How does it compare to Terminator I+II?
not as good, but definitely way better than Terminator 3. like okay first thing: McG is terrible. he had the potential to ruin this movie, but he didn't. he's still a talentless piece of shit and i don't know why anyone would ever hire him! some of the directing choices in this movie are reaaaaaaally bad, and some of the plot points are ridiculously cliche and some aren't really consistent with the first two films. for instance the Resistance has JET FIGHTERS and SUBMARINES, which doesn't make sense if you've seen the first two.
christian bale, sam worthington, and whoever plays john connors wife all give really good performances. especially worthington and yelchin. anton yelchin rules as kyle reese. common, moon bloodgood, and a few of the other supporting actors are really terrible. also i thought arnold's cameo was really well done! it wasn't bad CGI at all. everyone clapped in my theater when he came on screen.
the action sequences in this movie were really good. all of the terminator shit was awesome and for the most part the post apocalyptic landscape shit was really good. there were a lot of references to the first two films with dialogue and shit (the "i'll be back" was kind of forced imo, people laughed when bale says it)
honestly if someone half capable had directed this film it had the potential to be a REALLY GREAT ACTION FLICK. as it is it's still a PRETTY GOOD ACTION FLICK, but some of the plot points are kind of dumb/cliche. (the ending is terrible btw, but it's obvious there are going to be more movies) idk maybe i was expecting too much out of the movies, ive always been a big fan of the first two!