[net.movies] "The Terminator"

reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (11/05/84)

     "The Terminator" is better than I thought it would be.  The
coming attractions made it look like a fairly standard action
film emphasizing multiple deaths.  Well, that element is certain-
ly present, but there is more to the film than violent killings.
Not an awful lot more, but more.  The story concerns a killing
machine in the form of a human being (played by Arnold Schwar-
zenegger) sent back in time to eliminate a woman destined to be
the mother of a freedom fighter of the future.  Human guerrillas
in that future have just succeeded in overcoming a genocidal com-
puter and its machine minions.  The cyborg is sent back to
prevent the leader from ever being born, and the guerrillas
dispatch a soldier to stop the terminator.

     Schwarzenegger has nothing but a name and a city to go on,
so he goes to the phone book and starts murdering all the women
named Sarah Connors.  Meanwhile, the soldier, with a little more
information, has started tailing the important Sarah Connors, a
rather average young woman who has no suspicion that disaster is
about to strike.  The police and the press quickly catch on that
something unusual is up, but the terminator is extraordinarily
persistent.  Shotgun blasts and bullets are no more than minor
inconveniences to him because, beneath the flesh, he is really a
robot made from an incredibly hard metal alloy.

     James Cameron, the director and co-author of the script,
deserves most of the credit for lifting the film above others of
its kind.  "The Terminator" is well paced, the action sequences
are well handled, and Cameron manages to bring enough interesting
ideas (both in plot and presentation) to the non-action scenes
that we don't fall asleep between bouts of gunplay. Cameron puts
the camera in reasonable places, if not the perfect place, he
understands how to foreshadow plot developments, and (assuming he
had a hand in the editing) he knows how to put sequences togeth-
er.  The action scenes aren't on a par with those of "The Road
Warrior", or even close, but they are vastly superior to the gar-
bage one sees in films like "The Exterminator II".

     The acting is good, if unspectacular.  Schwarzenegger's body
looks even more impressive than in the Conan films, and he brings
a certain inhumanity to the role which is entirely appropriate.
He and Cameron even manage to get together for a few mildly comic
moments.  Linda Hamilton is properly paniced as the terminator's
target, and Michael Biehn heroic as the soldier from the future.
They work rather well together, which is fortunate, since they
are together for most of the film.  Paul Winfield is wasted again 
in the role of a police lieutenant who discovers too late that he 
is out of his depth.

     "The Terminator" is true to its genre.  Many bullets fly,
cars crash and explode, and a lot of people die.  For the most
part, the violence is not terribly explicit.  Cameron does not
insist on showing us closeups of bullets impacting on
Schwarzenegger's victims, which is a welcome change from the usu-
al style of presentation in exploitation films.  On the other
hand, "The Terminator" is definitely not for the queasy of
stomach, for Cameron deploys some special makeup effects which
allow Schwarzenegger (oh, why couldn't the man have a shorter
name, or at least one easier to spell?) to perform on-camera sur-
gery on his arm and his eye.  The effects, by Stan Winston, are
not terribly convincing, but the mere concept of presenting them
for our viewing pleasure is pretty gross.

     "The Terminator" also  has a few more science fiction tricks
up its sleeve than is customary.  There are extended sequences
set in the future that make good use of some fairly good model
work.  The special effects people still have to work on a more
convincing dummy for their car crashes, however, as the one they
used just doesn't make it.  There's also a bit of stop-motion an-
imation which is of varying quality, but effective overall.  Cam-
eron and Gale Anne Hurd, his co-writer and producer, give a bit
more sf type explanation than one usually gets, which is just
fine with me.  Adam Greenberg's photography is also better than
average for exploitation action films.  I particularly liked the
way he clearly established the difference between scenes set in
the present and those set in the future by lighting, using colder
and harsher lights for the futuristic scenes, warmer and more na-
tural lighting for the modern ones.  Not a major innovation, but
more than what cinematographers for action films usually bother
with.

     In summary, if you think you might like "The Terminator",
you almost certainly will.  If you are unsure, give it a try.  If
you really don't think that a picture with this kind of plot ap-
peals to you, skip it.  "The Terminator" works well within its
boundaries, but it certainly doesn't transcend them.
-- 

					Peter Reiher
					reiher@ucla-cs.arpa
					{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher

gnome@olivee.UUCP (11/16/84)

By the way, there is an article about TERMINATOR in, you guessed it

  SOLDIER OF FORTUNE   magazine!


I kid you not!

Newsstands hate speedreaders...

Gary

hlj@amdahl.UUCP (Hal Jespersen) (11/26/84)

Has anyone noticed the various textual data shown in the Terminator's
computer images?  One of the sequences was a *COBOL* program!  I also
thought I saw some VAX assembler.  Incidentally, I don't normally like
really violent movies, but this was one of the more entertaining ones
I've seen this year.  Parts were like the A Team with real bullets.
-- 
				Hal Jespersen
				(408) 746-8288
				...{hplabs,ihnp4,amd}!amdahl!hlj

[The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily
those of Amdahl Corporation, its management, or employees.]

leimkuhl@uiucdcsb.UUCP (12/10/84)

  I'm pretty sure it was 808900 assempbler--I caught a bunch of LDA's
and JMPand a few other 8080ops I recasll from, my hobbyist days.

  Kind  of makes it hard to takle the film seriously when you realize
that arnoldsArnold's csophiultrasophistyicated computer brain is controlled by and
antique microvcomputer that has a hell of a time with I/O.

  Nonetheless, Iliked the film--especially the ending.  A lot odff fun..

-Ben Leimkuhler

(uiucvdcsdcs!leimkuhl)