MovieChat Forums > acidraindrop > Replies
acidraindrop's Replies
To add to your hair comment, I seem to remember some fans alleging that Daniel Craig wasn't enough of a pretty, ladies' man too.
There's a lot of specificity across the range of Bond fans that OP is not recognizing here.
<blockquote>I actually think Florence is rising and Chloe is dropping.</blockquote>
Yes. This is true.
What's also true is that Chloe has more weight than Florence atm. And Florence is rising.
Chloe would pull a much larger salary than Florence for the same role in Widow.
He's good at martial arts. Is he actually a good fighter, been in actual fights? Not at all. He's a performer.
I'd say she's got more weight than Florence atm. Florence is rising.
You actually think getting a tattoo is wrong?
I didn't admit anything about Cosby.
Only think I admitted is that using parental approval to determine "wrongeness" is a stupid metric.
Precisely, lmao. There was no like deep subtext or anything. One could read into the victimization of young girls but at that point, one would be just making shit up.
The little girl assassin has been a trope for decades now lol.
We couldn't even make a Crank movie now lol
lmaoooooooo omg. are you one of those people that go home and beat their kids because their work stresses them out?
<blockquote>It made sense that they would both stayed back. They were the only ones with kids. Dom didn’t know about his yet.</blockquote>
This hypocrisy is actually directly acknowledged in the first ten minutes before Dom meets them at the airport. Letty wants to leave to help. Dom's like, Mia and Brian got out of the game when they had a kid. Letty's like, we're not like them.
Again, realistically, this isn't convincing at all, but as I told the other guy, the fact that the movie even acknowledges and tries to deal with it, I consider it an explanation, in a world where Tyrese can drive into space.
<blockquote>But Mia going and Brian staying behind? </blockquote>
This is also acknowledged by the movie when Mia first appears and hugs Letty. <i>Someone</i> still has to watch both kids. But Jakob is Mia's brother. Mia didn't just join to help out and have fun. Mia came to figure out wtf happened with their brother.
This is why I said as far as fast movies go, they dealt with both of these absurdities (as opposed to something like Hans' resurrection, where they didn't bother to even make up an explanation).
This isn't really a problem at all.
And if you're looking to go recast Bond's sexual and racial identity like the other guy is implying, you still don't need to this either.
There's this idea these days this sort of continuity is needed for multiple installment film franchises and it's really not necessary.
He's not. I think the phrase is used incorrectly often these days.
I think it's definitely underrated. A lot of intentionally unexplained questions. The poorly written/casted/acted Kyle Reese.
But on the whole, I think it's a fun ride, and a nice homage and sequel to the original, even if it also had to steal some of the better ideas from TSCC in the process.
It's a popcorn film. And way better than Salvation imo. Finally got to see another good future war scene since Salvation failed to deliver any of that for me.
<blockquote>For example, in Salvation, we see Marcus Wright teach Kyle to always have a string attached to the shotgun so it cant be taken from him. We would then see Kyle in T1 sawing off the shotgun in the alleyway hooking a string over his shoulder. </blockquote>
This is like...Solo-bad in terms of callbacks. That is NOT why Kyle hooked the gun like that in T1. I mean it could have been, but in all likelihood, that wasn't the reason. And this is part of what I was alluding earlier with the T-800 design or the whole night travel. It's like McG watched parts of the earlier films to find stuff to make fans happy, but didn't watch all the movies, and so as to introduce various inconsistencies.
<blockquote>I loved the fact that they had young Reese in this and the actor who played him was amazing!</blockquote>
This was great, except it looks like McG forgot that Reese was a kid. Because the dialogue where John Connor is confronting Marcus and says: <i>You and me, we've been at war since before either of us even existed. You tried killing my mother, Sarah Connor. You killed my father, Kyle Reese. You will not kill me.</i>
Marcus responds with something like, KYLE REESE IS ON A CARRIER TRANSPORT or something. Yes, that boy you just saw, is definitely grown man's father. This is incoherent dialogue. Something we'd get form Fast and the Furious. There are other internally illogical aspects to the film like this, but in dialogue and in actions.
Which is why I feel Salvation doesn't function as a Terminator sequel or even a good standalone action film.
You're no longer here, but I need to bust out a few points to show why I cannot stand this film and why it's my least favorite Terminator iteration.
<blockquote>This was actually good for plot sake. Why? Because at the end of the movie, we finally see the tide turning on the resistance! We see the implementation of the T800's being manufactured at SkyNet Central in San Francisco. This meant that the weapons which the resistance had been using would now be rendered obsolete against the titanium T800s in the next possible sequels</blockquote>
Unfortunately, the combat situations demonstrated throughout the film show how woefully underpowered the human resistance is. Look at how much effort it takes for John Connor to dispatch one machine. With the amount of destruction, and the intricacy of Skynet's plans (outside the absurdly abandoned final act), I can't believe that the resistance as depicted in Salvation would be able to survive at all. Even his little radio trick...you stun a machine for like 5 seconds while it shoots wildly and unpredictably while flailing.
I think they intended for the tide you described, but that is not functionally shown in the movie.
<blockquote>We also saw the prototype Arnold T800 in Salvation.</blockquote>
It's too bad the prototype was for some reason stronger than Uncle Bob and the T-1000 from T2. It's like McG got confused with the TSCC continuity for some reason.
<blockquote>I do agree that Salvation was too bright, but upon watching it the other day with my wife (which she loved it btw!), I noticed that one of the bandits hiding in the gas station said that they needed the food or fuel for the "dark season". This made me realise, what if it was dark season in James Cameron's vision?</blockquote>
I'm more of interested in why Kyle Reece told Sarah Connor in T1 that they only travel at night. Speaking of Reese...
I genuinely think that they weren't sure, and didn't quite think it through. There's enough in it to consider that it's entirely an AU. I was about to write out to someone my idea of the different terminator continuities that exist, and I realized I never quite decided where to play Salvation.
I'm pretty sure every actor in the biz who spoke up defended Bale for that particular situation.
Yep, there were so many absurdities in this movie; I can't believe anyone would rank this above T3, Genesys, or Dark Fate. Well Dark Fate, there could be an argument....but my problems with DF are very similar to my problems with Salvation lol
His reaction was...a bit...<i>obvious</i> you would say?
No, that's not what I meant.
The universe where a guy who refs street races and runs a garage is suddenly revealed to be one of the top computer experts in the world. The universe where a clandestine government organization hires a bunch of ex-street racers who used to rob big rigs to handle global threats. The universe where Han is suddenly still alive without any attempt at an explanation.
At least there are explanations for why Brian is home. It's absurd, but it's more of an explanation than for why one of the cast members didn't die when he was visible inside an exploding wreck.