Underrated film, with under-explored ideas

Rating: Null/10 (4 January 2012)

I really don't understand why this didn't do better. The chief complaint seems to be that it was not like the other 3 films. My response to that is this - How many times can we watch a guy go back in time to save John Connor before it gets old? The 3rd film was clearly just cashing in on the franchise's popularity (though it was still a fun romp). To this film's credit the makers at least had the guts to try something new and take things in a different direction. However, thematically it deals with issues similar to T2 - What makes us human, the sanctity of human life. It even raises the danger of becoming like your enemy, which is very topical these days. My chief complaint is that it only touches on these issues. Otherwise it is a solid addition to the franchise and a solid sci-fi action flick in its own right. Is it better than T2? No. Is it better than T3? By far. The plot is interesting enough and nicely plays around with the alternate timelines concept. It has decent action and acting. Sam Worthington outshines everyone else though by far (Sorry Mr. Bale, I still worship you as a God though, a Batman God). The cinematography is excellent. They really captured the post-apocalyptic vibe with that. The score is good. It creates new themes while still throwing in the classic Terminator theme in here and there. There are some nice homages to the first two films. Accept the fact that there is no time travel in this one and forget it is directed by a guy who calls himself "McG" and enjoy it on its own merits.