SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Jul 16 2010 04:40 am

I actually liked T3 as well. In truth I expected it to be much worse, but I thought it was pretty entertaining. T2 of course would be my vote for the best one, however the first one had one thing about it that was better than all of them. The bad guy. Arnold was a much darker, much creepier bad guy than any of the 'bad terminators' that followed. When Arnold became the 'good guy' there was just no one left that could fill his shoes as someone to be feared. But I will say that T2 is an overall better movie.
I just saw Salvation recently and it wasn't bad, but didn't really 'blow me away'. Although there was a pretty good 'Arnie lookalike' in it. He looked almost exactly like him. (If he were 40 years younger)

Posted: Jul 17 2010 04:10 am

The only thing I found unwatchable about T1 was the horrible stop motion scenes where the terminator skeleton is chasing Sara through those hallways at the end.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 04:29 am

Blackout wrote:

The only thing I found unwatchable about T1 was the horrible stop motion scenes where the terminator skeleton is chasing Sara through those hallways at the end.

Yeah, but keep in mind it was 1984 special effects.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 04:36 am

Yeah but I've seen better stop motion, Clash of The Titans and Jason & the Argonauts comes to mind, I think it was just the lighting that was off in the hallway scene.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 04:40 am

Yeah they probably should have just had Arnold dress up in a robot costume and play that part.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 09:10 am

Blackout wrote:

The only thing I found unwatchable about T1 was the horrible stop motion scenes where the terminator skeleton is chasing Sara through those hallways at the end.

i really liked that scene, it just looked so akward and funny.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 08:15 pm

UsaSatsui wrote:

James Rolfe (the AVGN) did a series for Spike about the "top 10 sequels that aren't as bad as everyone says", and T3 actually hit number 8.

He's pretty spot on with his analysis, pretty much covering both sides of our debate.

http://www.spike.com/video/cinemassacre-top-10/3423944

How do people not like Ghostbusters 2!? It's so good!

And Gremlins 2? Gremlins 2 was the most over the top excessive sequel ever, but it that's what made it great.

Surprised to see Spider-Man 3, Crystal Skull, and Rocky 5 on the list.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 08:17 pm

Rocky V was great, I thought it was better than Rocky IV.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

Yeah, I don't know anyone that dislikes Ghostbusters 2, it's fantastic. So is Rocky V.

I'm probably also in the minority when it comes to Jurassic Park 3. I really liked it.

Posted: Jul 17 2010 08:38 pm

Rocky V is so cheesy and as they point out, nothing gets resolved. I do like that he punches Fake Don King.

Rocky IV is my all-time favorite though.

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

So I am acquainted with a person who not only thinks that Terminator 1 was "the only teminator movie" but flat out hates Terminator 2. I asked him for his reasons, and got this:

Where do I start? Arnold walking out of the bar with bad to the bone playing? Edward Furlong as John Conner? Teaching a terminator to say chill out or whatever it was? The thumbs up at the end? The fact that they never explained how the circuitry in the liquid terminator would be able to stay liquid and still work? The entire movie was an attempt to sell happy meals and soundtracks. Arnold in a guns n roses video? Ugh

Debate that.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

Was your friend also two years old when T2 came out?

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

joshwoodzy wrote:

Was your friend also two years old when T2 came out?

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

I'm being serious. How old is he? Was he old enough to watch Terminator 1 in 1984, thus making us understand why he likes it better?

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

he was 20 when T2 came out

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

Dammit! I demand people challenge the reasons my acquaintance says it sucks! Otherwise I declare all the "T2 is the best" fans sheep with the wool pulled over their eyes!

Posted: Jul 18 2010 02:04 am

T2 was basically T1 on steroids.

Posted: Jul 18 2010 02:30 am

Is this like when you say "I have a friend who has a masturbation problem" but you're really talking about yourself?

T2 is better than T1 for many reasons. Visually, it kicks the shit out of T1. It's shot, edited, and directed better. The action is light years ahead in T2 vs T1. The story line is more epic. The special effects were groundbreaking for the time.

So your 'friend' didn't like a few scenes. So what? Everything else more than makes up for some cheesey parts. And it's not like the original didn't have some cringe-worthy scenes. Bill Paxton as a punk and his laughably bad acting is horrendous in T1.

I'm not saying T1 is shit, by any means. But it's dated and its rewatchability factor is far lower than even T3.

Also, this is all a matter of opinion so if your 'buddy' hates T2, then fine. Don't watch it, JRA.

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

Klimbatize wrote:

Is this like when you say "I have a friend who has a masturbation problem" but you're really talking about yourself?

T2 is better than T1 for many reasons. Visually, it kicks the shit out of T1. It's shot, edited, and directed better. The action is light years ahead in T2 vs T1. The story line is more epic. The special effects were groundbreaking for the time.

So your 'friend' didn't like a few scenes. So what? Everything else more than makes up for some cheesey parts. And it's not like the original didn't have some cringe-worthy scenes. Bill Paxton as a punk and his laughably bad acting is horrendous in T1.

I'm not saying T1 is shit, by any means. But it's dated and its rewatchability factor is far lower than even T3.

Also, this is all a matter of opinion so if your 'buddy' hates T2, then fine. Don't watch it, JRA.

No, the buddy is not me. I enjoy T2 and though I agree with the flaws that he pointed out (seriously, is there any line more dated than "Hasta la vista baby") but I think the flaws are evened out by the more awesome moments. That being said, I do think T1 is the better movie.

Posted: Jul 18 2010 04:58 am

Syd Lexia wrote:

UsaSatsui wrote:

James Rolfe (the AVGN) did a series for Spike about the "top 10 sequels that aren't as bad as everyone says", and T3 actually hit number 8.

He's pretty spot on with his analysis, pretty much covering both sides of our debate.

http://www.spike.com/video/cinemassacre-top-10/3423944

How do people not like Ghostbusters 2!? It's so good!

And Gremlins 2? Gremlins 2 was the most over the top excessive sequel ever, but it that's what made it great.

Surprised to see Spider-Man 3, Crystal Skull, and Rocky 5 on the list.

Eh Ghostbusters 2 was mediocre at best. Gremlins 2 was GOD-AWFUL! The only Spiderman movie I saw was the first one and it was ridiculously stupid, so I never watched any of the sequels. I am however with you on one thing. Rocky IV was the shit! It was better than V hands down.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

Yeah, hasta la vista may be a dated phrase NOW. It wasn't dated then, your friend is just being a jackass.

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

joshwoodzy wrote:

Yeah, hasta la vista may be a dated phrase NOW. It wasn't dated then, your friend is just being a jackass.

Because it was trendy and cool back then, doesn't really mean anything.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

But you said it was dated. How was it dated in 1991? How often was that phrase used in pop culture before then? I'm not trying to argue with you, holmes I'm just trying to gain some insight here.