baron arem heshvaun |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just saw a screening. I must say its good to see Arnold Schwarzenegger on the big screen again. I was really hoping for a win for him.
It is in a way, at least in part. A lot of the cinematic cues for those who watched the original Terminator, and Terminator 2. I can't say I remember the others in the series too well.
There are some plot holes, and the acting is about what you would expect from an action movie, but the movie is still a nostalgia filled romp ride with some good hard action scenes.
My best advise? Do Not watch the trailer, at all. It gives away some good plot points, not sure why they did that. Marketing must think the movie going public needed more push to see the movie and in the process gave too much away.
It's still a fun enough quick ride for us getting long in the tooth, a 7.5 out of 10 for some action scenes and funny moments, almost all featuring Arnold.
Lord Snow |
I just saw a screening. I must say its good to see Arnold Schwarzenegger on the big screen again. I was really hoping for a win for him.
It is in a way, at least in part. A lot of the cinematic cues for those who watched the original Terminator, and Terminator 2. I can't say I remember the others in the series too well.
There are some plot holes, and the acting is about what you would expect from an action movie, but the movie is still a nostalgia filled romp ride with some good hard action scenes.
My best advise? Do Not watch the trailer, at all. It gives away some good plot points, not sure why they did that. Marketing must think the movie going public needed more push to see the movie and in the process gave too much away.
It's still a fun enough quick ride for us getting long in the tooth, a 7.5 out of 10 for some action scenes and funny moments, almost all featuring Arnold.
As for the trailer giving away too much of the plot - most trailers do, these days. It's quite vexing, really. An example of what I would consider an awesome trailer is this - I don't much like the hunger games movies for various reasons, but their trailers are probably the best I've seen. Tells us what the movie is about without showing us 70% of it.
Lord Snow |
MMCJawa |
I think they gave away the twist because of fear the twist would tick people off. A good twist in a movie can lead to strong word of mouth and increase sales, but a bad one can cause people to hate the movie.
Also I thought I remember that the title mispelling was actually originally a typo, but it somehow got buzz and they decided to roll with it
Joana |
What's with the dumb spelling in the title?
"Genisys" sounds like it could be the trendy name of a company dealing in genetic engineering and/or computer systems, either of which could be used by SkyNet. /speculation
But, yeah, it's probably just an attempt to be cool and edgy (much like trendy company names).
Kirth Gersen |
About 70% of critics are giving it an F...
True, director Alan Taylor knows something about implacable lifelike automatons marching toward the apocalypse – after all, one of his first jobs was directing episodes of "Sex and the City."
But this movie is more like the too-much, too-loud spectacle he brought to the "Thor" sequel – explosions that turn into firestorms, widescreen blurs that suggest that somewhere there may be a fight going on.
Or, maybe, a movie.
Lord Snow |
Lord Snow wrote:About 70% of critics are giving it an F...Quote:True, director Alan Taylor knows something about implacable lifelike automatons marching toward the apocalypse – after all, one of his first jobs was directing episodes of "Sex and the City."
But this movie is more like the too-much, too-loud spectacle he brought to the "Thor" sequel – explosions that turn into firestorms, widescreen blurs that suggest that somewhere there may be a fight going on.
Or, maybe, a movie.
Which review is the quote taken from?
Also, didn't know it was from the guy who did Thor 2. I disliked Thor 2.
Hama |
Kirth Gersen wrote:Lord Snow wrote:About 70% of critics are giving it an F...Quote:True, director Alan Taylor knows something about implacable lifelike automatons marching toward the apocalypse – after all, one of his first jobs was directing episodes of "Sex and the City."
But this movie is more like the too-much, too-loud spectacle he brought to the "Thor" sequel – explosions that turn into firestorms, widescreen blurs that suggest that somewhere there may be a fight going on.
Or, maybe, a movie.Which review is the quote taken from?
Also, didn't know it was from the guy who did Thor 2. I disliked Thor 2.
It was ok to me. But I prefer 1. Kenneth Branagh is an awesome director.
Benchak the Nightstalker Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8 |
Kirth Gersen wrote:What's with the dumb spelling in the title?"Genisys" sounds like it could be the trendy name of a company dealing in genetic engineering and/or computer systems, either of which could be used by SkyNet. /speculation
But, yeah, it's probably just an attempt to be cool and edgy (much like trendy company names).
Bolded is in fact the case.
Krensky |
Kirth Gersen wrote:What's with the dumb spelling in the title?"Genisys" sounds like it could be the trendy name of a company dealing in genetic engineering and/or computer systems, either of which could be used by SkyNet. /speculation
But, yeah, it's probably just an attempt to be cool and edgy (much like trendy company names).
Has more to do with trademarks.
Genesys is unique and trademarkable.
Genesis is generic and not trademarkable.
It's slightly more complex, but that's the core of it. For company names too,
magnuskn |
Saw the movie a few days ago and I found it to be quite enjoyable. It's below Terminator 2, but above Terminator 3 and Terminator: Salvation. The time-travel stuff didn't bother me much, since time-travel stories have always been some of my favorites.
Arnold did good work, Khaleesi also was good and Jason Clarke and Jai Courtney were serviceable. The action was well choreographed. I would recommend seeing this one, if you can enjoy a movie with purple lasers and a few minor plot-holes.
The dude who released that second trailer should be fired, though. What a way to give too much info away.
Peter Stewart |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I largely align with Mangnuskn on this one. It was enjoyable, but it didn't really feel like a terminator movie to me. It lacked the tension, the feeling that they were being hunted, and the terrifying certainty of the first two movies.
At no point did I feel like the John Conner terminator was really that threatening, what with his habit of announcing himself, explaining himself, and talking rather than trying to murder them. He was a terrible substitute for both the original, and particularly the T-1000.
The actual action scenes are pretty well done, and the plot isn't terrible, but it was missing something. 6/10.
And I agree about the second trailer, which was so bad that I nearly declined to see it.
I had a few additional minor quips as well with small parts of the movie as well. Some spoilers follow.
-That the T-1000 apparently attacked Sarah as a child, and she just swam away.
-That the T-1000 was so easily dispatched. While I appreciated that it showed their planning, I wondered why in T2 they didn't just go after it with acid water guns.
-That the Dr. Who Terminator apparently slaughtered like 50 of John's hand picked, well armed, elite soldiers with future weapons. Just didn't jive with me. The entire terror of the terminators is that in this time, this place they are almost unstoppable. Less so in the future, against an elite tech-com squad.
Overall I thought the strongest parts of the movie though were, conceptually, the stuff in the future. The Tech-Com stuff and the war against the machines has been really underutilized by by writers. Salvation was an awful attempt, worse in every way than the 5-10 minute blurbs in the first two movies - and this one. I'd go see a future war movie in an instant.
spectrevk |
I saw it, and enjoyed it. I consider myself a pretty picky movie watcher, but to be honest, I never expected the plot of any Terminator movie to make sense, since the first one already established a time paradox that only gets worse with each iteration. The characters were likable enough, the action scenes were well done, and I got what I thought I was paying for.
Oceanshieldwolf |
Unfortunately I found myself in the cinema watching it.
I think I saw a movie. But it never moved me once, was frequently incredibly extremely boring, didn't make me go wow once and was cheesy as all get out. The rest was awful.
Oh, hang on. Arnie trying to smile was almost funny. But the autocorrect that just changed his name to Arnica made me smile more...