Reviews

I was very surprised to hear that a G.I. Joe sequel was in the pipeline after the lackluster performance of the first and expectations were set to low after the studio delayed release for a whole year in order to carry out reshoots.

If you go into this with low expectations and a willingness to enjoy some stupid OTT action and daft one liners you should have a good enough time. I started to lose interest after about 45 minutes but still found entertainment in some of the action.

The Rock is a good screen presence with enough charisma to carry the film and the supporting cast do well enough. The RZA is the only 'actor' who stinks up the scenes he appears in. Jonathan Pryce gives an over the top, flamboyant bad guy performance that makes his turn in Tomorrow Never Dies look restrained.

If you are 13 then this might be the "coolest film ever!" until your mind wanders to something else. For everyone else it really depends on your tolerance for physics ignoring action and gung-ho attitudes. I quite like that stuff as long as it's fast paced and doesn't take itself seriously so G.I Joe 2 barely gets a pass from me. 5/10. To put that in perspective Die Hard 5 was a 2/10. G.I. Joe is bad yet still enjoyable, not so bad it makes you angry for a week.

After being wrongly accused of murder and theft and sentenced to death by a lynch mob, Jed Cooper (Clint Eastwood) survives the attack and is on the path for vengeance. However, when he is offered a position as a Marshal by the judge who deals with capital punishment in the territory (Pat Hingle), Jed instead finds himself caught up between his own lust for revenge, his hankering to see people get a fair trail and the brutal, haphazard way the judge seems to hand out justice.

Eastwood is on good form as always but the role is not one of his best. Jed Cooper is not a name that will be remembered as fondly as Will Munny, Josey Wales or 'The Man With No Name' when people discuss his Westerns. This is Pat Hingle's show all the way, his portrayal of a man constantly justifying to himself why he must do the things he does in order to try and maintain a semblance of peace is the cornerstone of the picture. Bruce Dern shows up in a small but memorable role as a villain and Dennis Hopper gives a typically unrestrained performance in his only scene.

The script offering up the pros and cons of capital punishment for discussion is the highlight of an otherwise averagely executed Western actioner. Ted Post, who in later years would direct the second (and second best) entries in both the Dirty Harry and Planet of the Apes series', was a director who spent most of his time making TV shows. Clint bought him on to the project having worked with him on Rawhide and while their familiarity and bond may have help run a smooth set it did nothing for the artistry or excitement of the film. The studio's first pick, Sergio Leone, was unavailable at the time due to making on Once Upon A Time In The West and my opinion is that he would have done far better with the material.

A light recommendation to Western and Eastwood fans only.

Rob Zombie launched himself onto the main stage as an important voice in modern horror with his sophomore effort The Devil's Rejects. Continuing the exploits of the Firefly family, last seen in House of 1000 Corpses, the film follows the family on the run after a police raid on their den of torture and murder. The local Sheriff has a personal grudge to settle and as the film develops we are asked to side with the family as they become the victims.

Zombie's influences are clear from the outset with an opening narration and on screen text in the style of a documentary giving the back story in a clear reference to Tobe Hooper's Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The 70's setting and overall style of the film constantly hearkens back to genre classics such as Craven's Last House On The Left. The film never reaches the artistic heights of Chainsaw (partially due to a sexually juvenile and leery tone that undermines the other great work being done) but it can stand shoulder to shoulder with the vast majority of grindhouse movies.

There are many who accuse Zombie of being a Charles Manson sympathiser and it is easy to see why. The character of Otis, played by Bill Mosely, is clearly based on the most famous of mass murderers and I don't think it's a push to look at it as a homage. Zombie is clearly more interested in his killers than their victims, as he would go on to confirm in his remake of Halloween in which he made Michael Myers' inner psyche the central focus. Being encouraged to sympathise with killers as sadistic and brutal as the Firefly family in The Devil's Rejects doesn't work for me and I am constantly on the side of Sheriff Wydell. Obviously each viewer will bring their own personal politics and baggage with them and is free to form their own opinions but personally once I have witnessed a man rape a woman with a pistol I don't care how much he may love his sister, I look forward to his painful demise.

Whatever Zombie's agenda and wherever his sympathies lie, there is no denying he has made a powerful film and any movie that can get people debating about these issues has got to be doing something right.

It is astonishing, given the violence being portrayed, how many times I burst out laughing watching the film. From Sid Haig as father figure Captain Spaulding to Ken Foree as a pimp, the film is full of great character actors and genre favourites turning it up to 11 and spitting out Zombie's hilarious, twisted dialogue with relish. Even Rob's wife, Sheri Moon Zombie, turns in a great performance which surprised me massively because she is awful in Halloween.

A definite recommend to all viewers with even a passing interest in horror/grindhouse flicks.

Kevin Costner directs and co-stars with Robert Duvall (inexplicably billed first) and Annette Benning in this story of cattlemen being forced to take a stand against a big time rancher who wants them off 'his' land.

Costner directs with a sure and steady hand, letting the story unfold at an almost glacial pace while at the same time giving a great performance as a man at war with himself, struggling to forgive himself for the sins he has committed in the past. Duvall is the moral backbone of the story and to Costner, guiding him through his personal turmoil. Benning's role is a little underdeveloped and the cursory love sub plot seems forcefully placed into the story as a means to provide Costner with a chance for redemption.

There are echoes of Eastwood's Unforgiven; the change from the 'old' West to the 'new'; the old gunslinger who has tried to move on but cannot forget the past, yet Open Range opts for a more positive outlook by its' conclusion than Unforgiven's sombre climax.

The film builds to a showdown that we are more than ready for and the action and gun play is exciting and feels authentic. The epilogue, however, is a problem. It takes 3 or 4 scenes to do what 1 would have managed fine and puts too much focus back onto the already not too convincing romance. With the last instalment of The Lord of the Rings trilogy also in theatres, 2003 must have been the year of the self indulgent ending. I also had a problem with a few moments of slow motion and the overuse of fades and dissolves, which gave the otherwise epic scope of the picture a sudden made for TV feel. The font used on those opening credits didn't do much for either. How often do you pay attention to the font in the credits? That just shows how bad it is.

Overall though, Open Range is a fantastic modern Western and I highly recommend it.

On paper, The Quick and the Dead sounds like just my kinda thing as I am a pretty big fan of both the Western genre and Raimi. He is a stylish director, using kinetic, frantic camera movements to both advance plot and visually please the audience. Unfortunately, here he completely drops the ball and is unable to string together the narrative of what is one of the most basic and re-told stories in American movies.

Sharon Stone is the lone gunslinger who wanders into town with an apparent grudge against its' head gangster, Gene Hackman. Hackman chews the scenery like he is back on the set of Superman and is clearly having a blast, Stone on the other hand is so woefully miscast that it is just embarrassing. She never for a moment convinces us that she is anything more than a Hollywood princess playing dress up and when she has to square up to Hackman it is like watching a teenager throw a temper tantrum. Stone doesn't realise the director thinks he is making a comedy, which is something she probably should have cleared up with him as she, in her role as producer, hired him. Russell Crowe is underwhelming as the bad guy turned good and he can't hide that Ozzie accent. Leonardo DiCaprio rounds out the key players and he is fine as the young brash wannabe legend, showing that movie star charisma and handsome smile that would define him for a generation of teenage girls a few years later. He is also responsible for the films only real moment of humanity. Lance Henriksen, Woody Strode and Mark Boone Junior are among the supporting players who fail to make any kind of impact due to the lousy script and direction so flimsy the film seems to lunge from one scene to the next with no sense of purpose or vision.

The plot revolves around a shooting competition in which the contestants 'draw' on each other upon the strike of the clock tower bell. This gives Raimi plenty of opportunity to showcase some unusual and potentially exciting visuals but he is unable to inject any tension into the proceedings. Leone can make us feel the tension even when we know the outcome, whereas when watching The Quick and the Dead I found myself with one eye on the clock like one of the characters in the movie.

Lastly, I'll mention Alan Silvestri's score, which is routine and dull. That comment could review the whole film.

Lewis Gilbert returns to the series and while his first effort, You Only Live Twice, was a bland and plodding affair he manages to keep things afloat in The Spy Who Loved Me. The opening sequence is probably the best of the series, with a fast and frenetic ski chase culminating in Bond diving off a cliff before deploying a parachute. Things do start to falter in final act however, the extended action scene feels slow and poorly edited although it features some impressive stunts. Possibly the most memorable image from the film is the Lotus Esprit turning into a submarine. This is typical of Gilbert's camp and over the top sensibilities although it isn't too bad here as it follows a rather good car chase on land before going underwater for laughs.

Roger Moore is again on good form as Bond and has a particularly cold blooded scene as he essentially throws a man off a rood after interrogating him. He purposefully drops another henchman, Jaws, into a tank full of sharks – all good stuff. The aforementioned gigantic metal-toothed henchman, played by Richard Kiel, makes his first appearance in TSWLM and is quite threatening despite being somewhat ridiculous. Curd Jurgens as Stromberg is a great main villain with a particularly nasty streak. In his first scene he feeds a woman to sharks, it is a relatively disturbing scene for a PG action adventure, which is why it's so good! One of the most gorgeous woman I have ever seen,Barbara Bach , plays 007's love interest Anya Amasova, a Russian spy. It seems when they make Bond's female companion Russian they seem to cast the sexiest women imaginable, Bach and Daniela Bianchi from From Russia With Love are easily the two best looking leading Bond girls of the series. This is the first film in the franchise to feature Geoffrey Keen as the Minister of the Interior and Walter Gotell as General Gogol, both of whom would become recurring characters, although Gotell previously made an appearance in FRWL as a S.P.E.C.T.R.E agent.

This is also the first film to directly address Bond's marriage to Tracy in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Amasova prods Bond with it as a way of sizing him up and Moore's 'don't talk about that' reaction is a touching, sombre moment from the man who all too often went for raised eyebrows and daft expressions.

For all the good Gilbert does however, he is still the Bond director who stands out as lowering the bar when it comes to daft humour. From the 'comedy' music that plays as Bond and Amasova's van breaks down, to the double take and look at his bottle of beer a man does upon witnessing the Lotus exist the water, to the Lawrence Of Arabia music that plays as our heroes walk across a sandy plain, the film is chock-a-block full of groan-out-loud moments as the audience's intelligence is insulted with childish humour. While it is not enough to make the film as bad as say Diamond Are Forever, the sometimes grating attempts at comedy coupled with a disappointing finale make this Moore's worst entry in the series so far. Controversial that may be but I've always had a soft spot for The Man With The Golden Gun, which although I give the same star rating I feel is a more consistent and enjoyable film. TSWLM is a great outing for Moore and Bond and I feel with a more serious tone and well constructed finale it may have been Moore's best. Oh well.

Guy Hamilton returns for what I consider to be jointly (along with On Her Majesty's Secret Service) the most under rated 007 flick. Despite having many things going against it The Man With The Golden Gun manages to be one of the most entertaining and memorable Bond films.

The female lead, Mary Goodnight, is weak. Weakly written and weakly acted (by Britt Ekland) she gets by on her looks and somehow manages to not annoy me as much as other rubbish Bond girls despite being a completely useless klutz. Maybe it's the great performance of Maud Adams as secondary Bond Girl Andrea Anders balancing it out that keeps things tolerable. A special mention must go to the belly dancer Bond seduces to get information from as she is the ugliest girl 007 has locked lips with thus far in the series. Grace Jones would challenge her for that title 11 years later. Moore is again good as Bond, I especially love the scene where he smacks Adams to get information and threatens to break her arm – what a ladies' man! I don't know why but I really like a darker, edgier Bond and when Moore does it he does it very well. He doesn't even seem angry, like Timothy Dalton might be, good ol' Rodge is just like "Yeah, I'll shag you, then batter you and possibly kill you if I don't get what I want from you" all while keeping his poker face on. I love it. Scaramanga isn't a great villain but Christopher Lee elevates the material 100% - a true thespian. Hervé Villechaize as Nic Nac should annoy me to no end being as he is a gimmicky and silly henchman but he is actually genuinely funny and watchable. Lois Maxwell was always quite plain compared to her female co-stars but she was still somewhat attractive. Here, for the first time, she looks old. It's like watching you Mum flirt with the milkman. They should have sacked the character after this one but they kept on letting her embarrass herself for a few more years, poor old girl. M has my favourite moment of his in the series when Bond asks who could possibly want him dead; "Jealous husbands, outraged chefs, humiliated tailors, the list is endless!" Lee's delivery and Moore's reaction are priceless.

The title song by Lulu is disgustingly bad, easily the worst of the series but John Barry's score is top notch, one of his best. The music playing in Scaramanga's fun house during the opening sequence (which is blindingly good by the way) is tonally almost certainly the best work he's done with the series since From Russia With Love.

Of course, this is a Guy Hamilton film so there has to be some random dumb 'funny' jokes. Sheriff J.W. Pepper, that 'loveable' hick from Live And Let Die pops up to inject more 'fun' into proceedings and when Bond is attacked by Sumo wrestlers he defeats one by grabbing his bum cheeks really hard then giving him a wedgie. Yes, you read that correctly. Scaramanga's car that becomes a plane is also pushing it a bit too far for my taste.

TMWTGG features one of the best stunts in any film ever, as 007 leaps a car over the gap of a broken bridge while doing a barrel roll. This stunt was down for real and it is phenomenal. Forget about the CGI highway scene in The Matrix Reloaded, forget about whatever daft Jason Statham movie you sat through last, THIS is the real deal. For some bizarre reason though they put the sound of a sliding whistle on the soundtrack as the car makes its jump but even the ridiculousness of that decision in the post production process cannot ruin one of the greatest moments in action movie history.

I am a huge fan of TMWTGG, despite its many flaws it is hugely enjoyable and always entertaining. I am at a loss why so many consider it to be one of the worst of the series but to me it will always be Bond at if not his best, his very above average.

Another year, another Bond film. They sure did churn them out back in the sixties...

Considered by many to be the quintessential Bond movie, Goldfinger sees much of the groundwork set for what will become standard and eventually cliché in later pictures. Bond is tasked to observe billionaire gold lover and crime boss Auric Goldfinger (Gert Fröbe) to confirm suspicions MI6 and the CIA have that he is planning 'something big'. On his way he fights, shags and escapes in the ways you'd expect and of course he even finds time to sit down and have a drink with the enemy.

After the great From Russia With Love, Goldfinger has a lot to live up to. As far as I'm concerned it's a definite drop in quality but that isn't to say it is without merit. Connery has started winking at the audience instead of concentrating on his performance and the part doesn't feel as well written as the last two films. Guy Hamilton takes over as director and he does an admirable job. The sweeping helicopter shot over Miami beach to the hotel where we meet Bond after the pre-title sequence is impressive in its' ambition and grandeur and is a perfect example of how Goldfinger is trying to be a 'bigger' film than its predecessors. It is also worth noting that this is the first Bond film and Sean Connery's only not to involve S.P.E.C.T.R.E. and/or Ernst Stavro Blofeld. I think this plays a huge factor in its popularity with the general public as it feels very much like its own contained story, whereas other early Bond films, individual stories they may be, always make reference to each other and have a feeling of Bond getting higher up the chain of command towards Blofeld.

Goldfinger's plan too is much grander than we have previously seen, with an elaborate plan to break into Fort Knox involving far too many variables. This is also the first Bond film where the villain inexplicably keeps 007 alive for seemingly no other reason than to explain to the audience through boasting dialogue what is going on and to eventually let Bond foil his plan. It is handled reasonably well here but it is ultimately rather poor writing. Auric Goldfinger himself does not suffer from bad writing, his dialogue is generally of a high quality and often brilliant. He and Bond share possibly the most famous hero/villain exchange from the franchise; "Do you expect me to talk?" "No, Mr Bond, I expect you to die!" Honour Blackman as Pussy Galore is the first non-attractive Bond girl and her voice and line delivery annoy me beyond belief. Her casting will forever remain a mystery to me. Felix Leiter makes his second appearance in the series, this time played by Cec Linder. Unfortunately his character goes from being a worthy ally to Bond to being a kind of 'gee-shucks' sidekick without much useful to do. Goldfinger's man servant Odd Job serves as the main henchman of the film and again is a perfect example of the silly factor being upped as his primary means of attack is throwing a bowler hat (!)

With all this said it may seem like I dislike Goldfinger but that is not the case at all, it is a great Bond adventure with much to recommend it. It is thoroughly entertaining, very well paced and even though it is responsible for much of 'the formula' it manages to not be too groan-inducing. It also has one of the best pieces of music from the series as the Fort Knox break in is taking place. It has no sense of mystery or intrigue though and is definitely geared more towards being an action film than a thriller. To quote John Cork in 'James Bond: The Legacy', "This is no longer the detective thriller/Saturday afternoon serial world of Dr No, or the darkly mysterious one of From Russia With Love. It is a world of heightened absurdity, where a man can crush a golf ball with his bare hand, and a lesbian changes her sexual preference after a (literal) roll in the hay with 007."

I recommend Goldfinger highly to casual Bond fans as it contains a great main villain and some good action, it is probably the most well-known and 'classic' of the series and I can see why so many consider it the ultimate Bond film. I love all the films in the series (except Diamonds Are Forever) and Goldfinger is no exception but I feel it's place as the 'ultimate' is somewhat unfair to the half a dozen or so other films which far surpass it in quality and intrigue.

The Man Who Wasn't There revolves around and is narrated by a man named Ed Crane, a barber, under-played brilliantly by Billy Bob Thornton. Displeased with his profession and seeing an opportunity to buy into a dry cleaning franchise he decides to blackmail a local department store manager (James Gandolfini in one of those great 'character actor' parts he specialises in when he's not on TV) who is having an affair with his wife (Frances McDormand). Naturally, nothing goes to plan and one disaster leads to another as people are killed, betrayed and falsely accused. The best way to describe the film is as "typically Coenesque" and while that is a huge compliment it is also what works against the film. There is a definite feeling of been-there-done-that that lingers over the whole thing but I suppose that even the Coens cannot break new ground with every effort.

If Miller's Crossing was about "men in hats" (Barry Sonnenfeld), then The Man Who Wasn't There is about shadows. Many of the most memorable shots in the Coen catalogue occur in this picture and it's obvious that Roger Deakins is truly in his element. I would venture to say that visually The Man Who Wasn't There is the greatest film from the brothers, although No Country For Old Men is also a contender for that title.

As you'd expect, the performances are great across the board. The Coens excel in casting the right actors in the right parts. Even though they frequently use the same performers, it feels fresh every time and not like they are just casting their mates 'cause it's easier. Along with the aforementioned, Jon Polito and Tony Shalhoub chew up the scenery in great supporting parts and it's a nice surprise to see a young Scarlett Johansson pop up and display her natural talents early in her career. Read into that what you will...

The Man Who Wasn't There is certainly worth your time and it fits nicely into the Coen canon. It is by no means their 'worst' film (that will always be Intolerable Cruelty, which is still decent) but just don't go into it expecting anything overly original. Indeed, besides its black and white photography it doesn't really have much to separate it from their other work, that is to say that amongst their filmography you will find similar subjects being discussed in better films. Criminal plans gone wrong? Check. Disillusioned central character? Check. Frances McDormand having an affair? Check. You get the idea.

Still, The Coens prove that even when they are treading water they can deliver a better product than most directors going for gold, which is something they should be pretty proud of!

The nature of truth and its' relativity are the subjects focused on in Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon. The story revolves around a man found murdered in the woods, the events leading up to it are told from multiple points of view with each of the people telling their version of the story with different reasons to lie, or perhaps even believe they are telling the truth.

Much has been made of the narrative devices employed by Kurosawa. Rashomon is told mostly in flashbacks, with the same event being repeated over and over again as everybody has their say on what went down and it's not hard to see how it influenced future film makers such as Quentin Tarantino (Reservoir Dogs) and Stanley Kubrick (The Killing). It is easy to imagine how cutting edge this technique would have been in 1950 and I take nothing away from Kurosawa but let's not forget Orson Welles had done similar things with Citizen Kane nine years previously, though in that case it was used to show how people can have differing opinions of a man, instead of an event as in Rashomon.

Kurosawa felt that since the invention of the 'talkies' in the 30's, cinema had somewhat lost it's visual storytelling capabilities and relied too much on dialogue. He strove to make Rashomon be an unconventional experience, with many scenes lasting minutes without conversation, merely letting the setting, music and tone carry the narrative. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. As enthralled as I was throughout most of the film's second and third acts (the first is all talky set up and as a result rather dull) there were times when I found myself wishing that it would get a bloody move on.

There are a couple of fight scenes in the film and I feel I must mention them due to how different they are from what we would normally see from films featuring Samuri. They are not so much fights as scraps, with characters rolling around on the floor, desperately grabbing for a sword just out of reach. Expertly choreographed and executed, they are wonderful to watch and genuinely entertaining.

The performances are good across the board. There's a bit of overacting here and there but for the most part the cast carry themselves well. The standout, however, is Toshirô Mifune as the bandit accused of murder. He is a cackling maniac and wonderfully flicks between utter lunacy and childlike desperation.

Although the main focus of most people, including Kurosawa himself, is on how Rashomon is about the nature of truth, I also feel the film puts a great weight on the nature of faith, specifically man's faith in himself and the rest of mankind. It is hard to talk about this without spoiling the film but please, watch it with this in mind and see what you think. I watched Rashomon within a couple of days of viewing Ran and these themes were certainly prevalent in that film also, though Rashomon ends with a slightly more positive outlook.

Though not a perfect film, Rashomon is certainly a very worthwhile experience and a must for anybody interested in the development of storytelling techniques in cinema history.

The Terminator is a personal favourite, it has a perfect blend of action, sci-fi, horror and noir all on a medium budget. After the rise to megastar status of Arnold Schwarzenegger and creator James Cameron becoming the most popular action director of the day a sequel was inevitable.

T2 is essentially a retread of the original, this time with a stronger, smarter and faster machine, the T-1000 (Robert Patrick) being sent back to kill 10 year old John Connor (Edward Furlong) and another, a T-800 (Arnie) which has been captured by the future resistance and reprogrammed, being sent back to protect him. Sarah Connor is now in an institute due to trying to blow up the Cyberdyne (the company who will unwittingly cause the end of mankind) factory and in general acting crazy and spouting off about robots from the future.

T2 really shines in the action department. The effects of the liquid metal T-1000 were revolutionary and they look better than similar effects used in Terminator 3 over a decade later. Most scenes are permanently engraved in the public consciousness, iconic in every sense of the word. The bike/truck chase, Cyberdyne break in, they all showcase the perfect blend of CGI and practical effects.

Linda Hamilton gives a brilliant performance as Sarah, tortured by the knowledge of an unavoidable future. Cameron has a knack for writing female characters haunted by the memories of the past, as seen in Aliens, and I think Hamilton was deserving of an Oscar nomination, just as Signorney Weaver had gotten 5 years before.

The music is again composed by Brad Fiedel and, like with the original film, it rises above being a generic action film score and also manages to create new themes and motifs not heard in T1. It's a great score in its' own right and the main theme is one of cinema's greatest.

So, the action is mind blowing, the lead performance is touching and the atmosphere and music are top notch. What's not to like? I'll tell you what my problem with T2 is...

In the first film Skynet inadvertently causes John Connor to be conceived, as the man sent back to protect Sarah Connor, Kyle Reese, becomes John's Father. When asked why the machines have bothered with this plan rather than kill John in their time, Kyle answers "Their defence grid was smashed. We'd won, taking out Connor then would make no difference. Skynet had to wipe out his entire existence." Essentially, in a last ditch attempt to secure their survival Skynet sent back a machine to kill the man who had destroyed them, Connor, before he was ever born. They did not attempt this earlier because Connor was not a messiah, he was just a soldier, albeit a "great soldier". Kyle goes on to say, reference the "Time displacement equipment" that "The Terminator had already gone through. Connor sent me intercept and they blew the whole place." "How are you supposed to get back?" he is asked. "I can't, nobody goes home, nobody else comes through. It's just him and me." Reese is saying is that there is no way anything else can be sent through time as the time machine has been destroyed. Skynet were desperately grasping at thin air when they sent The Terminator back in the vain hope that it would salvage them. If they had time to plan they would have sent back 100 terminators and made sure the job was done right. Reese leapt in the machine just in time to be transported too.

Reese states that only living human tissue can pass through the machine, The Terminator is a metal endoskeleton but the flesh around it allows it through. This explains why Skynet sent Arnie and not one of those Hunter Killers we see in the 'future flashbacks'. This is conveniently forgotten in T2 as the T-1000 has no living tissue but still makes it through. However, why would it ever be getting sent through in the first place? THE WAR WAS OVER! The humans had won. After Skynet sent back Arnie in T1 the time machine was destroyed. They would not be sending back another machine to kill John Connor because they had been defeated. If Skynet was gonna send something back again, why not send 1000 Hunter Killers to make sure the job is done properly? Once you start asking questions you realise that T2 falls apart quickly and is really nothing more than an unnecessary, nonsensical sequel.

Another problem I have is with is Arnie himself. Since T1 he had become a huge star, hence the T-800 being reprogrammed by the resistance to give Arnie more screen time by partnering him up with the good guys. On many occasions during the film he is used for grating comedic effect ("I need a vacation"). The relationship between him and Connor as he becomes a father figure to the boy is well played out but for every great moment there is a groan moment. T3 and its' director Johnathan Mostow get trashed for turning the character into a joke but the groundwork was laid out here by Cameron. In the first film The Terminator dons sunglasses to cover a damaged eye socket. In T2, he puts them on for no reason other than to look cool, poses and then rides off on a motorcycle while Bad To The Bone blares on the soundtrack. It is silly, unnecessary and sets the tone for a machine that isn't to be taken seriously.

T2 is a highly entertaining action film but as a sequel to a sci-fi classic it is a letdown due to its' complete lack of respect for the rules laid down in the original. I recommend it and I do enjoy it but it is not the untouchable classic it is touted as and certainly doesn't hold a candle to its predecessor.