She was by far the worst part of this movie. She is a horrible actress. Movie was okayShe hasn't been in anything of note outside of GoT and voicing Dr Zoidberg's love interest in Futurama. and in Genisys she did an acceptable job playing an awkward character. This version of Sarah Connor is the 29 year old badass from T2 stuffed into the body of the 19 year old from T1, with a side order of raised from childhood by an inhuman killing machine with knowledge of the future. Maybe someone else could have nailed it, but she certainly didn't flub it.
She has had moments of greatness in GoT, but the writing for her character is generally consistent with the books, which is to say boring, awful, and tedious. But I thought she absolutely nailed it when she freed the Unsullied and ordered them to kill all the Old Masters, and the look on her face when Drogon saved her from the Sons of the Harpy was exactly how I thought a mother should look after being reunited with a lost child.
Might see them in a flashback, but whoever sent those terminators back is from a timeline that doesn't exist anymore.Saw it over the weekend. It wasn't bad. I would like to have some of the questions answered that weren't in the film, like who sent back Arnold and the t1000 to the 70s when Sarah was a child... Guess we will have to wait for the sequel.
Actually according to the blog of the guy who did TSCC, Headey did get somewhat ripped for it, sort of leaner ripped. She still had the tone when she played the villain in Dread. The physique really isn't the issue here, though it does break immersion a bit. Headey is a really solid actress who could convey the survivalist character. The whole reason the Sarah Conner/Ellen Ripley archetype worked so well in the originals is that you had committed strong acting in those roles. To be fair, I don't think there are a lot of established younger female actresses out there who they could have signed on for this. JLaw and Hit Girl can't be in every sci-fi flick.....Lena Headey didn't really look like T2 Linda Hamilton either, she just doesn't have that round faced look that Emilia Clarke does.
God knows where the fuck they were taking it after killing Derek and Jon teleporting to the future. Wouldn't be surprised if that played some small part in the decision to cancel it too.Headey was very good as Sarah. Really sucks that show ended.
Pretty much how I felt, except maybe I'm more of a Terminator fan boy than not. But I still liked it quite a bit. Vastly better than Salvation, like not even in the same league. Nothing will likely ever approach 1 and 2 again, but I was quite happy with this, much happier than I thought I would be.I wouldn't consider myself among the brain dead masses, but I wouldn't say I'm hard to please, either. Personally, I thought the movie was fine. I'd say 7/10 and worth the price of admission (maybe not if you're going to get popcorn and a drink).
You should know that I was never a die-hard Terminator fan boy. I thought the first two Terminators were great sci-fi films that confirmed sci-fi could be main stream (after Star Wars paved the way). Any story with time travel is going to inevitably have plot holes because time travel (as far as we know) isn't possible. Rationalizing it requires a ton of pseudo science or "it just works" explanations. When I watch something, I try to turn off the critical part of my brain that tends to shout out "PLOT HOLE" or "GRENADES DON'T WORK LIKE THAT." At the end of the day I judge movies by 'was I entertained?' or 'was I yawning and wondering how much longer was left before the end?'
If you're on the fence, like summer-action-popcorn-flicks, and aren't a dyed-in-the-wool Terminator fanboy, you'll enjoy the movie.
Part of it was needing a chip from a future terminator. Even though John2017 was pimp as fuck maybe he couldnt give his "chip" up to make the machine work, whereas Pops in 87 had the chip from the future bot.I'm curious as to why John in 2017, with Cyberdyne's billions, hasn't been able to do what Pops did in 1987 with spare parts from a junkyard...?
Eh, no. If John for some reason couldn't manufacture his own chip, then he would have at least tried to get Pop's chip. It was a rhetorical question anyways, just pointing out a plot-hole that irked me a bit. I try not to think about all the time-travel plot-holes and paradoxes, since the entire premise of the first movie is based on one.Part of it was needing a chip from a future terminator. Even though John2017 was pimp as fuck maybe he couldnt give his "chip" up to make the machine work, whereas Pops in 87 had the chip from the future bot.
I dunno time travel cause reasons.