Showing posts with label Terminator Salvation; review; McG; Michael Bay; Star Trek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Terminator Salvation; review; McG; Michael Bay; Star Trek. Show all posts

Monday, June 8, 2009

Oh Yeah! That Terminator Movie

I realized with sudden horror today that I have completely neglected to post a post-watch review of Terminator Salvation.

Humph.

When a movie gets 25% on Rotten Tomatoes, I necessarily go into it with low expectations. It was hugely disappointing to discover, one week early, that the film was getting such bad reviews. My worst fears, it seemed, were actualizing themselves in the most anti-climactic way.

Still, finding out the film won't be much good before actually going to see it is better than the bitter agony I was sure to sustain without the warning.

Conclusion? Well...I guess it wasn't that bad.

Crap! What was the point? It was supposed to be GREAT. What does it matter if it wasn't "that bad," which, incidentally, is about the language this film evoked from the most positive of its many reviews. What a complete waste.

I gave McG a chance. Sure, the only memorable thing he had directed before this project was Charlie's Angels (and Full Throttle...yep), but give the guy a break, right? I mean, Hollywood is tough stuff. It's hard to get good material as a commercial director.

He even said this to Bale. [I paraphrase] "This is my big break. C'mon, let me prove myself, Christian. I can DO this! Trust me..."

Well, he did. And since Christian Bale trusted him, so did a gaggle of other talented actors and filmmakers. Jonathan Nolan wrote a script that could have been made to sing, I believe, in better hands. But it was in McG's talentless hands that it was given life. And so people say it was poorly written. It wasn't. Sure, the writing could have been better, but it could have been much, MUCH worse. (See: Wolverine)

So how do I know? You can know that a film was directed poorly when the following things are true: The cinematography was beautiful; the cast was enormously talented; the writing was good enough to keep the audience from laughing at the wrong places; there was no shortage of cash (never once you cross that magical $100M mark); the movie still sort of sucked.

The thing that was so wrong with this film was the same thing that was so incredibly, brilliantly right with Star Trek. Pacing. The highs, lows, and emotional tone of each scene need to fit together in a somewhat mystical way to make the whole machine of the film...work. In the new Trek film, the audience was never lost. The emotional and kinetic tone and speed of the film was pretty much perfect all the way through. It worked as the ideal thrill-ride.

But Terminator loses its audience over and over again. The emotional tone almost never seems quite right. Why is he yelling so loud right now? Why do they seem like they're not sure what's going on? Wait, she loves him?

Everything is arbitrary. One scene tacked on right after the other. By the end, I noticed something very tragic: I didn't care at all. That, my good friends, is the kiss of death for any film.

As for McG, I think I've got him pegged. He's the poor man's Michael Bay. As for the magnitude of that insult...well, you either get it or you don't, I suppose.

Anyway, if any of YOU saw it, let me know what you thought.