Jest rewatched T-2 as an adult, and why T:SCC is better

Television, Movies Games and Books Terminator
#1

I rewatched my DVD for T-2 this morning. I saw t-2 in the theatres a few times in the theatres in High School. I bought the VHS as soon as it came out and watched it three or four times by “half watching” it, this is where I fast fwd to parts I like or watch it while painting or working out and only paying attention to scenes that I like .

When the DVD came out in 2000 or 2001… I watched the deleted scenes and “Half watched” it again. I always liked it… more for the information within, than the actual film. I just like the robots and want to see some action! I not only gave T-2 three thumbs up, but it’s in the Pantheon of my favorite movies ( Trek, Aliens, Predator, Terminator you know the greats if your my age)

So I have been rewatching T:scc and it occored to me that T-2 is so ingrained in my memory, that I never went back and rewatched those movies to go with my T:scc rewatch.

So I rewatched Terminator ( half watched) to listen to Kyle talk about the future and see clues for Sara to talk about herself and compare to T:SCC. I know that it was low budget and given that… it’s still a great movie!

When I got to T-2 I was first blown away by the improvement in effects… It looks great, even by today’s standards. Really a head of it’s time. It looks better than T-3 in a lot of ways.

Ok now fo…r the hard part. You read the title to the thread… let me get to the point: Acting isn’t just Looking the part. Both Furlong and Hamilton visually do a stand up acting job… it’s that more important part of the craft that they have probably never even read about… much less scene performed, and have never produced as much… even in a dream.

A) Linda Hamilton get’s all these props for her portrayal of Sara in T-2. I think we shouldn’t mistake “looking badass” and physicaly doing things on camera with being a good actress. She speaks in the “Christian Bale” batman voice throut the movie ( whenever she isn’t screaming or crying) and it’s practicaly comical. There is a reason that she was pretty much only in terminator and the one TV show for the most part… she is horrible. Her timeing is off. It’s just bad acting. It hurts me to say this… but time makes you look at this in new light… Lena Headey, while not being as buff as LH), is leaps and bounds a better actress ( with a resume of non-B movies to back that up). I am not compareing the characters ( I understand that’s apples and oranges given the time differance and time on screen) I am saying the act delivering dialoge. Linda Hamilton sucks. I nevernew it before because I was a child.

b) Edward Furlong is HORRIBLE! I blame this on the director! He delivers about on out of 10 lines in this fake voice suck lines as " the other kids wantes <Nintendo>" or the I supposed to be this great <leader>. the <> represents this horribley acted stress on the word that is the equivalent to when my sisters 6 year old is trying to make fun of another young child… it’s the voice a 6 and under kid uses to make fun. He uses it the whole movie because he can’t act. He also over acts all exciteing scenes, and acts with no confidence in all the scenes where he is supposed to be speaking about meningful things. He sounds like the bad acting in the original AKIRA english language anime ( example line from Akira: “that’s evalution , right?” - for those that had that VHS back in the day) He is a good Visual actor… he looks right. He, also, can’t deliver a line to save his ass. His dialogue delivery is horrible. No wonder he ended up a dope addict… he probably watched one of his own movies past age 17 and couldn’t take it.

These two acting jobs alone make T:SCC a better gig. I love Arnie, the effects, the plot, everything else in the movie. But, the job done by those two former actors ruins the rewatch if you are an adult that cares about anything other than effects. If you want to see the art of acting… watch T:SCC… those cat’s do it right!

#2

Good notes. I wish I could remember who wrote this: Early into T:SCC, a critic made the observation, “The TV Connors remain 90 IQ points lower than their movie counterparts.” Since you just watched T2, does that point still ring true to you?

#3

in NO way. To be 90 points less than Sarah in T2 would make her brain dead.

"what’s that sarah… we have the most advance killing machine , not yet invented, chaseing you and your son. You are off the grid and have tons of guns and money and your own Arnie. Your safe, and he’ll never find you. What’s the thing to do…go after Dyson because you have bad dreams… right NOW… have to go get him right now!

She isn’t that dumb ever.

First off let me say that Sarah on TV has more opprotunity to show us more intelligence… just based on the amount of characterization allowed in 31 hours instead of roughly 4. And on a show that bears her name… as opposed to the “Arnie” movie.

And john is older… so that’s practicaly impossible. Ed Furlong plays a young kid. He’s 10. He has skills with computers and can be a street punk… but he isn’t very inteligent past that.

john on Tv is a pretty deep guy.

That reviewer is just stupid.

I think that the reviewer just didn’t want to allow her to BE Sarah Conner. See there is a Myth surrounding SMV.

The problem wiht Sarah in the movies is that she is a little of a sacred cow. They show a chick that can’t functionaly deliver dialogue… but she can appear baddass by fighting fat mental hospital workers, middle aged psychiatrists, a computer company executive, rent-a cops, and she could run from cops. She fought a damaged t-1000 ( unsucessfuly) she can pump a shot gun one handed. So it becomes accepted without question that she is a baddass because that’s her good press. When the movie was doing press… they sold her as a badass… she wasn’t, she was just more badass than she had been in T-1. They never show her do much of anything that a high school wrestler can’t do … but because she is a woman doing it… this makes her Rambo.

And the myth of Sarah an icon in the pantheon of strong women characters. It’s kinda the same concept that Riply in Aliens , Alien, and Alien3 is a baddass. Why? Because she said "get away from her you bitch and can drive a lifter?

Characters like Sarah Conner, Riply, and Uhurah ( TOS) gain a following that is based on what some people want them to be… and not about what they acatually do. Riply is an Icon because she wasn’t a victem, Sarah became an Icon because she could do pull ups in her room, Uhurah was an Icon because she was present. These characters become more important than the sum of their whole and many people aren’t capable of dealing with any change to them.

Sarah on TV [ STV] has ALL of Sarah’s [SMV] positive qualities ( easy for me to say she really only has a few… she isn’t a deep character unless you the viewer choose to maker her deeper than she is)

  1. She is in good physical shape. STV is NOT as buff as SMV… but she is pretty close and seriously… why would she need to be… she was guns and judgement day was supposed to be over!

  2. she loves her son and to hell with anything else!

  3. She isn’t a soldier… but she knows her way around a gun, and gun runners.

So in those departments… STV hangs in.

Sarah is nowhere near as intelligent in T-2 as in T:SCC. Also … the “her being crazy” thing is pretty valid in that movie. it’s not “people think she’s crazy” she really is. She has been driven over the edge.

In T:SCCC she is pretty level headed. She is a MUCH better leader! I don’t want to be a pig… but she is WAY better looking. A much better actress and the plans that she comes up with… are better plans.

I Love her on TV… she really is a dumbass in the movie. Just watch it again and you will see. ( and I will say it one more time… she can’t act)

#4

I never had a problem with Linda Hamilton, she exhibited a wide range of emotion in both films and I never noticed a problem with delivery or timing. I think she was a badass because she went from an everyday waitress to a freedom fighter. She had a ton of courage and considering the circumstance she kicked a ton of ass. Its not like you expect her to take that poly mimetic alloy in a fistfight right?
Ive known wrestlers and Ive known trained infantry from the various armed forces and I would trust Sarah Conner before I trusted most of them.
Now, Ill admit that Ive never seen the tv show, but I think you underestimate the Sarah Conner from the movies.

#5

Loved T2, but your right TSCC is better on every front except for action sequences than T2. but lets not forget that they are different forms of storytelling. the movie doesn’t have the time a tv show has to add layers complexity and character moments…

#6

But I was answering the comment on the fact that the reviewer stated that the TV show was 90 IQ points below the movie.

I also challenge you to watch the movies as a an adult and compare the dialouge delivery of Linda Hamilton and the dope addict kid VS the tv counterparts… it’s leaps and bounds better acting on tv.

#7

erased because it sounded more rough than it was ment ot…

#8

If you are implying I have deluded myself into thinking that T2 was real, well, this is me disabusing you of that notion. As to your needlessly informative backstory, my point was that I trusted her, not that I thought she was some warrior extraordinaire. Neither Linda Hamilton nor Sarah Conner were or are professional soldiers of any type, but considering the opposition and her history, I think she did as well as could be expected. Maybe you would do well to remember that this is, after all, ‘just storytelling’.

#9

yeah it souded pretty bad… didn’t mean it to be that heavy… I snipped it out.

#10

The odd thing is that TSCC is a continuation of T2.

Now, TSCC vs. T3/TS is another matter…

#11

yeah, just with actors that have resumes’s that reflect the art of acting ( instead of Beauty and the Beast and b-movies) !