What's everyone's take on T3: Rise of the Machines?

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
quoted for truth and fair criticism.
this topic is a thinly veiled excuse to nerd-rage over the not-cameron movie... again.

before I even knew or cared about who directed movies I always though T2 was an outstanding movie. That has nothing to do with my opinion really.
 
As you never see the T-1000 come through the timesphere you have no idea wether it was coated in anything or not. The T-X on the other hand you see appear which does contradict the rule.

I think saying you've seen morphing a thousand times now isn't something to hold against the movie when it was the movie that brought it to the public's consciousness and was doing it first.

The theatrical ending leaves it ambiguous enough which re-enforces it's message of there's no fate but what you make for yourselves. Which T3 completely ignores.

For a film that's coming up 17 years old now the special effects have held up remarkably well, the T-1000 walk is a little stiff when CGI.

T2 was a groundbreaking movie that pushed the envelope and ushered in the Cinema we enjoy today. T3 didn't really have a story to tell, it seems like it was a bridging gap to usher in the nuclear war and nothing else.
 
As you never see the T-1000 come through the timesphere you have no idea wether it was coated in anything or not. The T-X on the other hand you see appear which does contradict the rule.

I think saying you've seen morphing a thousand times now isn't something to hold against the movie when it was the movie that brought it to the public's consciousness and was doing it first.

The theatrical ending leaves it ambiguous enough which re-enforces it's message of there's no fate but what you make for yourselves. Which T3 completely ignores.

For a film that's coming up 17 years old now the special effects have held up remarkably well, the T-1000 walk is a little stiff when CGI.

T2 was a groundbreaking movie that pushed the envelope and ushered in the Cinema we enjoy today. T3 didn't really have a story to tell, it seems like it was a bridging gap to usher in the nuclear war and nothing else.

:lecture:lecture:lecture

Very well said, agreed 100%
 
I hate Terminator 3
The Story sucks
The actor who plays john connor is miscast and plays the character as a wimp. I thought he was the saviour of the planet? Claire Danes is pointless.
They used a pretty girl just for some titalation of nudity at the start.
No Sarah connor.
Arnie did it, because had not had a hit in ages and also need some money to help fund his race for governor.
 
terrible !
never made for me.
the director of this movie made arnold act like a fool.
the part when they try to remake bar scene was so bad.
puts on those gay glasses omg what where they thinking.
hes performance in T2 was amazing felt like a real cyborg.
the tv show is 10000000000000 better then T3 and the 2 minute trailer of T4 better then the hole T3 movie.
 
terrible !
never made for me.
the director of this movie made arnold act like a fool.
the part when they try to remake bar scene was so bad.
puts on those gay glasses omg what where they thinking.
hes performance in T2 was amazing felt like a real cyborg.
the tv show is 10000000000000 better then T3 and the 2 minute trailer of T4 better then the hole T3 movie.

I know the sunglasses right. :monkey4
They tired to turn terminator into a joke. And not even a funny one at that !. :monkey4
 
I really liked T3 and was pleasantly surprised by it. I thought the crane/truck chase scene was great. It wasn't as "epic" as Cameron's T but I dug it.

BB
 
i hated T3 so much. bad acting/casting, unoriginal plot, not one ounce of terminator feel you got from 1 or 2, etc.
 
I really liked T3 and was pleasantly surprised by it. I thought the crane/truck chase scene was great. It wasn't as "epic" as Cameron's T but I dug it.

BB

Yeah but you're talking about a cool "action scene" the film still contributed nothing to the first 2 films before it. I agree though that scene was decent but you can usually find stuff like that in any action film.
 
As you never see the T-1000 come through the timesphere you have no idea wether it was coated in anything or not. The T-X on the other hand you see appear which does contradict the rule.

I think saying you've seen morphing a thousand times now isn't something to hold against the movie when it was the movie that brought it to the public's consciousness and was doing it first.

The theatrical ending leaves it ambiguous enough which re-enforces it's message of there's no fate but what you make for yourselves. Which T3 completely ignores.

For a film that's coming up 17 years old now the special effects have held up remarkably well, the T-1000 walk is a little stiff when CGI.

T2 was a groundbreaking movie that pushed the envelope and ushered in the Cinema we enjoy today. T3 didn't really have a story to tell, it seems like it was a bridging gap to usher in the nuclear war and nothing else.

You're absolutely right that it was a groundbreaking movie for its time. The problem with it is that from the ground up, every choice they made, from story to action sequences, seemed to be to show what they could do with the groundbreaking morphing CGI of 1990. Once you take that away from the experience there isn't much there.

The first Terminator holds up better because, while the f/x are laughable today, the film's storytelling and the story it tells stands apart from, and at times in spite of, its crappy f/x.
 
Well like some other said here,
The guy they choose for john connor & catherine brewster, sucked!
They should've got the boy from T2,
the 3rd movie was the worst of the 3,
my opinion T2 - Se was the best, then T1 and then T3,
T 4 - Salvation will suck anyhow without arnold in it and without the original john connor.
and the sarah chronicles series suck even more, they wasted the time line between
T2 en T3
 
You're absolutely right that it was a groundbreaking movie for its time. The problem with it is that from the ground up, every choice they made, from story to action sequences, seemed to be to show what they could do with the groundbreaking morphing CGI of 1990. Once you take that away from the experience there isn't much there.

The first Terminator holds up better because, while the f/x are laughable today, the film's storytelling and the story it tells stands apart from, and at times in spite of, its crappy f/x.

There's suprisingly little CGI in T2 there maybe 15 computer effects shots in total as they were very costly so when they were used they were used sparingly. Cameron wanted to do the "liquid metal man" as the antagonist for the Terminator. So it wasn't a forced idea, it was now at a level (and a budget where it was feasible) and the story dictated the effects shots, not the effects dictated the story.

Most effects were still down practically, from spring loaded effects vests for gunshot hits, animatronic puppets etc. CGI was always the last resort.

Plus the T-1000 was played to perfection by Robert Patrick, almost too well as he's been type cast as that ever since. He scared the crap out of me when I was younger and has remained my favourite character ever since.

Plus you have to remember the T-1000 dissapears from the movie for almost 40 minutes after the Pescadero escape. That time contains the films emotional core, Sarah's acceptance of the Terminator and the dedication to the mission.

To lay the success down to the morphing when it's used so sparingly (and at times isn't even shown) uses the same mentality that every film and commercial that came after it does.
 
As you never see the T-1000 come through the timesphere you have no idea wether it was coated in anything or not. The T-X on the other hand you see appear which does contradict the rule.

I think saying you've seen morphing a thousand times now isn't something to hold against the movie when it was the movie that brought it to the public's consciousness and was doing it first.

The theatrical ending leaves it ambiguous enough which re-enforces it's message of there's no fate but what you make for yourselves. Which T3 completely ignores.

For a film that's coming up 17 years old now the special effects have held up remarkably well, the T-1000 walk is a little stiff when CGI.

T2 was a groundbreaking movie that pushed the envelope and ushered in the Cinema we enjoy today. T3 didn't really have a story to tell, it seems like it was a bridging gap to usher in the nuclear war and nothing else.

When the T-X comes trough the time displacement she appears in skin (naked). How is that contradicting? Only living tissue can come through. I guess that was living tissue over her liquid metal and endoskeleton.
 
Because you don't see the T-1000 come through at all, you see the light storm and then he attacks the cop, you don't know if it was sheathed in something which was then discarded. Whereas the T-X is shown to arrive uncovered and is then straight on the street to attack the woman.
 
I think t4 salvation is going to be great, I saw the trailer and It looked fantastic. We finally get a movie of John in this future that the movies have been essentially leading up to. I agree however with T3 it was lack luster to say the least. I don't agree with whoever said that Bale isn't the right choice for the future Conner. I think he's a great pick. The boy who played in T2 was okay but for such a serious and grownup role I don't think he can even look the part. Ive seen him in some red carpet photos a year ago and he still has a very babyish/ teenagery face. Hes one of those guys that doesn't have an real adult looking face and that would hurt him trying to play this role. If they can consentrate the story on the people and the struggle against the machines and not just on the special effects I think this movie will rock!
 
I enjoyed it quite a bit. But then a again I'm more neutral towards Cameron's stuff anyways.
 
i only liked T2. that one was brilliant. the first 1 was soooo 80's and i just didnt like it, and the 3rd one was sooooo over-CGI'd crap female(WTF) turdminator elton john sunglasses gay stupid lame pathetic.
 
every one allways nocks T3, ok it was not as good as the first but it never will be because the first movie of an origional idea blows you away. The ending of the film has set us up nicely for T4 so there not too much of a jump/gap in the time line
 
Well like some other said here,
The guy they choose for john connor & catherine brewster, sucked!
They should've got the boy from T2,
the 3rd movie was the worst of the 3,
my opinion T2 - Se was the best, then T1 and then T3,
T 4 - Salvation will suck anyhow without arnold in it and without the original john connor.
and the sarah chronicles series suck even more, they wasted the time line between
T2 en T3

:rotfl

NO AHHNOULD IZ HORRID.


You're funny. :lol
 
Back
Top