Terminator 3-Sure, but Alien vs. Predator vs. Terminator Sounds Better!
Remember that scene in Demolition Man where Stallone finds out that Arnold was elected President? Hah, hah, hah. Dear God.
Terminator 3 is a very, very interesting film. Here is a flick that cost a seriously huge amount of money, about $180-$200 million dollars, ouch! Yet only brought in about $400 million. Now, I saw ONLY because the Terminator name combined with the success and popularity of Terminator 2, should have guaranteed that this film would do better than $400 million. I mean My Big Fat Greek Con Job, I mean Wedding made close to that amount and that was a truly dreadful film with relatively poor production values and a simply miserable and incomprehensible script. Bet you didn’t expect to see My Big Fat Greek Con Job, mentioned in a Terminator review, did you? I’m unpredictable baby. So what gives?
The script was solid enough. John Conner played, well by Nick Stahl, is a young lad in his 20's and we learn that he is sort of a drifter, staying “off the grid” and for good reason as robots from the future are looking to do a drive by. We soon learn that this time the machines have sent back a ultra-sexy robot love kitten by the name T-X, played by Kristanna Loken, who is like 7 feet tall and wears lots of tight leather. She is an upgraded killing machine and far more advanced than the old Terminator rust bucket sent back by the humans in the future. Yes, in case you were unaware, there is time travel, but if you didn’t know that you should probably stop reading this review and go see the other two films in the series first. Terminator 3 has absolutely great special and visual effects, tons of great fight sequences and interesting visuals. So again, what gives?
Terminator 3 had a solid script, lots of action, sex appeal with Loken and it seemed to move the history of the franchise on a bit, so the what was the problem. I can’t imagine that the word of mouth on the film was that bad and it should be taken into consideration that this was absolutely NOT a box-office failure. My bewilderment is only with the fact that the film was not more profitable. In fact, some estimates are that once all the cash was carved up the film wasn’t very profittable, which is very puzzling giving history of the Terminator films. I think there are several reasons why more folks did not turn out to see what is really a good sci-fi action oriented film. One reason must be a general sequel and failed blockbuster burnout. Terminator 3 had the unfortunate luck of coming out during a stretch of sequels that were miserably bad. It is a bit of a unorthodox argument but one key reason that the Terminator 3 did not hit the $600 or $700 million dollar mark is that the Hollywood blockbuster had been consistently disappointing during this time period.
Perhaps, a second reason that the audiences were not larger is that Terminator 3 did not give audiences what they wanted, namely a film set in the future. Based on feedback I received, audiences wanted the film to dive into the future in a big-budget effects driven way. Accommodating this wish might have meant the largest budget in film history in order, however, this is what people wanted. Continuing to set the film mostly in the present is actually following the films own established formula too well and as a result does not feel original enough, fresh or new. Third, no Linda Hamilton, just kidding. Although it is a truly perplexing decision.
Truth be told, director Jonathan Mostow, who really did not have the directing credits under his belt to warrant such a promotion plain and simple, does a fine job, but perhaps the film would have been served better by another director. In general it is only logical to conclude that the fact that the film was not directed by James Cameron made audiences feel that it was an indicator that something was wrong with the film. This is an instance where the studio made a critical error as they should have played up the monster budget of the film in order to ease audience fears.
The script was good enough and the effects and action sequences were good enough to live up to the Terminator lineage. Perhaps, the politics of Governor Arnold played some sort of role as well, but it is difficult to say. In the end, Terminator 3 is not an abomination it was likely just not what people wanted to see. In order to keep a franchise crisp, clean and interesting producers must resist the urge to cannibalize their own lore and instead aim for interesting new ground, which Terminator 3 ultimately fails to do. That said Terminator 3 is still worth a rental if you have not seen, for despite some problems, the film still has a lot of fun moments to offer. A final thought that many movie-goers probably don’t know, Dark Horse Comics published Alien vs. Predator vs. Terminator a few years back. While the title may sound a bit silly, this concept, done correctly, could really pack the theaters. Who wouldn’t want to see a 6 minute fight sequence between an army of Predators and Terminators broken up by a horde of Aliens coming over the horizon?
Story C+ (Not the innovative story we have come to expect from the Terminator line of product, if you will. Terminator 3 has a okay plot and okay pacing, but it just doesn’t feel original. It feels a bit forced.)
Acting B-
Visuals B+ (What no “A” for visuals ? No. With $180-$200 million dollars to play with my mind should have been totally blown. The visual effects and special effects of the film are good and fun, but with a budget of this scope, we deserve more.)
Originality/Innovation C (Not a lot of new ground was broken on this film, but it is still a lot of fun.)
Enjoyability Grade B+
Home Theater/HD Factor A (Update: Recent news states that the HD-DVD of the film is to soon be released. This makes Terminator 3 a must by for anyone with a HDTV or HD capable projector.)
Overall Grade B+ (Again, good enough to be fun, but perhaps not good enough to be a Terminator movie. That may sum up more than any other point, why this flick didn’t make more money.)
|
