IMDb > Terminator Salvation (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Terminator Salvation
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Terminator Salvation More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 99:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 987 reviews in total 

201 out of 336 people found the following review useful:

I liked it better than I expected, and was far less disappointed in comparison than other fans seem to have been.

Author: Elswet from .: Fiendish Writings in the Dark :.
27 May 2009

Wow, where do we start with a franchise film so rich in history...and so riddled with continuity errors? The time line problems began with the very first sequel, directed by Cameron himself, and perpetuated with T3. why then, is everyone so freaked by time line errors in T4? Depending on which line to which you subscribe, T4 still deviates vastly from BOTH sequels and begins a new alternative reality spin all its own.

And then there was the highly publicized expletive-filled Bale rant broadcast over and over and over ad nauseum. Upon seeing the film, I can better understand why that happened...this is a GRITTY film, full of angst and dancing testosterone. As "worked up" as Bale must have had to have been in order to pull off these angst-filled scenes (one after the other after the next), he exhibited amazing control in not HITTING the guy who blew the scene for him. I'm no longer upset or offended by his diatribe.

That brings us to the movie. Well, yes, there are problems with it, and many state that this film brings little to the franchise history and instead contributes to the growing list of errors and problems with the franchise, but I have to disagree.

This work, for me, demonstrates an intent to give us millions of machines marching en masse on human survivors in the attempt to quell a birthrate upsurge of the pestilence which has somehow managed to take control of its world...Mankind. The promise for something better is not only present due to how little this movie actually contributes, but by the actions and deeds therein.

There are several contrivances, and truthfully they were rewriting the script as it was being filmed due to Bale's demands, but all in all (and all things considered), this is an enjoyable film that not only is better on second viewing, but manages to ingratiate itself into the library of Terminator franchise films (or will when it's out on DVD in an unrated, extended director's cut edition, that is).

I liked it better than I expected, and was far less disappointed in comparison than I was with the Star Trek reboot.

It rates a 7.8/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Was the above review useful to you?

163 out of 272 people found the following review useful:

Terminator Salvation...barely salvageable

Author: quikbdr720 from United States
21 May 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Hmm...Hmm...Hmm...ho hum dee. Terminator- 1984, we see a ground-breaking film with never before seen special effects and a story that was 10 years ahead of its time, Judgement Day- 1992, We see more groundbreaking film-making, a stellar cast, and one of the most iconic performances ever (GO ARNIE!!!), Rise of the Machines- 2003, not bad, especially considering that after T-2, that was it for Cameron, he was done, moving on to new things, new writers, new director, great rewritten history of Skynet reemerging after we all thought it was TERMINATED. And the return of Arnie. So...after about a year of hype (for myself especially, I am as the equivalent of a Trekkie in the Terminator universe), 2009, Terminator Salvation...Not groundbreaking, but with Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Moon Bloodgood, McG, Seems like a damn good collection of actors and up and coming director right?? we go...

First off, the film kicks off in the right gear, I seriously felt like I was watching a live action version of Fallout 3, post apocalyptic world depicted with great detail, some very good action scenes (and acting) early on, All seems to go well, Marcus Wright (Worthington) is introduced very well, so is Kyle Reese (Yelchin, Star Trek), and the Terminator world we saw so little of in T1 & T2 was all there.

Buuuuut then what happens I can't even begin to try to figure it out. I swear there were 3 or 4 great ideas put into play by McG, but, when you start an idea, develop it, that just didn't happen, the whole film felt like it was jumping from one thing to another with very little explanation.

Character development: where was it??? John Connor was the focal point in T2 & T3, staying alive, fighting...Well, even Christian Bale (amazing actor, by far one of today's best) couldn't deliver, but it wasn't his fault, He has what barely constituted as a supporting role, the whole film was revolved around who Marcus Wright was, but even that wasn't covered very well. Honestly, it got old hearing Bale scream and Worthington howl toward the sky. And even Bloodgood and Bryce Dallas Howard who played Kate Connor had little screen time and no development what so ever.

Action: chock full of it, any thought or creativity put in it? NO, N-O. There were a totally of maybe 3 exciting moments in the whole film, I will not spoil them, because honestly, if this was just a post apocalypse action yarn, it was awesome, but its TERMINATOR, not at one point was there any new ideas put in any of the scenes, it felt like McG cheaply ripped off the previous 3 films (but with way more NOTICEABLE CGI), the major problem with Hollywood today, TOO MUCH CGI, NO PLOT DEVELOPMENT, and this film is no different.

I and the theater cheered with one scene...the entrance of...well, no need to guess here. Was also about the only other homage to the originals (the truck chase from the trailer is excellent as well).


TERMINATOR FILM 3/10, If there is going to be another one, Cameron needs to intervene and tell HIS look on the future war, and bring that someone back into the franchise (he won't be Governor forever!)

This may be a discouraging review, but remember, its all in what you like. i love action movies, but with Terminator, you need plot too. Go see it and make your own assumptions, this is just mine, I'm sure some will love it, but it took Terminator in the direction Attack of the Clones took Star Wars

Was the above review useful to you?

92 out of 135 people found the following review useful:

The destruction of a great franchise

Author: rnilsen from United States
25 May 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is one of the worst movies of all time. Not bad in a Plan Nine from Outerspace kind of way. No much worse. I have only once before ever felt so cheated and that was watching Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull last year. Cheated because of all the talent that could have made a GREAT movies and instead just cashed in big paychecks.

What makes this so bad is the destruction of a franchise through lazy writing and directing. Does anyone put effort into a script anymore or care about logic???? If the studio had enlisted any movie fan and given them a chance to read the script before this turkey was made, plot holes as large as a Mack truck could have been closed. Instead the Studio and Director relied totally on special effects to move this dog along.

Wher can I start? Well, here are a couple of the biggest problems:

1) Why does Skynet not just kill Kyle Reese????? He is their number one target, they capture him and instead of killing him, they just imprison him???? If they kill him then John Connor dies. Spock would throw up from this lack of logic. 2)What is Helena Bonham Carter's motivation in the beginning of the movie? She does not know at this time in history that Skynet will become self aware. How can she be involved in creating an infiltration machine without pre-knowledge of what will happen in the future? 3) The movie barely advances in the Terminator story. It is just a long television episode, the plot does not move along whatsoever. Perhaps they can just re-start the franchise and call this whole movie a bad dream like the ending of Dallas? 4) The acting is terrible, especially Christian Bale. He has one emotion and it is the same as he exhibited in that leaked internet tape earlier this year. Arnold's CGI performance is Oscar worthy in comparison. 5) Yes this is just a movie but in Sci-fi, it is important to follow the continuity and rules created in each films particular universe. A movie cannot take the lazy route and just makes things up when boxed into a corner. Here, there is a huge exposition scene near the end on a giant video screen with Helena Bonham Carter. Why does Skynet have a big video room to begin with? Ugh.

Studio's exist to make money, and I suppose this movie will turn a profit. However, from a long term perspective this movie has diminished the value of the overall franchise and potential of any future films.

Was the above review useful to you?

103 out of 162 people found the following review useful:

Do Not Waste Your Time, Money, and Consciousness

Author: Shaun Lawton from SLC, usa
23 May 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

TERMINATER: SALVATION is truly an abomination to the franchise - and don't for one second suspect otherwise.

I read one thing in the paper yesterday that suggested "the critics liked it" -(?) -- it garnered an astonishing Two And A Half stars in our local rag - - (!!) -- with a caveat that "it has no heart" -- well there's a shocker for ya -- I do not need to be told that a piece of fecal matter has no cardiovascular system -- its a redundancy I can do without, thank you very much -- here is a movie that deserves not one whit more than a ZERO STAR rating.

How on earth anyone - a professional critic or otherwise -- could even possibly give this movie more than ZERO STARS is beyond me. This sorry excuse for a movie is firing on ALL chambers when it comes to MISSING the mark: *SPOILERS* No shred of a plot with any grounded sense of coherence whatsoever, folks. The director "McG"'s notion of a plot can be summed up in one name, "John Connor." Oh wait, I forgot - there is a twist. (Don't worry about spoilers - - I couldn't possibly spoil this for you, and I don't mean that in a cheeky way. I literally mean that it is a physical impossibility for something without a plot to be spoiled. So read on. The twist is "Kyle Reese." Just throw in another iconic sounding character name with which an awestruck silence is generated every time its mentioned, and there you have it: the totality of this movie's "plot". (Don't ask me for an explanation: the movie offers none.)

And just as bad as "no plot" is the excruciatingly unfortunate realization that the setting - nearly a decade in the future (2018) - has zero visionary qualities, and I have to point out here that it ain't for any potentially noble reason as having accurately predicted that not much will change in 9 years. No. It's because they filmed this with what must have been McG's and crew's own jeeps and equipment - throw some military cameo netting and things bought for cheap at your local army surplus store, and you have "Terminator: Salvation". When all the dust settles - - you sit there blinking in astonishment that there really wasn't one damn worthy thing about this movie - no awesome future setting and no fully realized "terminator army"; just a few badly strewn together props with stale cheesy dialog thrown in.

But the movie did have some thought put into it, I guess. There is the token ragamuffin 9 year old girl with the nappy hair (check); her charming teenage companion with the mystery persona (check); and their god -given ability to pop out of nowhere with a convenient remote mine-trigger device to blow up titanic renegade Terminaters at a moment's notice (check).

This movie is far less than the sum of it's assembled parts - assembled entirely from every genre movie that came before it. I kid you not: if you were to painstakingly eliminate each and every scene and reference to a previous movie (Mad Max, Road Warrior, Terminators, etc) you would be left with NOTHING. It is that unoriginal.

So here's the deal. I've warned you not to waste your time and money and consciousness seeing this, and I meant it from the bottom of my heart. Seeing as how I happen to know that this is a "special" installment or continuation of a franchise that means a lot to us - I don't expect you to take my word for it. I know how it is. You want to find out for yourself; hell, you need to. So let's make a deal.

Halfway through the movie, the only thought running through my head was "I should lead a revolt of audience members to the box office demanding our money back". God do I ever wish I had at least tried. To do so - I would naturally have had to begin hurling obscenities at the screen, and I didn't because, well I didn't want to ruin the possibility that others might be, cough, enjoying themselves *wince*. Do I ever regret it, now.

When the ultimate slap to the face arrives (the end credits) -- you too will wish YOU had been the leader of such a noble revolt. So NOW you have the opportunity handed to you on a silver platter. I beseech thee all -- someone must take the responsibility to just yell out midway through this cinematic turd "THIS SUX!" with their fist in the air, and I can't imagine no one else in the theater agreeing or muttering their sympathetic consent. TAKE the opportunity to leap to your feet and look wildly around you. FIND the people frozen in their seats with eyes glazed over - decent people like you and me who have obviously INVESTED their hope, high expectations, valuable time, and hard-earned money - SNAP them awake to the realization that WE DON'T DESERVE THIS CRAP from Hollywood! Shout out dramatically "LET'S GO GET OUR MONEY BACK, PEOPLE!" and lead their way out of that theater and to the front lobby.

I want to read about it in the papers, how good people in several mid-western states ROSE UP and DEMANDED their money back. Because if we all just sit there like sheep stunned into submission - then we deserve yet another installment of prefabricated plasticity shoved down our throats. Let this be a lesson to all who would blunder into a theater to see a movie by someone named "McG". If its zero nutrition fast food fake movie franchise that you want - then you know where to line up.

TERMINATER: SALVATION opened in theaters nationwide Thursday, May 21st.

Was the above review useful to you?

74 out of 111 people found the following review useful:

Can't believe some people give this movie 8+ out of 10. T4 was garbage

Author: Popcorn man
5 June 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As a terminator fan who was hoping for a revival of the franchise, what a letdown this movie was. Before going in depth about the movie, let's take a look at how this mess was made:

Mistake #1) Newbie producers Derek Anderson and Victor Kubicek acquire the rights to the Terminator franchise. These two goons only have experience producing a low budget flick called "Cook-Off" to their credit and are absolute newcomers to the industry.

Mistake #2) Derek Anderson and Victor Kubicek, not surprisingly as newbies, choose McG as the director. LOL, McG, the director of Charlies Angels! FFS, you can see where the movie is going now ...

Mistake #3) The script is written and McG tries to cast Christian Bale as Marcus. Christian Bale says he wants to play John Connor and not Marcus. Unfortunately, John Connor has a 3 minute appearance in the original script and is not a significant character. At this point, the producers and McG have two viable options:

- Ditch the original script with Marcus and write a new one from scratch that explores John Connor's character in depth, if time allows.

- Say NO to Christian Bale, and stick with the original script if they are on a deadline. Memo to Derek Anderson, Victor Kubicek, and McG: THE TERMINATOR FRANCHISE CAN SELL ITSELF WITHOUT Christian BALE - STAR TREK PROVES THAT A BUNCH OF NO NAMES CAN SELL A MOVIE IF IT IS MADE WELL.

Mistake #4) Oh my gosh! They decide to cast Christian Bale as John Connor and then go on to mangle the script to give John Connor a larger role. The script goes through various hands, and even Jonathan Nolan is brought in to save the script but there is little he can do. They are even trying to rewrite the script on set. FFS, you know a movie is in trouble if they are doing major rewrites of the script on set.

Now that we know how the movie was made, here is my review: This movie has great special effects and action sequences. The problem is, it has no character development, the viewers could give a sh*t about the characters, and the story is garbage. In other words, it's the polar opposite of T2. T3 had lots of plot holes, but while T3 was letdown from T2, at least T3 attempted to give more attention to the characters.

If all you want is mindless action and special effects, this could be a passable movie for you. If you are a true Terminator fan and wanted a movie that would delve into characters, where action is secondary to the story (ie. T2), this is not the movie for you.

Since this movie cost $200 million to produce and so far, the box office receipts are $90 million, there are two possibilities: a) The Terminator Franchise has ended on the big screen. That would be sad but what can you expect with Derek Anderson, Victor Kubicek, and McG at the helm? b) Derek Anderson and Victor Kubicek never find the funding for T5 and are forced to sell it to a studio that is capable of making good decisions to make T5 (ie. start by picking a better director other than McG and find good writers).

I surely hope it's the latter.

Was the above review useful to you?

102 out of 167 people found the following review useful:

There is a SkyNet...and it wrote this film!!!

Author: Mr. Levitron from United States
21 May 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was stunned at how bad this movie is. I don't think I've ever seen a performance where Bale mails it in but I don't blame him. The story is beyond remedial. There's no suspense, no emotion, no plot and no point. The only reason this movie seems to have for being is that it looks cool. If you like mindless action then I guess you'll like this but what made the first 2 films great was the story (let's not kid ourselves, that's what makes any film great). It had suspense, characters that you cared about and most of all INTELLIGENCE and HEART. This one is so freaking obvious it's astonishing. To have these resources available to you and screw it up so monumentally...

Maybe I should take a crack at writing a screenplay. I couldn't do any worse than this.

Was the above review useful to you?

164 out of 294 people found the following review useful:

Fantastic action and effects, but check your disbelief at the door...

Author: phalanx256 from Dallas, TX, United States
26 May 2009

TS is a film that will wow your eyes and ears. It will be a standard for demonstrating the latest high-end home theater systems for several years. Do not, however, go to this film to stimulate the imagination. The plot has many holes patched with barely-there plot devices. I'm reminded of the film Thank You For Smoking when the character Jeff Mengall spoke of Hollywood plot holes getting filled with lines like "Thank God we invented the... you know, whatever device." In previous Terminator films, you could always assume that sending anything back in time took a lot of energy and resources - that's why you could accept that there was only one Terminator instead of 2+ working together. In this film, we are made to believe that fighting Skynet is like out-maneuvering a herd of angry elephants with laser beams on their heads.

In all, I gave this film a 7 because it does what a good futuristic action film should do: wows the eyes and ears. Just don't forget to check your disbelief at the door.

Was the above review useful to you?

118 out of 206 people found the following review useful:

This was actually a decent film!

Author: siderite from Romania
17 July 2009

Enough with the copycat comments! Everybody is so keen to criticize this film, while completely ignoring its good parts. Was there some plot weirdness? Well, yeah, we are talking humans winning versus machines here. But most of it was decent.

In this film you get to see more machine types, more character ambivalence (do you even remember the first Terminator? it was machine fascism!), more hints to the previous movies and, most of all, hints of the direction of the Terminator concept. I don't want to spoil it for you, but you must be blind not to see it is a good thing.

Other good things in this movie: Moon Bloodgood, the Oh-girl; Michael Ironside, just as fun as ever, even if having some scenes. And there is Sam Worthington, who is actually the main character and more like Help from BSG, but twice as cool, NOT Christian Bale aka John Connor.

I am surprised to see that both Terminator the series and the new Terminator are bringing some modernism to the old age concept of machine war. They are obviously not without flaw, but considering the alternatives and, even more, my expectations, I would say that saying this film was bad must be just some fashionable thing to say right now.

Bottom line: I liked it!

Was the above review useful to you?

171 out of 320 people found the following review useful:

It was a loud action film with no substance.

Author: stonemountainproductions from apple valley, california
27 May 2009

Christian Bale has proved that he is a fantastic actor. For me, this was just a paycheck movie for him. A very mechanical performance, in some scenes it seemed he never lets go of his Batman character. The movie itself was entertaining for the most part, but lacked the suspense that the first two Terminator films had. A quality that James Cameron possesses as a director that has been lost in the last two films. The screenwriters for Salvation can't decide who the main character is and what the main plot of the film is. Hoping that Salvation would revive the Terminator franchise, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth once again. It was a loud action film with no substance. Better luck next time.

Was the above review useful to you?

46 out of 72 people found the following review useful:

Judgement Day for cinema.

Author: Egg_MacGuffin from Pennsylvania, USA
26 May 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Spoilers ahead. If you decide not to read them and go to see the movie instead, don't say I didn't warn you.

I am appalled. I don't even know where to start. Maybe the title: Terminator Salvation. First, it's not even really a Terminator movie. John Connor was rewritten as the main character, which put Marcus Wright in the background, thus rendering a Terminator character secondary. But even if it was called John Connor Salvation, it still wouldn't make any sense because there is no salvation to be had.

Honestly, what is the point of this "story"? What is the culmination of the events? Skynet wasn't destroyed. The resistance gained no advantage. NOTHING was accomplished! The humans are fighting the machines at the start and at the finish. One Skynet base - one - was blown up somehow. No idea how or when the entire facility was wired for implosion, but it was. So what was the purpose of all this fighting? Skynet designs a prototype Terminator that doesn't even know he's a Terminator. I thought the machines were supposed to be smart. This Terminator had every opportunity in the world to squish Kyle Reese's head, but - oh yeah, Kyle Reese is in this movie. Don't even get me started on that.

But anyway, what the hell was Skynet's plan for killing John Connor?! Lure him to the Skynet base, let him inside to free hundreds of human prisoners, then send ONE naked CGI Arnold after him?! Are you freaking kidding me? And why was Kype Reese, Skynet's number one target, allowed to remain alive for - what, like three days? I don't understand any of this.

The world's most advanced intelligence looks like a bunch of dumb-asses in this movie. John Connor takes down a super-advanced cycle-thing that's capable of countless super-fast calculations with a trick from The Road Runner cartoons? Give me a break! Who the hell wrote this script? Are you somebody's 7 year-old cousin? There's a prologue text that appears at the beginning of the film that offers a good idea - John Connor being seen as a false prophet by many. But where in the blue hell are these non-believers in the actual story? The only guy that doesn't believe in Connor is Michael Ironside, who simply doesn't believe because the script calls for it.

The Oriental-looking woman - who somehow has freshly shampooed and deep-conditioned hair during a nuclear apocalypse - is tossed in for the sake of...well, who knows. She's there. She does nothing and acts irrationally.

The acting in this movie is so bad, I can't think of a word to accurately describe just how bad it is. It's THAT bad. Every line is delivered in either a dramatic whisper or a dramatic shout when the context of the scenes usually calls for neither. Don't people TALK in movies anymore? Talking can be dramatic. Yelling when you don't have to and whispering for no reason is just retarded, especially when everything that's said is completely obvious and on the nose. It's not even's worse.

There are many references to the first two films that are as pointless as they are countless, thrown in simply because this movie has no good ideas of its own. Nobody is going to remember this film one year from now, but we'll still love the original two.

I really can't think of one single redeeming quality of this catastrophic disaster of a movie. Maybe the fact that is has some giant robots, but I can get from Robot equally terrible film that is at least a funny kind of terrible. T4 is just terrible. It's seriously one of the worst films I have seen in recent memory.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 2 of 99:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history