Change Your Image
ona6
Reviews
Terminator Salvation (2009)
My Perspective...
I have been anticipating this movie for a long-time (almost since the first preproduction time). Then, the trailer hit the theaters and finally the movie opened just this week. I bought my ticket and watched Terminator Salvation on 05/21/09.
Last few days, because I have been a huge terminator fan, I have been checking out the reviews about Terminator Salvation over the net to get a feel. I must say that I have been shocked about some of the reviews that basically stoned to movie. I don't know how many of you ever noticed what I am about to say but a new trend popped out: not liking certain movies for no good reason became somehow "in". As a result, I witnessed the crucification of certain movies. It almost seemed like movie-goers are programmed NOT to see or even boycott the movies. The way I see it, movies are condemned because either they are not properly made or they are not well- analyzed/understood. I started to believe that TS falls in latter category. Having said I am a big fan of terminator franchise, I decided to ink this review not to rate but to comment on it fairly..
The first point concerning TS that worths emphasis is that it is not planned as a single movie but first of few others to come, in stead (if you go ahead and check the IMDb page for McG, you will see Terminator 5 "in development" stage). Why am I saying this? if you watch TS unaware of this revelation, TS seems like a single incomplete movie, inherently causing some of bad reviews. The mission of this movie was simply bridge the previous "trilogy" to upcoming one. This is why we just see some part of story as a result of which certain events are left to be seen for the future. All we saw is the beginning of the end. All we saw was how John Connor began putting pieces together. This is why we don't see an army of Arnold-like terminators because sky-net just began copying the human tissue. We don't see John Connor as a big soldier (the way he has been portrayed in 3 movies) but just a struggling soldier. And more importantly, we don't see huge victory against the machine but just a battle won. So, please be patient..
Let's say that McG decided to follow the footsteps of the idea of sending a terminator to kill John Connor. Don't you think that we have seen enough times? So why to do over? Like in the Saw movies, how many times we have seen some people being trapped and wound up punished for something they did or they didn't? 5, 6 times by now? How many of you are looking forward to new Saw movies wherein the story barely proceeds and just goes around the circle? Thank god, McG did not go down that road. Here, we catch the next step. We see actually the ultimate battle between Skynet and mankind. Don't you think this is better watching the same John Connor-terminator dance for the 4th time? if you ask me, it is...
It may also seem like this movie spare less screen time on John Connor as if he happens to be the forgotten one, in stead of being one. This is because now there are more characters involved and their story becomes as important as John. If you take the first terminator, how many character had significance in the story-line besides Sarah Connor? the same for the second movie. But in the 4th movie, we have a new Marcus character (who has a secret agenda), we see Kate Connor as pregnant woman (a review in the internet says that the baby will play a crucial role in the future) and long-time coming Kyle Reeves, to name few. These characters and their developments are as important as John Connor's as seen here and will be seen in the following movies. Fortunately, McG grafts the new-comers into the movie beautifully in proper dosages.
More importantly, I believe that McG did a great job and we are presented the 4th movie exactly the way it is destined, needed to be. I must also say I was amazed how much this installment respected the previous ones, like the use of Guns 'n Roses song - You could be mine, universally known lines ("I'll be back" or "come with me if you wanna live") and the surprise cameo which blew me away. If you are fanatic of this franchise, you can even see how Connor got the scare in his face (look at him T2 in the scene before the opening credits), as a totally unimportant and minor detail. But to me, this shows a firm evidence of how McG took this project seriously to complement the other movies and even respect them.
Enough said. Just don't pay attention to bad critics floating over the net. If you are not a big fan of terminator, it would be safe to assume that you would been exhausted by now anyway and the odds are that TS won't be so appealing to you. But if you are a fan - like me, you'll appreciate the movie big time..
9/10
PS: As I was enjoying reading a heated discussion over time-traveling and time-loop in terminator movies, I came across a note that virtually claims "people taking this movie this seriously should see a doctor". Like (s)he says, let's altogether cease discussing movies. What's next? stop discussing poetry? music? Then, why are we still beating the bushes to unreveal the meaning behind Mona Lisa? Isn't it just a picture of a woman? As far as I am concerned, the movies are art and without art, we wouldn't be much different from these terminators. Just an opinion..
50 Ways to Leave Your Lover (2004)
Good Movie if you are in mood of it..
Owen McCabe (Paul Schneider) is an writer residing in LA. Shaken up by a minor earth-quake, he realizes how unhappy he is with his life: he just writes the lives of other people just to make to look good (or better than what they actually are) and he has not met someone special one all this time. So, he decides to "break-up" with his life and move on. Unfortunately for him, just when he accepts a job in New Jersey, he meets Val (Jennifer Westfeldt) at the airport. The conflict between knowing that Val is out there available and that he really needs to go to Jersey forces him to put this relationship on fast track, facilitating his decision: should he stay or should he go?
Of course, when any romantic movie begins with such a premise, it sounds like one of these awfully made chick-flicks like On the Line (no offense): guy meets the girl but can not forget about her and yet they somehow wind up together a result of some freak coincidences and/or events. Thank god, "how to lose your lover" in nothing like this cliché. Here, writer/director Jordan Hawley comes up two original ideas. The initial concept of "breaking of my life" seemed pretty fresh: Owen quits his job, cancels his cell-phone, sells his car and starts a fight with everybody so he can not come back to LA, no matter what. In other words, he burns his bridges in LA. But I think Hawley hits a home-run with the way Owen puts his relationship with Val on fast track (e.g., meeting the parents on the first date, asking her to have sex almost immediately), together with seeing what such a shallow guy prioritizes in his relationship with Val. Additionally, side-characters like Bucky Brandt (Fred Willard) as the astronaut with drinking problems and Allison (Poppy Montgomery) as the bisexual love- interest of Owen are well-designed and beautifully fit into the story.
How to lose your lover is not Eiffel Tower of romantic comedy genre and it won't be a timeless classic either. However, if you watch this movie just keeping in mind that this is nothing but a little movie and appreciating aforementioned ideas of Hawley, you'll find it good and entertaining. I have known Paul Schneider through his minor roles (like in "the family stone") and this is the first time I saw him under the spotlight. I must say he gives a solid performance as this a**hole Owen. Despite that the end seems a little bit weak and unsatisfying comparing the rest of the movie, How to lose your lover is definitely worth- seeing, especially if you like dark comedy...
7/10