This is one of the best films ever made. The mix of action, drama and mind-bending time paradoxes makes it a masterpiece. It's difficult to decide which is better, the first or the second Terminator film. They both have a lot that speaks for them. The original film followed the pattern of horror films, an unstoppable killer, but the second film is a more typical science fiction film.
The paradoxes build up here. We find out that Miles Dyson was the man responsible for the invention of the artificial intelligence that led to the creation of the Terminators. But he could only do this by copying the structure of a CPU that was salvaged from the brain of a Terminator sent back from the future. You see the problem?
Today I watched the longest version of the film, the so-called Skynet Edition. This has a final scene showing Sarah Connor in 2027 with John and her grandson. This contradicts the beginning of "Terminator 3", which takes place in the early 2000's when Sarah is already dead. Oops. But I guess "Terminator 3" continues from the theatrical version of "Terminator 2".
I've heard rumours about a reboot of the Terminator franchise. I admit that this would be preferable to making a sequel to the awful fourth film, but it still worries me. How can anything new stand up to the near perfection of the first two films?
Definitely a gamechanger (to use Cameron's favourite term) in science fiction films.
ReplyDeleteThe action sequences are brilliantly choreographed and the good guy being weaker than the bad guy is a rather powerful hook.
Arnie and Patrick smashing each other through walls is a scene I could watch over and over.
I've read reviews in which people talk disparagingly about "Terminator 2" not being as good as "Terminator". I don't see it that way. I'd rate them approximately equal. Okay, "Terminator 3" isn't as good, but that's not a Cameron film.
Delete