Flyerplesys Perfectly adorable

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Cody One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Richie-67-485852 Who doesn't like the Terminator storyline? The original blew our minds and the follow up the same. However, for this 3rd installment, a little laziness and money driven dynamics is at work here. The allure of quality of the theme is diluted and not brought out. There are long-drawn out scenes and scenes under-developed. There is so much one can do with a super robot that just doesn't surface here. Also, the human parts lack depth and development. This is more of a mathematical movie meaning return on investment than a memorable one. Too bad too but only for the viewer. Everyone else made a buck or two. One gets the felling of being rushed while watching and not slowed down enough to sip a scene for depth. The thrill and action sequences were over the top and while this is allowed, these scenes ran too long and took away from the movie not added to it. Good sci-fi has to be respected if one wants in for the hall of fame spots. For the popcorn and money making, this one performs well-enough. You have to see it to judge it making you a...

marieltrokan Daring to be mocked, is the same as not daring to be respected. To not dare is to not attract. To not attract is to not motivate.To be respected, is to be valued. To be valued is to stand out. To stand out is to intrude. To not motivate, in order to intrude is to motivate in order to not intrude. To motivate in order to not intrude is to give reason in order to not intrude.To give reason in order to not intrude is to give an excuse in order to not intrude. To give an excuse is to be an excuse.To be an excuse in order to not intrude is to be why intrusion doesn't happen.To be why intrusion doesn't happen, is to not be why intrusion does happen.To not be why intrusion does happen is to not be why violence happens.The happening of violence, is the absence of balance. The absence of balance is the absence of presence. The absence of presence is no presence. No presence is not not not.Not not not is an implied criticism of the presence of absence. To refuse blame, for an implied criticism of the presence of absence is to accept blame for no implied criticism of the presence of presence.To accept blame for no implied criticism of the presence of presence is to accept being the reason why the presence of presence shouldn't be a criticism.The presence of presence is the lack of presence. The lack of presence is an implied criticism. To accept being the reason why an implied criticism should be acceptable is to accept being the reason why an implied peace shouldn't be acceptable.An implied peace is the illusion of implication and the illusion of peace. An implied peace is the reality of certainty and the reality of violence.To accept being the reason why an implied peace shouldn't be acceptable is to accept being the reason why certain violence shouldn't be acceptable.To accept being the reason is to not be the reason. Certain violence not being acceptable is certain violence being unacceptable.To not be why certain violence is unacceptable is to be why certain violence is acceptable.To be why certain violence is acceptable is to be why certain peace is unacceptable.Being why certain peace is unacceptable is being why certain peace is violent.Certain peace is mysterious violence. The violence of mystery is the peace of certainty - the convenience of certainty.The convenience of certainty is the convenience of no possibility. Reality is possibility - the convenience of no possibility is the convenience of no reality.Being why the convenience of no reality is violent is not why the convenience of no reality is wrong.Being why the convenience of no reality is wrong is just the convenience of no reality being wrong.The convenience of no reality being wrong is the violence of the convenience of violence.The violence of the convenience of violence is the peace of the inconvenience of peace.Contrary to popular opinion, it's not either of the two James Cameron Terminator movies - The Terminator and Terminator 2 - that are the most intellectual in the Terminator franchise - it's actually Jonathan Mostow's third instalment that has the most depth. And the most brilliance.Unlike The Terminator, and unlike Terminator 2, two movies that insidiously promote robot-repression and human hierarchy, Terminator 3 is about the literal peace of reality having the right to be violent toward itself. Reality's actual origin has the right to exert violent towards itself, in order to maintain its existence.Not The Terminator. Not Terminator 2. Terminator 3 is the actual pinnacle of the Terminator series

david-sarkies There was a period of time between when I was at university and when I started writing reviews for films again that I had become somewhat distracted. In fact there was a period of time when I didn't see all that many films at all, with the exception of some really big name ones that I absolutely had to see – Terminator 3 was one of them. I guess the reason was because ever since Terminator 2 I wanted to see a version set in the future where they are fighting the robots, and a part of me was expecting the third installment to be that movie. Unfortunately, as it turned out, this wasn't to be the case. In fact it seems, in many aspects, simply a remake of the second film – pretty much more of the same.This time we are ten years in the future and John Conner is now in his early twenties. He is a drifter, his mother is dead, and it seems as if the world has been freed from Skynet. Well, the problem is that John still seems to be having these nightmares, so he is wandering whether he can actually relax. It is clear that he can't because he is simply drifting, off the grid, simply trying to survive while hoping that the world doesn't blow itself up. Unfortunately that isn't going to be the case because two more terminators come back from the future, one to protect him and one to not only attempt to kill him, but to also kill his lieutenants.As I suggested, this film is basically just a rehash of the plot of the second film, which boils down to the simple line of two robots slugging it out. Sure, we have Arnie returning to reprise his role as the T800 (actually it is the T850 now, which is somewhat better than the previous two), but we also have another terminator come back, this one being a more advanced version that can now create energy weapons as opposed to simply knives and stabbing weapons. Mind you, it felt a little contrived since it seemed that the T-1000, that was pure living metal, was somewhat more advanced than this new one that happened to have an endo-skeleton.I have since discovered that the second movie was supposed to be the end of the franchise, but obviously the demand for sequels was just that little too high, which is why we have had it resurrected in this third, forth, and fifth movie. However, the idea behind the film, in that while Cyberdyne was destroyed, the idea of Skynet wasn't, does hold a lot of water. For instance, the suggestion is that Miles wasn't the only person that worked at home. The other thing is that the movement of technology was inevitable. All we need to do is look about us today to see how the movement towards AI is progressing, and more so, despite the warnings that are given to us in not only movies like Terminator, but also Isaac Asimov, we seem to be blindly charging into the future once again. Who knows, one day we may wake up under the rule of our robot overlords.

MaximumMadness Sometimes, a series just isn't meant to continue. After delivering a solid and exceptionally well-made Sci-Fi thriller with 1984's "The Terminator", director James Cameron followed it up with one of the greatest action films ever made with his 1991 sequel "T2: Judgment Day." But it would be twelve long years before a third film in the iconic franchise. Twelve years of rumors and speculation and hopes and dreams on the part of film-goers the world over. But when details on the production of "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" started to emerge, fans grew noticeably (and rightfully) concerned. Especially with the loss of series creator Cameron, here replaced with director Jonathan Mostow and a small army of screenwriters.Would it live up to the long-building hype? Could it come even close to matching the essentially perfect quality of the previous films? Would it be another great installment in the franchise?Well, despite an upfront warm reception from critics and general audiences, the answer to these questions in retrospect is sadly a resounding "No!" While "Terminator 3" is far from being a terrible film, it's unfortunately a painfully generic and often soulless retread of the far superior second chapter, filled to burst with contrived winks and nods tossed in to win over fans... but never feeling necessary or even particularly fulfilling. Yes, it is entertaining enough to warrant a one-time viewing. But on the whole, it's just a prime example of an unneeded continuation to a perfect and self-contained tale.We pick up some time after the previous tale, as John Connor (Nick Stahl) has grown paranoid about his future, and lives "off the grid." However, he is forced to face his possible destiny as a savior of mankind once again when a new Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) arrives from the future to protect him from another threat- the T-X (Kristanna Loken), a new model that combines liquid metal with an endoskeleton armed to the teeth with future-weaponry. At the same time, a mysterious computer virus is striking all over the world, and the military contemplates using the newly-completed Skynet system to eradicate it, not knowing the power that Skynet has and the destructive consequences its activation would cause.To give the film credit, there are some elements at play that do indeed work. Schwarzenegger is a joy as always, and it's a blast seeing him reprise what is perhaps his most well-known and beloved role on- screen. The rest of the cast plays their roles well, and there isn't really any sore thumbs. Mostow also delivers some genuinely thriller sequences of action and adventure, including a phenomenal and wildly explosive car-chase early on that still holds up well to this day and is one of the best sequences of the entire franchise. I also thought that despite not quite matching the high- bar set by "Judgement Day", newcomer composer Marco Beltrami does an adequate and admirable job with the film's score. He gets the tone quite well, and while his themes are never as memorable as Brad Fiedel's prior work, it gets the job done with style.Unfortunately, some great action and performances can't really overcome the biggest issue, which is that this is a really bland and blatant inferior copy of what's come before. Too much of the film is devoted to just trying to match the last film beat-for-beat, to the point it feels borderline condescending. To try and avert this, Mostow and the writers pepper in comedic subversions, but they just feel contrived at best. (Do we really need to see Arnold wearing a male-strippers "Star Sunglasses" as a gag?) The film feels without soul or identity because it plays it far too safe for its own good. And thus it can be tedious to sit through on a second or third viewing.There's also just a slew of issues I have regarding the general writing and production. The film's pacing is a bit of a mess, and key segments feel left out and poorly established. The idea of the villain being a female Terminator is fascinating and could work, but Loken comes across as miscast looking back. She lacks menace and plays the role a bit too "sexy." (They really needed someone like a Lucy Lawless or an Uma Thurman in this role.) And it lacks the polish of Cameron's work with flat cinematography and sometimes uninspired choices in shots and composition.Still, it's not a total loss. The story is just solid enough to be worth checking out, the action is great and it's good fun seeing the Terminator back in action. It's not a great film, but "Terminator 3" also isn't objectively terrible. I say give it a shot once if you're curious, because there is some definite fun to be had. But I'd mainly suggest just sticking to the first two.I give "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" a mediocre 5 out of 10.