My stab at a review

Rating: Null/10 (18 October 2001)

As there are over 140 posts here, I doubt that this will be read by many people, however, I'll get my thoughts off my chest anyhow.
I liked the Terminator, being a big fan of AI stories (especially Isaac Asimov, the famous SF writer). As with many movies, especially low budget cult movies, there is always room for improvement. As the saying goes, however, hindsight is always 20/20. The film was dark and contained a brooding (though primitive) soundtrack based on repeditive percussive beats, matching the systematic mechanical nature of the machines which were the 'enemy' of the film.
Many SF readers may be familiar with Asimovs three laws of robotics:- 1. A robot must not harm or by inaction allow harm to come to a human. 2. A robot must obey all orders given by humans, unless these contradict the first law. 3. A robot must protect itself from harm unless this contradicts the second and first laws, in order of priority.
Many of Asimovs stories were based around both the single mindedness of the robots, and their potential danger when these laws were not installed within them. The Terminator allows the viewer to experience a robot governed by totally different laws, of which, protecting and serving humans is DEFINANTLY NOT one of them. It opened the prospect of artificial intelligence emerging on an unprepared and undereducated world, and developing its own motives and desires, and deciding that human beings are an impedement to these desires (See Terminator 2 for an explanation of these desires - when you hear it, you almost feel sorry for SkyNet, the supercomputer which creates the terminator).
Arnold Schwarzenegger has become much more accomplised as an actor over the years, and is quite reasonable now (see the Sixth Day). However, back then, he was quite stiff. This fit the role of an awkward, aggressive robot extremely well, especially with that intimidating scowl permanently fixed upon his face. His then strong Austrian accent, does not impede his performance, but actually seems to enhance it in some sort of subliminal way. Perhaps watching all the old war movies where the Germans were the baddies (the Nazi elite etc...), has something to do with this.
The prospects of a Terminator 3 bring me a lot of hope, however I expect a lot of disappointment after discovering who the scriptwriters were. Any computer user will puke when they've seen 'The Net' - one of their 'acclaimed' works. Perhaps a wait of five years and a REMAKE of the first would be more appropriate. It might open the avenue to another tough guy actor playing the Terminator. Let's face it - Arnolds not getting any younger especially with the heart troubles and there's nothing sadder than an aging muscleman.
The film, at first, appears to be a tough guy film, especially with the overbuild '4 wheel drive' physique of the younger Arnold Schwarzenegger appearing at the start of the film. Whether it was intentional or not, James Cameron did the film credit by slowly revealing the nature of the Terminator (Arnolds role) as not a tough guy villain, but a very dangerous mechanical device with a totally narrow minded intent to kill the heroine of the movie, Sarah Connor (played by Linda Hamilton). This leads to the end where, the terminator, stripped of its outer covering of cloned flesh, is revealed to be the warmachine it is. The metal skeleton covered with hydraulic muscles is an artistic masterpiece. The scene in the factory, although done with basic stop frame animation, was the one which most impressed me. This would look fantastic if done by computer animation, and lets hope a remake will be made.
The second movie, although very imaginative in parts, was disappointing in terms of script (though not in action and visual effects). There were many recycled themes from the first, such as the tanker chase, the mimicking to Sarahs mother/John Connors Foster mother. There are many more similarities which I'm sure you'll find. James Cameron is an imaginative director, and I think he could have done much better. Why couldn't the T-1000 have a more complex role? For example, instead of going gung-ho for little John Connor, it could in secret, construct terminators in the present time and send them after the Connors one by one.
The character change of Sarah Connor from the first movie to the second was a little unsettling, although novel at the first appearance. I didn't find the fact that she had turned into a hardlined semi-sane dragon woman very believable, after the performance of the vulnerable young woman she gave in the first.
Like I say, I don't expect much from T3, although, with some better scriptwriters, or some advice from some accomplished science fiction writers (say, Steven Baxter, Arthur C. Clarke, Poul Anderson), a very clever plot could make up for the shortcoming of making a sequel of a sequel. I hope I am pleasantly surprised. After all Aliens (by James Cameron as well) was an excellent sequel to Alien, although not quite as good. Mr Mostow, if by chance you are reading this, PLEASE CONTACT THESE SCIENCE FICTION AUTHORS, or others like them. It could give you the recognition you deserve after U-571, which I loved.
All the same, thanks for reading this... And I apologise for any spellung misteaks I may have made. I'm not going to error check it.
Be reading you.
Phil