Science > Physics > Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler***
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Steve Harris" |
| Date: |
05 Jul 2003 04:12:00 PM |
| Object: |
Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
Terminator III, the Rise of the Not Very Much
Reviewed Not Very Fairly by Steven B. Harris
Well, you've seen the trailers. It's no secret that the
newest Terminator in the series is a Fembot. You know what
that means: she has twin plasma blasters which poke out
through her bustier when needed for blasting manbots. And
she does blast Arnold, the old T-1, quite a lot. And drags
him though buildings. And burns off half his face. And grabs
his crotch. And pokes his head in urinals. And wraps her
legs around him and squeezes unmercifully.
We're not quite sure what she's made of, except there's a
hard underthingy, sort of like foundation undergarments, and
over that is a liquid metal magnetic outer coating that
looks like that stuff that T-2 is made of. In the first
Terminator movie, it was explained that the time
displacement device requires that all things that go through
it, be covered in living tissue. Which is how Arnold and his
obsolete cyborg he-man series do their time travel. For the
newer series of Terminators in movies II and III, which are
less and less masculine as they get nastier, no living cells
are apparently needed or used at all. The reasons for that
are never explained, but it does all seem to hang together
thematically.
The newest Terminator is a blonde. With adjustable breast
size, like Dolly Parton. Like T-2 the liquid metal cop, T-3
is also is a mimic who has the ability to change her
appearance to perfectly duplicate anything she touches.
Which ability allows her to go around through the whole
movie in cool leather pants which are as indestructible as
Jim Morrison's. Of course, youth must be served and T-3
doesn't duplicate the middle-aged lifted face of the
Hollywood rich lady she steals the pantsuit look from. The
contact does make her hair curl up into a serviceable
killing-bun, though. (I predict a Terminator Granny for
T-4).
Our new feminine Terminator 3 has many added features over
T-2. For one thing, she is mistress of other machines, so we
seen no swearing and banging mechanical stuff with the
purse. T-3 instead sticks a long hot needle into machines
that grows from a fingernail, and this manicurical control
makes their chips sit up at attention and do as they're
told.
For another thing, T-3 is designed to be an anti-Terminator
Terminator. She seduces Terminators, marries them, divorces
them, takes their houses and saddles them with killer
alimonies. Following which the old style Terminators take
out their hydrogen power cells, put them in their mouths,
and blow off their own heads. And at the end we see that
underneath the soft exterior coating of the new T-3 Fembot
series is a squirming minx-eyed yowling thing, which is
possibly screaming about money and lawyers and her unmet
needs, but we can't quite make it out.
In this movie, we have some of the same characters as in the
previous movies, but few of the actual previous actors,
except Arnold (and a welcome cameo shrink). John Connor is
now grown up into a somewhat ineffective doofus who does
things like attempt to rob a veterinary clinic with a
paintball gun. He doesn't have a clue, and he's a mess, and
nobody shies away from telling him so. Nobody can believe
he's the future savior of the world, including the other
characters, himself, and the audience. The middle-aged
character of Sarah Connor is gone in this movie (Linda
Hamilton wanted too much money, and Sally Field wasn't
available). But in her place is a brand new and younger
love-interest for John Conner, who starts by telling him
that he's just swallowed chemical castration pills, right
before manhandling him into an animal cage, where he sits
with puppy eyes. Yes, the males (human and robot) are badly
used in this politically correct movie, but what did you
expect? The T-1 as played by Arnold doesn't have any balls
to grab or bust (though T-3 does try). But the human male
does have them (possibly), and he gets his share of lumps, a
sort of Futurama Fry who has to deal with Leela and several
varieties of Bender.
The end of the world is approaching, you see, and it turns
out that the female Terminator has been sent thought time
not only to deal with Arnold, but also to kill the female
veterinarian, who is going to also be important in the
future. Females Are Important In The Future. Get it? By
marked contrast, males in the present are ineffective.
Especially males in uniforms, who in this movie run around
looking helpless before they die. The computers of the world
are being infected by a virus. All the servers of SAC-NORAD
are becoming useless, as they all are taken over with the
task of sending e-mail ads for herbal penis enlargement
pills. Which none of the human male characters in this movie
are able to get their hands on. Things look grim for the
race.
I won't tell you how it finally comes out. Well, okay, yes I
will. It's sort of like the end of Dr. Strangelove, except
that when nuclear Doomsday comes, John Connor winds up in an
empty underground fallout bunker not with his choice of
unusually stimulating females, but rather with just one
castrating veterinarian who reminds him of his mother. He
does some ineffectual whining about this, and I certainly
sympathize.
And that's the end. Hitch up yer pants, boys. If you paid
for this one, and especially if you paid for your date, too,
you've been none too gently had.
SBH
.
|
|
| User: "mystique" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
05 Jul 2003 11:07:23 PM |
|
|
"Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in mes
Why or how this stuff is related to this board sir? (please be short!)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bruce Bowen" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
07 Jul 2003 01:03:17 PM |
|
|
"Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message news:<be7ev1$rr8$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>...
Terminator III, the Rise of the Not Very Much
Reviewed Not Very Fairly by Steven B. Harris
Well, you've seen the trailers. It's no secret that the
newest Terminator in the series is a Fembot. You know what
that means: she has twin plasma blasters which poke out
through her bustier when needed for blasting manbots. And
she does blast Arnold, the old T-1, quite a lot. And drags
him though buildings. And burns off half his face. And grabs
his crotch. And pokes his head in urinals. And wraps her
legs around him and squeezes unmercifully.
...
SBH
Yeah, It is basically the exact same plot at T2 (as my wife would say,
"fighting and chasing, chasing and fighting") but with more/dramatic
"action" sequences. They could have done a lot more with the concept.
One good tidbit line at the end was something to the effect, "Skynet
could not be stopped because it was everywhere and nowhere. In laptops
in dorm rooms, offices, etc." Implying it was a distributed entity.
-Bruce
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Harris" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
10 Jul 2003 05:40:25 PM |
|
|
"Randy Poe" <rpoepa@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:585ab5d8.0307101306.449c14a4@posting.google.com...
brucebo@my-deja.com (Bruce Bowen)
While we're throwing spoilers around, somebody tell me
one thing. I suppose I should be used to sequels and
"the monster's not really dead after all" but the very
concept of a T3 has been bugging me, sight unseen.
Supposedly
at the end of T2 we had killed the inventor of Skynet and
the terminator CPU, as well as any physical evidence from
which Terminator technology could be copied, AND we
blew up corporate HQ. We saved the big bad future from
happening. Humanity won't get nuked, the machines won't
take over, etc.
So as T3 opens, why does it happen anyway?
- Randy
T3's answer is that the action in T2 only managed to delay
things 6 years or so, so that Armageddon occurs not in 1997
(the date used in T2) but rather in 2003. In the T2 future,
Cyberdyne Sysystem is able to develop Skynet early by using
knowledge from the original terminator (T101). But if it
can't do that, the system gets developed anyway, eventually.
One of the movie's messages is that A.I. is inevitable, and
use of it for defense systems which control nukes seems
pretty hard to stop also.
There is some suggestion in the movie that the computer
network or DARPAnet like grid on which Skynet "lives,"
exists at least partly in hardened nuke defense computers
and shelters, and that's why the Soviet response to Skynet's
attack doesn't completely succeed in wiping Skynet itself
out. The movie clearly makes a distinction between the
unprotected internet that we all know and love, and the
special and separate web of computers used by the military.
SBH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lawson English" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
10 Jul 2003 07:33:29 PM |
|
|
"Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message
news:bekq0q$ed3$1@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
"Randy Poe" <rpoepa@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:585ab5d8.0307101306.449c14a4@posting.google.com...
brucebo@my-deja.com (Bruce Bowen)
While we're throwing spoilers around, somebody tell me
one thing. I suppose I should be used to sequels and
"the monster's not really dead after all" but the very
concept of a T3 has been bugging me, sight unseen.
Supposedly
at the end of T2 we had killed the inventor of Skynet and
the terminator CPU, as well as any physical evidence from
which Terminator technology could be copied, AND we
blew up corporate HQ. We saved the big bad future from
happening. Humanity won't get nuked, the machines won't
take over, etc.
So as T3 opens, why does it happen anyway?
- Randy
T3's answer is that the action in T2 only managed to delay
things 6 years or so, so that Armageddon occurs not in 1997
(the date used in T2) but rather in 2003. In the T2 future,
Cyberdyne Sysystem is able to develop Skynet early by using
knowledge from the original terminator (T101). But if it
can't do that, the system gets developed anyway, eventually.
One of the movie's messages is that A.I. is inevitable, and
use of it for defense systems which control nukes seems
pretty hard to stop also.
Sigh. I knew I should have sent in my idea to James Cameron. Rather than
have some NEW Arnold clone show up from the future, have TWO t-1000's show
up, one to siphon off Ahnold's memories and reactivate him so he can commit
suicide and keep "history" consistent, and the other to save our friend the
Doctor just before he blows himself up at the end of the last movie.
Seperately, they're just two liquid metal dudes running around, but they can
merge and form into an Arnold clone the same size as the original, with all
his memories and his nascient humanity intact.
The reason why they come back is because:
1) there's more than one piece of the original Terminator floating around in
research labs and any one of those pieces eventually could and WILL lead to
a new Skynet;
2) because of that, rather than trying to destroy Skynet, use the technical
knowhow of the doctor from the last movie, combined with the knowledge of
the dual-arnold clone to create their OWN skynet to neutralize the bad one
when it arises.
You can have fights between both the dual arnold clone and/or the 2 separate
T-1000s vs whatever bad Skynet sends back, and for a sequel, you can have a
fight between good Skynet and bad Skynet, with the newly born version being
supported by its future version.
Alas it will never happen.
--
New definition of irony:
'Today's liberal Democrats are like the supporters of the Third Reich of the
'30's and '40's
- they absolutely trusted the government to "make things right". '
-Comment made on the internet by an ardent GW Bush supporter.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
10 Jul 2003 11:30:07 PM |
|
|
"Lawson English" <english7@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:bel0ks$3ul$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
"Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message
news:bekq0q$ed3$1@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
"Randy Poe" <rpoepa@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:585ab5d8.0307101306.449c14a4@posting.google.com...
brucebo@my-deja.com (Bruce Bowen)
While we're throwing spoilers around, somebody tell me
one thing. I suppose I should be used to sequels and
"the monster's not really dead after all" but the very
concept of a T3 has been bugging me, sight unseen.
Supposedly
at the end of T2 we had killed the inventor of Skynet and
the terminator CPU, as well as any physical evidence from
which Terminator technology could be copied, AND we
blew up corporate HQ. We saved the big bad future from
happening. Humanity won't get nuked, the machines won't
take over, etc.
So as T3 opens, why does it happen anyway?
- Randy
T3's answer is that the action in T2 only managed to delay
things 6 years or so, so that Armageddon occurs not in 1997
(the date used in T2) but rather in 2003. In the T2 future,
Cyberdyne Sysystem is able to develop Skynet early by using
knowledge from the original terminator (T101). But if it
can't do that, the system gets developed anyway, eventually.
One of the movie's messages is that A.I. is inevitable, and
use of it for defense systems which control nukes seems
pretty hard to stop also.
Sigh. I knew I should have sent in my idea to James Cameron. Rather than
have some NEW Arnold clone show up from the future, have TWO t-1000's show
up, one to siphon off Ahnold's memories and reactivate him so he can
commit
suicide and keep "history" consistent, and the other to save our friend
the
Doctor just before he blows himself up at the end of the last movie.
Seperately, they're just two liquid metal dudes running around, but they
can
merge and form into an Arnold clone the same size as the original, with
all
his memories and his nascient humanity intact.
The reason why they come back is because:
1) there's more than one piece of the original Terminator floating around
in
research labs and any one of those pieces eventually could and WILL lead
to
a new Skynet;
2) because of that, rather than trying to destroy Skynet, use the
technical
knowhow of the doctor from the last movie, combined with the knowledge of
the dual-arnold clone to create their OWN skynet to neutralize the bad one
when it arises.
You can have fights between both the dual arnold clone and/or the 2
separate
T-1000s vs whatever bad Skynet sends back, and for a sequel, you can have
a
fight between good Skynet and bad Skynet, with the newly born version
being
supported by its future version.
Alas it will never happen.
Man, all I wanted a distributed parallel system for was to be able to make
fast .mp3 playlists from pirated internet music sites before they were all
shut down by the DMCA, and then it had to become intelligent and blow up
the world. Damn the MPAA and their damn dirty lawers!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Fergerson" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
08 Jul 2003 05:27:45 PM |
|
|
Bruce Bowen wrote:
"Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in message news:<be7ev1$rr8$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>...
Terminator III, the Rise of the Not Very Much
Reviewed Not Very Fairly by Steven B. Harris
Well, you've seen the trailers. It's no secret that the
newest Terminator in the series is a Fembot. You know what
that means: she has twin plasma blasters which poke out
through her bustier when needed for blasting manbots. And
she does blast Arnold, the old T-1, quite a lot. And drags
him though buildings. And burns off half his face. And grabs
his crotch. And pokes his head in urinals. And wraps her
legs around him and squeezes unmercifully.
...
SBH
Yeah, It is basically the exact same plot at T2 (as my wife would say,
"fighting and chasing, chasing and fighting") but with more/dramatic
"action" sequences. They could have done a lot more with the concept.
One good tidbit line at the end was something to the effect, "Skynet
could not be stopped because it was everywhere and nowhere. In laptops
in dorm rooms, offices, etc." Implying it was a distributed entity.
That last bit was particularly stupid and crashed my WSD
(Willing Suspension of Disbelief) completely. All them nukes
would trash Skynet's distributed "brain cells" unless it hid
somewhere safe at the end. Like, say, a collection of
underground EMP-proof 30-year-old toob computers...
Mark L. Fergerson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bruce Bowen" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
09 Jul 2003 12:06:24 PM |
|
|
Mark Fergerson <mfergerson1@cox.net> wrote in message news:<3F0B4561.4030604@cox.net>...
Bruce Bowen wrote:
Yeah, It is basically the exact same plot at T2 (as my wife would say,
"fighting and chasing, chasing and fighting") but with more/dramatic
"action" sequences. They could have done a lot more with the concept.
One good tidbit line at the end was something to the effect, "Skynet
could not be stopped because it was everywhere and nowhere. In laptops
in dorm rooms, offices, etc." Implying it was a distributed entity.
That last bit was particularly stupid and crashed my WSD
(Willing Suspension of Disbelief) completely. All them nukes
would trash Skynet's distributed "brain cells" unless it hid
somewhere safe at the end. Like, say, a collection of
underground EMP-proof 30-year-old toob computers...
Mark L. Fergerson
I had the same thought.
-Bruce
.
|
|
|
| User: "chris" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
10 Jul 2003 12:14:16 PM |
|
|
(Bruce Bowen) wrote in message news:<b824a8a0.0307090906.6348a0a8@posting.google.com>...
Mark Fergerson <mfergerson1@cox.net> wrote in message news:<3F0B4561.4030604@cox.net>...
Bruce Bowen wrote:
Yeah, It is basically the exact same plot at T2 (as my wife would say,
"fighting and chasing, chasing and fighting") but with more/dramatic
"action" sequences. They could have done a lot more with the concept.
One good tidbit line at the end was something to the effect, "Skynet
could not be stopped because it was everywhere and nowhere. In laptops
in dorm rooms, offices, etc." Implying it was a distributed entity.
That last bit was particularly stupid and crashed my WSD
(Willing Suspension of Disbelief) completely. All them nukes
would trash Skynet's distributed "brain cells" unless it hid
somewhere safe at the end. Like, say, a collection of
underground EMP-proof 30-year-old toob computers...
Mark L. Fergerson
I had the same thought.
-Bruce
had the same thought
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Fergerson" |
|
| Title: Re: Terminator III, The Rise of Not Very Much ***spoiler*** |
10 Jul 2003 01:48:47 PM |
|
|
chris wrote:
brucebo@my-deja.com (Bruce Bowen) wrote in message news:<b824a8a0.0307090906.6348a0a8@posting.google.com>...
Mark Fergerson <mfergerson1@cox.net> wrote in message news:<3F0B4561.4030604@cox.net>...
... All them nukes
would trash Skynet's distributed "brain cells" unless it hid
somewhere safe at the end. Like, say, a collection of
underground EMP-proof 30-year-old toob computers...
Mark L. Fergerson
I had the same thought.
-Bruce
had the same thought
OK, so at least three of us have strong suspicions about
the basis of the plot of the next sequel.
If this alleged "savior of humanity" doesn't notice, he
ought to be too stupid to breathe unassisted.
Mark L. Fergerson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
