Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I think after lengthy analysis I have discovered why Terminator 3 doesn't stand up to the first two (but it's still better then any recent action flick I can think of, except for The Punisher and Batman Begins).

It's the style. It has all the superficial elements of a Terminator film, but the heart, the soul, the powerful underlying messages and the equally powerful action scenes are missing. To me, T3 feels more like a superhero movie (Spiderman or Superman) rather then a movie about cyborgs. In many ways it was too comic-booky.

And too short!

What would you have added to make it longer?

Originally posted by chriscaffee
I think after lengthy analysis I have discovered why Terminator 3 doesn't stand up to the first two (but it's still better then any recent action flick I can think of, except for The Punisher and Batman Begins).

It's the style. It has all the superficial elements of a Terminator film, but the heart, the soul, the powerful underlying messages and the equally powerful action scenes are missing. To me, T3 feels more like a superhero movie (Spiderman or Superman) rather then a movie about cyborgs. In many ways it was too comic-booky.

Originally posted by barand1
And too short!

Good points you two


Originally posted by chriscaffee
What would you have added to make it longer?

1. More future battle sequences
2. Flashback of what happened after T2.

Benhacker

Get out you Terminator Wanna Be's, Face it you're not a real Terminator fan, Terminator 3 is the shit, Not long enough? Pffttt The 1st one didnt even go for 2 hours either, Only the 2nd one.

Originally posted by Undertaker
Get out you Terminator Wanna Be's, Face it you're not a real Terminator fan, Terminator 3 is the shit, Not long enough? Pffttt The 1st one didnt even go for 2 hours either, Only the 2nd one.

Yeah we do know that!

I'm just saying it needed to be longer so it could fit more things in, like more future war scenes, flash backs, and more story to help explain things better etc.

T2 wouldn't of worked if it was the same length as T1. It needed to be longer to explain more story, characters etc. This should of been the same case with T3.

Also we waited over 10 years and we only got an under 2 hour film. Surely you would of wanted it to be longer, yes?

I suppose a more impressive fight scene between the T850 all torn up and half-roasted versus the T-X endoskeleton with partial liquid metal covering would have been welcome.

I think it badly needed more characterization. I mean Connor and Brewster were basically just cardboard cut-outs, no real depth to them.

It all happened too quickly, they needed to prolong the middle stages, build up the tension a little.

Originally posted by barand1
Yeah we do know that!

I'm just saying it needed to be longer so it could fit more things in, like more future war scenes, flash backs, and more story to help explain things better etc.

T2 wouldn't of worked if it was the same length as T1. It needed to be longer to explain more story, characters etc. This should of been the same case with T3.

Also we waited over 10 years and we only got an under 2 hour film. Surely you would of wanted it to be longer, yes?

I was quite happy with the film's length seeing as it left the door open for a Terminator 4, You need to stop worrying guys, The whole story will be explained, I wanna see the Future wars as much you lot do, We will see it for sure.

Linda Hamilton turned down the role of Sarah Connor in T3 because the script had nothing about 'the human condition, no message about human life'. I have to agree. T2, especially, had some very important messages about human life in it, with those all too famous quotes 'The futrues not set, there is no fate but what we make for ourselves'. This quote speaks for itself.

She also says, 'We were in unchartered territory now, making up history as we went along'. This says that everything we do helps to shape our future. If SC or the T101, John or Dyson had have done anything, even slightly wrong, the entire future would be changed forever.

Nothing was said in the third film about the human condition, no important messages, so IMO, T3 was crap because of it.

Girls know she's hot so they're upset. bye.

T3 ****in sucks you why? hell James Cameron wasn't the director and Edward Furlong is the Original John Connor. If u like T3 then you SUCK

In that case... I suck.

Hey I know people that like Mortal Kombat Annhilation.

Now they suck.

I've always believed T3 would have worked much more efficiently had it taken place in present time for the first half and then began the war of the machines during the second; Then ending at a cliffhanger leaving the door open for T4 to focus solely on the war and a more aged yet experienced John Connor.

Originally posted by vvvrulz
I think it badly needed more characterization. I mean Connor and Brewster were basically just cardboard cut-outs, no real depth to them.

It all happened too quickly, they needed to prolong the middle stages, build up the tension a little.

Could not agree more,

Originally posted by vvvrulz
Hey I know people that like Mortal Kombat Annhilation.

Now they suck.

maybe T3 got a crappy response because the new T-X was just a crappy knock off of the much cooler T2 terminator. so it could graft weapons from its arms, big deal, they hardly changed the concept at all, whereas the change from T1 to T2 was more impressive, like the machines had made a real technological advance, not just strapped a flamethrower into the old model. 10 years should have been long enough for them to think up something a bit better dont you think

Its kinda hard to think of improvements though.. a gaseous Terminator?

Its crap we all know that, T fans are probably still bitter including myself, hey these are the movies we grew up loving and thats why i still hold on to it.

Amen !

Originally posted by Undertaker
Get out you Terminator Wanna Be's, Face it you're not a real Terminator fan, Terminator 3 is the shit, Not long enough? Pffttt The 1st one didnt even go for 2 hours either, Only the 2nd one.


And who're you to say we're not Terminator fans? You don't sound like a fan yourself. We know T3 wasn't as good as T1 or 2, but don't diss the length of T1. It's a classic.

O and btw, don't taint the Deadman's name. You're just making a fool out of yourself with the name "Undertaker". There is only one Undertaker who walks this earth and he's on Smackdown, not you. He'll Tombstone your a$$ any day!

We get twits like him around here all the time, i've learnt to ignore them completely

Take your attitude somewhere else "Undertaker".

Originally posted by vvvrulz
I think it badly needed more characterization. I mean Connor and Brewster were basically just cardboard cut-outs, no real depth to them.

It all happened too quickly, they needed to prolong the middle stages, build up the tension a little.

Yep. That, and there was no real plot device for the T-X. She was just there to 'kill John and Kate'. That stuff could've been fleshed out a little more.

It was better than Blade:Trinity

Originally posted by Darth Martin
It was better than Blade:Trinity

Sure was!

I'm not a big fan of T3 but one good idea of the movie was to send a Terminator back in time to kill JC's future lieutenants. That was quite a good concept.

Merry Xmas everybody!!!

I didn't like it T3 much and I'm glad I'm not alone.

A major flaw was that I just couldn't take Arnie getting his arse kicked by a woman (Terminator or not) seriously!

I could not connect with the recast John Connor either.

Plus, there was nothing really new about it. T1 had badass Evil Arnie and obviously T2 had Good Arnie but that was OK because we still had the awesome T1000. So in T3 we had Good Arnie was again, nothing new there and the TX who was not different enough from the T1000. It just didn't feel like it broke any new ground like the first 2 did.

Also, it just felt wrong without Linda Hamilton.

I wish I was looking forward to T4 but I'm not.