Re: Which Superman Movie is your favorite Superman movie?
I've already explained all this. Once again, its the pacing and the tone. T1 has it, T2 doesn't. The T2 "kills" don't matter when the rest of the tone is so light, preachy, and tame. T3 had one of the most gruesome kills of all with the fist through the backseat out the guy's chest. So what. Its still just a silly, campy movie that copies the formula of T1 just like T2.
T1 is like a brilliant episode of the Walking Dead but with a robot instead of walkers. And last I checked Walking Dead is a current day hit so the "stands the test of time" absolutely applies. Not everything looks "real" in TWD either but it all looks cool and the best episodes at least have a great pace, likable characters and a great sense of "what would you do." Just like T1.
On the other hand, when they tried to do another T2 we got T3. Same crap but it doesn't work anymore. More poking fun at the T800's arrival, one liners, and even more advanced CGI. It even had a clever twist with the T850 being John's future killer. Halfway decent effort but it ain't no T1. And neither was T2.
Who cares if the 80's hairstyles are dated in the first Terminator. They're also dated in every period film ever made. That's absolutely beside the point.
But The Terminator stands the test of time with it's mirror puppet effects, stop motion (ED-209 was way better in my opinion, Tippett was a beast with the AT-AT, ED, and Dinos), and it's crappy 80s soundtrack which featured pretty much unknown artists? That doesn't seem very fair.
I still love the Terminator, everything about it, but how does it stand the test of time but T2 doesn't? The prosthetics for the damage Arnold sustains is waaaaay more believable in T2 than in T1. I'm sure if Stan Winston were here, he'd agree that the second was a much better effort. The CGI of the T-1000 still looks great. The acting, all top notch, even from secondary characters (like the Pescadero staff).
We can rip John Connor and 90s gallerias, but 80s clubbin' Sarah and her perms with Photoplay in the background is a-ok? Ginger and Matt are really better actors that have better scenes than Janelle and Todd Voight? The T-800 is really scarier than the T-1000?
I mean yeah, let's say T2 is a rehash (I agree, the arrivals, chases and climaxes of both are completely similar), but T2 covered new ground. We got to see John Connor, Skynet, Miles Dyson. We got to see where Sarah went in the first film (Enrique's camp). The whole concept of changing the future with the "No Fate" plot was entirely new that was only hinted at in a deleted scene for the first film. Even T-1000 was revolutionary and a fantastic villain, dare I say topping the first T-800 villain from the first film.
I've already explained all this. Once again, its the pacing and the tone. T1 has it, T2 doesn't. The T2 "kills" don't matter when the rest of the tone is so light, preachy, and tame. T3 had one of the most gruesome kills of all with the fist through the backseat out the guy's chest. So what. Its still just a silly, campy movie that copies the formula of T1 just like T2.
T1 is like a brilliant episode of the Walking Dead but with a robot instead of walkers. And last I checked Walking Dead is a current day hit so the "stands the test of time" absolutely applies. Not everything looks "real" in TWD either but it all looks cool and the best episodes at least have a great pace, likable characters and a great sense of "what would you do." Just like T1.
On the other hand, when they tried to do another T2 we got T3. Same crap but it doesn't work anymore. More poking fun at the T800's arrival, one liners, and even more advanced CGI. It even had a clever twist with the T850 being John's future killer. Halfway decent effort but it ain't no T1. And neither was T2.
Who cares if the 80's hairstyles are dated in the first Terminator. They're also dated in every period film ever made. That's absolutely beside the point.