Chris Stuckmann: Terminator: Genisys

Chris Stuckmann reviews Terminator: Genisys

About ChrisStuckmann

Quick, funny reviews of movies and games, new and old.

17 comments

  1. Three Degrees of Bacon

    I’m excited for it precisely because it screws up the timeline. Like, the first one establishes that time is static – that time travel was always a part of history, and that Kyle Reese and the Terminator created the past they’re trying to change. But this one? Things are different. We see a branch in the timeline, and that excites me for all its possibilities. Everything is changing. The static things no longer have to be static.

  2. I think they try to show the branch in t 2 where she was trying to prevent skynet from being born.

  3. I saw, I think, two trailers for this movie. (It may have been the same one twice) and I feel like just from watching the trailer I’ve seen the *entire* movie. So why bother paying money to watch a movie I’ve already pretty much seen? But that’s just me, maybe other people don’t mind being spoiled for seemingly every twist in the film.

  4. T:Genisys was just okay…not terrible, not great, not really a Terminator movie. Sure, we had actors playing characters with familiar names, but it didn’t feel like the epic Terminator adventure I was hoping for. It should have been as good as the first two films, and not get the typical comments of “Well, it was better than T3 and Salvation.” That’s not really high praise IMHO. Perhaps now that the timeline is reset…ugh, another one of these reboot things…and that Jim Cameron is listed on IMDB as a writer for two untitled Terminator follow-ups for 2017 & 2018, that the series might/maybe/could/hopefully/gonna wish upon a star that it gets back on track.

    More than likely he’ll just give us more Dances With Aliens sequels instead.

  5. Chris, you always come off so measured in your reviews of films, even (/especially) these really disappointing ones. From my point-of-view, I’m having a hard time understanding you.

    Have you not had a traumatizing experience at the cinemas? I did. I was 11. Mostly because of how utterly horrible the movie was, how it dashed all my expectations, spat at my love for the previous film in the franchise, and made me feel horrible in front of my parents, whom I dragged to the cinemas. It left a deep, DEEP scar. Have you no scar of your own?

    Do you even take the disappointment of a film personally? Feeling like the filmmakers OWED you a good sequel? Of course, such thoughts are potentially silly….

    But they are nontheless entirely appropriate. Have you NEVER been so burned?

    Do you actually analyze Hollywood’s methods? Try to suss out why those films that disappoint you so disappoint you? Not just the surface elements, as in “X movie had bad acting, or X movie had action scenes without a strong central plot”, but more like “X movie cast a bunch of people who were more popular than they were talented, put them in a cookie-cutter plot a nine-year-old coulda though up, spent almost half their time making half-assed references to earlier films, and then ruined every action scene with cheap CGI in place of reasonable practical effects?

    Just to create a random example, of course. Anyway, have you ever taken time to consider WHY filmmakers decided (over many months, over many giant piles of money) to make a film so bass-ackwardly? Leading with their weaknesses (lame humor, $#I++y CGI), and ignoring the strengths they were building upon (simple, but solid story; good, deliberate atmosphere).

    Just asking, because your reviews mostly try to be both spoiler-free, and detail-free. If the actions scenes don’t work for you, you just say they don’t, and don’t speculate on why they maybe ended up the way they did. You say Arnold did OK by you, but the rest of the cast seemed, at best, OK. With so much money, so much time, so many resources, and so much on the line, any wonder why they ended up with the cast they did, or why that cast didn’t seem to work for you?

    I like your reviews, Chris. But I crave deeper analysis. You’ve done longer-form reviews of stuff. But only of stuff you’ve liked (from what I’ve recalled, there’s also the trailer stuff, which is spot-on, I will say). Do you feel it goes beyond your mandate as a reviewer to speculate on production decisions? Is it only about the finished product? Does it deserve no analysis beyond the basic review of the finished product? I saw Genisys (I hate spelling it that ways), and my thoughts fit almost exactly with yours. Only moreso. Which means, as incredibly disappointed as I was, I would have preferred to see you explore your disappointment. Do you do in-depth examinations of failed films? Of films that were probably conceived in cynicism, lowest-common-denominator pandering, and trailer-focused filmmaking. Genisys, especially, reeked of all these very, very common modern Hollywood tropes. I’d LOVE to see you examine them in depth.

    • I agree. I’ve tried a few of his reviews including this one and they just don’t appeal to me. I won’t watch any more; I’ve tried 3 in all. I think what you said describes it well. He has very shallow reviews. There’s no in-depth analysis as to why this is a thing or not or why it matters or shouldn’t. And that’s what I like to hear!

    • Chris has done quite a few in-depth retrospectives / reviews of older films…go and look at his body of work on YouTube. Just because those videos are not embedded on Channel Awesome does not mean that they don’t exist 🙂 I do like to see the occasional ranting, foaming at the mouth type reviews…they’re funny most of the time, but Chris isn’t that guy. I found his points in this video to be very well done, giving his opinion without spoiling the film for those who haven’t seen it yet. You know…like a real critic?

  6. I had fun with this movie. It was an enjoyable popcorn flick and nothing more. It’s better than the last two Terminator films, but the first two are still the best. I didn’t find the plot confusing, maybe because I realized that this movie was basically a cleaning of the slate. Kind of like what JJ Abrams did with the Star Trek reboot and created a new timeline with which to make new stories with. That’s what this film did, it erased not only all of the past of the Terminator but it also erased the future so if they make any future films they are not beholden to the original Terminator lore and can create fresh new stories. Finally the future is not set.

  7. zipperintheback

    I liked the movie, despite the plotholes. But you know what I *love*? THAT SHIRT, Chris. Where did you get that shirt, man?

    *Monotone*: Your clothes…give them to me.

  8. I’m seeing this this weekend. I think that I’ll like this movie since I’ve never seen anything Terminator related and a lot of criticisms seem to come from re-tread complaints.

  9. MidnightScreeningsman2014

    I will totally skip this movie cause it’s not doing so well at the box office and it has a 27 percent. I will definitely watch the first two terminators just to see what makes them so awesome. I think there are way better movies for men to see in theaters this weekend like Jurassic World or if they have a family inside out. If you are a man reading this comment go see magic mike xxl with your wife you will not be disappointed or be bored by that film like this one. But if they do make more terminator films then they should hand it over to a director who knows the franchise(like lets hope James Cameron has time for it).

  10. There is a word that you used in the film that pretty much sums up the film as a whole for me: “serviceable.” The good parts aren’t great, the bad parts aren’t abhorrent. The film maintains your focus for (most of) the runtime. I think there are some plot holes you could drive a truck through, but as Terminator can be described as “the play about the retcon,” that goes with the territory. I’d at the very least recommend it to people who like the franchise, but I’d give them the same warning I’d give the JJ Abrams Star Trek films.

  11. Is Matt Smith any good? I’ve never seen him in anything other than Doctor Who, and I hear he has something of a small role in this. I know small roles don’t mean a whole lot for a movie, but I really enjoy Matt Smith so…

  12. Im surprised you didnt mention this, which I think is a big thing and a huge flaw. This movie is PG-13.

    Seriously, a Terminator movie thats pg-13. In other words, its watered down for kids. I was interested in going to see this move, until I found out the rating. Just imagine if T1 or T2 was pg-13…. uug.

  13. Everyone keeps mentioning all these “plotholes”, and I’m just not getting where the plotholes lie. They address the question of “Well who sent the Terminators back to you as a child? What’s with the deleted programming?”, they just didn’t ***answer*** it, just like they didn’t everything about the One Ring in Fellowship, or many other planned trilogies. It’s clear someone’s playing with the timeline just by watching, so I don’t see why we need more hand-holding to get to that. Stuff’s going on behind the scenes, and they’ll be addressing it over the next couple of movies. And Sarah’s clear about it, the terminator has had 11 years to pull a bullet in the brainpan, and hasn’t done so.

  14. I finally saw it. It was awesome in my opinion. The twists were awesome and the action scenes were pretty cool. There was also a surprising amount of humor. This was the first Terminator thing I’ve seen and I think that this was a good opener for me.

Leave a Reply