Kanecorp Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 it was an awful movie. T2 was by far the best, then T1, all of you that like T3 dont know what you're talkign about, it was so dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicane-UK Veteran Posted July 21, 2003 Veteran Share Posted July 21, 2003 Yes, all of us that liked T3 are ALL dumb.. Kane knows EXACTLY what kinds of movies we like to watch, and anyone that disagrees is SO DUMB!! Just accept that different people like different movies dude.. sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 (edited) The reason for giving the TX an exoskeleton is simple: watch the directors cut of T2. Need more? Okay fine, its common sense after the t1000 was damaged repeatedly it lost it's morphing abilities. The t1000 was not meant as a war machine like the T800/850 (arnies model) it was meant as an infiltration unit, that is why it was easily damaged. The TX on the other hand was meant as both an infiltration model and a war machine. Hence an updated exoskeleton, which was even stronger, then arnies and she is equipped with projectile weapons. this is common sense and well enough explained in the movie. why are people argueing over the movie. it worked perfectly regardless of whether it was a bad movie or not. sure they'll make more, terminator 4 the future war or something with crazy special effects. really people these are action movies what else do you expect. T800/850: soldier, grunt sent out in mass. t850 has an improved chasis as well as minior self repair abilities. mass produced. T1000: infiltration, close combat. not mass produced. TX: Infiltration, Close Combat, and long range battles. commander, queen what have you. not mass produced. Edited July 21, 2003 by Leif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parasite Posted July 22, 2003 Share Posted July 22, 2003 The reason for giving the TX an exoskeleton is simple: watch the directors cut of T2. Need more? Okay fine, its common sense after the t1000 was damaged repeatedly it lost it's morphing abilities. The t1000 was not meant as a war machine like the T800/850 (arnies model) it was meant as an infiltration unit, that is why it was easily damaged. The TX on the other hand was meant as both an infiltration model and a war machine. Hence an updated exoskeleton, which was even stronger, then arnies and she is equipped with projectile weapons. this is common sense and well enough explained in the movie. why are people argueing over the movie. *snip*T800/850: soldier, grunt sent out in mass. t850 has an improved chasis as well as minior self repair abilities. mass produced. T1000: infiltration, close combat. not mass produced. TX: Infiltration, Close Combat, and long range battles. commander, queen what have you. not mass produced. well said, Also The t-1000 was only a prototype. But as i say again, no t4 please unless its directed and written by james cameron crew. They butcherd the series enough already :no: :no: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troop101 Posted July 22, 2003 Share Posted July 22, 2003 I really wish James came back and repaired the storyline somehow. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron901 Posted July 22, 2003 Share Posted July 22, 2003 it was an awful movie.T2 was by far the best, then T1, all of you that like T3 dont know what you're talkign about, it was so dumb. i know what i'm talking about. i like T3. and i can't wait for T4 because T3 feels incomplete. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif Posted July 22, 2003 Share Posted July 22, 2003 lol what exactly needs to be repaired? are people really not that informed? people need tp pay more attention to storylines in all the movies and not jsut the fx. also hames cameron gave his approval of T3. do i need to say that again? he said he even liked t3 noteing that he may have done it differently but the plot is what he would have done. what has been butchered? what needs to be fixed? t3 was short and no not as artistic as t2. but it was exactly what it should have been a man unable to escape his fate. a fourth movie would simply be him facing it and no longer trying to change it. we'd see him send reese and arnold back in time and then have the actualy war and eventually seeing the defeat of the machines down the line. i don't see where all this confusion and nit picking is coming from the movie was made and done with but it was what it was suppose to be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parasite Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 lol what exactly needs to be repaired? are people really not that informed? people need tp pay more attention to storylines in all the movies and not jsut the fx. also hames cameron gave his approval of T3. do i need to say that again? he said he even liked t3 noteing that he may have done it differently but the plot is what he would have done. what has been butchered? what needs to be fixed? t3 was short and no not as artistic as t2. but it was exactly what it should have been a man unable to escape his fate. a fourth movie would simply be him facing it and no longer trying to change it. we'd see him send reese and arnold back in time and then have the actualy war and eventually seeing the defeat of the machines down the line. i don't see where all this confusion and nit picking is coming from the movie was made and done with but it was what it was suppose to be To me Terminator 3 was a terminator Parody. In t2 the t-800 walks into a bar causing a fight between about dozen worth of Bikies, Then he finishes the scene with him steeling the bar tenders Shotgun and the mans bike, Total Bad ass. Without spoiling anything look over how he did this in T3, total panzy. In The Terminator , the scene where he goes the the guns shot asking about a list of guns, he reloads a sotgun and kills the Owner after he says "you cant do that". In T3 they did this scene except its in the Petrol Station, i was displeased to end result. i mean i dont mind some comedy, but they went overboard. With all the money they had they could of written better action scenes . Compare the way the terminators first meet each other. overal its a good movie, but in the terminator trilogy wise... :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troop101 Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 lol what exactly needs to be repaired? are people really not that informed? people need tp pay more attention to storylines in all the movies and not jsut the fx. also hames cameron gave his approval of T3. do i need to say that again? he said he even liked t3 noteing that he may have done it differently but the plot is what he would have done. what has been butchered? what needs to be fixed? t3 was short and no not as artistic as t2. but it was exactly what it should have been a man unable to escape his fate. a fourth movie would simply be him facing it and no longer trying to change it. we'd see him send reese and arnold back in time and then have the actualy war and eventually seeing the defeat of the machines down the line. i don't see where all this confusion and nit picking is coming from the movie was made and done with but it was what it was suppose to be With James Cameron at the helm the storyline could of been the same, though it would of came out differently. Also no one is for sure James liked the film, he might say he liked the film, but James is the father and Mostow is the son and James is just being supportive. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomwarren Veteran Posted July 24, 2003 Veteran Share Posted July 24, 2003 Must go see this movie as soon as it's out :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts