Click here for the review of Terminator: Salvation

SPOILERS must be tagged with the "SPOILER" tag! (Note: The review carries a SPOILER warning.)

Well, I'm pleasantly surprised. It sounds like it may have more bite than I had expected.

I'm also quite interested to see if Bale is better here than in the Batman movies, because I consider him top notch is those.

Something to be a tad excited about now.

I had a feeling James was going to give this three starts at best. At worst, I think he would have given it two stars.

I guess it seems McG doesn't mess up the franchise with this film. I mean the impression from critics so far is he doesn't approach Cameron's greatness, but he doesn't embarrass himself either. It seems overall he does a satisfactory job like Mostow did with T3. I still can't fathom how the guy who made those "Charlie's Angels" movies got the gig in the first place. Almost as baffling as to how Brett Ratner got picked for "Red Dragon".

Like T3, I find this to be an unnecessary sequel/prequel/whatever. To me, T1 and T2 were the full and complete story and I feel the Terminator series lives and dies with James Cameron. I'm sure this new movie won't be bad at all, but I think it's a safe assumption that sadly it won't come anywhere close to the first two films. I think the primary motivator for this sequel/prequel, like with other prequels/sequels, to this franchise is money with creativity in second place. The Terminator series wasn't exactly calling for a creative reboot like with the Batman films, but we got one anyway.

But hey, no matter what I think we'll at least get an entertaining Summer diversion. I'm just worried that if there are sequels to be done, and most likely there will be regardless, then there's just going to be a rehash of T1 and T2. I don't know if there's a lot that can be done storywise with this future stuff. How many highly-advanced Terminators can you send after John Connor? How many times can you go back in time? I don't think these things will be done in future sequels, but I just don't want to see old ideas rehashed again. This same concern worries me about future sequels to "Star Trek".

I have been really surprised at the negative reviews so far (at least those posted on Rotten Tomatoes). I had heard that initial word on this movie was positive but then the reviews were poor. Glad to see that James liked it—that bodes well. I will be there Thursday and hoping for an enjoyable summer movie. Star Trek was a nice start (and a good cleanser after Wolverine). I hope that the other “event” movies live up to their billing.

I'm glad to see you liked it James. RT was scaring me for awhile. Definitely going to see it this weekend.

On par with the third film was about the best I was hoping for.

wow, you have no IDEA of how reliefed I am now. after seeing all the negative reviews in rotten tomatoes (24%!) I was starting to get scared, but considering you also liked T3, like me (I know, we're in the minority here) then I'm probably gonna enjoy it too.

still, I'm disappointed with all the negative reviews from other critics so far =( I was really impressed by the latest trailer.

I feel the same way. I’m sure JB is right and Terminator: Salvation is a perfectly serviceable action film. Nevertheless, it’s extraneous. I think I’ll skip this film.

saw this last night...McG was there and introduced the film! which was cool. I'll have my review up tomorrow morning! I...wasn't blown away. It had it's pros and cons. My short take using some "a" words: The action is awesome, the acting is awful.

It's extraneous by all means, but so much of the enjoyable things are. They're not essential, but they're fun. If the movie falls into that category then I'm reasonably happy. Given the spate of reboot/late sequels we're being exposed to, any of them that manage to be decent, if not groundbreaking, entertainment probably deserve some applause.

For a three-star movie, JB sure had a lot of qualifiers for this one. Sounds like if you can make it through the first 90 minutes, the last half hour or so may be worth the effort. It's 50/50 whether I'll see this in the theaters. It may be well-suited to waiting for the Blu-ray and turning up the audio real loud. That helped a lot with Transformers.

When I first saw T1, and saw those awesome shots of the piles of human skulls being pulverized by the automated tanks, I thought that making a sequel set during the future wars would be really cool. I'm just not sure that this was the movie I was waiting for.

Eh, I couldn't care less about what the hell Rotten Tomatoes says about this film, I like many flms they give incredibly low scores to.

Well you have a point, but a lot of these reboots/late-sequels/prequels are uninspired and just cash-ins. The ones that were the most successful to this point (Batman Begins, Casino Royale, Star Trek, etc.) were done because the lackluster previous films in their franchise buried the franchise. Of course no studio wants to lose their sacred cash cows so they seek out hot, new talent to give a fresh spin on things.

Interesting point.

I wonder how much new movies are stifled by the studios obvious preference for proven money spinners? Why invest in a new project when you can reboot Terminator, a name that everyone knows, and will likely have punters willing to part with their cash?

A little OT, sorry.

In this instance, however, judging by JB's review alone, it seems like it has some worth, even as simple entertainment, rather than an essential part of the Terminator story.

I would say A LOT. It's no secret remakes/reboots/late-sequels are all the rage since name-recognition means money. These films are safter to make since there's a built-in audience. Original movies, especially expensive ones, are very risky and studios don't like losses. I'm not fond of these types of movies because most are uninspired, unnecessary and just a way to cash-in.

As a rule, I agree. In this case, however, though it seems like a decent motion picture has been made. Bale is a class act and getting him signed on was a coup for the quality of the movie, director McG, despite the stupid name, seems to be competent and willing to make a movie that stands up as worthy in the Terminator story, given these facts perhaps this is one of those exceptions (there are always some) that is a good movie.

I should preface this all by saying I have not seen it yet. I'm basing everything on general impressions and JB's review.

Well of course there will always be a few diamonds in the rough. Not every reboot/reimagining/prequel/sequel is automatically doome to failure.

it's always hard when giving a "rating" to a movie, because in this film there were some scenes and lines that were unintentionally funny...but is that entertaining? yes...

Damn right unintentional hilarity is the best kind of hilarity there is. Who cares if Johnny Mnemonic was supposed to be a cyber-punk movie, it's a damn good comedy.

Who would've thought that a Terminator film would end up feeling like a B-movie?

The franchise was once known for its big flashy action sequences that were as fun as they were thrilling. In Terminator Salvation there's still plenty of action but little fun to be had. The washed-out color palette, which works well for the post-apocalyptic setting, contrasts starkly with James Cameron's more colorful approach to action. The effect is that everything just feels a bit dull. The characters take a backseat to action--another thing that never happened in past entries in the Terminator series. The film feels alienating at times--keeping the audience detached from the characters.

Maybe its the lack of old Arnold popping out of a electric bubble from the future that gives us nothing to relate to initially.

Terminator Salvation has the distinction of being the first PG-13 rated Terminator film. A rather remarkable fact when you consider that this entry is by far the darkest and least family-friendly in the series. But the F-word isn't used--good work, MPAA.

Full Review