More effective than electro-shock therapy

Rating: 2/10 (8 December 2005)

I know, Iknow, I am in a minority but I feel compelled to write (for the first time ever) because this film is rubbish in comparison to the original. Yes I do mean RUBBISH, GARBAGE or whatever else you may care to call it. I've rated it a two because if you just want to see Arnie flex his muscles, grunt in an Austrian accent, and generally shoot the place up, I'd have to give it 10 out of 10 and if I was then to say that the special effects were way ahead of their time, why I'd go so far as to give it a 12. The plot's well paced, the acting is good and it makes a decent mindless action film. However this is NOT what I want from a movie, not even an Arnie number.
Much of my disappointment is probably due to the time I saw the first film. I will never forget the fear I felt of the implacable terminator ruthlessly tracking ITS prey without regard for anything but fulfilling ITS programmed objectives. The first Terminator film now looks dated beyond belief, but it was way, way ahead of its time. Nonetheless in the sequel there's nothing amazing (apart from the special effects) to freak anyone out. Instead, James Cameron sets out to prove that vacuum cleaners too can have complex personalities. Sorry, it just doesn't wash. And neither does the anti-war theme which is so lightly graffiti-ed over the entire film with the subtlety of a skinhead wielding a baseball bat at a gay pride demonstration. The final little speech made at the end of the film is so unashamedly and outrightly didactic that its saccharin taste leaves one with the need to reach for the bucket. (It still makes me want to wretch just writing about it.)
What I love in a good film is coming out of the cinema, forgetting it, but then continually thinking about it over the next few days. What I loathed about Terminator 2 was coming out of the cinema, forgetting about it, and then continually thinking about its inconsistencies for the next few years. Poor though the third film is, at least it attempts to sort out the muddle of illogical time lines left by the second film. It's downright illogical that the mainframe in the future, knowing it had been destroyed would firstly send a model of a Terminator with a surprisingly large batch run, then realize it had failed and so send a new and better number. Why didn't it just send the more advanced prototype first? (If it had lost the war at the hands of John Connor, what else was the thing going to be used for?) If it weren't for the third film, which was desperately needed to explain this mess, the mainframe computer must have known it had lost the battle instantly. After all, it must have found out through its own non-existence. I know I'm pedantic, but I can't really be the only one out there. However, if you are capable of leaving your brain somewhere else, be my guest. Otherwise I must seriously warn you: this film will do serious damage to your IQ and should be given a government health warning. Give it a miss or start talking more kindly to your household appliances.