Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-05-2019, 12:48 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,514
But still, even if one can make a nanoswarm that way with sufficient AI, surely it would be both easier and more practical to make a robot like the one in T3, with a solid endoskeleton surrounded by the nanotech stuff. The only reason they didn't do that in T2 is because they wanted the spectacle of things like it reshaping into facing the other direction without turning around. The TX can still disguise itself very effectively, or turn its hand into a sword, or whatever, but it can also bring back plasma cannons and the like, which you'd think would count for something.

I'll grant the fatalism of T3, and can see how someone might consider it an inferior movie because of it. I don't happen to agree with that argument, but it's a matter of taste, about which there can be no argument.
  #52  
Old 11-05-2019, 12:59 PM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
It's pretty strongly implied that individual bits of the T1000 do not possess independent intelligence. If they did, it should have just taken the form of 10,000 individual wasps and the good guys would have never had a chance.

Presumably its intelligence comes from some neural net that requires sufficient processing power, and it has a certain amount per bit of nanotech, or whatever.
That's how I'd write it, but it looks like there is no central processor. Take the scene where the T1000 flattens out and imitates a floor. A small bump where the processor would be would have been easy to do.

Or the liquid nitrogen should have shattered the CP, if it had one. But the T1000 reassembled from only little liquid bits.

I mean, I wanted such a central processor, but the movie seems to say there isn't one.

But the 10000 wasps is what I was implying - a true nanobot terminator could not be defeated. Obviously the movie didn't want that. But to me it seemed the movie failed to consider the full ramifications of the terminator's construction.
  #53  
Old 11-05-2019, 03:32 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 12,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
They get stuck because they act stupidly. At this point they could just be on one side of a large lathe or whatever is there, and the Terminator can be on the other side and it couldn't get them. Instead, they slowly go up stairs, and then Sarah just continues to stay on the stairs needlessly staring until the Terminator is right upon her.
Ok yes this is definitely true. They should have moved faster once they saw it and Sarah should have kept moving not waited as Reese fought it. But to me it works because they are acting like terrified people at their physical and emotional limits, not Monday morning quarterbacks analyzing the situation from a distance.

There's also useful characterization. Reese keeps urging Sarah on because he considers himself expendable, but she's unwilling to leave him behind. She doesn't stop on the ladder while he fights the Terminator to be dumb, but because she's terrified and hopes he will defeat it and then come with him.

I don't consider myself a stupid person, but I doubt I'd have the nerves to stay in close proximity to an unstoppable murder skeleton robot because I thought it probably couldn't get me. But let's imagine that they analyze the situation as you have and decide to slowly circle a large piece of machinery until the police arrive. There was after all a giant explosion outside and an obviously broken door so it shouldn't take that long. I believe that the next thing that happens is that there are now some dead police and a Terminator armed with their sidearms. Probably better to have more than a lathe between you at that point.

Chronos I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree on the special effects. I think they still hold up well. Not because they're impressive in their own right but because the monster they created with it is so cool. I'm ok handwaving away the fact that an infinitely divisible Terminator would be unstoppable by imagining that there's a critical mass of Terminator-stuff required to do a thing. Smaller pieces just have enough smarts to seek out other small pieces. There is a deleted scene where the liquid metal Terminator is glitching out after freezing/thawing, so they did consider that that process would do serious damage but it got left on the cutting room floor.

I'm not sure I understand the complaints about T2 being just a long chase. There are multiple chase sequences, but on par with all the other Terminator movies. And all driven by legitimate and non-stupid character-driven choices. John's not willing to abandon his mom to death, and Sarah tries to destroy Cyberdyne to prevent Judgment Day.

The things I didn't like about T3 are:

1. I felt that they got the character of John Connor all wrong. He's a loner with no friends or particular charisma. He's whiney and unimpressive. This is not a man who leads a human resistance. Eddie Furlong was a rebel and a charmer, fighting the man, inspiring friends to help him flee from the cops, etc. Nick Stahl had a hard time talking his way out of a dog crate.

2. It leaned a bit too hard on comedy for my tastes.

Plot-wise I thought it was good, though. And the above two bother me less on rewatches.

As long as we're listing things we'd rewrite, I'd have changed the ending of T3 to have Arnie crush himself and the bad Terminator by closing the giant blast door on them. What a great callback to the original!
  #54  
Old 11-05-2019, 03:59 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
I believe that the next thing that happens is that there are now some dead police and a Terminator armed with their sidearms. Probably better to have more than a lathe between you at that point
I agree that this could be a probable outcome. At least after Reese pipebombed the Terminator and it was just an upper torso and one arm, they had Sarah with a deep leg wound so in-movie, she just couldn't move as fast.

Quote:
1. I felt that they got the character of John Connor all wrong. He's a loner with no friends or particular charisma. He's whiney and unimpressive. This is not a man who leads a human resistance. Eddie Furlong was a rebel and a charmer, fighting the man, inspiring friends to help him flee from the cops, etc. Nick Stahl had a hard time talking his way out of a dog crate
I also agree with this.
  #55  
Old 11-06-2019, 03:42 AM
DWMarch is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
I also agree with this.
With all due respect, I don't. JC in T3 had just been in a motorcycle accident and treated himself with horse tranquilizers he stole from a vet clinic. I think it was well established why he was not at his best in that movie.
  #56  
Old 11-06-2019, 08:25 PM
msmith537 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,700
Really the problem with the Terminator franchise is that they created this interesting concept of the "future war with the machines", but never figured out how to transition from the small story of Sarah and John to that larger story. So basically they just keep regurgitating the same pattern of:

Your clothes...give them to me.
Are you Sarah/John Conner?
Are YOU Sarah/John Conner?
Come with me if you want to live.
I'll be back.
Let me tell you about the future.
You'll be safe here with these 40 cops.
It...won't...stop...EVER...UNTIL YOU ARE DEAD!
Let go into this steel mill or whatever and crush/melt/freeze/acid bath it.
There's no fate but blah blah.
  #57  
Old 11-06-2019, 09:24 PM
Banksiaman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
...
I'm ok handwaving away the fact that an infinitely divisible Terminator would be unstoppable by imagining that there's a critical mass of Terminator-stuff required to do a thing. Smaller pieces just have enough smarts to seek out other small pieces. There is a deleted scene where the liquid metal Terminator is glitching out after freezing/thawing, so they did consider that that process would do serious damage but it got left on the cutting room floor. ...
I came across that scene when I was channel-surfing a few nights ago. I hadn't realised it took place in a factory with giant cauldrons of white-hot metal in the immediate background. What would have happened if Arnie had scooped up some of the mercury puddles of defrosting T1000 and thrown them into the furnace?

Do individual bits contain specific elements of data so the T1000 would now be reformed minus its left leg, or could it recreate itself at 80% complete, so they'd just hire a shorter actor in a cop uniform?
  #58  
Old 11-08-2019, 03:02 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 12,109
msmith573 that is an apt criticism. That said, when they do it well it makes for a compelling movie (to me).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banksiaman View Post
I came across that scene when I was channel-surfing a few nights ago. I hadn't realised it took place in a factory with giant cauldrons of white-hot metal in the immediate background. What would have happened if Arnie had scooped up some of the mercury puddles of defrosting T1000 and thrown them into the furnace?

Do individual bits contain specific elements of data so the T1000 would now be reformed minus its left leg, or could it recreate itself at 80% complete, so they'd just hire a shorter actor in a cop uniform?
I think that's sort of answered by the movie. When they shoot off one of his little grabber hooks on the back of the car, John grabs it and throws it on the ground. The T1000 then walks up and it absorbs into his foot. If that piece was anything, it was part of his hand. But he has hands when he walks up, and the piece just goes into his foot. So each piece is totipotent/holographic.
  #59  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:28 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,514
And I suspect that an incomplete T1000 would just leave a hollow space inside so that, superficially, the disguise would continue to hold.
  #60  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:51 PM
muldoonthief's Avatar
muldoonthief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 11,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
And I suspect that an incomplete T1000 would just leave a hollow space inside so that, superficially, the disguise would continue to hold.
Considering that the T-1000 took multiple different human forms with significantly varying volumes, including the somewhat bulky Don (or Dan?) Stanton, it must either be able to change its own density, or have voids inside it's structure.
  #61  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:45 AM
DWMarch is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by muldoonthief View Post
Considering that the T-1000 took multiple different human forms with significantly varying volumes, including the somewhat bulky Don (or Dan?) Stanton, it must either be able to change its own density, or have voids inside it's structure.
This is shown to some degree in Genisys, with hints that the T-1000 is reconfiguring itself internally to avoid damage:

1st encounter: Kyle shoots it in the head with a revolver, stops it cold for a minute.
2nd encounter: Sarah shoots in in the head with a Desert Eagle, slows it down for a few seconds.
3rd encounter: Kyle empties an M4 assault rifle into its head, it gives him a dirty look and walks away.
  #62  
Old 11-12-2019, 10:20 AM
ebb is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
And I suspect that an incomplete T1000 would just leave a hollow space inside so that, superficially, the disguise would continue to hold.
And that hollow space... was his heart.
  #63  
Old 11-12-2019, 09:35 PM
Quimby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: NJ
Posts: 8,471
I saw it and yeah wow that was not good. Boring villains. Basically Terminator 1 + 2 who is completely invulnerable until he isn't because the movie is almost over. Boring heroes. The savior of humanity hands a gun back to a starving creep who was about to murder a kid or worse and instead of shooting her in the face, starts worshipping her after a bad speech because the script says so. Boring action . Just boring all around.

The only interesting idea was the idea of a Terminator that actually fulfilled its mission and learns to feel remorse for what it did and the movie hardly does anything with it. I would have liked to see a movie about a Sara Conner enraged by vengeance hunting a Terminator that refuses to kill because it learned it was wrong.

I guess back to the drawing board and in a few years they will try again.

Last edited by Quimby; 11-12-2019 at 09:36 PM.
  #64  
Old 11-12-2019, 11:28 PM
digs's Avatar
digs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West of Wauwatosa
Posts: 10,132
I just walked in the door from seeing it on Cheap Movie Tuesday. Wife asked how it was and I answered "Well, it was worth five bucks. If I'd paid six, I'd be resenting it."

I wanted mindless action with a few interesting characters, a few one-liners and a few nice touches. And a big bag of popcorn. That's exactly what I got.
  #65  
Old 11-13-2019, 10:31 AM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,516
Not the greatest film. Good use of Linda Hamilton and Arnold but in a weak effort.

Only 8 hours afters seeing it, I've already spotted more flaws than in The Terminator after 30+ years. To quote another famous move, "Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away? There's just too much stupidity that is partially masked by the action.

But the biggest thing would be some hint of exposition as to how the terminator* worked. Are the nano-skin and metal chassis fully independent? Are there limitations to what the bot skin can not do (like heavy lifting, tearing down doors) without the chassis? Because it was not clear. It wasn't even clear when the two were separated or together..

Interesting bit - the trailers before the movie were an odd lot. Not what I would normally think would be linked with an actioner. Until my friend pointed out they were all strong female "empowerment" type films.



*
SPOILER:
so, in the new alternate future of 2040 why are they still called "terminators"? They aren't the same thing. They don't do the same job.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017