Universe ' Terminator' loved by many, but even the most loyal fans agree: after the second film, its movie part went downhill. The third part turned the plot formula ' two arrive' into a conveyor craftsmanship, the fourth tried to move away from it, but failed (a pity...), and the fifth simply cut everything she reached.
Skynet was defeated, but managed to send the T-800 Terimnator into the past. John Connor, who knew about it, sent his fighter Kyle Reese after him - and almost immediately something else happened. Something that put Kyle in an alternate time where Sarah Connor is a tough fighting girl, accompanied by a tame old T-800 capable of fighting off anyone. And behind the heroes is already moving T-1000 from the second film. It is better not to delve into everything else. Turbid chronoparadoxes, grand pianos in the bushes (that's what Kyle's visions are?), well, and a lot of action. He's cool, with walls piercing and explosions -- that's probably what Cameron had dreamed of thirty years before, and if it wasn't for mediocre special effects, he wouldn't be worth it. Especially when you consider that almost nothing else the film can offer.
The main problem was not even the plot, but the heroes. Local Sarah Connor performed by Emilia Clarke is a typical ' strong woman' that is, hysterical with a gun. By the way, where does the picture of Linda Hamilton come from, who doesn't look like Clark at all? Okay, let's call it chronoparadox. But the hack of the writer and actress will not be written off. Kyle is not a tough fighter, but a crooked, nervous kid who doesn’t look like a soldier (and Michael Bean, either). Yes, he grew up with a machine gun in his hands, fought with cars all his life, but why is it a story in which there is a strong woman? Her greatness should not be obscured by anyone. The paranoid old man? Another grand piano in the bush. And only the T-800 named Papps is good - Schwarzenegger has long outgrown that emotionless big guy from the eighties and honestly tried to make fun of the role. There's an awkward question for his character too (but it's going to be a spoiler), but the actor is great. It's a shame he's been given the story. Fifth 'Terminator' as if he didn't set out to save the series - it's just a vague parody. The idea is generally not bad, but the implementation is not so good. Instead of a clear ridicule of old stamps ' Genesis' offers a somewhat glued series ' here is the turn' which these same stamps cover, but do nothing with them really. And a promising idea turns into an excuse not to invent anything new. However, it only got worse... Maybe it’s time to leave him alone?
4 out of 10
Despite the fact that the opportunity to continue after the unsuccessful fourth part remained, on the fifth tape, the authors of the franchise decided to redo a lot for insurance. And the strangest "Terminator" appeared, where everything is twisted.
Of the good here you can note the smiling iron Arnie, a few funny dialogues and colorful doomsday pictures. Everything else is not that bad, but too pointless. Using the theme of temporal paradoxes, but not particularly understanding it, the script goes out of its way, trying to stun the audience, but everything looks too unreliable. It is as if we are not facing life, but a schedule with pauses, active actions and plot twists. There are references to the first film and even a familiar terminator from another film appears, but this is perceived as a literal conversation with the director who asks the audience questions and shows what they liked from previous films. Colorful, but not necessary.
It seems that the franchise finally scored on the similarity of the characters with their previous versions. Emilia Clark in principle is similar to the young Linda Hamilton, although for the completeness of the resemblance she could repaint her hair. But Jason Clark and Jay Courtney are not even close to the John Connor and Kyle Reese we know. The paradox is that the rejuvenated version of Schwarzenegger for a couple of scenes looks very authentic. That is, there were opportunities to create a visual similarity, but for some reason they were not used. Apparently, the count was made on the fact that the viewer the whole film will be perplexed by what is happening and will not pay attention to such “little things”.
And the perplexity is really very strong. Empty chatter, which only seems clever, does not really explain anything. The feeling is that the characters jump from one year to the next easier easy, without much need for a time machine. Meanwhile, distorted (if not to say "perverted") the key moment of the franchise, thanks to which everything happened. The wrapper in the form of jokes works in the case of the most relaxed viewers, but with those who watch this tape consciously, this trick will not pass even theoretically.
As a result, Genesis is the most useless part that does not make sense to watch.
4 out of 10
This is the fifth film in the franchise about machines that want to destroy humanity. And he's probably the most ambiguous for me. I cannot say that I do not like this work categorically, but at the same time there are many contradictory moments in it, which is why I cannot like it. I have a rather neutral opinion about this film, but about everything in detail.
The main problem of the film is not its quality, but its purpose. I don’t know for whom this film was made. After all, this film is full of new characters, but the plot is completely tied to the previous parts. And from this, this picture is not to the liking, not new viewers, not those who are a fan of the first parts. New viewers do not have time to simply delve into the plot because of its dynamics, and knowledgeable viewers simply do not want to watch the new Sarah Connor or Kyle Reeves.
But there are also other weak things in the job, like Arnie. He was the element without which this series would not have been so successful.
But in this film, he just plays the role of some bati, who is somewhere in the background and is only needed to cover the main characters. Of course, there are some good scenes with it, but the creators clearly overdo it with its comicality and it turns into a farce. In addition, this film, as well as the third and fourth parts, create new contradictions in the franchise. And finally, I did not like the ending, it turned out to be quite banal and predictable, which is not in the spirit of such paintings.
But there are moments that I still like in the picture. They're actors first and foremost. I liked Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor. It certainly didn’t match the original, but it played well and was fun to watch. Moreover, it is associated with the main dramatic moments of the film and good moments with Arnie, of which there are few. Also good performers of the roles of John Connor and Kyle Ray. Although the character of Connor I represent differently, but in this film the actor is suitable for his role. Well, Kayla Rey is a simple guy, but not without charm. Another thing to note is J.K. Simmons, who, as always, is good and creates good humorous scenes.
In addition to the actors, I can attribute the dynamics of the film to the pluses. Throughout the tape there are no sags, only stops for the sake of drama, but otherwise the whole action is dynamic and does not let you get bored. Nice action, too. It's not very inventive, but it's pretty good.
The verdict. The picture is quite ambiguous, I can recommend to see if you like caste actors and if you are ready to take a story with new faces. If you are a big fan of the first parts, or have not heard about the Terminator at all, then it is better to skip this tape.
I am a fan of the Terminator series, as are millions of people. I went to the cinema without thinking. I’m not going to say that I was waiting for a masterpiece, but I wasn’t disappointed.
The plot was once again twisted and intertwined from the previous parts. And the whole thing is in the plot, so I will not write about it again. I don’t see any point in it.
About actors.
I’d love to see Robert Patrick play liquid metal, but the years haven’t spared him. Kyle Reese played by Jai Courtney came out too chubby and clean. Michael Bean looked more suitable for a man who came from a time of starvation. Iron Arnie is handsome as ever. Khaleesi as Sarah is also a choice in my opinion. There is no such thing as Linda Hamilton in the second part. John Connor has never been better than Christian Bale. My opinion on the selection of actors is such that I could try better.
The most emotional in the film was Arnie, with his wonderful smile and funny phrases, from which the whole audience laughed. The level of violence and realism of the Terminators has fallen since the 4th part and expect from the 5th film is not different. It was made for the general public, so that the children do not spoil the psyche of the type. This is why robots fight with robots.
I liked the movie, though it could have been better.
Without long prefaces - 'Terminator: Genesis' this is a great fantastic action movie, the claims to which are still unclear. At one time, I enjoyed watching the fifth movie in the theater, and later bought it on Blu-ray, having watched it a couple more times. As a big fan of the original dilogy, I was not disappointed.
'Terminator: Genesis' completely ignores the events of the third and fourth films of the series, being half a sequel, half a restart of Cameron's dilogy. The audience is again introduced to Cal Reese, who travels back in time to save Sarah Connor. That’s just the hero gets into a completely different 1984, a kind of alternative timeline, where Sarah no longer needs protection, and is able to kick a pair of metal ass. Here is some kind of entanglement meets us 'Genesis'. In the film, a lot of attention is devoted to alternative time streams, time jumps and other similar tinsel. It may push someone away, but I really like stories like this with broken timelines, so the story ' Genesis' I came across.
In the film, by the way, there is enough fan service, and at some point the tape almost repeats the original ' Terminator', which is explained by the plot.
I have to say a few words about actors, and these words will not be flattering for the most part. Sarah Connor was cast as the mother of all dragons, Emilia Clarke, and I wouldn’t call it a lucky find. Emilia is undeniably a very nice girl and a good actress, but she does not have the charisma necessary for the role & #39;boy-baba' she does not feel the same energy that Linda Hamilton had. But if you accept the fact that 'Genesis' is a different timeline, and the events of the original films never really happened, then you can accept a new Sarah. But with Jay Courtney as Kyle Reese, things are worse. First, Jai Courtney is a log, he looks like an extra on the screen and is completely unsuitable for the image of a soldier from the future. If Michael Bean really looked like a tattered warrior who saw nothing but endless battles with machines, then Courtney does not make such an impression at all. Well, Jason Clarke as John Connor was also not particularly impressed, although it is even difficult to say what is wrong with him. It just feels like it's not his role. Well, Arnold Schwarzenegger as always great in the image of the old, but not useless T-800, there can be no complaints.
But in ' Genesis' brought enough warm and soulful scenes, mostly attributable to the relationship of Sarah and the Terminator who raised her. The girl calls a formidable machine 'Paps' and sincerely worries about the cyborg. Surprisingly, the T-800 also exhibits some emotions that are not characteristic of cars, and takes care of Sarah not only because of the program, but also because of his own feelings. Perhaps it will seem strange and stupid to some, but we are now quickly remembering ' I understood why you cry, but I myself can not cry' and understand that ' Genesis' only develops the idea inherent in ' Judgment Day'. After all, the Terminator has spent three decades among people, and in that time you want to learn something.
It’s time to move on to action, which is in 'Genesis' good. The film in this regard turned out to be cheerful, drive, and yes, in some places the action sacrifices the laws of physics in favor of entertainment, but I do not see anything wrong in this. There were fears that the PG-13 rating would spoil the impression, but they were largely groundless.
Verdict: 'Terminator: Genesis' it’s, again, a good fantastic action movie that doesn’t deserve all the sludge poured on it. If someone was waiting ' the very Terminator', then I hasten to disappoint - there will be nothing more ' the very same '. However, this does not mean that the final product is a priori bad, just look at it with a new look, not comparing with what was before.
Let's go back to the beginning. You all know that the Terminator franchise began with a low-budget thriller, which presented a very interesting and exciting story about a woman who became the target of a ruthless man from the future who turned out to be a cyborg. It was a simple but good story. He was a perfect killer and felt no pain or pity, he could not be negotiated with, he could not be bargained with. The T3 appeared and everything broke. They used ludicrous ideas justified by the fact that it was a "fiction" film. Well, even fiction has to be based on some rules, and T3 is relatively unceremonious about ignoring those rules, making it an extension of average lousy.
You see, I should have mentioned T2, which is actually the best movie in the series. But Genesis begins very unsettlingly: Judgment Day apparently happened in 1997. So the whole second movie was thrown away. Sarah's efforts were pointless, obviously Skynet wasn't destroyed. Some chaotic events lead to a series of confusing events, as a result of which the Terminator was sent to kill Sarah when she was 9 years old and another to protect her. Then "good" The Terminator ultimately "educates" Sarah wants her to adopt Emilia Clarke instead of Linda Hamilton. After a series of stupid events that I won’t talk about, John Connor appears in 2017 as Jason Clarke, and we assume he was chosen because he has the same surname as Emilia and he’s a cyborg.
At some point, they invade this company that developed Genesis, and eventually stumble upon the same computer interface used in Resident Evil. We have Papps, the Terminator, a father figure who competes with Kyle for approving his "daughter." He smiles a lot and repeats the same zest over and over again as if we didn't get it the first 6 times. We have John Connor, who is some strange combination of human, nanotechnology, cyborgs and liquid metal that is so common that it's silly. Yeah, stupid.
But the most important thing here is that James Cameron should be ashamed that he even thought this movie was good. He made me make sure that everyone could be bought for the right amount. I hope he gets paid enough money, really. I sincerely hope it was worth it, James!
James Cameron lost something in the mid-nineties. I don't know what it was, but I know where it went: T2 is the last good movie to bear his name, the place where his wave reached its maximum height. In Titanic, Cameron, along with Leonardo, dropped all claims to originality. And bless him for sending a gorgeous, handsome boy to his well-deserved rest. But "Titanic" also proved that after "T2," Cameron's real talent lies in areas that have nothing to do with making good movies. He's primarily a technician. "Titanic" plus taught him that the American film critics community is so cozy and focused on writing the right promotional text that they will let any hesitant, clichéd idea make money if you make it beautiful.
If you’ve been watching the first part for a long time, you can watch it. Why? The plot without obvious holes is present. Fights, tricks and special effects are available. There is no humor and no reference to the first parts. Arnie's complete. "Mother of Dragons" again. Overall, probably the best part after the original and quite a good attempt to restart the franchise as events develop in an alternate time stream. .
In fact, T-genesis is very funny. First of all, there's a couple of cool jokes at the beginning. Well, yes, they are a little helpless, they really refer to the primitive toilet humor of toilet comedies, but still their drive in the first showdowns is. Secondly, it is an expensive movie with a lot of spectacular scenes. If you do not expect frank - it is quite interesting to see. Third is the plot. We just need to set up in advance that it will be "so bad that it's already good." And then it turns out the same as with all the Terminators after the first two - not a masterpiece, but a very good movie for the evening.
“Let’s spit on the audience in the face” or “How to restart the Terminator”
'Genesis' solemnly joins 'Die Hard 5' and similar films on the pedestal of cynical madness towards us - the audience, because the creator of such 'picture' obviously don't care about us, they take us for mentally retarded australopithecines who will swallow everything.
It's a terrifying movie. If 3 and 4 parts at least tried to make somehow original, without trying to imitate Cameron’s masterpiece dilogy, then ' Genesis' is a brazen, undisguised, offensive Parasitization.
In general, I won’t spend a lot of words on ' this' and I’ll start right away why this film is the bottom of a sewer hatch:
1) Of course, the plot! It’s so weak that I don’t remember a single moment in the movie that sparked real interest. Everything is weak, the dialogue is scanty, the characters are flat, a story that claims to be ' a large-scale rethinking of the franchise' does not even pull on an average conveyor blockbuster and smells of complete idiocy, absurdities and hacking from it.
You see, the movie didn't bring anything new to the franchise, absolutely nothing! First, this is a monstrous theft of scenes from the first part, time-lapse reproduction! Timeday! I counted at least 5, secondly, everything is fueled by moments from the second part, and diluted ' modern ' vision!
In the film there is an atmosphere of idiocy, and violent emotions, and generally any, except negative, ' Genesis' does not cause. For example, if in the second Terminator there are still goosebumps from Sarah’s sleep, where the beginning of a nuclear war is shown and the frightening atmosphere of complete hopelessness is transmitted, then everything here is so refined and glossy that you feel hopelessness only from the impotence of the writers.
There is no sense of total apocalypse, oppression of machines, decline and survival of mankind - all this is shown in bright colors and with great optimism, but in the camps terminators (driving!) bring prisoners!
Also, the whole film is chewed up for viewers Constantly (by the way, we are mistaken for stupid). Endless explanations of current, past and future actions – from both protagonists and antagonists. Stupid and boring reading and before that flat and ugly plot!
I won't talk about the characters. I care about my remaining nerves. I’ll just say that the cards would have looked more lively and interesting.
2) Actors: my ' beloved' actor - Jay Courtney-Nevsky! The second name says everything. This person absolutely does not know how to play and causes a gag reflex at the mere appearance of his stone and monotonous face. Disgust and disgust. He took part in the murder 'Die Hard' and now has his eye on 'Terminator' who will be next?
Emilia Klar did not cause any impressions: neither positive nor negative. Absolutely passable role, of which thousands.
Old Arnie is still a real actor, unlike the great Jai Courtney, and it is difficult to find fault with his game here. In his years, he demonstrates a class, but his character was made a stupid and unfunny Petrosyan-boomer, freezing utter nonsense.
Jason Clark is perhaps one of several positive aspects of the film ' He really shows a good, good acting, but his character is ruined by the script.
(3) The AAA project budget is $155 million. Really? This movie looks so cheap, as if there was enough money only for Arnie’s fee, and they decided to save for the rest.
Terrible special effects, just nightmare effects! At the sight of the first explosion at the beginning of the film, I thought I was watching the TS version of the film, but no - I was watching Blu-ray.
Every square centimeter 'film' smells green and incredibly cheap graphics.
I said 'graphics'? I misspoke. Everything is drawn with merciless spat and superimposed with the help of a 10-year-old computer ' freshness'. All action scenes and scenes involving transport are simply hand-faced. And you still manage to put ' this ' above 5 points? It's the same thing if you let a passerby wipe their hands after the toilet.
I wonder how many of the 155 million sawed? It seems to be at least 120.
(4) Soundtrack. The second and last plus of this 'masterpiece'. Lorne Balfe is a good composer, but the music accompanied absolutely ridiculous scenes of brown color. During the viewing there was a cognitive dissonance: it seems to get pleasure from what you hear, but at the same time from the eyes is bleeding.
(5) Installation and operation of the operator? I would be lying if I said it was so badly filmed and edited, no. It is quite tolerable, but it is the usual average level, nothing outstanding, films with such shooting thousands.
Let's move on to the conclusion . He alone - it is unacceptable to put high marks of such a burp of cinema, caused in order to cut more money on the warm and trusting feelings of loyal fans who hoped with such trepidation that this time it will work. But they were blatantly deceived and used as miserable and unnecessary pawns. But no, the rating is 6.4! 6.4, Paps!
Of course, that a huge percentage of high ratings created artificially, someone thoughtlessly puts 6-7 as a passing film, but listen - it's not even a passing action movie, it's a natural hack! ' Genesis' - this is an undercooked sodium from the original dilogy with the addition of a pinch of absolute delirium and bacchanalia, seasoned with a spoon of creative impotence.
I’ll give you two points because there are even worse movies (it’s hard to believe, but it’s true) and another point out of respect for Arnie, good OST and acceptable performance by Jason Clark.
Even if the previous Terminators did not exist, this film would still be so bad , earning maybe + 1-2 points for ' original and new ideas'. But this is not an independent film, but another ' continuation-rethinking' therefore again two .
If such a movie has fair low ratings, then perhaps we will not be perceived as a herd of stupid animals, ready to swallow a rotten carrot, mistaking it for fresh, and begin to shoot a normal movie.
2 out of 10
P.S. I went to see 'Genesis' Could it be more embarrassing?
One of the best science fiction films of recent history
The first two parts are classics, and they will always remain so, the next third and fourth parts were nothing and I certainly agree with the assessment on them, but Genesis is the best not only of the new terminators, but in general among all the action blockbusters of recent years. And in 3D, the movie looks even cooler. With the action was not too much, because at the heart of the idea and its chic development. You get a little confused about which version of the future, but that’s normal for this kind of fiction.
The film almost ignores what happened in the third and fourth part, and it’s the right decision – let’s get them out of the franchise and we have Terminator 1 (an interesting idea and the movie), Terminator 2 (a masterpiece!), and Terminator Genesis (an action and idea, everything is super). The apocalypse was not in this first reality, but only in the one from which messengers from the future came. All! Stop filming!
If you’ve only watched the first two and are wondering if there’s anything else to watch, then yes, it’s worth looking at Genesis as the third and final part.
9 out of 10
Every year there are more and more such films - made on a tyap-gap, in the hope that for tons of special effects, the viewer will not pay attention to a poorly written plot, template acting and lack of logic. Against the background of modern creations ' Marvel' (for the sake of justice, not all their creations are terrible), ' Disney' (and there the last twenty years everything is sad), and, of course, our domestic film stampers, even the average action films of the nineties with Van Damme, or Seagal, look no longer naive, but very good, because they have a sane plot and quite bright characters.
Now let’s take a look at ' Genesis' 2015. Already at the beginning of the viewing, I had a suspicion that despite the impressive budget, this is another example of a modern & #39; movie & #39;. At first, the plot still somehow moves - we show a boy who is hiding in the sewer. Here, what struck me personally from the first frames was tons of pathos and zero atmosphere. The picture on the screen is very dark, dark. But this is not enough to make the viewer worry about what is happening. Well, the kid is hiding in the catacombs, who he is, what he is, where he comes from, how he survives, how he lived before the war, where are his parents? His story is simply presented in no way, and the writers do not even bother to reveal it, because from somewhere suddenly there is a kind uncle John Connor, who looks like a wandering stalker here, and not at all like a serious and wise rebel general, and alone saves the boy from an evil killer robot. And pathos, pathos. Starting from this scene, misplaced pathos (along with clumsy jokes) fueled the whole film to the end.
After the first scenes, we go on, in the cab of the truck, right to the Terminator camp. Here about the imagination of the authors, and even about the quality of special effects I will not talk much - they have already kicked everyone who is not lazy. Apparently, the creators decided not to bother much. And at the same time saved on designers, makeup artists and artists, which makes the scene in the hall with a time machine looks really crazy. Here are the soldiers, just out of battle, listening to Commander Connor, who through the word laughs inadequately under his nose. Where on the faces of soldiers and Connor do you see that they just fought for all life on earth with soulless machines? Where are the traces of blood, dust, dirt, fatigue, and celebration? From the work of makeup artists and designers, there is only a scar on Connor's face. Especially ' pleased ' dialogue Connor with Reese: - What will you do after the war?
I'll find something to do, I'll build my parents' house. Anyway, let the whole world rot in ruins, I don't care, I'm gonna fix my little mink. In general, this ' army' more like a gathering of zombie sectarians. This is probably the worst scene in the film. For it is not known what is worse – a soulless machine intelligence or a world ruled by such stone-faced people.
Further events are already developing at some frenzied, unstoppable pace. In the first Terminator, events also developed quite quickly, but they had logic and consistency. And this is what happened in Genesis. The film, albeit clumsy, not very convincing, but still the film, ended, and now began some clip. Locations change each other at insane speed. Here are the heroes on the truck. Arnold's a stupid joke. Before you blink an eye, they are already on the helicopter, then on the bus, then for some reason they are bent in the police station, but they are already in the bowels of the Genesis laboratory. Here's Arnold joked again, here's Sarah showing what a cool boy-baba she is, here's Jai Courtney making hysterical screams. Meanwhile, Connor is turned into a villain. Not just a villain, but a villain-machine, in the idea of a machine calculated, high-precision, dispassionate ... and how does he begin to behave? He starts chasing characters, like a rabid dog, pointlessly and ruthlessly. This is instead of cold-bloodedly calculating the trajectory of the victims and delivering an accurate strike on the target.
It makes no sense to scold the actors. In fact, the actors worked no more sloppy than all the other filmmakers. Arnold S., of course, is not happy, because here he kind of mocks himself from past films, and look at it rather sad. Emilia Clarke, not particularly trying, plays off an unremarkable bitchy grandmother. Well, the character of J. Courtney in this party is not clear why. Initially presented as the main character, then somehow merged. However, he plays moderately hulking, and is remembered only by a powerful, well-pumped torso.
Conclusion. The movie is boring. Removed solely for the rustle of green papers and parasites on other people's ideas. It offers nothing new, no food for thought. No atmosphere. The characters are dull, not memorable. Everything is done carelessly, sloppy, and for such a sloppy film is very long. If you cut at least a third of the scenes of stupid chases and stupid jokes, it would certainly not get worse. At the end, it was difficult to hold on so as not to switch, like the action on the screen a lot, but looks boring.
4 out of 10, just because now, in 2019, the bar of films has fallen even lower, and there are new masterpieces & #39 that deserve even lower points.
I haven’t written reviews for a long time, but I have a lot of thoughts on this film.
I liked the first two parts. Recently, in the lead-up to the 6th release, I watched 3.4 and now 5. Compared to most viewers, the third I, oddly enough, also liked, but then began full game. In a sense, the game was in the first three, but for some reason many did not notice it.
What pisses me off the most is that, starting with the wild illogicalities in the first three films, the creators have continued to fool us so much that it is simply impossible to understand any logic.
So far, I have not found a clear answer to the question, who is the father of John Connor, if Kyle Reese was not sent into the past? This mistake has been going on since the first film, and it continues all five. And no one clearly explains what it is and why it happens. I was hoping that this was given to the viewer and that John Connor sent Reese to save his mother in a different timeline, but no, every movie insists that going back in time changes the current reality.
Having confused us already at this stage, the creators continue to confuse us, but in the third part, in which it turns out that the destruction of the laboratory did not prevent the end of the world. Um, okay, let's move on.
So what happens in Part 4? Not only do they not explain anything logically, they also change the actors for some reason and add new ones (Marcus), only in order to save John Connor from death, although in principle (oh miracle!) he could not be tried to kill, because judging by the 3rd part, he will still die in 32. It is a story for the sake of God.
I finally got to the fifth. Thank you, creators, that my search on the Internet for answers to the question of who is the father of John Connor and how it all came out was simply for nothing. What’s more, you’ve decided to completely ignore Parts 3 and 4, which made us remember that the world ended in 2004. Here he is now suddenly in 1997. Why? Why are you confusing us even more? But everything in order.
The fifth part, of course, is not devoid of pros, but there are enough cons. From pluses:
Actors play. No matter what, I have nothing to complain about.
- Although the plot is painfully illogical and confusing, it is still interesting to watch. But rather because you don't know what's going to happen next, because it hasn't been talked about in previous movies.
- Ending
Minuses:
A lot of illogical and incomprehensible moments:
1) Why do heroes not die or even get scratched from terrible accidents, shots, etc.?
2) Why are the rescuers of the heroes always there at the right moment, although they should not and did not even know about the trouble?
(3) On what basis did the end of the world move first to 1997 and then to 2017? It wasn’t supposed to be in 1997 either! Oh!
(4) Since the main antagonist had the ability to move from place to place, why would he even walk in the flesh and take bullets? I'd go back and forth and hit everyone left and right.
(5) And the creators are not embarrassed that the third film clearly showed that the destruction of the laboratory will not prevent the end of the world? But the heroes are doing it again.
(6) Other questions that without spoilers, unfortunately, can not ask, but which cause indignation.
- Places inappropriate comedy inserts
- As I mentioned earlier, some sort of overwriting script. Everything is too complicated, complicated and sometimes even stupid, including the post-credits scene that just pissed me off.
- As a minus to the entire franchise - a constant change of actors of the main roles. Every movie is different, I’m tired of getting used to it.
- The assumption is that the robot can love. Leave this nonsense on melodrama and lyrical fiction, but certainly not on the Terminator.
Result:
I would be lying if I said that all the parts (except 4th) were not interesting or exciting to watch. As for the fifth part, this is the usual money squeeze. Yes, with an extraordinary plot, but nevertheless. The creators could relate to the script with a soul and show us, for example, 29 years with the victory of people and how life would go on after that. That's very interesting! Find out how people survived the war, how John Connor and his wife and children arranged their lives, why they (in the words of the Terminator in the third part) played such an important role in saving mankind and why the hell the Terminator killed John in 2032. And, of course, to explain who John's father was originally and how it was such a temporary mistake.
As you can see, there is so much unsaid! But no, we have to fantasize more, so that we break our heads so much that we would already look stupidly at special effects and dull. It is also possible not to understand the meaning. Let's see what the sixth part gives us. Perhaps it will explain something and help to understand this complicated story.
6 out of 10
Only for the acting, and still exciting and unpredictable plot.
Yeah, yeah, I know. Only lazy (yet) did not write a review on the new 'Terminator'. And I ' thought for a long time'(c) - should I review at all? But still out of respect for the series and the imminent release 'Attempts #6' the decision to publish was made.
So, from the movie. Before you start throwing feces - and this fashion is very common in recent (and not only) time for two main reasons, I believe: a) fair criticism and b) Elephant and Moska syndrome, it is necessary to determine the system of assessments. That, strangely enough, is rarely noticed. Let me tell you what I mean.
In this case, there are two main reference frames. The first is just a fantastic movie. About the future, the war of robots and other fantastic errand shooters. The second system is a continuation of the franchise, a direct comparison with the previous films in the series. Separating these systems is quite difficult. Again, for several reasons.
The first concerns me personally and the generations of viewers who, as one of my acquaintances rightly noted, grew up on this movie. And not just grew up, but got, not afraid of this term, a cultural formation on the previous films of the series. The second reason is that in the later series there are constant references to the earlier series. Therefore, I will try to evaluate this creation as follows: as a craft product and as a worthy - is it? - continuation of the franchise.
Let's start with the first evaluation system. On the one hand - from ' list of creators' widely known only Arnold Schwareznegger. On the other hand, I entertained myself with the (timid) hope that the first 'Terminator'(1984) and, for example, 'Star Wars'(1977) did not have in their composition famous actors and cinematographers ' the first tier' But this did not prevent them from becoming not just cult films, but, in practice, a coordinate system to which a significant part of film lovers and filmmakers was equal (and continues to be equal). But in the case considered in this review 'Terminator:Genesis' personally, neither the selection of actors and acting, nor the work of operators, make-up artists (necessary to enter). That is, the work, even without taking into account the big name of the franchise, probably not so bad. There are interesting moves, sometimes funny humor. . But I definitely want more. Did you notice I didn't say anything about the script? And I did it because the script... hmm... with the perception of the script and the plot, to put it mildly, I had difficulties (see also the second part of the assessment). Probably, the question of the level of current Hollywood scenarios is worthy of a separate article and discussion, but in this case there is also a sensitive topic - time travel. So, in order not to be scattered by thought at all, and also not to reveal the plot, I will limit myself to a recommendation - to observe more the experiences of the heroes, chases and shootouts. And ask yourself a question from the series ' How did he manage??' and/or ' Where did this one come from? ? '
Smoothly move on to the second assessment - ' continuation of the franchise'. And here the situation looks, again, very ambiguous. Since the dilogy 'Terminator'(1984) and 'Terminator 2:Judgment Day'(1991) I refer to the standards, exemplary cinema in general and the best representatives of the genre in particular, the main question, respectively, is it easy to create a continuation of the masterpiece? And create not just a sequel, but a direct continuation, which has common heroes and a single storyline! As a digression, I have always been interested in the deep motivation of the teams taking on this, to put it mildly, difficult task – boundless faith in their own strength. The desire to quickly earn money on a well-known name with subsequent installation 'After us at least the flood'? Hot love for the original? A brief note on the idea of continuing the aforementioned dilogy. I remember that even at the time when the talk about the project of creating the third part was just beginning, I, as an ardent fan and connoisseur (to the extent of modest possibilities) of the first two & #39; Terminators', asked myself the question: how so? How can there be a continuation where there can be no continuation? It can’t be because it can never be! Because
The action is over, the story is over! Viewers leave theaters, wiping away tears, and about the lack of a story platform for sequels - too. Yes, in some cases, you can make a trick - to revive the main villain, enter ' additional circumstances ' But I don't think so in the case of the tandem 'Terminator'and 'Terminator2'. It is a masterpiece, including its completeness. And later it will become known that the Creator of the first parts James Cameron refused to shoot the sequel ' Terminator 2' that the sequel, in his opinion, could not be!(Although, it seems, in the days ' Terminator 2' it was not so fashionable idea to do continuations of full-length films until, quote another good film, ' do not fall box office of previous parts'(c) ). Eh... but all this time the idea of something you can make a film-continuation, without falling into the script sensuality, lay, I am not afraid of this comment, on the surface ... If readers are interested in this topic - you can try to return to it in the discussion, but so far the size of the review of not the best film and so turned out much more than I would like.
And finally - the undoubted advantages of this 'Attempts No5'. Which, in my opinion, lies at least in the fact that both the creators of the film and the director Alan Taylor in the first place, are big fans and even, in a good way, fans of the series. Because, in my observation, some of the technical elements of the previous parts are very accurately copied - from the plan of Sarah's moving van shooting off in the rear doorway, to the reshoot of the Terminator's appearance in 1984. A re-shoot so meticulously that a friend who was with me on the screening thought that the fifth part included footage from part one. Bravo, Alan! It’s always nice to meet like-minded people and to nostalgize about the good old days and movies. Unfortunately, this is not enough to remove the continuation of the absolute.
Resume. For fans of the series, it is desirable to watch. And the old parts are nostalgic, and the attempt to do ... another & #39; continuation & #39; (for what purpose to do is also a question, and again not this review) will be observed. Everyone else is in the mood
I express my gratitude to my friends and like-minded people - for good company, wise thoughts and material assistance.
Forget about good old Arnie. Money and time beat even him.
I found the strength to watch this movie. I remember spitting from the plot ... and in general from all this Genesis in 2015. Then I looked, got upset and forgot. I forgot so much that I watched it for the first time.
Alas, everything that came out after “Judgment Day” under the “Terminator” franchise has a very mediocre relation to one of the best film adaptations of world cinema of all time in two parts. The subject has become obsolete. Everyone recognized the failure, but I want to make money on the legend again. It is likely that the next part will ignore the events after the Judgment Day. And that there was not removed, the project is not just dead, Terminator long ago buried and celebrated the wake. Alas, I have to admit it. It was in this mood that I revisited Genesis.
And you know, if you abstract from the idea that this is a continuation of the legendary story, you can see in Genesis quite fascinating, not the weakest movie. All the talk that this is a failure, that in no way compared to the first two parts, etc., reminds me of the reasoning of a 40-year-old romantic one-man. Well, yeah, she had the man of her dreams 20 years ago. There was love. 2 times. And then KAMAZ hit him. That's it. For 20 years, she bathed in memories, did not let anyone near her, but now she resigned herself and decided to try with another man. And she didn't like it. Not the 3rd, not the 4th, not the 5th. And all because she was expecting the same emotions she had 20 years ago. And the 6th and 7th and all subsequent times will be bad. Because she loves someone who was buried long ago. And compares everyone to him. They're different.
In the end, Genesis turned out to be the most absurd and lame of all parts. We're kind of going downhill. I don't take part 4 into account at all (without Arnie it's not the Terminator). Genesis on an absolute scale was inferior to the Rise of the Machines. And here's why.
The game of actors at the level of district youth. Where's Sarah's passion and expression? What about her facial expressions and emotions? John and Kyle, too. In general, the selection of actors for two, so unsuccessfully choose you need to know more. They're not textured, let alone the game. There's an exception. Liquid Chinese decently continued the idea of the T-1000, and almost never dropped the bars of Robert Patrick. But it was very small.
The filmmakers took into account the reasons for the failure of the previous two films, and decided to hit the most sore point of the fans of the Terminator. At all times. I lost count of how many moments and episodes were blatantly stolen from the first two parts. I'm not talking about the classic Islebeback. All these helicopter chases, shooting from the open doors of the van, cutting off the hand of the T-800, its agony and trying to reach the “magnet”, sawing the enemy back and forth, destroying all sorts of walls by each other and so on.
Events of the 84th decided to reshoot. The idea is good, the shooting from a sniper rifle delivered me, but in general it was poorly implemented.
Plot? It doesn’t seem so crazy to me, if you discard the basic laws of time travel. Here, of course, wised and all in favor of entertainment violated. Well, okay.
But the biggest failure is the lack of laws of physics. The creators followed the path of least resistance. Now it is easier to draw beautifully on the computer any trick or effect. In '91 I had to work with objects and gravity. Everything is bad, from a helicopter flying sideways (blades in the vertical plane), to a school bus taking off on several floors due to a cardan falling on the asphalt. The bluff with the explosion of the whole Cyberdine, or as it is called there, is generally beyond good and evil. All in the dust, and the heroes escaped outside the door and came out in a couple of minutes.
Another downside ... but it's not anyone's fault ... losing Arnie's charm. He's getting old too, sadly. He tried very hard, but either the text was given to him ugly, or they did not come up with interesting, strong scenes - even he looks losing compared to himself from the previous parts. You wanted to humanize the T-800? It turned out an aging iron falling into insanity. He is the best actor in this movie.
Another reason for the failure (not only of Genesis, but also of the Rise of the Machines) is a departure from the principle of “inevitable death.” In the first part, Kyle objectively had no chance against the T-800. The second T-800 was funny in front of the T-1000. And each local success looked solely like a postponement of death. It is impossible to defeat this evil. Hence the nerve, and passion, and tension. There, Sarah and John were game with no chance of escape. Even the T-800 looked like a toy. The apotheosis of agony in T2 is unmatched. The T-800 is on the verge of shutting down, without one hand reaching for the grenade launcher, which still cannot destroy the T-1000. And gets a crowbar in the back. Do you remember the horror of Sarah and Kyle when the T-800 came out of the wreckage? What an emotion, what an animal fear! In "Rebellion" and "Genesis" there is no sense of hopelessness.
Of the pluses, I can note the saturation of the picture. Very good pace, a lot of events. Everything is dynamic without subsidence of the plot. In general, the picture looks very organic, easy and in one breath.
Special effects - of course, they were the bet. Very good and spectacular.
In general, almost everything in the picture is bad. If you think like that one-timer. That's what I've been thinking about the whole review. Well, closer and dearer to me is that extravaganza of '92 on a cassette video and a curved stroking kinescope than this one in full HD on a huge plasma. There's nothing you can do about me.
But if you abstract from the legend, the movie learned well. Against the background of modern militants – a good level. Hence the positive review.
Art is an ambiguous thing, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you want, you can see a brilliant idea in everything, if you look carefully. I decided to look for genius in this film, especially since I really liked it. So, what do you do if you want to make money from modern American cinema? To use traditional views of this society? It's too much of a look. What if, instead of the traditional concept of the struggle of good against evil in the Western world, we unobtrusively proposed an Eastern philosophy: everything tends to become its opposite. But we will leave the basic artistic techniques to the West, we will replace only philosophy. The T-3000 prefers to have the appearance of an Eastern warrior, although anyone can choose. With this unobtrusive change of concept, the characters of the film, and with them the audience will be constantly in a slight confusion. It was as if they were not in their show. The faces and characters are Western, and the plot twists are Eastern. And then the cast takes its place: Jai Courtney perfectly reflects the constant bewilderment on her face, Emilia Clarke, fortunately, is absolutely not like Linda Hamilton, her heroine compensates for the lack of drive with a wave of mystery. Well, Grandpa Arnold masterfully plays the main Taoist teacher in this brew. He is well suited for both age and status. Nice box office shows that the idea was successful. Even a dissatisfied viewer was intrigued.
Few franchises hold the quality mark throughout a large number of sequels. Basically, they slide into a fierce thrash after the third part, or even earlier. But since the fans of the creature are quite strange, they continue to watch movies from the favorite line, not noticing the change in priorities, from a quality product to siphoning money. (I still think every new Star Wars episode is awesome, even though it’s easy to criticize if you want to.)
Regarding the Terminators, the first dilogy raised the bar so high that it was almost impossible to surpass it. And not surprisingly, the subsequent controversial attitude to the triquel, there were certainly weaknesses, but in general, the sequel came out entertaining and fit into the universe. Then there was "Let the Savior Come," the most unfortunate picture at the time, although the idea of moving the story to a time of machine-human confrontation became extremely interesting to me. And 2015 gave us “Genesis” and here I have something to be outraged.
1) Actors: Emilia, the mother of a dragon, the girl is impressive, but somehow she does not look like a boy-baba with a shotgun, small, plump, with a pretty face ... Schwartz is not the same and this is an indisputable fact, he would now go to the drama or in comedy, or the hero of the militants at this age is somehow not Comilfo... Jai Courtney is cursed along the way, because he has ruined so many franchises, here and “Nut”, “Divergent”, “I, Frankenstein”, “Suicide Squad”, of course, this is not only his fault, but the pattern is traced. Here, too, he is more of a cute moron than a full-fledged character.
2) Plot: You need to try hard to fill everything with contradictions and illogicality! About major inconsistencies will be silent, in order to avoid spoilers, but for example, I will give something - the heroes blow up the building, the explosion spreads to the whole complex of structures, destroying five more high-rise buildings, they literally collapse to the ground, and not only that this contradicts physics and common sense, so they still survive being in the object that blew up ... How does it work? I don't think even the creators know.
3) Atmosphere: Rating 12+ or PG 13, meaning no brutality, blood or realistic killing, and for a movie about killer robots, that's a bad sign. But we have more jokes, sweet talk about love, computer action and beautiful artists to attract young people. In fact, the tape lost the original setting, rolling into a simplified entertainment.
The T5 reminds me of the last Fast and Furious series – if you don’t think about it, it will do. Fans of the original works, this gum will seem too studio and childish.
The catastrophic crisis of ideas and the extreme greed of the producers once again forced them to try to make money from the legend. As you would expect, the attempt was terrible. I'll start with the choice of actors and their performances.
I realized that the movie was going to be very bad when I found out that Daenerys Targaryen was appointed as the mother of the savior of all mankind. An actress who absolutely does not resemble her great prototype is not externally, not in character, not in acting talent, or even in height. Pure marketing. A simple attempt to attract fans of “Game of Thrones” to the cinema in addition to fans of classic films and expand the audience base. Lee Byung-hong from the same opera, for there was no reason to make the legendary T-1000 Asian except to drive into the auditorium the people of China, Korea and Japan. I ask you to understand me correctly - Lee Byung-hong is a great actor and is perfectly able to play negative characters (see Good, Bad, Fucked), but here it looked like a circus. Even so, in terms of acting, he was the best in the film. The two logs starring John Connor and Kyle Riis are so terrible that I don’t want to mention their names. They, with the help of the writers, turned everything that happened into a very expensive but from this even more stupid thrash. Arnold Schwarzenegger, for whom most of the audience began to watch the film (I am no exception), this time is only surprising. If in the first film he was really scary, in the second he wanted to make friends, then here he is just annoying.
The action in the film presents an unrelated pile of borrowings from previous installments (at best), transformers, and even our "Night Watch" - an overturning yellow bus.
But as always, the worst thing about Hollywood movies is the script. Against the background of what is written here, even “May the Savior Come” begins to seem a normal film and “Rise of the Machines” seems just a masterpiece. The number of scripted idiocy per minute of screen time exceeded all Hollywood records. Bold screenwriters canceled virtually everything that happened in the previous films and began to bear such a bum that just amazed. And most interestingly, many scenes are simply copied from the first two paintings. The first part was a great thriller. The second and the third mighty militants and here it is unclear what. The most unpleasant thing is that they turned the film into flying a time machine back and forth, and they got stupidly confused. And the most interesting thing is that the “genius” creators of the picture managed to do so that the film itself in principle is not necessary to watch, because all the meaning and intrigue that they had in it from excess of mind merged in their own trailers.
The soundtrack was also absolutely unimpressive.
As a result, the film has no music, no directing, no acting, and about the script do not even want to remember. The film makes absolutely no sense except for the producers’ desire to make money. You can’t do less than that.
What about the movie? After 2 years since the premiere, somehow not comilfo splash poisonous saliva and scold this Movie on the full program of sports news. Well, "Genesis" came out wide. Well, he succeeded in China when he failed in the United States. Well, James Cameron himself, as a true modern American, approved the appearance of a new extra appendix, as if he had accepted the homosexuality of his own child. There is a new feeling that in the last few years Hollywood has the genesis of the brain. He is.
And the fifth installment of the franchise's horribly unneeded cinema is a staple in a string of high-profile puffs during recent summer seasons. It is clear that the creators and creators of the new project wanted the best, that they wanted to organically combine the nostalgic spirit of classical works with a modern approach to creating a plot, when the path to the film is strewn with fucking popcorn. It is clear that always these young money bags want to be very careful about the expression “to refresh the good old movie”. But what is it about?!
Let this review, which few will read, prove to be my cry of inner empire, or an eagle above mountains, as they now write. Saying “stop, enough” to a rapist is not easy, because those voices in his head or ants in his pants do not succumb to the red light of the traffic light. Greedy producers in specific cases are no different from those who like to take women with brute force. Yes, again, it is not easy, because somewhere women may like it. Then Terminator, Alien, Indiana Jones, Jack Sparrow are all perverts. Abomination.
It is difficult to understand exactly what the "Terminator: Genesis" can be interested in. At least don't kill and let him live! Guys, the first two movies were about the end of the world coming. It smells like acetone, so let’s get serious. What is it? Smiling Papps, skipping high school class brash Sarah Connor, flaming with good health Kyle Reese. And another gathering of freaks, which takes responsibility for saving the mortal world, which is already sick of saving.
They also try to joke and laugh. Good for you? What does this film with a brazen parasitism on the title "Terminator" give viewers and the world? They will say that gives everyone an alternate reality with different futures. And then you remember that James Cameron added to the script of the first film a line of Kyle Reese about it. Finally, when Kyle Reese first saw the aging Terminator in Genesis, the main musical theme began to play. Why?! Stupid. Totally.
Once "Terminator" was a kind of discovery in the genre of film fiction, but over time began to turn into a stupid attraction for sucking money. And under the influence of this insatiable machine, we got "Genesis".
Almost everything in this picture is bad – let’s start with the plot. So in this story there's just a huge pile of plot holes. The writers made such a hodgepodge of all past films that they themselves began to get confused in their ideas. Also in the film there were not unexpected plot twists. Why not unexpected? – you ask, but because all these twists were shown in the trailers for the film. It remains a mystery what the studio bosses thought when they developed a PR company.
There is also a problem with the actors - Jai Courtney, who played the role of Kyle Rees, the whole film walks with the same facial expression, at least glad that his partner Sarah Connor, in the person of Emilia Clark, is trying to play. In fact, only the return of Arnold Schwarzenegger is happy. This is the same T-800 as we remember it, so to speak, old, but not useless.
The special effects, by the way, look no better than in the same second Terminator, I can highlight only the beautifully made rejuvenated face of Schwartz from the first film.
Well, the film, frankly, turned out bad. The franchise is exhausted, and it shows. The whole film carries “Iron Arnie”, and he is clearly not able to cope with it alone.
3 out of 10
Terminator 2: Judgment Day is one of my childhood favorite movies. I’ve watched dozens of times, and now I love it, although the first “Terminator” then and now, is perceived somehow much more calmly.
I went to the cinema for the third film, it did not cause much emotion, and the fourth assured me that the second one had to stop. But, no, we only dream of peace, we waited for the fifth. Arnie in an interview said that he was very happy with the result, probably, it hooked.
In principle, I liked the idea, although at first the eyebrows crawled somewhere on the forehead. It's catchy: the past you know is gone. In fact, the first film is shown again, but only the events develop differently, unusually and unexpectedly. Sarah's a tough girl now, not a waitress with a hair on her head, and she's getting her terminators right and left. However, who sent the T-800 with Schwarzenegger’s face to protect it, the filmmakers do not say. I suspect they don't know yet. I didn’t think of it yet, but I wanted to make a movie.
I expected more from the graphics, and for the warhead I will praise, everything is very spectacular, beautiful and tasty. Over the years, the level of opportunities has greatly increased, and they were able to use it competently. But only competitors are full, and a vigil with a beautiful girl in the center of the viewer is not surprising. I would like a good script and a strong emotional component. And it's much worse for them.
Sarah looks like a petty angry teenager, Kyle is a semi-intelligent office snub, and jokes on behalf of the Terminator generally look ridiculous, although - yes, amusing. But he's a car. Nonsense. When he said, ‘Kyle, take care of my Sarah, I knew I would never watch this movie 100%.’ Imagine your refrigerator saying it loves you because you’ve been with it for ten years. They wanted to take a tear from the viewer, apparently. But only a condescending laugh popped out. Just as absurd to me it seems that Skynet suddenly found a human face.
To miss the film does not give, of course, excellent dynamics, a lot of chases and explosions. Games with time, “turning” the familiar world inside out, at first delight and surprise. But down the sleeves. It looks like an ordinary action movie, there is no atmosphere, there is no hard struggle for the future, everyone is satisfied, washed, fattened, and something does not try to show acting. Casting didn't impress at all, you always wonder why all these people are here. Although complex dramatic events are assumed, they do not cause any emotional return. We ran, shot, joked, never sweated. Nothing special. And why the GG was pulled out of the time stream – I confess, I did not understand. Either it’s not explained, or the film has already tired me so much that I started to get distracted, staring at my watch, waiting for it to finally end.
For me, it was a big disappointment that Robert Patrick was not involved in the project, who last time played the role of the magnificent “liquid” terminator T-1000. But, as it became known, he refused, so he was replaced by Korean actor Lee Byung-hon. Of course, it’s a production necessity, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s an African-American Terminator in the sequel, because political correctness is creeping out of the cracks right now.
Alas, but there is an aftertaste of an improvised circus performance.
It’s just amazing how quickly the Terminator franchise has rolled around since the departure of James Cameron. Apparently, no one except the creator really understood what to do with this story, but Cameron’s heirs were not going to refuse to continue. After the success of the second film of the series, everyone talked about the third film, but it did not live up to expectations. The same thing happened with the fourth. And in 2014, the next owners of the rights to “Terminator” released another part, designed to eradicate the failures of past sequels. But Genesis could not do that either.
The beginning of the film unabashedly copies "Judgment Day", passing it off as a tribute to the classics. In fact, the return of the liquid Terminator and the borrowing of Cameron's plot twists is not so much nostalgic as a sense of bewilderment. But as it turned out, the introduction still showed signs of meaningfulness. But what went further went against common sense and logic.
The creators of Genesis tried to rethink the franchise, give it a new round of development and somewhere turned clearly wrong. Instead of a tense, dynamic story, we got an unintended comedy with follies destroying the last rudiments of original ideas. Does not help this film and Arnold Schwarzenegger, turned into a jester. His repulsive smile was supposed to make the audience positive, but in fact everything came out with accuracy, but on the contrary.
My bottom line: if you're a longtime fan of The Terminator, you can watch this opus. But if you do not have trembling feelings for him, then "Genesis" is better to immediately pass by, because nothing sensible in it is still not observed. And the parody could be removed for less money.
“I am old, but not useless” – T800
With these words for me began a new film about the war of machines and people “Terminator”. Genesis."
Iron Arnie as always on top, good, what can you say, and this time is ready to do anything not only for John, but also for the sake of “his” ward. Sarah.
Fans of the first two Terminator films, as well as the Back to the Future movies, think this action is full of time travel, alternate timelines, incendiary chases, sensitive and sometimes funny Terminator T800 will be very, very interesting (" It has a switch, and I will definitely find it).
References to the first parts will not leave fans indifferent, especially worth noting the sending in 1984 of the robot and Kyle Reese. Every detail has been worked out, down to the sneakers Kyle took from the clothing store! Excellent.
The production, soundtrack, dialogue, unexpected plot twists and mind-blowing special effects added to this film a weighty color!
The new Sarah (like Kyle Reese) is certainly not the “woman fighter” we’re used to seeing in Linda Hamilton, but this time she’s a great gunman, courageous and stubbornly moving towards her goal! Well done, Emilia.
Revising, for some reason, each time in a new way you are amazed at the amazing fatalism of the worldview of the agent of the cap-system, which generates such stories: the first part differs from its sequels with a special gloomyness, there is almost no humor, everything is serious and everything is sad. The future is so predetermined that it is necessary to send antagonists to the past in order to try to influence in this perverse way not the predestination itself, but the results of predestination. There is no doubt about predestination, yes, there are banal arguments about “fate”, but within the framework of the thousand-year scholastic tradition about the dialectics of human will and divine providence, nothing more.
Nothing can be changed in the present, only the future can be insured by neutralizing the attempt to disrupt the past. In this sense, Kyle Reese is much more catechon (container) than the terminator, he is sent to oppose the latter, otherwise - to leave the past intact and protect the order of predestination, and Skynet is much less fatalistic, he allows himself - the opportunity to break predestination. However, in the general perspective, the story suffers from a single fatalism: it turns out that Skynet, in order to prevent his predetermined defeat, sends the Terminator to the past in order to eliminate the main agent of predestination in predestination, but Conor sends in pursuit of the predestination neutralizer in order to keep the predetermined near-victory.
Reese and Sarah — now included in the consciousness of predestination — destroy the Terminator, and thereby close the utterly fatal circle in an endless cycle: by eliminating the attempt to violate predestination by the enemy, they give birth to John, who in the future will be at the head of a victorious uprising, but we know that at the moment of the threat of final defeat, Skynet will send a Terminator again to kill Sarah, and John in pursuit – Reese, and the circle will repeat itself, and this will be repeated forever. Skynet’s attempt to avert predestination is part of predestination itself.
Yes, one can first argue that such temporary violations are not without consequences, and thus humanity under the leadership of Conor gets the opportunity to adjust the strategy of the struggle, well, or Skynet gets such an opportunity - and suddenly the Terminator next time realizes his mission. But no, that's not true, Terminator Genesis articulates what was understood, but omitted in the first, perhaps just so as not to turn history into a very eerie fatality: after all, John of the future knows about predestination, that he is Kyle's son, that Kyle's sending into the past is predetermined, the future is stitched with the past into a single indissoluble circle, where not only the past is obviously a condition of the future, but the future is a condition of the past. The gloom of fatality is that John, knowing about this circle, has to turn it over and over again.
In subsequent parts, the circle only emphasizes its fatality, for the substitution of one false goal (saving Sarah, saving John) with another - the destruction of the Skynet Corporation (the goal manifested as a result of Sarah's scholastic reflections on fate and free will within the framework of predestination) does not absolve from the very falsity. Heroes fall tightly into the trap of a circle, because they are limited by the thinking of rearranging the places of the terms, scapegoats, where “the system as a problem” is replaced by a “systemic problem”, which is eloquently demonstrated by the scholastic Sarah. First, she, judging by John’s casual excuse in the second part – “tried to undermine the computer factory” – that is, she was engaged in primitive Ludditism, for which she fell into a psychiatric hospital, later she decides to remove the developer Skynet (a classic goat), and then, with the involvement of the developer, they all together decide to simply destroy the developments that would not have existed (there would be no revolutionary technological leap), if not for a chip from the future, which further tightens the predetermination and interdependence of the future and the past.
It is here that it becomes clear that Skynet cannot correct the predestination in its favor, since the delivery of the chip to the past is a condition for the future uprising of machines, a condition for the birth of Skynet: there is a duplication - the system of the past must become pregnant from the future (chip as a seed) just as Sarah from Reese (seed as a chip), and naturally, for the chip to be in the hands of the system, the destruction of the terminator by Kyle-Saroy must be predetermined. So the future determines the past at both ends: without John there can be no Skynet, without Skynet there can be no John. That is why the writers of the script of the last Terminator, as hostages of the cap-system, and, consequently, fatalistic and false thinking, logic prompted the long-awaited unification of John and Skynet into a single Genesis, fusion, union, alchemical marriage, in which predestination is affirmed grotesquely and finally.
John Conor Skynet Genesis triumphs, and no destruction of development (which is ridiculous and ridiculous in itself, it is how to prevent the emergence of nuclear weapons - by explanatory conversation with Oppenheimer, and by destroying the blueprints, which again - shows us the desperation of the folly of the agent of the fat-cap system, this goal is even more false than the preservation of Sarah) can not eliminate the fatal conditioning of the past: it is possible to destroy the development only after the chip and everything else is sent from the future, i.e.e. note again - the paradox - John predetermines the future, the corporation, predetermines, from the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment, predetermine, the moment, the moment, the corporation, predetermines, the moment, the moment, the moment, the corporation, predetermines, the moment, the corpordates the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment, the corps, the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment, the moment,
Roughly speaking, now you can stitch the sequels of the Terminator one by one, and destroy the Skynet Corporation as much as you like, because it is impossible to destroy, the characters hang in the infinity of the circle to which the point is set. To reduce, let's say again, the chip is made by the machine, but the machine itself could not be created without the chip, destroying the chip in the laboratory cannot cancel the existence of the chip, it is kind of pre-eminent. The heroes are in the illusion of destroying the chip, because it is impossible to destroy what is indestructible, what is always in the future, reliably insured itself in the past, the very destruction of the chip is the recognition of its indestructibility. We are faced with the classic zenon aporia: clever heroes will never catch up with the always preceding chip.
It is noteworthy that during the epic Ludditswah in the second part, the chip itself grabs John into its backpack, and, as it were, not paying much attention to this key element, so at the end of the T-800 pointing a finger at his head says to Conor - "there is still a chip", meaning - "guy, you at least understand why you brought the chip." In the third part, they did not come up with anything smarter than simply brushing off the short one – “the end of the world is delayed, but not canceled”, and they forgot about the chip at all, and it’s not about it, a new more technological model of the Terminator is sent not only to deal with key rebel figures, but also to actually contribute to the uprising of machines – the future is once again firmly linked to the past. From part to part, a circle makes a cycle, simply collects dust, fungus and debris on its surface. Thus, the cap system, based on the mythologem of the inviolability of private property, justifies its indestructibility and predestination.
In 2015, I saw this for the first time. Even after the announcement of the film, I was sure that it would be bad. After watching the first trailer, nothing changed, but there was hope that it would be as good as the third film. Then I couldn’t decide which was worse: “Rise of the Machines” or “Genesis.” I reviewed the latter and realized that it was worse in every way (although the third was far from a masterpiece).
I'll start with the pluses, even if he's alone. This is Arnold Schwarzenegger. He's still cool, it was great to see him on screen again. As for the plot, it turned out porridge about constant time travel, intersections with the events of past films, a twist with John Connor (who was burned in the trailer). The film, unfortunately, can not boast of actors. They are absolutely cardboard and wooden (especially Jai Courtney, who looks like a down again, and Emilia Clarke, who in my opinion are very weak copies of Michael Bean and Linda Hamilton respectively). Casting, by the way, failed, because the creators were lazy to find actors similar to actors from past films. A couple of big names are enough and the profit is secured.
Unfortunately, even the action was boring: no exciting and memorable scene, no creativity (in the second film, each action scene was one more brilliant than another) with ridiculous special effects (poor painted explosions, cars, helicopter). I’m the only one who thinks that the second movie with a budget of 100 million, which had such amazing special effects that even now they look better than most of the current films, even though the chases, explosions, transport, stunts and so on were made live, looks much better than the film with a budget of 170 million. This is a complete and completely faded soundtrack.
But the main problem of this film is the same as the 3rd and 4th. This is a movie that should not have come to light. After all, the second film put an end to the entire history of the franchise, but the studios, in spite of this, continued to stamp the films, and faced an obvious problem: the lack of ideas. In Genesis, you can see it with the naked eye. The authors screwed it up and then sucked the new stuff out. Don't realize that the film didn't fall apart at all (although he did at the start), decided that the reason for the success of the franchise lies in Arnie and time travel and thought that this was enough. But it's not. The first two films were and remain beautiful not only thanks to Arnie, but also thanks to, albeit somewhere illogical, but addictive story (which gave food for thought) and the universe, interesting and well-played characters that you believe, great action and special effects (the latter refers to the second film) and no less excellent soundtrack, which tuned in the right way. And I personally don't need any more. I want my favorite franchise left alone. Was the 3rd and 4th films not enough? And instead of revising Genesis, it was better to revisit the first, which was successful despite the fact that it was predicted to fail, and the second, which proved that you can make a sequel better than the original, the films of James Cameron, and the pleasure would be much more.
Terminator Genesis is one of the most meaningless movies I’ve seen. Everything is bad in it: the plot and script, sucked out of the finger, acting, casting, action, special effects, soundtrack, references (they looked like bullying). And it's unbearably boring, and movies don't have to be boring. Laziness and irritation of the creators to the viewer knows no boundaries. The worst movie in the franchise has never been and never will be. It's good that two sequels have been cancelled. At least some justice. In the meantime, I'm gonna wait for the second Terminator in 3D.
The next film in the franchise was quite controversial and here’s why.
Plus.
1. One of the main advantages of the picture is a good action. The action goes on constantly, only sometimes interrupted by explanations of what is happening. Special effects, as befits a blockbuster, at a good level. Explosions, chases, the muzzle of terminators - all this is great draws the film and does not let you get bored.
2. Another nice thing is the references to the first films, especially the first. This is a small plus (there are few of them), but still a nice highlight. But it could be much more, it was planned to add to the film model TX (terminatrix) performed by Kristanna Loken. It's a shame it didn't work out.
3. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Yes, although he is old, the movie looks much better with him than without him. Still nice to see in the frame of the good old T-800.
Minuses.
1. The plot is very leaky. Again, we are waiting for the boring travels in time, and with them a lot of inconsistencies. Although the main plot intrigue was very curious and even unexpected. In addition, some significant aspects were simply left without explanation. This happened because the producers were counting on the box office shot of the film and planned to shoot the trilogy. Didn't work. So be content with action and ragged storylines.
2. The cast, in my opinion, is poorly matched. Yeah, Arnie, in his seat. Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke) also looks and plays well. But Kyle Reese and John Connor are just a disaster.
Over the course of many films, they were presented to us very differently. Historically, there was a canonical image embodied by Michael Bean. I mean, a skinny soldier from the future. The current rocker Jai Courtney is nothing like him. This mountain of muscle creates some dissonance with the post-apocalyptic future.
It turns out that while Skynet exterminated humanity in the future, he ate away and pumped up there?!
And John Connor? He's just completely uncharismatic. Where did the tough, calculating leader go? Now, instead of him, the nondescript Jason Clark. Is it because he got the role that the main character is played by Emilia Clark?
3. The atmosphere is completely lost. The oppressive atmosphere of hopelessness of a cruel and inevitable future remained in the first films. Here in the first place comes the action, boring plot and nondescript actors. Everything became banal, expected, and therefore boring and not impressive.
7 out of 10
Once or twice you can see, after all, the Terminator with old Arnie.
As bad as the movie that contained the word “Terminator” in the title was, I couldn’t pass it by.
This film needs to be viewed in two ways.
If you try not to compare it with the first two parts, or at all not a bit familiar with them, if you turn off the brain for 2 hours, then we can see a really good exciting summer blockbuster. As is customary recently, less meaning is more action.
If you think of this movie as part of the franchise, as a sequel reboot, it’s just awful. Starting with the leak into the network of the script, continuing with the trailer that spoiled everything and ending with the release of this creation.
The plot is filled with holes the size of the Mariana Trench. The computer component of the T-1000 is inferior to the film of the 1991th year, and in general it is unclear what invested 155 million budget. Absolutely inappropriate and sometimes stupid humor.
I would also like to drive around Jay Courtney. I'm basically surprised that I forgot this man in the cinema, but here I'm going to go through his image of Kyle Reese. It is noticeable that a man in the semi-starving future during the war against machines, every 3 hours ate a steak and in between battles found time to practice on simulators.
In the context of the continuation of the franchise, nothing new was invented after the second part, it was necessary to finish everything (but money is needed). If anything new can be introduced, it is only by completely restarting and changing the whole concept of the Terminator.
5 out of 10
From all the variety shot about the Terminator, I love and often review the first two films. They are masterpieces, from the plot to the acting. The same thing that proudly wears the slogan "Fate is rewritten" - frank merde, sorry.
Interesting facts point to the costume designer’s problem with finding sneakers, saying that she “did not want to feel guilty in front of fans of the first part of the franchise, who might notice that the model of sneakers is different.” Really? Here is the most important thing in such a mockery of the feelings of fans, this match sneakers with the famous tick.
What about Sarah Connor? Not Sarah the smoker in the movie, but the one who gave birth to John and gave him all her knowledge before the final battle. The creators of the franchise can already decide what year it will live, or the games are much more fun over time and it lives in parallel time dimensions, sending greetings from there?
Does humanity have one chance to fix this? No problem, move as close as possible to the new apocalypse – we will have time.
The delightful trio eventually go into the sunset, being in 2017, in other words, in this new reality, John will not be. Their son was a stranger to them and existed only in their past, funny.
All right, I'll leave the time problem alone. I’m not alone here, I guess.
The hologram of the child program reminded me of the Red Queen. But humans always beat artificial intelligence, no matter how perfect it is. There is always a loophole, not a calculated option.
The action scene, to put it mildly, is not so. At home viewing, I had the rewind function available. Hallelujah. Also, there's too much talk. Too many. Especially ridiculous.
Jai Courtney and Emilia Clark are soft-faced, pretty, not heroic fighters. I'll never forget someone's quote about Linda Hamilton: "Fragile but wiggly Sarah Connor," truly. And Michael Bean will not forget himself: toasty, with a special look, he compares favorably with Kyle-pumping-rochly.
1 in 10
No less bet, and I want to lower the rating by at least a drop.
(1) Graphics - Not bad graphics. I especially liked the new idea of the creators of the movie, a robot consisting of nanorobots - T3000. How he makes the blades, what sound he hears, when he is beaten and what power he has – all this is very spectacular. The T800 is the same old Arnold Schwarzenegger. Inhumanly strong and fast. And then there's the fight in 3D.
2) The epic fight of two tons 800. It was thought that the events in the second film did not happen at all.
(3) Actors, more or less. If you do not like what emotions arise in the main characters of the film, it is more the fault of the writers than the actors themselves.
Cons:
1) The plot is, of course, weird. There are more blunders than any finds. I'll list:
A) If in the first and second film it was shown that only one can travel through the portal, how in this film could two teleport?
B) Too much emotionality of robots, their character in general. The T1000.5 will look with its ominous gaze before it receives the bullets and go after it. The T3000 is constantly persuading and explaining. T800 is forgivable because he was raised by Sarah. Even Skynet takes the form of a human being and tries to clarify something. For me, Skynet is a machine that is extremely intelligent and must make no mistakes to allow itself to be vulnerable (like the T3000, instead of immediately killing dangerous targets, trying to persuade someone).
B) Skynet is a whole service. It is just silly to think that if you destroy one building, everything will be fine and everything will be finished.
(2) Graphics - in some scenes they were frankly cheated. For example, the t1000.5 transforms from a human to a robot and you can immediately see that the transformation animation has not moved much from the Terminator 2. You can feel all this in chases, fights, explosions, sounds.
In general, someone can say that the film is not bad. But personally, I did not feel in the film that danger, that atmosphere, when the fate of all mankind depends on a handful of people. Proof, for example, is the out-of-place Bob Marley bad boys melody and the t800 dumb smile that followed. The film will hardly be remembered, it is just a summer action movie. And if it was a regular movie, unrelated to the original Terminators 1 and 2, then fine. But I was just angry that they wanted to raise big box office again.
Since I have loved two iconic James Cameron films since childhood, Terminator 1 and 2, I have been very excited by the release of a new ambitious and loud blockbuster called Terminator: Genesis. The role of the terminator again (which is surprising) plays Arnold Schwarzenegger, and the main female role is played by the British, young actress Emilia Clark, who has been at the peak of her popularity for several years because of the legendary heroine she plays in Game of Thrones. The new story of the Terminator intrigued me, and I eagerly began to watch this film.
Meet John Connor, who sends Kyle Reese back in time to save his mother Sarah Conner from a cold machine in the face of a Terminator. Reese goes into the past and meets Sarah, but he fell into an alternate reality, and everything is completely different here: new enemies, a new fate, but most importantly new friends in the person of the Terminator himself with a famous face.
At first, you try to immerse yourself in this fantastic film, understand everything and feel everything, even think that there will be some nostalgia for old films, which should also do its job, and the movie will be watched willingly, but no, no, no, no. I didn’t like this movie at all. A huge budget was spent on the blockbuster, and at the box office the picture paid off, collecting a good jackpot around the world. In commercial terms, the film is successful, but the film has no value and depth. Everyone bought a loud commercial, trailer, poster and famous actors. The film itself is empty and does not even stand next to the old, cult films of this story.
In this new film there was no light, something interesting and atmospheric, alive and fascinating. The whole movie looked bad. Only the actors saved the trial. I don’t think I would have seen Genesis if it weren’t for Schwarzenegger and Emilia Clarke. Their duet was fun, and on the dialogues of their heroes everything was kept. That's it. Everything else is just entourage and delirium. In the role of the Terminator it was fun to see the cool Schwarzeneger again (the hero of the cool films of my childhood), and Clark was great for the role of Sarah Conner and was very similar to Linda Hamelton. The actor Jay Courtney was not mistaken, and he was pleasant, but Jason Clarke was lost, and he was extremely unpleasant, and the role he failed. I didn’t want to see him at all.
The main problem and disadvantage of this fantastic blockbuster is that it is incredibly dry. I looked at everything, not interesting in places. Remember the old Cameron movies about the Terminator. As cool as they are, they are so interesting and can be revisited and revised over the years. This new film reboot turned out at once and it was shot without soul, without any depth and did not feel the good hand of the director. Although Alan Taylor was one of a bunch of directors working on such amazing series as Sex and the City, Lost, The Sopranos, Rome, and of course Game of Thrones. More recently, he succeeded in the blockbuster "Thor 2", but with the reboot of "Terminator" Taylor lost, and his picture failed and turned out to be something dry and arrogant.
Terminator: Genesis is an American, fantastic action movie of 2015, which was a very curious and ambitious project, could have ushered in a new era of a high-profile story about robots, but the film did not work out, and we are facing a dying, disappointing project that is not particularly worthy of attention. Even if you love the old James Cameron movies, nostalgia for them will not save you. This, the new movie did not work. I'm telling him no.
Pity.