Well, McG's "Terminator" certainly doesn't suck ...

Before I dive into McG's take on "Terminator," I suppose the big news of the day is the return of Michael Moore, and this certainly seems to be a time that's ripe for his input.

Now, I've always had a lot of time for Michael Moore, and I'm glad he's still making noise (and documentaries), but I really just didn't care for "Sicko" at all. Watching him gallivant around Europe, Canada and finally Cuba just felt like such a stunt, and more importantly a missed opportunity to properly analyze the catastrophe that is health care in America.

But I've enjoyed all his other movies quite a bit, and I'm glad he's about to come back and tackle a subject he's rather familiar with: Capitalism and the American economy (I don't want to spoil anything here, but I don't think he's gonna be a terribly big fan.)

Due to drop Oct. 2, his as-yet-untitled flick "will explore the root causes of the global economic meltdown and take a comical look at the corporate and political shenanigans that culminated in what Moore has described as 'the biggest robbery in the history of this country' – the massive transfer of U.S. taxpayer money to private financial institutions."

The press release notes that year is the 20th anniversary of "Roger & Me," and assuming that's true it just makes me feel really old, but I'm still glad Michael Moore is back to make me laugh and hopefully think at the same time.

But getting to the main event, I come today mostly to praise McG, not to bury him, and he could certainly use it; "Terminator Salvation" currently sits at 33% positive at Rotten Tomatoes, made much worse because that puts it even behind "Dance Flick" at 35% (Really? Amazing.)

I, however, had a pretty great time with it, which admittedly may have had a lot to do with the fact I was going to see a new movie on Thursday at 5 p.m., when much of the real world is still hard at work. It's certainly not, however, a great chapter that propels the "Terminator" saga forward in a really compelling way. In fact, the screen script that sets the scene (Skynet, Cyberdyne, 2018) reads pretty much like what I'd imagine the flash card they gave McG to familiarize himself with the "Terminator" universe would have read.

That said, he at least doesn't manage to crap all over the established mythology like, say, Brett Ratboy did with "X-3." He instead seemed to just embrace as much of the saga as he could understand and made his own often very fun movie.

So, what's it about? Well in the truly ludicrous opening sequence (which is rivaled for sheer stupidity only by the final five minutes or so), we meet Marcus Wright (a very good Sam Worthington), a death row inmate who signs his body over to "science" (which, in this case, means Cyberdyne, so you know he'll turn up later with a secret even he doesn't know about.) Meanwhile, flash forward and John Connor (Christian Bale, of course) is leading his followers in the resistance against Skynet, and Kyle Reese (remember that name?) and a young, mute companion make up the entirety of the resistance's L.A. branch.

And that's really all you need to know, because from there it pretty much just plays out as a chapter from the battle against Skynet and little else, but given the expectations that was good enough for me (were I a conspiracy theorist, I'd imagine McG might be engineering this expectations game W. style, but I really don't think he has that much power or cunning.) And, not surprisingly, the machines are indeed pretty friggin cool, especially one particularly menacing dude who shoots robotic motorcycles out of his feet, and I hope I never get too old to appreciate that.

The main beef I had heard going in is that Christian Bale delivers a performance as robotic as any of the machines, pretty much just barking orders through the whole thing, and that's true. I have to ask, however, given the way the part was written, what else was he supposed to do? And besides, though he clearly has a knack for picking movies that I and everyone else get thoroughly geeked up for, is he really all that good an actor overall? Although it pains me to say it, I'd say no.

As I said earlier, Worthington fares much better, and he's gonna be a big star very soon. Even better, though, is Anton Yelchin's Kyle Reese. Yelchin, of course, has already played Chekhov in the far-superior "Star Trek," and he's now someone whose name I'll always take note of on movie posters and wherever else I might come across it.

And, finally, what of the humanity that made the first "Terminator" such a classic? Well, admittedly, there's not much of it here at all, but I really just don't think McG has it in him as a director to draw that out. The only other movie of his I've seen is "We Are Marshall," and oddly enough it left me with pretty much the exact same impression: A solidly told tale that would have been a lot more compelling with more of the human stakes thrown in.

The bottom line, however, is that if you show up five minutes late and leave five minutes early (because, trust me, those really are just about the two worst scenes you'll see in a movie this year) you'll get a better-than-average action flick that delivers a solid dose of summer fun, which on this day at least was more than enough to satisfy me.

And I'll leave with you this featurette for "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," which focuses on the relationship of Harry and Dumbledore. That's what made this installment my favorite of Rowling's novels about the boy wizard, and has me thinking this will also be the best of the Potter movies when it finally comes out July 15. Peace out.

"Star Trek": Not bold, but still brilliant

As I was waiting for J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek" to start last night (I showed up plenty early, expecting, frankly, a much bigger crowd), I was trying to remember the last time I had even bothered to watch a movie based on an old TV show, and I really couldn't think of one.

"Bewitched"? Why bother? And despite the presence of both adorable Anna Friel and veryfunnyman Danny McBride, I really can't see myself getting into Will Ferrell's upcoming "Land of the Lost."

In most cases, even if its called a "reimagining," it usually just means adding tired jokes about all the anachronisms. What Abrams has accomplished with "Star Trek," however, is something entirely different. By embracing the best elements of the original animal but adding a fresh and almost uniformly appealing cast and enough of his own touches to give the series a big jolt of new blood (and adrenaline), he's created something so entertaining that it should relaunch the series and have it thriving (or, if you must, prospering) for a long time to come.

Though our 7 p.m. showing was only a little more than half full, I could tell from the crowd that we were in for something thoroughly fun. Despite the absurdity of a local country station giving out Trek t-shirts (to the only two people who bothered to come in costume), all the good-natured "Star Wars" jokes ("I should have come dressed as Vader") just set the stage perfectly.

So, what about the movie itself? Well, after a superb opening sequence that simultaneously features the birth of Kirk and introduces the movie's big bad, the Romulan Nero (Eric Bana, not really all that menacing except for the fact that - with all the Romulan facial tattoos - he looks a lot like Mike Tyson), Abrams and screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman wisely spend a lot of time introducing the new members of the Enterprise crew-to-be.

And though the types are already well set in stone, the new players are all just about perfectly cast (with the glaring exception of Simon Pegg, but more on that later.) The only thing I could remember seeing Chris Pine in was the mildly disappointing "Bottle Shock," but here he captures the combustible mix of anger and potential that makes the young Kirk intriguing, and though I gave up on "Heroes" during the disastrous second season, Zachary Quinto finds the soul of Spock rather than making him the cartoon it would have been easier to become.

Among the supporting crew, Zoe Saldana smolders just enough as Uhura, and gives the movie its most tender moment along with Quinto. Karl Urban's McCoy (a truly eerie dead ringer) and Anton Yelchin's Chekhov are mostly there for very effective comic relief, but my favorite crew member of all was John Cho's Hikaru Sulu, perhaps mostly just because it was so much fun to see him do something besides get incredibly stoned.

The main (and just about only) beef I had heard from the minority of critics who at least kind of panned this was that the story was lacking, but I have to disagree. Though it is indeed a fairly standard revenge tale with enough wrinkles thrown in to keep it interesting until the end, I have to wonder, just how intricate could you really expect what amounts to the first mission of Kirk's Enterprise crew to be?

As it is, Abrams keeps the tale moving at a very fast but fluid pace, enough so that - for once - I really didn't mind the occasionally shaky camera work because it really does set up some simply stunning set pieces. Kirk and Sulu get the best one of all, as they dive from the Enterprise to take out a crazy giant drill that Nero is using to assault the Vulcan planet. I guarantee it will be the best action sequence you'll see this summer (or at least I welcome the challenge from "Terminator: Salvation" trying to top it in two weeks or so.)

My only quibble (and I hesitate even to bring it up, because the movie really was just about perfect summer fare) was that, after producing a script that set up the natural dynamic of the young Enterprise crew, it really felt like they went back at the end and crammed in the catchphrases that any Trek fan (and even a casual admirer like me) expect to hear. They're very funny at first, but exceedingly just a little annoying as it feels like Abrams and crew are working from a checklist.

And the introduction of Pegg's Scotty unfortunately feels right in this vein too. You know going in that he can't be a member of the Star Fleet Academy class with Kirk and company, but he just feels tacked on when he's finally brought in, and it doesn't help matters that Pegg - shockingly - just doesn't seem to fit the part at all. It's the first time on the big screen that I just really haven't much liked him at all.

But all that said, the bottom line is that this is a thoroughly fun flick that will thrill "Star Trek" devotees and newcomers alike. And with that, I have to go pay $70 to keep from having my power cut off and then to the job that pays me just enough to put me in that admittedly rather sorry position. Peace out.