Terminator 2: Judgment Day

A great film. The second installment was definitely not a disgrace to the first one. It was just as good, and, thanks to more advanced special effects, it might have even surpassed it in quality (although I’m not sure if that’s even possible). The cast was excellent and both Terminators were extremely convincing. (09/13/2016)

Because The Terminator was a clear success with the audience and the revenue was, in one word, magnificent, the production studio decided to use its reputation to make a sequel, which was handled by almost the same crew as in the case of the first one, with the exception that William Wisher Jr. helped Cameron with the screenplay instead of Anne Hurd. Both main characters were portrayed by the same actors as in the first film, with the addition of Edward Furlong alongside Linda Hamilton as the future leader of the human resistance against the rule of machines. This fourteen-year-old boy was chosen in an audition from 1,400 applicants and received an unbelievable 30,000 dollars for his role. Unlike the first film, the sequel had a significantly larger budget, which allowed Cameron to come up with the concept of the liquid Terminator, an idea he had already thought of in the first film. However, at that time, he could not realize the idea due to insufficient visual effects technology and a limited budget. Unlike the gritty and stylish first film, the sequel is considerably more mainstream, and the altered character of the Terminator reflects that. Audience favorite Arnold Schwarzenegger was no longer meant to be a tough killer, but a robot yearning to understand human emotions, effectively becoming a positive character. On the other hand, Linda Hamilton portrayed Sarah Connor as a woman marked by her past, who was significantly tougher and more cynical. The unique innovation was the T-1000 robot, for which Robert Patrick found his role of a lifetime. The special effects required an investment of 25 million dollars, but it was well worth it in terms of revenue. The screenplay once again played with a clever time loop and even utilized the remains of the original terminator from the first film. Given that the sequel is just a safe bet and lacks the originality and rawness of the first installment, my rating is slightly lower. The second film was a safe bet for the director and producers, albeit one lined with dollars and therefore grandiose. Overall impression: 75%. (01/18/2008)

This is total overkill in several filmmaking disciplines that hasn't been knocked into the dust by time or silicon by better-refined followers. It's all been said about it already, but the unwritten Cameronian dictum that action scenes must serve the story and not the other way around ages like a fine wine with every unnecessary megabyte of data generated, and it's a wonder that there haven't been many action blockbusters that work on a similar principle in the twenty-six years since. Personally, I'll always prefer the uneven trench warfare of planetoid LV-426, but I still very much understand why this fully holds up in the genre battle even after blowing away all the nostalgic overlay in this millennium. This will survive judgment day because it's... (see the beginning of my comment). (10/01/2017)

In part one, Arnie promised that he’d be back. And he kept his word like a real gentleman. But the stumbling block here is the sticky epilog which I have never come to terms with (and have no plans of doing so in the future) and this also applies to the special effects which are unusually frequent for Cameron. P.S.: This is one of the few movies that HD is detrimental to. The picture is so crystal clear that in most stunt scenes you can easily recognize Arnold’s stand-in, who really doesn’t look much like him. (01/08/2010)

An action blast with revolutionary visual effects never seen before. Five stars for the T-1000 and its metamorphosis, five stars for the vision of nuclear war, three stars for the script, as well as for some scenes that were too militant for my taste (Arnie vs. a column of police cars). But to overlook the fact that this film meant so much to the development of filmmaking technology and visual effects would be a great sin. Therefore, the only and correct rating is for five, it’s just awesome! (05/11/2003)