Top Action Movie Facing Unrealistic Expectations

Rating: Null/10 (10 October 2003)

It seems fashionable for some to critique this movie based on their reaction to the political success of Arnold Schwarzenegger. By using their comments on this film to criticize voters and/or "America" for choosing an actor as governor (California, by the way, is not synonymous with the entire US), they overlook the fact that by slamming a movie for that reason they commit the same error they say they abhor - allowing someone's performance in one field to cloud your judgment about them in another.
So, here I critique the the film and not my reaction to Mr. Schwarzenegger's political success - with which I and apparently the majority of real-world US folks have no problem, just for the record. This is a great action film. Unfortunately, it is a sequel to two of the best action films of all time. This unfortunately causes a number of problems that this film handles well, but not perfectly.
A major problem is that each sequel becomes less and less original - by necessity. If you are a Star Trek fan, you can't help but notice the same problem. There is too much "canon," too much framework that inhibits the creative process. It gets taken to absurd lengths by some, as they try to point out "flaws" in a character's age at various points in the movies' continuum. These are movies, not documentaries, a fact some who get a little too involved seem to forget.
I thought T3 handled the "canon" problem well. Certain changes in the "timeline" established in the first two films but changed in this film are explained away well by the simple device that the events of those films actually changed future "history." Of course, the problem with that is that other things are said to be "inevitable," which does not quite square with "changes." We can let the metaphysicists and fan(atic)s quibble about this, things like that do not disturb the average moviegoer in my opinion.
Another "problem" handled well is the immutable fact that actors age between sequels. Now, a robot doesn't age, so if the actor changes appearance, that is kind of difficult to accept. However, I thought that Schwarzenegger carried off his part brilliantly and basically made you overlook the fact that he no longer is in his 30s as he was when he first played the role. There is less raw physicality and more humor and strategic calculation by the character. I like the change, personally, and find the banter a needed relief from the overwhelming somber tone of the series.
A third problem is explaining in reasonable terms how the future "rebel leader" becomes a leader at all. T2 established the character as an annoying, basically useless brat. T3 carries the characterization forward in what I felt was a reasonable fashion. I will not give away the ending, but suffice to say that I thought the screenwriters' solution was very neat and believable.
A fourth problem is that the "bad Terminators" have to keep getting more and more menacing in order to achieve shock value and conform with certain elements of the storyline. How, though, is that possible when each in turn is about as invulnerable as the writers can dream up? I thought this was the weakest part of the movie. The evil female terminatrix is simply not very menacing, at least relative to the amazing one in T2. One can search for reasons why a female robot was sent back - listen carefully to the dialogue and you will notice who was still around at the (future) time to be doing the sending - but there was nothing particularly original about this movie's villain. I think when people fault this movie, this area is the basic source of their concerns.
As for the script, I think it is clever but, as I said above, increasingly constrained by the "canon." Nothing in the movie is completely unexpected, all goes according to (slightly altered) plan. I think the filmmakers made the Schwarzenegger robot more avuncular in reaction to this problem. The device works to a certain extent, but creates an uneasy, conflicting dynamic that tends to undermine the creative tension so necessary for the suspension of disbelief.
All in all, a good film, worthy successor to its predecessors and a very worthwhile cinematic experience. In terms of overall quality, though, more in line with a "Godfather 3" than a "Godfather 2." Enjoyable and with several memorable scenes (Arnold firing a gun while carrying a casket, some good chase/fight sequences), but not quite achieving the classic status of the first two.