Does the Future Hold Up?

Rating: 5/10 (11 September 2017)

Candid admission time: despite selling myself as a fan of action cinema there are two classic genre films I've neglected my whole life. Predator is one, and The Terminator is another. Recently because of this blog I decided to watch both in the hopes of giving a fresh review from a new perspective. Alas, I couldn't finish Predator. I didn't think it was particularly entertaining in the action department, I cared little for the characters, the Predator itself was threatening but not enough for me to be glued. I considered it more a slasher film with buff men in lieu of stupid teens.
The Terminator falls into the same boat in a way. It's a horror film more so than action, a kind of slasher/chase movie where we follow our heroes in their escape from the monster. Unlike Predator which hides the creature from us, The Terminator focuses on the cyborg hit-man and makes sure we know what he looks like and how daunting he can be.
Sarah Connor is a waitress in Los Angeles when her life is shattered by the appearance of two men from the future, one a resistance fighter, another a Terminator, a cybernetic organism. The future is bleak with nuclear holocaust caused by the rise of the machines sending humans underground. With the machines ruling, a resistance fighter named John Connor has become a hero, throwing a monkey wrench into the inorganic creatures plans. Facing defeat thanks to this man, the machines send a Terminator into the past to eliminate Connor's mother and reset the timeline. Somehow one of the resistance managed to go through as well to protect Sarah Connor.
Despite the futuristic ideas and plot the movie itself is very light science fiction and operates more in the horror genre. Sarah Connor is completely unprepared for what she is about to face and Arnie's Terminator is like Friday the 13ths Jason, an unstoppable brute who is seemingly unkillable. It makes for some compelling sequences of destructive action, the Terminator shooting up a police station being a particular highlight.
As this is a site dedicated to action critique, I'd be remiss not to mention the editing making many action sequences quite awkward. The very first series of murders has the Terminator kill a trio of punks. What could have been a quick and effective assault is a jankily edited nightmare that hardly makes sense. As the movie progresses, I found the editing got increasingly better but overall it's another case of overediting ruining the effectiveness of action.
Another reason I wasn't as enthralled by the action as others is my disdain for what I call "Industrial Action". These movies are typically dark, ugly affairs that focus on abandoned places and industrial areas for settings. Cannon Films was a constant perpetrator of making films that felt inorganic purely because of the settings. Cobra is a prime example and even a film like Robocop, which I do quite enjoy, comes across as bland and uninteresting because of the setting. All of these films take place in metropolitan areas but nothing feels lived in or real. Even in Terminator, the chase sequences aren't as compelling as they could be purely because of how staged it all seems. I don't care how late at night it is, there would be a lot more cars on the streets than the movie portrays. It pulls me out of the action.
The other facets of The Terminator are just as artificial in my eyes. The plot is interesting as a concept but goes nowhere interesting. I'm sure T2 will expand upon the mythology built up in this first outing, but as a stand alone product The Terminator doesn't invest me in the film's world. The stakes feel nonexistent because Sarah Connor is so removed from the future war against the machines and there isn't enough of a connection thematically. We see the war and its effects, but they aren't tied into the events of 1984 enough.
What ties the past and future together is Kyle, the resistance fighter protecting Sarah. The problem here is that Kyle is a weak character and the romance that buds between himself and Sarah is poorly executed and extremely two-dimensional. Sarah, for her part, has some character development but she doesn't exactly feel well-rounded and isn't interesting either. When the artificial killing machine antagonist is the most compelling character in your film, you're missing the point.
I don't have a lot to say about The Terminator because I didn't feel it provided me with anything to really talk about. And that's the sign, to me, of an average film. I don't think The Terminator is bad but I do think it's two-dimensional and lacking in a lot of departments. I mentioned with Speed that you can turn your brain off and enjoy it. That was a fast paced, dumb action movie though. This is trying to have a little more gravitas and meat on the bones and I really do not think it works.