves to be praised for taking a well-known storyline and keeping it fresh.
First Star Trek complimentary insults and now Terminator.
Do the writers of SyFy even like science fiction?
By Marty B. at 6:45 PM ON 05/20/09
Hard to say if the fans like it since there's only been a handful of screenings so far.
Reviewer did his job, though I think he focused to much on McG and not the film itself.
By Marty B. at 6:48 PM ON 05/20/09
Son of a Maui P: I generally don't care for your intellectual property diatribes, but I do like seeing Mudfield pwned. +1
By betty sue at 10:27 AM ON 05/21/09
I went and saw this at the midnight showing last night. And I'm a huge TSCC fan. I really enjoyed this movie. Some people are a bit let down at the ending, but what people need to realize is that this film is about the beginnings of John Connor - he's just beginning to grow into the icon he is to become with the resistance. So, should there have been horns blaring and angels singing when he showed up? No, because he's considered a bit of a trouble maker by the resistance.
I enjoyed the film - a few slow parts - and a bit choppy at points - but the story was good and I'm going to see it again on Monday!
By Son of a Maui Portagee at 4:22 PM ON 05/22/09
Muldfeld,
Thanks. You might want to consider that just because Todd's tastes differ from yours in one area that it doesn't necessarily follow that his evaluation in another can't possibly reflect your own. SALVATION'S Thursday haul is impressive: $13,372,491
More than 3 times that of STAR TREK.
Marty B.,
"Fixing Hubble: No sweat; Watching a movie: No way"
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jjSTaV7YG-47suvakTvBgvaCMZSwD98BF9182
"Fixing Hubble: No sweat; Watching a movie: No way"
By Random guy at 10:48 AM ON 05/26/09
I can' t believe how this movie is being reviewed, its a terminator movie about the war in the future, its not supposed to be an intelligent drama with some sort of deep meaning storyline. Sure its about humans creating there own demise but lets be honest... I went to this movie not expecting a storyline because of what the movie was, an explosion packed, death machine filled action flick. The fact that they managed to put in fairly decent story line on top of that is pretty amazing as far as I am concerned.
This review of Terminator Salvation is like somebody watching a porno and criticizing it for not having a decent story line. I am certain when we all saw the previews of the movie with people running for their lives and the scene with the motorcycle like terminator chasing a truck, and then flying through and exploding, we all thought; "Wow, I am going to go watch that movie for its deep and meaningful plot line."
I think the movie was great for EXACTLY what it was, and it felt like it was just one adventure in the many to come from the great war between man and machine! I went to the movie with very high expectations, I didn't know really what to expect, except terminators and action, and I must say, it exceeded my expectations. Am I an action junkie? For this movie, yes, that's why I wanted to see it. I certainly didn't go to the movie "Maid of Honor" with my Girlfriend expecting to see a non-stop explosive action movie.
I do agree that T3 was forgettable, but to me that was mainly because John Connor came off as a dweeb and his personality in the movie didn't fit being the future hero for all mankind. I feel that is not the fault of the actor but the script that was given to him.
Anyways that's just my two sense, sorry for all my spelling and grammar mistakes, heheh.
By CTB at 11:00 AM ON 05/29/09
Todd, I've been complaining on IGN about you leaving for so long now and I finally found you. I really enjoyed the review, it makes sense and you manage to do it without spoiling anything (unlike certain current IGN reviewers). You're the only reviewer who's opinion I've been able to relate to most of the time, don't stop writing the way you do. It's funny how people can criticize you for using (as they see them) "complicated" words and ideas for a movie they deem is supposed to be an action blockbuster. It's obvious these people don't understand the layers that the original Terminator movies contain, which may have been possible in this movie with the 'leaked' ending which they changed (sadly).
Anyhow keep up the great work, some of these comments on your reviews sound like characters from the movie Idiocracy. And not the cryogenically frozen ones either (even though they aren't much better).
By Introspective at 8:07 AM ON 08/02/09
Terminator Salvation is a very good movie. It is obvious that even without Schwarzenegger the movie can be good. The action scenes are top-notch.
Visit mobile.syfy.com/wire on your mobile device.
Introspective:
Terminator Salvation is a very good movie. It is obvious that even without Schwarzenegger the movie can be good. Th...More »