Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

[dancunian]

It seems to have been well received by reviewers - was I the only one to be immensely disappointed with this film? Bad script, acting, continuity erros galore and no improvement on a film that is 12 years old whatsoever.

[d+dwidow]

No, I thought it was total pants as well!!! Mind you, wasn't that impressed with the other two. Special fx were good, but apart from that there was nothing memorable about the film at all. Plus my brain can't cope with the whole time travel idea and starts twitching with irritability at the implausibility of it all!!

[dancunian]

d+d you leave me confused. The time/paradox thing you dont like, but you watched all three films which are based on a massive time travel paradox after another... Still, I know what you mean. Even the producers got confused. In T2 he was "ten year old John Connor" and in T3 he referred to being attacked by the second machine when he was "13". Absolute garbage.

[d+dwidow]

The only reason I've watched all 3 is cause my stupid husband made me!!! Mind you, think he regretted it as shouted 'rubbish' at telly through most of it! We constantly have arguments about the whole time travel issue.

[rja211077]

i thought it was awful too. like you say...non-existent script, bad acting (i almost walked out when Claire Danes shouted 'WHY DON'T YOU JUST DIE...B1TCH!') and Nick Stahl was unconvincing and unengaging too. dancunian I think you're mistaken about "10 year old JC". It just left me totally underwhelmed. The character was clearly supposed to be older than 10. Edward Furlong's voice had broken, after all. T1 and T2 were great films though.

[rja211077]

whoops, in my answer the sentence "it just left me totally underwhelmed" should have come before the one starting "dancunian". Continuity error to rival T3, there.

[johnloony]

I thought T1 and T2 were brilliant, but I think it was a mistake to make T3, because T2 brought the story to a natural end without any loose ends waiting to be tied up. Many people have said in the last few days that T3 is a disappointment, although it is better to think of it as an action film on its own rather than comparing it with T2. I don't have any problem with the idea of time-travel because it is solved by the use of parallel universes. By the way, did I misunderstand the previous comment about Edward Furlong? His voice had not broken when T2 was made - I think he was 13 then.

[dancunian]

Rja - trust me. T2 was billed as "ten year old John Connor" and in the movie the T-1000 checks his details on the police database. It comes up on screen as "Age 10". I thought their treatment of Sarah Connor was bang out of order too. And where does "Desire is irrelevant...I am an MACHINE!" come from? So much potential wasted.

[johnloony]

I think they should not have made T3 because the story had come to a natural end at the end of T2. By the way, Edward Furlong's voice had not broken when they made T2 - I think he was only 13 then.

[bernardo]

I think it was a mistake to make T3, because the story came to a natural end with T2, leaving no obvious threads open (like at the end of T1). Io think it should be regarded as a fun action film in its own right, rather than comparing it with T2. By the way, Edward Furlong's voice had not broken when they made T2 - I think he was 13 at the time. Or did I misunderstand that bit in the previous message?

[5029]

Yep, he was 10. Read the tagline here http://uk.imdb.com/Title?0103064