THE PLANK MAY 21, 2009
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Toward the end of Terminator: Salvation, one character explains, "What is it that makes us human? It's not something you can program. ... It's the strength of the human heart, the difference between us and machines." As philosophical rumination it's not much, but as self-critique, it's spot on. Terminator: Salvation is a sharp-looking film with a few impressive action sequences, but one almost completely devoid of emotional resonance or human connection. Its heartbeat is all clicks and whirs.
Like previous entrants in the series, the film concerns itself with the nastiest family feud since Hatfields and McCoys glared at one another across the Tug Fork River. Cybernetic hegemon "Skynet" and its innumerable mechanical offspring are once again at odds with the Connor clan, and without Richard Dawson to channel their disagreements into more amiable competition, both sides have taken to violence. This time, John Connor (Christian Bale), an already legendary though as yet unofficial leader of the human resistance, is out to save young Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin) from termination, so that the teenager can grow up and travel back in time to sleep with John's mother, thereby ensuring the birth of John and, more importantly, the franchise. Once again, the human faction is intermittently aided by a turncoat terminator (Sam Worthington), and once again, it all culminates with a quest to avert Armageddon. There's even a cameo by the Governator himself, though one accomplished by digital wizardry rather than his physical participation.
What's missing is much of anything that could be plausibly described as fun. Director McG--best known for his work on music videos, commercials, and the Charlie's Angels movies--paints his post-apocalyptic landscape in a palette of sand and steel, as if color itself had been bleached from the world. But in contrast to The Dark Knight (one of the obvious models for this reboot), he fails to imbue his grim vision with any depth, texture, or complexity. A slender, silly movie that is upfront about its silliness (say, Star Trek) can be a giddy pleasure; a slender, silly movie that presents itself as an unflinching portrait of human endurance is setting itself up for failure.
The film's leading man is of little help here. Intensity need not be the enemy of personality, but in Bale's work it too often has been. Though his rasping vigilante was perhaps the least interesting character in The Dark Knight, that film was a case where the center didn't have to hold: Aaron Eckhart, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and, in a perverse way, Heath Ledger provided the necessary doses of humanity. In Terminator: Salvation, by contrast, the supporting performances cannot support the film on their own, and Bale's deficiencies are on full display. Like the enemy with which he is supposed to be contrasted, he is relentless, impervious, and utterly uninteresting. Indeed, his performance is so uncompromising and devoid of nuance that one half-wonders why McG didn't leave in the infamous outtake in which Bale profanely berated a crew member who'd wandered onto the set. Guns, grenades, and helicopters all have their roles in the battle for humankind, but an obscene tirade of that caliber could've knocked Skynet right out of orbit.
--Christopher Orr
13 comments
Termi-whatnow? Sorry, Orr- none of us here at TNR watch these kind of movies.
What's that you say? Let it go?
Nah....
By the way Chris, I don't know what goes on in the oaken halls of TNRZone, but in print at least you've done an admirable job of staying out of Marty's cesspool.
- boneill
May 21, 2009 at 8:17pm
Damn, boneill beat me to it, but I was going to comment on how I've never heard of this "Terminator" franchise, since being a loyal TNR reader it would not appeal to me....another great review but to bad that not one person who reads this blog will have any inclination about going to it (and that was before the review)
- pdx1
May 21, 2009 at 9:57pm
Chris,
You can do better.
I don't mean the review; I mean your employer.
Don't suffer fools. There's no need to, not in your case.
- Bill
- williamyard
May 21, 2009 at 10:20pm
I protest this shameful dogoo excuse of a review of [expletive] POPULAR culture. Bone hit the nail right on the hit with the doyly; my teacup brimmeth over with umbrage. Egad, as LibRef would say, and forsooth!
Instead of writing abotu them newfangled MOVING PICTURES, why don't you do a review of something I would watch, like the latest production of Madama Butterfly - and not the HD version of the Met production (what BLASPHEMY) but the real thing.
What the deuce, I say, is the world coming to.
- icarusr
May 21, 2009 at 10:45pm
I think all of us will readily agree it is highly unlikely that any sequel to "TheTterminator" will ever match the acadamy award performances in the first film. To note just one example, hundreds of critics have compared Arnold's "I'll be back" with Marlon Brandos's "the horror, the horror" from "Apocalypse Now"
As for philosophical lessons, The Terminator [or The Matrix] is to philosophy what Akira Kurosawa's "Ran" and Walter Herzog's "Aguirre, The Wrath of God" is to Saturday morning cartoons.
george
- iambiguous
May 22, 2009 at 2:51am
No, no. STFU Chris, how would you like it if I trash your review, so don't you go dare trash torture policy. Jeez you are an amater. (these words said in the best Bale whereever the hell he is from accent)
By the way, how was Hurlbuts cinematography, better, I take it, than Bales acting?
- blackton
May 22, 2009 at 10:07am
It must be a sign that I'm getting old if it was necessary to link to an explanation of who Richard Dawson is. Reminds me of the priceless line from some '80s sitcom that has itself vanished into the aether: "Paul McCartney had a band *before* Wings?"
- austinexpat
May 22, 2009 at 11:35am
Wow, I missed that whole Marty-Orr controversy. What a shitty and clueless thing to say. I hope he apologized in addition to retracting the statement. (For those who, like me, don't bother with The Spine anymore, and don't know what bone et al are referring to, see blogs.tnr.com/.../krauthammer-needs-no-defense.aspx --the "update" at the bottom and the first comment from tep.)
Anywho, excellent review. It's too bad that the movie doesn't do anything interesting with the story, which is well-suited to fun pop philosophy that goes somewhat deeper than "humans are specialer than even human-like robots -- cause humans got heart, dammit." T1 was dark and primal -- a "Techno Noir," to use the name of the nightclub where the three principals -- Kyle, Sarah, and Ahnold -- first encounter each other. It featured a few too many car chases, a good sex scene, and a classic final showdown, but it steers clear of both wit and deep thought, except to observe that the time-travel conundrum that is central to the plot is the sort of thing that could "make you go crazy" if you think about too much. T2 added a lot of elements, including wit, and introduced some ruminations on destiny ("fight the future") -- which, while diverting enough, is not a *very* serious theme, especially given that fighting the future has the, I think, unexplored downside that John would never be born absent the time-travel shenanigans that only the bad future entails -- and what makes us human -- which *is* a serious theme. T3 backtracked somewhat. Once again, a few too many dull action sequences to fill out the time, Sarah's presence was missed, and nuclear Armageddon is an awfully serious event to be depicted in the way it was -- as a side-drama in the story of John Connor, or, the story of the Terminator franchise. It sounds like T4 backtracks further. I recommend the TV show instead, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, which is doing the pop-philosophy thing -- the what makes us human aspect, in particular -- more seriously than the movies, and to good effect. It's a little religion-ish for my taste, but the argument of human "sacredness" -- expressed by a Christian former FBI agent retained to teach a robot how to be human, including an understanding of right and wrong and of why humans are special -- is a plausible argument in the abstract, and it is not the only argument presented. The possibility that one of the robots could learn to be more-or-less human in full -- despite a lack of sacredness -- is tantalizingly left open. (One of the epsiodes suggests that in the future, John keeps the pretty girl robot by his side as a sort of Spock? a lover? Well, at this point we don't know.)
- jhildner
May 22, 2009 at 1:08pm
Jhildner, I hear that the Fox Terminator series was canned. Pity. It was one of the few things left on broadcast TV I watched. Not perfect by any stretch but it was entertaining (not as good as BSG though; what a fantastic series).
- tnmats
May 22, 2009 at 8:52pm
Day-ang, I must be the last to know, but this is the 1st I heard about Christian Bale's tirade. He has a huge anger management problem.
- satyendra
May 22, 2009 at 10:46pm
This is exactly why the rest of America doesn't like "liberal elites. " "Pshaw, a movie about fighting robots?....why, I never..."
- jwl2672
May 23, 2009 at 3:53am
Why was Terminator: Salvation so dull ? And why, in particular, was Christian Bale's John Connor
- Anonymous
May 27, 2009 at 2:00pm
Yes, I know that's an awfully high bar, especially of late. But the news that producer Fran Rubel
- Anonymous
May 28, 2009 at 4:23pm