miscellany / miss-sil-ay-knee \ * n. 1. an assortment of items, things.
2. issues arising from Film, especially those of a slight or incidental nature.
When a soldier got shot by a Hunter Killer or one of those cool tank machines' purple ray guns in The Terminator, they exploded spectacularly into a puffy pile of bone and regret. When the same thing happened in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, however, soldiers merely staggered about for a second before tumbling to their skull-lined resting place. Sure, the wound sizzled a bit and glowed with lasery goodness at the point of impact, but it's not nearly as impressive or frightening as it was in the '84 original.
Since these future war scenes depicted events from the same time period in the first two films, there was no reason to update the kill style on a narrative level; The Machines would still be using the same weapons. And since the sequel arrived several years after the original, with vastly superior SFX, why change one of the most striking things about these beloved sequences? The sight of Reese's comrade bursting to dust in the original genuinely scared me as a child and I was looking out for that effect especially when I watched the sequel again the other day. Needless to say I was disappointed at its absence.
I put it to you, Internet, to explain this and join me, if it pleases you, on the cutting edge of pedantry.
2. issues arising from Film, especially those of a slight or incidental nature.
When a soldier got shot by a Hunter Killer or one of those cool tank machines' purple ray guns in The Terminator, they exploded spectacularly into a puffy pile of bone and regret. When the same thing happened in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, however, soldiers merely staggered about for a second before tumbling to their skull-lined resting place. Sure, the wound sizzled a bit and glowed with lasery goodness at the point of impact, but it's not nearly as impressive or frightening as it was in the '84 original.
Since these future war scenes depicted events from the same time period in the first two films, there was no reason to update the kill style on a narrative level; The Machines would still be using the same weapons. And since the sequel arrived several years after the original, with vastly superior SFX, why change one of the most striking things about these beloved sequences? The sight of Reese's comrade bursting to dust in the original genuinely scared me as a child and I was looking out for that effect especially when I watched the sequel again the other day. Needless to say I was disappointed at its absence.
I put it to you, Internet, to explain this and join me, if it pleases you, on the cutting edge of pedantry.
Comment