The Bigger Picture: In Defense of McG: Or, Why I’m Not a Movie Critic

Arend Anton May 25, 2009 14

terminator-salvation1When our esteemed editor and retired slow jam artist Jeff Giles first asked me to contribute to this site, he wanted me to contribute as a movie critic. I believe what he wanted was a “Chuck Klosterman of movies.” Certainly all of my friends would have thought me a perfect fit, but I told Jeff I’d rather do something a little different.

Popdose currently has two fine critics in Robert Cashill and Lance Berry. These are two gentlemen whose opinions I respect and enjoy. Many times, however, I find myself in serious disagreements with them.

I don’t consider myself a critic, though I have agreed to do the occasional DVD review here. Though I argue with my friends incessantly about film, to the point where they are often surprised when I actually like a movie, I don’t want people to think of me as a critic. Often my opinions stem more from feeling than actual critical thought, which may or may not be a good thing.

Say the name “McG” out loud. Sounds pretty stupid, doesn’t it? Now allow your natural reactions be displayed when I tell you he brought us Charlie’s Angels and Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle. Are you vomiting yet? Now that you know all that, check out this little movie he just made based on the cult, critical, and fan favorite Terminator movies.

I know you hate it already. How could you not? The guy’s name sounds like a Scottish gang member. He’s responsible for a movie starring not only Cameron Diaz, but also Drew Barrymore; a movie that looked to have a brighter color palette than an 8-year-old Pokémon fan’s brain scan, mid-seizure.

The critics all hate his new film Terminator Salvation as well, leading you to be very afraid when you walk into the theater. All your worries as a fan of Terminator seem to have been validated even before you set foot in the theater. You’ve read the 33% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, a rating that is normally reserved for the latest Wayans Brothers parody film (Dance Flick, debuting the same week, ended up with only a slightly lower score).

I knew all of this going into Terminator Salvation. I noticed a couple plot holes, some occasional poor direction decisions, and bad acting. I said earlier that I tend to judge films more on feeling than critical thought. Surprisingly, this movie gave me a good feeling. The action is intense and shot mostly well. There is a robot character, played by Sam Worthington, who echoes the same sense of conflicted humanity than we felt in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s T-800 from Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

Some of it doesn’t make sense, such as why a terminator fires at Marcus early on if Skynet wants to keep him alive. Lance Berry, who absolutely despises this film, pointed out a plot hole I’d rather not discuss for the sake of spoilers. These are both very good questions, but I still don’t see them as an example of Gene Siskel’s “idiot plot” scenario, in which the plot would be resolved easily were the characters not idiots.

The fact is that the James Cameron movies, which are held in such high esteem, are also laced with problems. There is probably as much hokey dialogue and acting in Terminator 2: Judgment Day than there is in Terminator Salvation. Go back and watch that movie, as I did recently, if you don’t believe me. Terminator Salvation fulfills its purpose quite well; that is to be an enjoyable sequel despite being mostly unnecessary.

Some of the critical anger has been directed at the lack of humor. To start with, this isn’t the same fish-out-of-water story that made Arnold’s performance work in a humorous manner. Tonally, it’s exactly like the apocalyptic dream we saw in the second film. This is a big, sweaty action film without the stupidity and emotional retardation of a Michael Bay movie.

Sometimes I wonder whether there is a conference of film critics where they decide which movies they will like and which they will destroy. How else can the mostly glowing reviews for Will Ferrell’s abominable collaborations with Adam McKay be explained?

Another example of my recent disagreement with the critical community is with Star Trek. The critical reception to this particular summer reboot couldn’t have been more different from that of Terminator Salvation. Star Trek received an incredible 95% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It’s a fun movie if you ignore a lot of plot holes (the black holes, anyone?) and annoying choices by the director and some obnoxious characters.

I found Star Trek to be a parody, with caricatures rather than characters, and little mockeries spread throughout the film. For example, when Kirk and Sulu parachute onto the Romulan drill, a character is given a red space suit and promptly disposed of. There is also the scene in which Kirk beds a sexy green alien broad. Star Trek reminded me in some ways of the critically reviled, Joel Schumacher-helmed Batman movies, which took a lot of the worst elements of the 1960s version and winked into the camera. Granted, Star Trek is a lot better than those movies.

terminatorsalvation_t600_big-thumb-500x820-128611I should mention that I am no more a Terminator fan than I am a fan of Star Trek. I grew up watching Star Trek with my parents because they controlled the television in our home and that’s what they enjoyed watching. I respect Star Trek for the moralistic and optimistic future it attempted to convey, but don’t really consider myself a real follower. Likewise, I’ve seen Terminator 2: Judgment Day a few times, and only parts of the first movie. As only a casual fan, I didn’t notice many of Salvation’s “wink-wink” references until they were explained to me later.

I find it hard to believe that Terminator Salvation would have been any better had James Cameron directed it. To start with, James Cameron seems to possess the recessive George Lucas gene. He is a very skilled and arrogant technical director who has a lot of trouble handling emotion competently. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if his Avatar, scheduled for release later this year, turns out like Lucas’ ham-fisted return (though I hope it doesn’t). Linda Hamilton’s acting was never a strong point of the classic Judgment Day, and the movie is basically a B-movie with great action and some flimsy time travel plotting. I still love it, though, and so do you.

Terminator Salvation probably isn’t a classic. Neither is Star Trek, despite its incredible critical reception. The last 40 minutes of Terminator Salvation feel like they’ve been chopped to hell in the editing room, and my colleague Lance raises some very valid criticisms. I’m never going to convince him that this movie is better than he thinks, and I hope his opinion of me hasn’t been destroyed by my differing view.

When we watch a movie, it’s often hard to judge it without taking into account certain outside forces. Expectations can often harm our experience. I had supremely high expectations for The Dark Knight, and had to watch the movie several times before I was able to separate my feelings from my expectations and actually enjoy it on its own. The shame is that in defending Terminator Salvation, I’m not really certain whether it’s actually a good movie, or whether my expectations had simply been lowered. What I do know is that this column wouldn’t have to be written had Terminator Salvation and Star Trek received roughly the same 70% score on Rotten Tomatoes. I enjoyed Terminator Salvation for what it was, and didn’t enjoy Star Trek for the same reason.

In the end, it’s all just a feeling.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • http://robertcashill.blogspot.com BobCashill

    Boy, for someone who's not a critic, you have some mighty strong opinions–or feelings, though I think criticism runs deeper than that.

    You should watch all of The Terminator, one of the best films of its period. I find most of Cameron's films quite affecting, particularly Aliens (one of the few sequels that's truly distinctive from its original), The Abyss (the director's cut in particular), and Titanic, which I love, mindful of the weaknesses in his work. I suspect Avatar will have similar deficiences–an emotional bluntness being the most prominent–but it should be quite a trip.

    The masterstroke of T2 was reconceiving the Terminator as a hero, which I knew nothing about when I saw the film in Hong Kong (movie marketing wasn't as savvy there at that time). Genius–but having done that Cameron rightly walked away from his creation.

    More opining: Much as I disiked The Phantom Menace (which I dozed through), the second first trilogy, or whatever it was called, picked up steam toward the end of Attack of the Clones; I found Sith fairly satisfying. And I have to say I enjoyed Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze in Batman and Robin–I wish he had a better script to work with, but he looked mighty–cool–in that suit. And that's how I felt at that time.

  • Arend Anton

    Wow, this ran already?

    I actually plan on watching the first one this week some time.

  • http://www.popdose.com jefito

    At Popdose, we strike while the iron is hot! Or at least semi-warm.

  • Arend Anton

    When the iron loses to Night at the Museum 2, I'm not sure you can actually call it warm.

  • Arend Anton

    It was probably cooled by my typos as well.

  • http://robertcashill.blogspot.com BobCashill

    It actually ran on Thursday, May 28. I went ahead in time, retrieved it, and posted it today. I'm afraid I had to kill Jeff to do it; the “jefito” below is an android replacement. I'm killing all Popdose members and replacing them with robot doubles, for reasons only McG can explain.

  • Arend Anton

    What's interesting about “feeling” a certain way about a movie is that you don't really know how truthful it is. I also enjoyed Sith, but I don't have much interest in watching it again.

    However, it did serve its purpose by allowing me to enjoy it once without picking it apart critically.

  • http://www.popdose.com DwDunphy

    Sith is particularly frustrating. It tried to be badass and succeeded on occasion, but lost the ball on so many interesting fronts. For instance, Lucas could have had a major call back (or foreshadowing) of the scene where, in the swamp woods, Luke beheads Vader revealing Luke's face inside. Had Kenobi done the same to General Grievous, revealing the reanimated Darth Maul inside, I think it would have made for an almost iconic moment.

    Vader's Frankenstein moment at the end was just awful. It was just an excuse to get James Earl Jones to howl. It would have served the story better if he just stayed in his shackles and quietly mentally tore the lab to hell, then casually unlatched his binds and stepped away. It would have indicated his complete transformation that the audience doesn't really have a verbal clue about his opinion of Amidala's death.

    None of this has any bearing on the Terminator series. I just get chatty when it comes to how Lucas buggered my childhood pet, that's all.

  • http://robertcashill.blogspot.com BobCashill

    Star Wars is a very personal subject for a lot of people. I was never that deeply invested in it, but wished Lucas has either left it alone, or handed I-III to less rickety directors.

  • http://www.lancereviews.homestead.com/ Lance

    To paraphrase your beloved McG super-sized meal, Arend: “We've been disagreeing about this movie since before either of us existed.” While I won't go into how much I hatehateHATE this fim here, I will defend Judgment Day's honor: Linda Hamilton gave a terrific performance as Sarah Connor, being that Cameron also reconceiving her character as a true independent heroine, as opposed to the mousey waitress she was in the first film. He gave her the entire emotional gamut of emotions to play with, and Hamilton ran with it.

    Also, there truly isn't a lot of hokey dialogue in either T1 or T2. T3, yes(“Talk to the hand”, anyone?) But in preparation for viewing Salvation, I rewatched the first two Governator films, and with some minor obviousness about a couple of the effects in T1, both films still hold up solidly to this day. T4 will be forgotten in about a week(or sooner, since fans are already deserting it at the box office).

    Of course my opinion of you hasn't been destroyed just because of your differing view…that's part and parcel about what makes discussing the validity of movies so much fun.

    Just don't diss The Dark Knight again…or There Will Be Blood as Rob and the other staffers Witness this View To A Kill as they sit in their rocking chairs On Golden Pond.

  • Arend_Anton

    I love The Dark Knight and There Will Be Blood!

    I plan on watching T1 and T2 this week for comparison. Linda Hamilton always bugged me, though I know what she means to people as a strong female lead. I honestly think a lot of T2's dialogue is pretty dated. It doesn't stop me from enjoying the movie, but a lot of it is pretty cheesy.

    This whole debate is really more about my frustration with the inconsistent views of the critical community, and not necessarily because I “love” Terminator Salvation. I had a blast watching it, but when Star Trek is unanimously praised and Terminator Salvation unanimously panned, there's something wrong because neither of them are as good or as bad as advertised.

  • http://robertcashill.blogspot.com BobCashill

    “A Film by Jospeh McGinty Nichol” would be a lot easier to take than “A Film By McG.” All his movies would go up at least 10 points on Rotten Tomatoes if he dropped his shizzle fizzle of a handle.

  • http://robertcashill.blogspot.com BobCashill

    “A Film by Jospeh McGinty Nichol” would be a lot easier to take than “A Film By McG.” All his movies would go up at least 10 points on Rotten Tomatoes if he dropped his shizzle fizzle of a handle.

  • http://robertcashill.blogspot.com BobCashill

    “A Film by Jospeh McGinty Nichol” would be a lot easier to take than “A Film By McG.” All his movies would go up at least 10 points on Rotten Tomatoes if he dropped his shizzle fizzle of a handle.