Terminator Genisys

the_monkey · 23-06-2015 1:46pm

MrWalsh wrote: »

Looked up Bobby George there - I see what you mean!

Proper Darts!!!!

MisterAnarchy · 23-06-2015 2:07pm

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Apparently Emilia Clarke and Jai Courtney are dating

She is like a little kid beside him ,she is 5 ft 1 ,he is 6 ft 1

She really is tiny

briany · 23-06-2015 6:41pm

Chain Smoker wrote: »

Saw Schwarzenegger on Graham Norton there last night, he's starting to look a little bit like former BDO darts player Bobby George (aka that guy who managed to break his back playing a game of darts)

I don't want to derail the thread here, but Bobby George had one of the most hunched stances I've ever seen in a darts player. Might have been a bad (the worst, even) case of RSI.

But, now that I think of it, Bobby George and Arnie on a Graham Norton couch would be a great contrast of personalities, despite their apparent verging physical similarity.

Wedwood · 23-06-2015 7:55pm

See James Cameron has endorsed this as the 'real' third Terminator movie, which follows very lukewarm responses to the trailer.

Cameron emphasises he had nothing to do with its making, but gives it the thumbs up.

Desperation or reassurance ?

Riddle101 · 23-06-2015 8:10pm

I wish Jame Cameron had continued making the Terminator movies. Only his vision is the one that should be used.

py2006 · 23-06-2015 9:21pm

Wedwood wrote: »

See James Cameron has endorsed this as the 'real' third Terminator movie, which follows very lukewarm responses to the trailer.

Cameron emphasises he had nothing to do with its making, but gives it the thumbs up.

Desperation or reassurance ?

Doing his pal Arnie a favour

the_monkey · 23-06-2015 9:42pm

8.1 on IMDb - earliest rating , considering most films are 9+ with early ratings - looks bad ...

Rubber_Soul · 23-06-2015 9:47pm

the_monkey wrote: »

8.1 on IMDb - earliest rating , considering most films are 9+ with early ratings - looks bad ...

You seem pretty eager for this to be bad.

the_monkey · 23-06-2015 9:57pm

StarshipPooper wrote: »

You seem pretty eager for this to be bad.

No really don't - I just expect it !!

I'd love to be proved wrong - in fact cos I expect nothing maybe I can go and see it and enjoy it as a stand alone film - hardly tho ...

Faith+1 · 23-06-2015 10:36pm

Loved how this thread went from Terminator to Darts! I love Boards! :pac:

ancapailldorcha · 24-06-2015 12:57am

Cineworld screened the original tonight. It'a amazing how well it holds up. The worst thing I can say about it is that some of the effects haven't aged well but the film as a whole is just wonderful.

SouthTippBass · 24-06-2015 1:32am

The CGI for young Arnold looks surprisingly good, and I really like the delivery of old Arnolds line here.

Disclaimer: Must not get hopes up, the movie will still suck.

DoYouEvenLift · 24-06-2015 2:23am

Lmao @ the poster they went with for this on imdb, it's so bad but at least it's not the one where Sarah Connor is holding the metal skull like a basketball player

MrWalsh · 24-06-2015 7:49am

I wonder who they got to be young Arnold's body, he did have a unique physique in youth.

frostyjacks · 24-06-2015 8:10am

The PG-13 rating tells me all I need to know about this film. It's for kids. I want to see some punk get his heart ripped out, not the sanitised violence like we see on WWE.

Bacchus · 24-06-2015 8:20am

Wait... so in that clip the T-800 can run! The makers of this really are insisting on sh*ting over the original aren't they.

pixelburp · 24-06-2015 8:22am

SouthTippBass wrote: »

The CGI for young Arnold looks surprisingly good, and I really like the delivery of old Arnolds line here.

I dunno, the younger Arnie running looked really dodgy, with that classic 'rubbery' feel CGI has. Not to mention undercutting the whole point of the original film by having him gallop like a gazelle :rolleyes: I had heard some time back of reshoots for this fight, with the studio insisting on a more 'epic' dust-up. I immediately interpreted 'epic' as 'more CGI destruction'

check_six · 24-06-2015 10:16am

pixelburp wrote: »

I had heard some time back of reshoots for this fight, with the studio insisting on a more 'epic' dust-up. I immediately interpreted 'epic' as 'more CGI destruction'

The style of some modern day CGI punch-ups has gone a bit daft. A bigger fight just has more stuff flying around the screen and it's difficult to focus on the important bits. Think back to the fights between the Terminators in Terminator 2 and you can probably recall each punch thrown, or each wall they mashed the other into. There was drama, and action, and a clear narrative of what was happening. They didn't skimp on the spectacle either with the inclusion of some amazing visual effects (Arnold cleaving the T-1000 with the bar, the T-1000's head melting to catch a punch and then reconfiguring into hands, etc.). If more stuff is thrown up on the screen it doesn't necessarily make it any better. In most circumstances it takes from the experience because you can't decide what to concentrate on.

Bacchus · 24-06-2015 10:58am

check_six wrote: »

The style of some modern day CGI punch-ups has gone a bit daft. A bigger fight just has more stuff flying around the screen and it's difficult to focus on the important bits. Think back to the fights between the Terminators in Terminator 2 and you can probably recall each punch thrown, or each wall they mashed the other into. There was drama, and action, and a clear narrative of what was happening. They didn't skimp on the spectacle either with the inclusion of some amazing visual effects (Arnold cleaving the T-1000 with the bar, the T-1000's head melting to catch a punch and then reconfiguring into hands, etc.). If more stuff is thrown up on the screen it doesn't necessarily make it any better. In most circumstances it takes from the experience because you can't decide what to concentrate on.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Those fights were tense stuff, had great weight to them and with the T-1000 FX also threw in some iconic images in cinema history.

Corvo · 24-06-2015 12:02pm

check_six wrote: »

The style of some modern day CGI punch-ups has gone a bit daft. A bigger fight just has more stuff flying around the screen and it's difficult to focus on the important bits. Think back to the fights between the Terminators in Terminator 2 and you can probably recall each punch thrown, or each wall they mashed the other into. There was drama, and action, and a clear narrative of what was happening. They didn't skimp on the spectacle either with the inclusion of some amazing visual effects (Arnold cleaving the T-1000 with the bar, the T-1000's head melting to catch a punch and then reconfiguring into hands, etc.). If more stuff is thrown up on the screen it doesn't necessarily make it any better. In most circumstances it takes from the experience because you can't decide what to concentrate on.

Agree 100%. I think the most impressive thing about some of those scenes (especially in the original Terminator) is that you can actually feel the power of the machine. There is no second chance once it hits you or decides you are dead. It just does it. If it gets close, you are gone.

They seemed to have weakened the Terminator after all this, despite the "upgraded" Terminators that followed that actually "performed" worse or seemed like a downgrade in fact!

DenMan · 24-06-2015 12:18pm

Is it just me or do the three punks there look like real dorks! They lack the callousness of the 1984 ones. These guys look like surfers (sound like them too) who were drafted in from Miami beach to play them. That being said I am looking forward to the movie big time.

Faith+1 · 24-06-2015 1:11pm

It cut just before they said 'F*ck you asshole'.....what are the odds? Oh wait it's 12A

Bacchus · 24-06-2015 2:11pm

Corvo wrote: »

They seemed to have weakened the Terminator after all this, despite the "upgraded" Terminators that followed that actually "performed" worse or seemed like a downgrade in fact!

I'm not sure I agree with that...
The T-1000 was a definite upgrade. It had the same dread around it as the T-800 in T1 and was a genuine threat.
T3 suffered from a lot of issues but the T-X was a lethal killing machine that didn't hold back. It had that same "if it get close to you, it's going to kill you" threat. I think though that following the same pattern of having the T-800 face off against another advanced Terminator (and win) reduced the threat a bit. Maybe this is what you're getting at, that the T-800 continuously defeating the "superior" Terminators reduces their menace.
Genisys certainly looks like it will continue that trend to extreme measures with the T-800 facing off against a T-800, T-1000 and whatever that new hybrid thing is.

Simon2015 · 24-06-2015 3:40pm

SouthTippBass wrote: »

The CGI for young Arnold looks surprisingly good, and I really like the delivery of old Arnolds line here.

Disclaimer: Must not get hopes up, the movie will still suck.

I'd go and see Genisys just for that scene.

Rubber_Soul · 24-06-2015 4:32pm

Bacchus wrote: »

Wait... so in that clip the T-800 can run! The makers of this really are insisting on sh*ting over the original aren't they.

The t800 ran in the original. Remember it chased Kyle and Sarah out of the nightclub?

Bacchus · 24-06-2015 4:42pm

Simon2015 wrote: »

I'd go and see Genisys just for that scene.

It's the one hook they have in me too. It's a surreal setup for a scene.

I imagine it was even more surreal for Arnie. To think that 32 years or so ago he was trying to break into Hollywood and now here he is re-visiting the opening scene in the movie that made him a star. It's not like it's a remake of Conan or something where he plays a different character handing off to the new generation. Here, he is literally (kinda) stepping back into the scene he played 32 years ago and changing it. It's a fun setup even if it is just a cash in on the nostalgia that is left for the original.

Bacchus · 24-06-2015 4:43pm

StarshipPooper wrote: »

The t800 ran in the original. Remember it chased Kyle and Sarah out of the nightclub?

I'd have to watch again, but I always thought it walked.

bullvine · 24-06-2015 4:51pm

He ran in the original, very very fast!

24-06-2015 4:56pm

the_monkey wrote: »

8.1 on IMDb - earliest rating , considering most films are 9+ with early ratings - looks bad ...

IMDB ratings mean zilch, especially in the early stages. Because it's user rated, you get a lot of people voting it down for personal reasons. I remember when The Wind That Shook The Barley was released and it was voted down massively as it was seen as a British director making an anti-British movie. You're much better off waiting for metacritic/rottentomatoes rating.

Rubber_Soul · 24-06-2015 5:01pm

Bacchus wrote: »

I'd have to watch again, but I always thought it walked.

Nope it definitely ran, although it didn't look remotely as daft as it does in that clip.

bullvine · 24-06-2015 5:07pm

4 reviews up on RT, not very good so far.

ancapailldorcha · 24-06-2015 5:39pm

According to IMDB, James Cameron gets the rights to the franchise back in 2019. There could be hope yet.

Looper007 · 24-06-2015 5:55pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

According to IMDB, James Cameron gets the rights to the franchise back in 2019. There could be hope yet.

With the way he's making movies over the last few years I prefer someone young and ambitious who's willing to take chances. The films ever since two have played it far too safe.

ancapailldorcha · 24-06-2015 5:57pm

Looper007 wrote: »

With the way he's making movies over the last few years I prefer someone young and ambitious who's willing to take chances. The films ever since two have played it far too safe.

Fair point though I'd say it's the shareholders and bean counters who get to decide what, if any chances are taken.

Looper007 · 24-06-2015 5:58pm

bullvine wrote: »

4 reviews up on RT, not very good so far.

To be honest the way Arnie has been promoting this over the last few weeks and with the no personality that is Jai Countney in it plus a 12A rating and the months and months of bad reports about it , I think its fair to say this was always going to be a disappointment and that's why I think they cut it down to 12A cause the kids will eat this up no matter what the film is like and I say the studio be happy if this makes 500 million overall.

py2006 · 24-06-2015 5:59pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

According to IMDB, James Cameron gets the rights to the franchise back in 2019. There could be hope yet.

Eh Arnie will be well passed it.by then. Plus Cameron aint no spring chicken either.

24-06-2015 6:00pm

Why are people against Jai Courtney? Then again, who exactly are they? The name doesn't ring any bells!

Looper007 · 24-06-2015 6:25pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why are people against Jai Courtney? Then again, who exactly are they? The name doesn't ring any bells!

An Australian actor. He was in the 5th Die Hard film as Willis's Son, was in Divergent films and the bad guy in Jack Reacher. He made his name in the Spartacus.

He's one of those guys that Hollywood really want to be a big action star, but he's sadly got the gift of making watch paint dry seem more interesting. Sadly he didn't get the gift of charisma from fellow Aussie greats like Hugh Jackman or Russell Crowe. I feel bad for him cause they are pushing the poor lad into a position he's just not capable off. Not everybody today can be like Chris Pratt, A likeable action star you either born with the likeability or your not.

24-06-2015 6:29pm

Looper007 wrote: »

An Australian actor. He was in the 5th Die Hard film as Willis's Son, was in Divergent films and the bad guy in Jack Reacher. He made his name in the Spartacus.

He's one of those guys that Hollywood really want to be a big action star, but he's sadly got the gift of making watch paint dry seem more interesting. Sadly he didn't get the gift of charisma from fellow Aussie greats like Hugh Jackman or Russell Crowe. I feel bad for him cause they are pushing the poor lad into a position he's just not capable off. Not everybody today can be like Chris Pratt, A likeable action star you either born with the likeability or your not.

Ohhh now I know who he is. God, he was terrible in that Die Hard!

ancapailldorcha · 24-06-2015 6:33pm

py2006 wrote: »

Eh Arnie will be well passed it.by then. Plus Cameron aint no spring chicken either.

Fair enough. I've accepted that the days of 5 star Terminator films are long gone.

_Kaiser_ · 24-06-2015 7:58pm

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I thought that was awful myself.. let's compare to the original (NSFW language/violence of course!)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-TmQ1ktaLU

- The punks seem/sound more menacing as mentioned earlier. The new lads sound awful and the make-up/costumes are wrong
- Arnie's responses/expressions in the original are more dead/robotic which you'd expect
- The classic dun-dun-dun-dun is better in the original
- The lighting is off too

Rather than give me hope, this new clip makes me cringe to be honest

Bacchus · 24-06-2015 9:32pm

StarshipPooper wrote: »

The t800 ran in the original. Remember it chased Kyle and Sarah out of the nightclub?

bullvine wrote: »

He ran in the original, very very fast!

StarshipPooper wrote: »

Nope it definitely ran, although it didn't look remotely as daft as it does in that clip.

Had a look on YouTube at the scene. Yeah, he runs when chasing them from the club. Not in the same charging way shown in the clip for Genisys but yeah, the T-800 runs.

the_monkey · 24-06-2015 9:33pm

SouthTippBass wrote: »

The CGI for young Arnold looks surprisingly good, and I really like the delivery of old Arnolds line here.

Disclaimer: Must not get hopes up, the movie will still suck.

Simon2015 wrote: »

I'd go and see Genisys just for that scene.

Really ? I think it looks terrible, the eyes just are wrong, they still can't get that right , look the way they move when he hears old Arnie talking behind him... also the mouth movement looks off as well when he speaks.

Yes, I probably will go see it for just that scene :P

Dair76 · 24-06-2015 9:38pm

I've never understood why a machine, built by other machines, needs a heads up display in English! :pac:

MrWalsh · 24-06-2015 9:45pm

the_monkey wrote: »

Really ? I think it looks terrible, the eyes just are wrong, they still can't get that right , look the way they move when he hears old Arnie talking behind him... also the mouth movement looks off as well when he speaks.

The CGI eyes are dead, but I think this adds to it! It's a machine, it should have dead eyes! Rarely does it make sense, but in this case, it does. For me.

Personally I'm not a CGI nitpicker. Unless it's so bad that it confuses me.

the_monkey · 24-06-2015 10:03pm

Found a good review ..

http://geekculture.co/geek-review-terminator-genisys/

Slydice · 24-06-2015 10:56pm

Threw that clip into youtube doubler.

http://www.youtubedoubler.com/?video1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DV-TmQ1ktaLU&start1=0&video2=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DOhQcwku3DEg&start2=0&authorName=Terminate!

Looks well done.

Bacchus · 25-06-2015 12:02am

Dair76 wrote: »

I've never understood why a machine, built by other machines, needs a heads up display in English! :pac:

Or why it needs a HUD at all really.

Dair76 · 25-06-2015 12:04am

Well yeah, my post missed a comma, but that's part of the point I was making.

SouthTippBass · 25-06-2015 12:14am

the_monkey wrote: »

Really ? I think it looks terrible, the eyes just are wrong, they still can't get that right , look the way they move when he hears old Arnie talking behind him... also the mouth movement looks off as well when he speaks.

Yes, I probably will go see it for just that scene :P

I stand by my comment, I think the CGI looks really good. Although Im aware my nostalgia is being tapped, Im looking forward to seeing this (this scene at least)

Terminator Genisys

Comments