Terminator Genisys

A narrative mess and basically an unnecessary variation on the already sufficiently dissected Terminator legend, which, despite everything, works quite smoothly and becomes at least a very entertaining, B-grade sci-fi action flick. It's better not to think about the frantic time twists, given the existence of previous episodes, and the suffocating atmosphere of inevitable fatality has been replaced by action, situational humour and a number of necessary postmodern references, but maybe that's why Terminator Genisys pleasantly surprised me and didn't disappoint; it moves along, there's always something going on, the young cast is at least watchable, and the great Arnold, in my opinion, lived up to his questionable presence in the film by more than a measure, and once again strongly reminded the world that he alone is the one and only Terminator. And to be honest, maybe that’s all it was about. 65% (15/09/2015)

It's certainly not a bad film. The opening part, which plays with the viewer and (mainly) with the first part of the saga, was even excellent, but then it (very smoothly, I admit) turned into an extremely and unnecessarily overcomplicated goulash, which was only saved by every shot, every line and every "smile" by Arnold Schwarzenegger. If someone asked me for one reason to see the new Terminator, I'd tell them it's because of Arnold. Actually, for the Arnolds, to be exact. Otherwise, I was disappointed by the lack of action scenes, the sometimes very flashy digital gimmicks (not true of the 1984 T-800, but definitely true of the school bus crash or the helicopter chase), the supremely unsympathetic Jason Clarke, and I was literally annoyed by the scene in the end credits. (16/07/2015)

A pretty good instalment. There is just the issue that the story with its leaps from the past to the future and from the future to the present made such a mess of it that it is hard to set it to the timeline of the previous instalments. Especially of the third instalment, which it completely ignored. On the other hand, it is made better by Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose sparse acting is good enough to not only entertain, but also awake some nostalgia. Just enough for three stars. (29/03/2016)

The worse the film, the better you know the rules of its narrative. What starts out as promising entertainment that boldly requires viewers to be well familiar with the previous films and to find their bearings in several time planes soon turns into tiresome recycling of previously utilised ideas and the same narrative formula. Furthermore, the filmmakers didn’t make any effort to disguise the fragmented nature of the episodic narrative. The elimination of a villain in one period is followed by a shift to another period, in which another villain is taken down without really addressing what happened in the preceding minutes. The most extreme bits of screenwriting laxity and the overall mechanical nature of the film, in which you won’t find much that is sincere other than from Arnold, take the form of additional patching of holes in the logic with dialogue explaining what happened when the camera wasn’t running. Why bother with the more skilful incorporation of explanations into the ongoing plot when you can resolve everything ex post with a few horribly stilted lines. The gritty 1980s stylisation is luke-warm due to the PG-13 rating and mainly relates only to how the film looks. Because of the hackneyed characterisations and bland actors (or rather, blatantly bad actors, which is true mainly in the case of Courtney, who is simply unable to portray complex emotions), the mediocre melodramatic storyline with “daddy” and his adopted daughter (a tough girl who quickly turns into a victim who has to be protected and rescued) doesn’t work, nor does the attempt to add depth to the characters’ motivations. Arnold, who is the only one of the actors who clearly rises above all of this, can scowl a lot, but he can’t give any firm shape, order or meaning to this trash heap of worn-out blockbuster ideas. Unfortunately, the film is not pulled out of its misery even by the action scenes that form its foundation and which are filmed in a completely dull manner, without suspense, surprise or regard for 3D technology. If a two-hour recognition game of “find all of the (visual) quotes from Cameron’s movies” is enough to make someone happy, I wish them pleasant viewing. Personally, however, I would rather watch those Cameron films in their full-blooded form instead of this watered-down mash-up. 40% (03/07/2015)

The script must have been written by Jára Cimrman, based on one of his plays. So it's clear, you are my son, but you could actually be my father, or brother, and if the time paradox allows, father and son at the same time, along with my mother, who’s actually my daughter. Whatever. Time paradoxes have always been there, they are part of the sci-fi genre. What I just realized is that the Terminator has no place in today's cinemas. What seemed revolutionary and innovative at the time of the release of Cameron's first two Terminators, which enchanted awestruck audiences with the metamorphoses of the T-1000 model thanks to digital effects that were at the dawn of their age, now, in an age overcrowded and overstuffed with CGI atrocities, no longer impresses anyone and has nothing to offer beyond that. And when you present the core of the story, those time paradoxes I mentioned earlier, as clumsily as Alan Taylor does, then there's a problem. Especially since the film doesn't have a single (!) memorable action scene that you'll remember years from now. Unlike, for instance, Terminator 2, which is a textbook of the action genre. And Arnold? Due to the plot, his presence here is rather symbolic, all he has to do is show up and throw in a few one-liners and fans will be satisfied. But he's fine, and it has to be said, the only (surprising) bright spot of the whole film. If the Terminator has to age, it should certainly be in the way Arnold has demonstrated here. (14/07/2015)