The director of the film, Alan Taylor, is not bad at directing in the TV circle. His participation in directing the worldwide-famous "Game of Thrones" and "The Gangster Family", which is rated as one of the best TV series in the United States, is proof. However, the continuation of Cameron's classic Terminator series itself is a daunting task. This is the third time the director wants to repeat Cameron's glory that year, and the third time he has failed.
There are many rogues in the film plagiarizing the first two. For example, the Li Bingxian part of making soy sauce should be completely deleted. The part where Lee chases Kyle in the clothing store is almost the same as the first one. Is Lee Byung-hyun invited to join to attract a Korean audience? In another line, the beginning of "Terminator 2" is repeated. The elderly Uncle Nuo tries to defeat the young Uncle Nuo. In the end, the young Uncle Nuo is shot to get Sarah out of the game. To be fair, Lightning Lightwave Crossing is the label of the Terminator, so it is understandable to repeat this point in the movie. But remember how Mr. Cameron innovated on the basis of repetition? The beginning of the second part of the Terminator is very similar to the first one. Uncle Nuo and T1000 appeared naked at the same time, just because everyone held their breath and thought that the bad terminator played by Uncle Nuo was coming to kill Sara again. But at the moment when the gun was fired, we realized that he was here to protect Sarah and John. The editing of that part is wonderful, and those roses that fell on the ground have become one of the most classic shots in the Terminator series. This is a typical example of how Cameron taught us the difference between plagiarism and innovation.
Such innovations are not seen in this film. Although the director and screenwriter seem to be very hardworking and the script is very complicated, Uncle Nou in the play said a lot of things that I think Einstein can say. But the end result is that the passage of many characters and the change of annual rings make the audience very confused. Maybe I watch the movie a few more times or catch the scriptwriter's notes. Maybe I can sort out the basic plot line. But a good movie should not require the audience to do after-school homework to understand the main plot of the movie. The plots of classic movies such as "Citizen Kane" and "Seven Samurai" are simple and easy to understand. Why does the Terminator play a maze with the audience? OK, you can refute me that Nolan's "Inception" is also very complicated. But "Inception" has its internal logic, and this logic determines the plot. But the complexity in "Terminator 5" feels more like the consequence of the director's rudely changing the logic of the story for the development of the plot.
Where is the cruelty concretely manifested? The most intuitive manifestation is the love rewriting of Sarah and Kyle. No matter how the story changes or how time passes, one's appearance shouldn't change, right? When Sarah, played by Emilia Clarke, appeared in front of Kyle in a big truck and shouted that she wanted to live with me, I didn’t know how others reacted. I just felt my eyes were bright and blind. For nearly an hour, I found that there was only one thought in my mind: What? You are Sarah? Sarah who? A sensible person would tell me that Linda Hamilton is almost 60, and who would go to the cinema to watch this? An aunt? This may be true, but I already have a pair of lovers named Sarah and Kyle in my mind, and it feels very confusing now that a new pair appears. Without mentioning the change of actors, the transformation of the two's poignant relationship into a modern fast-food love is even more of a failure. Maybe I have seen it deep, but didn't the actor really come from the studio of a certain superhero movie? The characteristics of New Kyle’s role setting are as follows: a little boyish, loves to quarrel with the elderly, awkward with the little lover, and contracted most of the jokes of the plot. The feature he shares with most heroic heroes in Hollywood is that they are very boring.
The last frustration is that the screenwriter, in order to add personal charm to Uncle Arnold, turned the Terminator into a living image of a father with human emotions. The charm of Cameron's Terminator lies in its ultimate setting of not giving up until the goal is reached. Did the Uncle Nuo who kept crawling out of the flames in "Terminator 1" scared your soul? In "Terminator 2", at the end of the film, I almost paid homage to the dedicated T1000. Since "Terminator 3", Uncle Nuo's Terminator began to have feelings. In "Terminator 5", this key detail is even more magnified. Uncle Nuo was supposed to be a machine that would only execute orders without feelings, but during the thirty years waiting for Sarah to travel through, he posted a picture of Sarah at the place of work. I don't use my hands well for fear that Sarah would have cast a sad glance when she found out. In the end, when he "will die with the villain", his eyes even had twinkling tears.
The image of the Terminator was thus ruined by hypocrisy.
View more about Terminator Genisys reviews
