Skip to main content

And this computer thinks it can win... by killing the mother of its enemy. Killing him, in effect, before he's even conceived... a sort of retroactive abortion?

The Terminator
(1984)

(SPOILERS) The Terminator franchise is a mess of jumbled narratives, stop-start continuations, temporal entanglements and ill-conceived recasting, so at least this year’s latest entry looks as if it will be right at home. The original is only structurally tidy in terms of being relatively linear and unconfused about its objectives. Of course, that means that it needs to sweep a lot of internal logic under the carpet to work. But work it does in spite of that. This James Cameron at his leanest and hungriest, in stark contrast to the narrative bloat that has since (quite unnecessarily) consumed his storytelling.


Indeed, The Terminator is a relentless nightmare of a movie. It’s years since I revisited the picture; I don’t think I’d revisited either this or T2 in the years since the second and third sequels have come out, but watching them back-to-back it’s very evident how this series’ roots have as much, if not more, in common with the horror genre as they do action cinema (it has that in common with the original Mad Max). It’s a blend it would share with Aliens. It’s said Cameron switched to action after Terminator was enthusiastically received that way, rather than as horror, but that may be on the apocryphal side.


The predestination paradox at the heart of the plot is one that refuses to really satisfy, but at least it’s in the DNA of the picture. Some have sought to explain it by positing the idea that, for the events in Terminator to occur, there has to be an original timeline where – for some reason – a John Connor who isn’t the son of Kyle Reese sends Reese back in the first place. Consequently, the loop we see here is at least the second iteration of that. 


It’s a commendable try, but ignores essential simplicity with which Cameron devised the tale and the linear manner in which such plotlines tend to be constructed. When Reese whisks back in time minutes after Arnie, the filmmakers aren’t considering this in terms of the tricky logic that the already arrived T-800 should have all the time in the world as an advantage. T2 follows this schematic, as indeed do most time travel narratives. It’s simpler that way.


The causal loop is also there in Cameron’s deleted scenes. The reveal that the factory at the end belongs to Cyberdyne is picked up in T2, and is as crucial as the identity of John Connor’s dad. Harlon Ellison took a credit after claiming Cameron had used The Outer Limits episodes as inspiration. Whether or not he did (Cameron has claimed otherwise), the concept isn’t exactly exclusive to Ellison; Doctor Who’s Day of the Daleks had a similar predestination paradox 12 years earlier (albeit absent of any crucial rumpo), and 12 Monkeys would follow a such a course a decade later.


Thus we have a narrative where John Connor dutifully ensures Kyle Reese gets a photo of Sarah (the one taken at the end of the picture) so he can become devoted to her and volunteer to go back in time. T2 will forsake this. Ironically, since it is a much less satisfying movie: the predestination paradox is generally the stuff of twist short stories leaving the reader going “Oh, that’s clever”. The more one pokes at it, the less appealing the cleverness becomes (the most irksome example of this kind of thing is Time Crimes, where the protagonist’s precise re-enactment of events beggars belief). So it’s curious in this regard that a deleted scene from Terminator addresses the main thematic thread of T2; the unfixed future. Sarah suggests they go and destroy Cyberdyne and Reese replies that’s not his mission.


What Skynet thinks about all this is questionable (until Salvation, but even then…). They are presumably sending all these differently skilled Terminators back in a fairly short space of time (one of the most marked aspects of the first movie is that the resistance has won, so where these Skynet resources come from is curious in itself). Do they just hope to strike it lucky? Do they never come to realise the essentiality of their own involvement in the paradox? It’s one of the problems of a franchise like this that once one considers the many variables they might affect the same dogged focus becomes less and less convincing (How about sending a Terminator back to steal a nuke and wipe out LA, if Judgment Day is inevitable (Rise of the Machines)? Skynet would presumably still be developed eventually and it would at least sort out the Sarah Connor problem.)


The only time travel theory I find reconcilably satisfying is that of parallel timelines, since it can get on board with most anomalies and paradoxes. It’s something the series has generally avoided (although the TV series appears to entertain the idea), with only a singular but multiple expunged timelines. There’s certainly no room for it in the original. This is a series that has repeatedly stumbled with internal consistency; as Reese says “One possible future, from your point of view. I don’t know tech stuff”.


The theoretical side of the series is, however, spotlighted in one of my favourite scenes. Exposition-heavy scenes are often a pain in the arse, clumsily introduced and delivered. Here though, Reese’s interrogation by Earl Boen’s Dr Silberman serves to hold the picture’s rules under bright lights. Silberman’s a great character: lazy, bored, patronising (“A sort of, retroactive abortion”). It’s no wonder Cameron brought him back (it’s a particularly nice touch that he exits, engrossed in his pager, as Arnie enters the police station).


Combined with Lance Henrikson’s detective, cackling encouragingly whenever Silberman leads Reese on (“Ray guns?”; especially good is how his self-aggrandising anecdote about junkies on PCP is interrupted), the scene has a down-to-earth quality that lends weight to the picture’s verisimilitude. The limited budget also really helps the picture for the most part in this regard, with only the occasional effects-heavy moment falling down. I’d have liked them to find a way to get both Henrikson (off screen death) and Paul Winfield (badly wounded) back in the sequel, but getting Boen was particularly appropriate in terms of the outright disbelief of Reese’s tale told.


The actual genesis of Skynet picks up where WarGames left off the previous year; it was “built for SAG NORAD by Cyberdyne Systems”. If only Matthew Broderick had been on hand this would all have been satisfactorily sorted out by now.


This is a movie where it holds true that less is more. The more a franchise is unearthed and mined, the less mystery it holds.  Reese explaining, “The 600 series had rubber skin. We spotted them easy. But these are new” evokes a world of claustrophobic possibilities. And Cameron’s flashbacks to future Earth are a master class of economic storytelling that may have been incrementally exceeded budget wise in the sequels but aren’t actually more impressive. The guerrilla warfare and the infiltration by a Terminator are riveting and kinetic scenes.


It’s the little touches that appeal too. The T-800 doesn’t know Sarah’s full name so is gambolling around like a serial killer, offing anyone with the particular name he doesn’t like.


Arnie’s impassivity here isn’t actually all that impassive (Cameron purposefully reined that in) but he’s like a rock compared to the touchy-feely stuff that will follow. In T2, Cameron doesn’t really recapture the “dilation of time” as he calls it with the Terminator attacks. It’s a shame, as there’s a palpable, visceral terror to the dreamlike slow motion of the scenes in Tech Noir and the murder of other Connors and Sarah’s flatmate (it has to be said Matt – Rick Rossovich – the flatmate’s boyfriend actually gives as good as he gets before he goes down, much more so than any other human victim).


The celebrated Arnie moments are all pretty much as good as you remember. The opening with Bill Paxton’s and The X-Files’ Brian Thompson is perhaps a little less confident than later scenes, but the weapons purchase from the great Dick Miller is sheer class (“Phased plasma rifle in 40 watt range’). Arnie doesn’t actually don his trademark leather and shades until nearly the hour mark. The attack on the police station hasn’t been bettered, even if more polished set pieces have followed in T2. Then there’s his “possible response” to a guy asking if he’s got a dead cat in his apartment or what (“Fuck you asshole”).


Less satisfying is his retreat to do a few self-repairs, when he could surely have finished off Reese and Sarah at the scene of the car wreck (one asks similar questions about Reese wasting so many explosives trying to hit Arnie on a motorbike). The fake Arnie head and blue screen endoskeleton finale are less effective effects wise; although the warehouse clawed pursuit is up there in terms of tension.


Both Biehn and Hamilton acquit themselves well. Biehn can alternate between slightly unnerving (he was Lauren Bacall’s obsessive stalker in The Fan a couple of years before) and chipmunk innocence, which is about right. He has the right kind of build for someone surviving on scraps (unlike Jai Courtney; one valid complaint about the Terminators, and a consequence of casting Arnie, is that they’re not really the greatest of infiltration devices amid a malnourished human resistance), and doesn’t think twice about appropriating dirty smelly tramp trousers.


Hamilton’s transition from disbelief and terror to internal strength is more nuanced and impressive than the cuckoo’s nest of T2, although the line “You’re terminated fucker” is dreadfully cheesy. She falls victim to the inevitable failing of the heroine making stupid choices (calling mom) to fuel the advancement of the plot, but she’s believably a different person come the last scene.


It’s unsurprising Cameron hasn’t gone near overt sex scenes since this; their passionate embrace is rudimentary stuff, and one gets the impression Jimbo was very relieved to have it done and dusted. The love story is rather pressed into place and rudimentary, lacking the development that would forgive the way it strains for the hopelessly romantic (“I came across time for you Sarah”). Such elements have never been Cameron’s strong point (see both True Lies and Titanic as evidence). It’s probably just as well the take-it-or-leave-it Christ retelling is unintentional (saviour of humanity John Connor – JC – Jesus Christ) as Cameron would have undoubtedly overegged it.


There are a fair few elements in The Terminator that haven’t aged well – the haircuts, especially Sarah’s are dreadful, headbands are popular in 1984 and 2029, although the obsession with Walkmans is more endearing – but for the most part it stands up. I remembered the aforementioned Terminator effects to be more jarring that they are, if anything. I’ve never been that keen on Brad Fiedel’s score, however, truth be told. The ominous Terminator theme works, as does the main theme, but an awful lot else resembles discordant bashing about that is only so far from getting on the nerves.


What really vindicates the picture is that, in spite of a plot that should get demerits for lacking internal coherence, The Terminator succeeds by dint of conviction and verve. The spectre of the bomb, and the intimate scale of the elements lend the movie particular endurance; the inevitability of the apocalypse (“He said there’s a storm coming”) is balanced against personal peace with the long game. There’s little doubt that each reiteration since has picked at the scabs of logic here and exposed them, but that shouldn’t make the original any less of a compact and effective little gem. Cameron could learn from his early lack of self-indulge now. Perhaps after Avatar 4 he will take stock (no, I don’t think so either).



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.

It was one of the most desolate looking places in the world.

They Shall Not Grow Old (2018)
Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old, broadcast by the BBC on the centenary of Armistice Day, is "sold" on the attraction and curiosity value of restored, colourised and frame rate-enhanced footage. On that level, this World War I documentary, utilising a misquote from Laurence Binyon's poem for its title, is frequently an eye-opener, transforming the stuttering, blurry visuals that have hitherto informed subsequent generations' relationship with the War. However, that's only half the story; the other is the use of archive interviews with veterans to provide a narrative, exerting an effect often more impacting for what isn't said than for what is.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…

It seemed as if I had missed something.

Room 237 (2012)
Stanley Kubrick’s meticulous, obsessive approach towards filmmaking was renowned, so perhaps it should be no surprise to find comparable traits reflected in a section of his worshippers. Legends about the director have taken root (some of them with a factual basis, others bunkum), while the air of secrecy that enshrouded his life and work has duly fostered a range of conspiracy theories. A few of these are aired in Rodney Ascher’s documentary, which indulges five variably coherent advocates of five variably tenuous theories relating to just what The Shining is really all about. Beyond Jack Nicholson turning the crazy up to 11, that is. Ascher has hit on a fascinating subject, one that exposes our capacity to interpret any given information wildly differently according to our disposition. But his execution, which both underlines and undermines the theses of these devotees, leaves something to be desired.

Part of the problem is simply one of production values. The audio tra…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.