trailer:
Moria likes it. So does Roger Ebert. Time.com calls it "A humongous, visionary parable that intermittently enthralls and ultimately disappoints. T2 is half of a terrific movie -- the wrong half." Variety says the director
has again taken a firstrate science fiction film and crafted a sequel that's in some ways more impressive - expanding on the original rather than merely remaking it.The New York Times says,
Mr. Cameron has made a swift, exciting special-effects epic that thoroughly justifies its vast expense and greatly improves upon the first film's potent but rudimentary visual style.
Posts
T2 was a real disappointment. It had one innovation - The T-1000. Beyond that, T2 is T1 with a larger budget & to make it friendlier for the kiddies (no nudity & Ah-nuld only shoots people in the knees). Although my friends really enjoyed it, I can't stand it & I haven't watched it in about 15+ years. I'd rather watch T3 before watching this film.
ReplyDeleteA better T2 film would've been an aggressive T-800 (meaning deadly) battling an equally aggressive T-1000 to reach the boy, with the audience not knowing who is good or who is evil (or if both of them were evil) until the very end. At least then, you could've put a nice undercurrent theme of Mutually Assured Destruction into the movie to go with the storyline of eventual robotic holocaust.
I've never understood the appeal of the Terminator franchise. It seems like a bunch of special effects and stunts thrown together. Not as bad as some of movies in that respect (some of the Batman movies, for example), but not enough of a story to keep my attention.
ReplyDelete"It seems like a bunch of special effects and stunts thrown together."
ReplyDeleteSee? You _do_ get it. We often count explosions or exploding cars during movies like this. Film is not a spectator sport around here.