Terminator - Dark Fate

[Mox]

7 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Anybody who watches Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D care to give their opinion on him?  I don't think I've ever seen him in anything. 

He'll be good.

[Uncle Buck]

Here are a couple of trailers to the upcoming Terminator movie, which is titled Terminator 6: Dark Fate.  I want this to be as good as the first two movies, but they were so amazing that it's going to be a tough act to follow.  The first problem I'm seeing in the trailers is that the two main actors from the original (Arnold and Linda Hamilton) are just looking very old and tired.  It's hard to blame them for that since 35 years have passed since it all started.  They are human and we all age.  I just hope they can find a way to bring some fresh excitement to the old franchise.  We shall see I guess.

 

[MacReady]

Arnold probably isn't a machine in this one.  Going to be interesting.  Also looks like John Connor has no role, or at least no significant role. 

I'm just a little bummed with the whole trying to advance things angle.  The tall lady who looks like she's going to be the main protagonist and the girl she's trying to protect... Why is there this need to change things?  Why do they have to go this direction and not just have another story with John, Sarah and Arnold? 

They already took this exact route with Terminator 3.  Couldn't find John Connor, so they go after his lieutenants. 

Is there anybody who is a fan of Terminator and Terminator 2 who would not be hyped if this movie was John Connor, Sarah Connor and Arnold as a human trying to prevent what he helped create? 

Terminator was two humans versus an early model Terminator.  Almost impossible to stop. 
Terminator 2 was an old model Terminator against a new model Terminator.  Wildly outmatched.

Would the next step not be three humans against the superior Terminator? 

Would that not be enough action?  Enough increased struggle? 

We have zero connection with human hybrid girl and new girl to be protected.  None whatsoever.  This should be the culmination of the Connor story, not an introduction to more. 

I'm just so sick of Hollywood being out of touch with 80's classics.  They are out of touch with everything that fans love about those movies. 

Predators was the closest thing to a good sequel from the 80's I have ever seen because it didn't **** with the recipe. 

Predator - Let's take it out of the jungle and try to make Predator blended with Robocop.  Then, let's put a bunch of psychopaths and an autistic kid.  Then let's have the Predator speak and say autistic 9-year-old kid is a warrior.  Who wrote this? 

Aliens - Let's take it out of space and put it in a prison.  Let's go way into the future and turn it into some weird alien eroticism.  Let's make an Aliens prequel, but not have any aliens.  Let's make a sequel to the Aliens prequel, put an alien in it to please the pissed off fans, but then still make it about androids. 

The Thing - Let's turn the most iconic practical effects creature feature of all-time into a CGI mess, but then let's also take the paranoia and hidden dread and remove it completely for the final 40 minutes of the movie and just have it about a lurking beast with no paranoia whatsoever. 

Terminator - Let's make one with a female terminator!  Let's make it PG-13, show Moon Bloodgood's sideboob and throw a Guns N' Roses song in for nostalgia while having it centered on somebody we have no connection with.  Let's make one about Sarah Connor and completely kill her son and try to cash in on a romance angle that should have ended with the first one and also make it PG-13.  Throw Jai Courtney in there to get women to see it. 

Die Hard - Let's make it PG-13 and have John McClane jump onto a jet and survive after he kills a helicopter with a car, and let's remove his signature line because it's PG-13, even though we are allowed one F-word in a PG-13 movie (Die Hard 4 I actually enjoy well enough in the unrated version).  Let's turn a franchise that has never had shaky cams before into a shaky cam terrible action plot, take it international and throw Jair Courtney in to attract females and then blame the poor performance on an R-Rating even though that's BS. 

It's just so aggravating to me how Hollywood producers can sit in a room and discuss how to make the movie a success. 

Producer 1: Let's turn the main character into a female or throw a female in it to attract women.
Producer 2:  Let's make it PG-13.
Producer 3: Let's completely change the setting and the tone.
Producer 4: Let's copy the original and replicate everything about the original that made it such a success.
Producer 5: Let's fire Producer number 4. 

Terminator had a full movie to turn Sarah Connor from meek to strong.  We BUILT a connection with her.  It wasn't thrust upon us, we weren't expected to connect with her immediately.  We weren't thrown some cardboard action heroine to like, we grew to like her.  Why do we need a new character when we have Sarah coming back?  Why relegate Sarah to some mentor, why try to pass on the torch when we can continue her story and make her the focus? 

Alien had Ellen Ripley, who was feisty and intelligent and the only one capable of dealing with the threat and we grew to lover her because she was underestimated, ignored, overruled and questioned every step of the way.  While everybody neglected her advice, she alone survived and we loved her because of it.  The same damn thing happened in the sequel.  The Alien franchise at least tried to maintain this, but the rest of it was wrecked.  It sucked at the evolution of the threat.  There was one alien, then multiple aliens, then you go back to one alien?  No.  That's dumb as ****.  Then in Alien: Resurrection, they make Ripley some hybrid superhero who you can't even connect with because they purposefully confuse what she is.  Are we even rooting for the same Ripley?  Is it Ripley?  You failed. 

The Thing prequel actually did a decent job, and I love Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and I wish they had given her a better script to work with.  That movie failed in its terrible plotting, terrible test idea, terrible dialogue, terrible CGI and just poor direction (your fault for giving it to a music video and commercial director who has never directed a movie). 

The Predator just sucked at everything and I don't even want to talk about it.  Predator 2 was okay, just misguided and completely changed the tone.  Predators was pretty decent.

I just get so frustrated.  Somebody get me a foot in the door with a major Hollywood studio and I will write a script to an 80's action film that will please everybody. 

[KManX89]

@Outpost31 the new Terminator (Dark Fate) will be R, or so says Jim Cameron. Arnold OTOH says it hasn't officially been rated yet, but he's also pushing for an R rating (as he should). I think what Jim Cameron means is they filmed it to be rated R, it just hasn't been given to the MPAA yet. God willing Paramount won't cut it up to get a PG-13 again.

RoboCop is getting the hard R treatment as well from Neill Blomkamp with RoboCop Returns. It looks like studios are finally starting to learn their lesson about neutering adult franchises/concepts after AVP 1, RoboCop 2014, Expendables 3, etc. (except Sony). Good, because it pretty much never works and quite often ends in disaster (great watch):

TS could've been a legitimately scary future war movie pushed to its full potential. Instead, we were "treated" to a not-so-dystopian future hampered by PG-13 limitations. Unsurprisingly, it sucked.

Edited May 27, 2019 by KManX89

[showtime]

3 hours ago, Uncle Buck said:

Here are a couple of trailers to the upcoming Terminator movie, which is titled Terminator 6: Dark Fate.  I want this to be as good as the first two movies, but they were so amazing that it's going to be a tough act to follow.  The first problem I'm seeing in the trailers is that the two main actors from the original (Arnold and Linda Hamilton) are just looking very old and tired.  It's hard to blame them for that since 35 years have passed since it all started.  They are human and we all age.  I just hope they can find a way to bring some fresh excitement to the old franchise.  We shall see I guess.

First let me say, I love the first two movies.  However, I'm probably in the minority, but the first two movies look terrible.  They were fine for the time they were made, but the movies look like crap right now.  The special effects are downright horrible.  When I first saw Hamilton and Arnold - I was like okay.... this will be a new refreshed take on the series with up to date special effects, etc.  That is a good thing.

They should just remake the first two movies, tbh.  Maybe with new actors and such.  Star Wars has this same issue.  The original movies look like crap (IMO) and the problem is it's harder for this brand new younger generation to fully get into the movies because how bad everything is.  That's why Disney essentially remaking them was the right move and those are better.

[Forge]

Was I the only one who thought the trailer looked really bad? 

[Broncofan]

7 hours ago, Forge said:

Was I the only one who thought the trailer looked really bad? 

It just screams “been there, done that” feel.  It wasn’t poorly executed.  But it didn’t raise my pulse or surprise me in any way.   Maybe Cameron is saving the impact changes for the movie but given how poorly the last 2 movies have done financially you’d think they need to create buzz.  That trailer didn’t do much in that regard. At all. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by Broncofan

[INbengalfan]

5 hours ago, Broncofan said:

It just screams “been there, done that” feel.  It wasn’t poorly executed.  But it didn’t raise my pulse or surprise me in and way.   Maybe Cameron is saving the impact changes for the movie but given how poorly the last 2 movies have done financially you’d think they need to create buzz.  That trailer didn’t do much in that regard. At all. 

Hopefully they learned from the most recent Halloween, which also chose to ignore the bad sequels.   Someone above mentioned that Arnold would play a human.  Would an unexpected twist be that he survived the drop into the iron in the second one and is watching over sarah and John m from a short distance (Obi Wan style)

[Fresh Prince]

2 minutes ago, INbengalfan said:

Hopefully they learned from the most recent Halloween, which also chose to ignore the bad sequels.   Someone above mentioned that Arnold would play a human.  Would an unexpected twist be that he survived the drop into the iron in the second one and is watching over sarah and John m from a short distance (Obi Wan style)

I would hate that twist to be honest, would completely ruin the ending to T2 if he’s alive in the sequel.

[thrILL!]

7 hours ago, Forge said:

Was I the only one who thought the trailer looked really bad? 

Nope.  It looks terrible.  This franchise is beyond played out.   There’s nothing left to salvage. 

[43M]

The only reason I think this has any chance of being a success is because James Cameron's name is attached to it.

Otherwise, this doesn't look remotely appealing.  

[Uncle Buck]

6 hours ago, thrILL! said:

Nope.  It looks terrible.  This franchise is beyond played out.   There’s nothing left to salvage. 

It makes me sad to admit it because I love the movies, but I think you are probably right.  At this point, maybe we should just hope Cameron finds a way to finally give us "closure" on the whole storyline. 

[thrILL!]

1 hour ago, Uncle Buck said:

It makes me sad to admit it because I love the movies, but I think you are probably right.  At this point, maybe we should just hope Cameron finds a way to finally give us "closure" on the whole storyline. 

T2 was fantastic and left us wanting to see more about the future in this world they created. Years later they did a director’s cut of it showing more footage of the future but that was clearly the area just ripe for exploration going forward.  Instead, we got another movie (a bad one too) dealing with Terminators sent to the past.  Protecting John  hunting John.  Again.

I know Terminator: Salvation isn't popular around here but at least the film took place in the horrible future that the first 3 films’ heroes were desperately trying to save humanity from.  We got to see how bad it truly got and why John sent Reese into the past in the first place.  We see the circle moving.

And yet they give us 2 more films about the past and time travel as the vehicle.  And years later??  I just don’t get it.  What’s left to mine in this plotline?  The only area with room to explore is the future and even that moment has passed.  Quite frankly, if Cameron wrote and directed this movie himself, I’m not sure it would make much difference. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by thrILL!
🔥🔥👎🏼🔥🔥

[seminoles1]

I definitely appreciated Terminator Salvation going into the future and showing the war, but they came up with a bad story and McG was just awful.

Amazing trailers though.

[THE DUKE]

Honestly, what was the last great movie James Cameron was attached too?  Avatar made a bunch of money, but I don't know if I've ever heard anyone call it a great movie.  The guy had a legendary 15 year run, and did some cool stuff with 3D, but it's been a while now.