Terminator 3 (4½ Stars)

"Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" has the unenviable task of following two of the greatest science fiction films ever made. It isn't as good as either of them, but that's hardly a criticism. Taken on its own terms, "Terminator 3" is an excellent action film and a worthy continuation of the story.

Ten years have passed since John Connor and his mother prevented Judgment Day. Sarah is now dead and John has disappeared off the grid. He has no permanent home, no telephone and no credit cards. Nick Stahl looks gaunt and weary, very different from Edward Furlong in "Terminator 2", but that fits the character perfectly. John has spent his life preparing to become the leader of humanity, only to be told that the future he was preparing for no longer exists. He doesn't know what to do with himself, but he can't quite believe that the danger has gone away.

Then another Terminator arrives.

Kristanna Loken is superb as the T-X, a new model sent back to kill John and other future Resistance leaders. It would have been a mistake to imitate Robert Patrick's T-1000, and Loken creates something quite different. She's cold and mechanical, but she's also been programmed with distinctly female characteristics which she uses to her advantage. One of my favourite moments comes when she tastes John Connor's blood. Her expression of pleasure is almost sexual. She's found the man she's looking for, and she seems to savour the moment.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is back as another T-800, this time sent to protect John and Kate Brewster. There's more humour than in the previous films, but humour has always been part of the series, particularly in "Terminator 2", and the increase doesn't bother me. Arnold is still completely convincing when the action begins, and "Terminator 3" has some magnificent action sequences. The chase involving the enormous crane is particularly spectacular, relying on a level of physical destruction that still looks impressive today.

Claire Danes' Kate doesn't look like a future Resistance leader, but why should she? At this point she's a veterinarian living an ordinary life. She has years ahead of her to become the woman she's destined to be. John and Kate are both being pushed towards futures that neither of them is ready to accept.

And then comes the ending.

For most of the film we're led to believe that John and Kate are racing against time to stop Skynet and prevent Judgment Day once again. They reach Crystal Peak expecting to find Skynet's central core. It isn't there. There is no central core. Skynet has spread through computer networks and there's nothing left for them to destroy.

They haven't been sent to Crystal Peak to stop Judgment Day. They've been sent there to survive it.

When I first saw the film, this revelation shocked me. I didn't see it coming at all. After two films about preventing the nuclear apocalypse, "Terminator 3" has the courage to let it happen. Judgment Day wasn't prevented in "Terminator 2"; it was merely postponed.

Then, as nuclear missiles begin flying and the old world disappears, radio messages start arriving at Crystal Peak. People are confused and frightened, asking what's happening and looking for someone to tell them what to do. John picks up the radio and answers.

This is what everything has been leading towards. John has spent years running away from the destiny that his mother prepared him for, but when the moment finally arrives he doesn't need anyone to tell him what to do. He takes command. John Connor finally becomes John Connor.

"Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" isn't "The Terminator" and it isn't "Terminator 2". It doesn't need to be. It's exciting, spectacular and far more intelligent than its reputation suggests. Most importantly, it takes the story somewhere that genuinely matters. The future hasn't been prevented. The war is about to begin.

Success Rate:  + 0.3

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Sword of Xanten (3½ Stars)

In February I watched "The Nibelungs", made in 1967. It's the most famous German tale, and not just because of Richard Wagner's adaptation to opera. It's strange that it hasn't been filmed more often. That's probably because the story is too epic. Too much happens. It might be possible to do a Lord of the Rings on it, i.e. divide the story into three three-hour films.

"Sword of Xanten" is the first half of the Nibelungs saga. It ends with the death of Siegfried. The second half is about Kriemhild's revenge. It's a curious film, as far as the production goes. It was made by the German director Uli Edel in English, with a mix of English, American and German actors. Brunhild is played by Kristanna Loken (an excellent choice for the role) and Kriemhild is played by Alicia Witt, both American actresses. Siegfriend is played by the famous German actor Benno Fürmann. I've seen him in a lot of films, and I can guarantee that it isn't his voice. He's been dubbed. The film has been released with different names, including "Dark Kingdom", "Curse of the Ring" and "Ring of the Nibelungs". It's no longer in print, but I managed to get a used copy on Ebay.

Siegfried is an orphan who's raised as a blacksmith. He doesn't find out until he's an adult that he's the son of the King of Xanten. Brunhild is a Valkyrie who's become the Queen of Iceland. While visiting Germany she receives a prophecy that a man will defeat her in battle, and that's the man she'll marry. Siegfried defeats her, and she promises herself to him. He says that he has work to complete, and after that he'll visit her in Iceland.

Siegfried visits the Kingdom of Burgundy and hears about a dragon. Gunter, the King of Burgundy, attacks the dragon with his 12 strongest men, but he's defeated. Siegfried sneaks out of the castle to challenge the dragon by himself, and he wins. There's a large treasure horde in the dragon's lair. He's warned by ghosts that the treasure is cursed. He puts on a ring, which has the biggest curse of all, and he brings the rest of the treasure to Gunter.

Gunter's sister, Kriemheld, is in love with Siegfried, so she gives him a potion to make him fall in love with her. Gunter confesses to Siegfried that he's in love with Brunhild, but she will only marry a man who defeats her in battle. Siegfried and Gunter travel to Iceland. Brunhild is heartbroken that Siegfriend no longer wants her. Siegfried has a magic mask that gives him the appearance of anyone he wants. Pretending to be Gunter, he challenges and defeats Brunhild. There's a double marriage in Burgundy: Gunter marries Brunhild, and Siegfried marries Kriemhild. Brunhild tells Gunter that even though she's his wife she'll never sleep with him. She ties him up and makes him sleep on the floor next to his bed.

It's a beautiful story of love and tragedy. Kristanna Loken plays her role to perfection.

The 1967 version was made with a large budget and looks quite good, considering how old it is. "Sword of Xanten" was obviously made with a smaller budget. We still need a modern, well funded version of "The Nibelungs".

In the Name of the King (4 Stars)

When I watched this film in 2016 I complained that it was too short. This week I bought the director's cut. The original theatrical version is 118 minutes long, and the director's cut is 156 minutes long. The extra 38 minutes greatly improve the film. That's my opinion, at least. The critics aren't convinced. The film still has a whopping 4% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It's about time I stopped referring to that site as if it had some relevance.

As far as I can tell, most of the extra footage is invested in longer battle scenes, but I did recognise a scene with Leelee Sobieski that's not in the theatrical version. This scene tells us a bit more about her character Muriella, the magus' daughter. Jason Statham's character, Farmer, is also better rounded than I remember it from the other version.

Ron Perlman impresses me more every time I see him. The first time I saw him was in "Name of the Rose", one of the few films that I watched in the cinema in the 1980's. Then I forgot about him until "Enemy at the Gates" in 2001. (Those are two films I need to watch again). However, it wasn't until I saw the TV series "Hand of God" that I said, "Wow! This guy is brilliant". I can appreciate his older performances better now. He never does anything wrong.

As far as the acting is concerned, he's similar to Leelee Sobieski, who also appears in the film. They both have a calm, composed way of speaking, but they're both able to switch to displays of deep emotions within seconds. As is to be expected, they're the two actors who carry the film, not Jason Statham in the lead role.

Overall the acting is of high quality. Ray Liotta performs solidly as the evil wizard Gallian, while Matthew Lillard puts on a typical over-the-top performance as Duke Fallow. I wish I could see more of him, but in recent years he's specialised in voice acting for animated films. Burt Reynolds is disappointing as King Konreid. He used to be one of Hollywood's best actors, but he seems to have lost his talent with the passing of years.

The film's greatest weakness is the computer graphics. Castles look artificial, and in distant army scenes it's obvious that the scenes are computer-painted. The film's budget was $60 million. Couldn't a few million have been spent on better computer artists?

"In the Name of the King" is based on the computer game "Dungeon Siege" which was released in 2002, but the similarity to Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy is so strong that it borders on plagiarism. The primitive Krug look like Orcs, there are two rival mages who used to be friends, and even the shots of the four warriors walking across the mountains look like scenes from the Lord of the Rings films.

I know my readers are already desperate for more screenshots of Leelee Sobieski. Let me give you just one picture. You can click on it to enlarge it it if you need a new Windows wallpaper.

What's that? You want more? Are you sure? Here's the proof that I'd do anything for my readers:

That's Kristanna Loken with Leelee in the last picture. I like tall girls. Leelee is 5'10" and Kristanna is 5'11". They're big, they're tough and they carry swords. How could anyone fail to fall in love with them? If I were in the army facing them I'd have to surrender. My right hand would be quivering too much to hold my sword.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

P.S. The Amazon UK link is to the normal edition. The Director's Cut has only been released in America and Germany.

Terminator 3 (4½ Stars)

I've watched the first three Terminator films back to back this month. It's a good way to start the year. Admittedly, the third film doesn't quite live up to the first two, but it has a lot in its favour. The car chase is one of the best car chases ever filmed, superbly over the top. The subtle in-jokes get funnier every time I watch the film. Added to that, it's the first time a Terminator has looked sexy. I know I'm being shallow and judging only by outer appearances. Underneath she's the same as all the other Terminators, but you have to admit that she does look good on the outside.

Having said that, the Terminator T-X – that's the model number – does seem to have been programmed to have female traits. It doesn't just march around like a man in a woman's body, it's slinky and sexy.

Today I noticed something strange for the first time. I have the film on Blu-ray. It's a widescreen presentation, 1920 x 790 pixels. Today I found a full screen version of the film online, 960 x 720, presumably ripped from a television broadcast. Please compare the high definition version of an identical scene (above) with the low definition version (below).

I checked my boxes in the cellar, and I found my copy of "Terminator 3" on DVD that I'd discarded after buying the film on BLu-ray. It's a full screen version, just like the version I found online. I immediately rewatched it.

The widescreen picture is sharper, of course, but it looks like a cropped version of the full screen picture. I wish I had the whole film in full screen format in Blu-ray resolution. It's not just in this opening scene where it looks like censorship. I checked a few scenes later in the film, and the whole of the widescreen version is cropped, meaning that film details have been omitted. That's just wrong.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

In the Name of the King (3½ Stars)

This is the 24th film starring Leelee Sobieski, made in 2007. It was actually filmed in 2005, but there was a lengthy post-production process. This was the director Uwe Boll's 12th film, but it was his first big budget production. Up until then his films had cost a maximum of $3 million, but this time he had a budget of $60 million at his disposal, and he didn't want to make any mistakes. The film still made a loss anyway. It only earned $13 million at the box office, plus $30 million in DVD sales, which made it officially a flop.

I know Uwe Boll is the director people love to hate. I already discussed my feelings about this in my reviews of "Bloodrayne 3" and "Postal". Let's just judge "In the name of the king" on its own merits.

My main problem with the film is that it's too short. We're thrown right into the action from the start, and it's difficult to see what's going on. Apart from that, the characters aren't well developed at the outset, although we do get to know them slowly as the film progresses. The film would have profited from another 30 to 60 minutes build up. There's a big mythology in the background, and I would have liked to know more about it before the action started. On the other hand, I've found out that there's a director's cut that's 40 minutes longer than the version I watched today. Maybe that would solve my problems.

The film is based on the video game "Dungeon Siege" which was released in 2002. I expect that people who have played the game will judge it on its similarity to the game. Uwe Boll admits that he's not a game player, but he let someone play the game in front of him so that he could see what it's like.

The film is about a man called Farmer, played by Jason Statham, an orphan adopted by a family in a small village. The land is caught up in a civil war when the king's nephew tries to overthrow his uncle. He's first in line for the throne, but he's too impatient to wait for his uncle to die. It's a tale of swords and sorcery, with rival magicians fighting on each side. There's also an army of dog-like creatures called the Krug, not too different from the Orcs in "Lord of the Rings". The king is assisted by wood nymphs, under the leadership of Kristanna Loken. Leelee Sobieski is the daughter of a mage loyal to the king, but she's also willing to carry a sword into battle.

Leelee has a brief scene at the beginning in which she passionately kisses the rival mage Gallian. That brings the total to one film that contains a simulated sex scene and five films with passionate kisses. That makes the percentage of films in her career so far with sexual stuff to either 4% or 26%, depending on whether or not the kisses are included. This is far below the 90% that she claims are necessary in films today.

I've never considered Jason Statham to be a good actor, but he's suitable as an action hero. When he plays the main role in a film you can expect exciting fight scenes, not emotional depth. The film contains a lot of battle scenes, both one on one and armies clashing. The final showdown between Jason Statham and the enemy mage is remarkable. It makes up for many of the weaker scenes earlier in the film.

Last week Uwe Boll announced that he's decided to retire from film making. He's only 51. I've listened to a few interviews in which he explains his decision. He gives more details in the German interviews. He sees himself as a champion of independent film making. With few exceptions he considers the big budget Hollywood films to be trash, although he praises a lot of the low budget independent films. Uwe Boll has financed most of his films himself out of his personal savings. Despite mediocre box office results he's managed to make money from most of his films, though only with the help of German state subsidies. He's said that he personally can make one million dollars profit from a typical film, but if he makes two million dollars loss from a film it wipes out the profit from his last two films. He now feels that the independent film industry in general is too risky for him. He's a gambling man who's decided to quit while he's ahead. That's sensible. At the moment he has enough money to live on for the rest of his life, but one unsuccessful film could change everything.

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Mercenaries (4 Stars)

I watched this film last month, but I had to come back to it for a second take. These four girls -- Kristanna Loken, Nicole Bilderback, Zoe Bell and Vivica Fox -- are the sexiest jailbirds ever. They're all doing long sentences for violent crimes, but they're offered a free pardon if they go on a covert mission to an unnamed former Soviet republic. The head of the CIA is the equally sexy Cynthia Rothrock. The tribal chief in the country they refer to as Shithole-istan is Brigitte Nielsen, who looked good in her younger days, but is now just scary.

This is the first film I've seen directed by Christopher Ray. He has an eye for fast action and explosions that reminds me of Andy Sidaris. My only criticism is that he doesn't capitalize on the girls' sex appeal. A few brief scenes of gratuitous nudity and seductive posturing would have gone down well.

Mercenaries (3½ Stars)

Today Burbank, tomorrow the world?

Christopher Ray, best known for directing shock horror films like "Two-Headed Shark Attack" and "Megashark vs. Crocosaurus", has now given the world more of what it likes to see: bad girls with guns! The American president's daughter has been captured and is being held in an unnamed Middle Eastern country that looks like Iran, though it might be a former Soviet republic. The USA military expert Mona (Cynthia Rothrock) knows that there is only one way to free her. America's top female soldiers, all currently imprisoned for going over the top in action, are assembled and sent on a mission to invade the top security prison called the Citadel.

Kristanna Loken is put at the front on the poster, since she is supposedly the film's biggest star. However, the team leader is Zoe Bell, and she's undoubtedly the best fighter in the group.

The similarity with "The Expendables" and its sequels is obvious. If not for copyright considerations the film might have been given a trashy name like "The Expendabelles" or "Expendababes", but I prefer "Mercenaries". It might be less expressive, but it's classier. From the exterior it might look like a cheap B-Film, but it's surprisingly well made and has a very good plot. Surprising, that is, if you aren't acquainted with Christopher Ray. Low budget doesn't mean low quality.

Burbank? Oh yes. "Mercenaries" won the best film award at the 2014 Burbank International Film Festival.

Terminator 3 (4½ Stars)

Imagine if you knew you were going to do something important with your life. Something amazing. Maybe the most important thing anyone has ever done.

This is a film that I keep returning to. I was disappointed when I first saw it in the cinema, but it's grown on me. I admit that it doesn't live up to the high quality of the first two films, but it's still a good film, and I'll argue with anyone who says otherwise.

Terminator 3 (4 Stars)

As my regular readers know, this blog isn't really a film review site, it's a film diary. That means that if I watch a film more than once I'll write about it more than once. Or at least, I will if I have anything left to say. I'll just repeat what I said in my last review that this film isn't as bad as people say. It's lacking the Cameron touch, but some of the scenes are outstanding, such as the car chase with the remote controlled police cars. This was a good film to round off the Terminator films. It's a shame they had to spoil it by making a totally unnecessary fourth film.

Terminator 3 (4½ Stars)

After the big success of the first two Terminator films James Cameron was asked repeatedly to write and direct a third film. Trilogies are the in thing, as far as film studios are concerned. He refused, on the grounds that "Terminator 2" had wrapped up the story, in his opinion, and needed no third part. So eventually the film was passed to other hands. Less capable hands? Kind of. The third film isn't up to the standard of the previous two, but it's still surprisingly good.

The second film saw Cyberdyne destroyed, so that Judgement Day would no longer happen. We now hear that Judgement Day wasn't prevented, it was just delayed. A new terminator, a model T-X, has been sent back in time to assassinate the future deputy leaders of the resistance. An older Terminator model, a T-850, is sent back in time to protect John Connor, the resistance leader, and his future wife Kate Brewster. Arnold Schwarzenegger stars once more as the T-850, whereas the T-X is played by Kristanna Loken. Killing machines have never been sexier.

When this film was released it was heavily criticised. Maybe the expectations were too high. Now, 10 years after its initial release, it's viewed more favourably. (Is it really 10 years? I remember going to see it in the cinema as clearly as if it were yesterday). Maybe the reason is that it looks good compared with the awful fourth film, "Terminator: Salvation". I believe it stands as a good film in its own right, if it's not viewed in the shadow of the Cameron films. I've heard people claiming it was a box office flop, but they're misinformed. A flop is a film that earns less than it cost to make. "Terminator 3" made a profit of $230 million, admittedly less than Terminator 2's $420 million profit, but a lot more than the paltry $72 million profit earned by the first film.

Bloodrayne (3½ Stars)

The story takes place in 18th Century Europe. Rayne is a dhampir, the offspring of a vampire and a human. She's been captured by a travelling carnival and is being put on show as a freak. Until one day she escapes and vows to take revenge on her father (the vampire Kagan) for killing her mother. To do this she allies herself with an organisation of vampire hunters called Brimstone.

Kristanna Loken, best known for her role as a killing machine in "Terminator 3", is a beautiful woman, but in this film she somehow lacks sex appeal. Michael Madsen is an often criticised actor, but he puts in a good performance as the leader of Brimstone. Ben Kingsley gives a very impressive performance as the cool, reserved Kagan.

Maybe it's unfair that I'm giving this film so low a rating. The film's main weakness was made necessary by its very concept: it's a film based on a computer game. I've never played the game, but watching the film I can see all the elements of a game, so I suspect that the story is based closely on the game itself. There are quests, journeys, clues, and battles with monsters at key points. At so many points throughout the film I could see the main characters doing things immediately that as a game player I would have finally done by trial and error. That disturbed me, which is why I couldn't rate the film any higher. Please leave your comments about this film.

Click here to view the trailer.