Terminator Genisys

Adamantium

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFxaCa-hr8o

Pray we see the likes of this again in a modern Terminator movie. Everything about it. Genuinely terrifying, it's so meaty/analog/raw.
One of the greatest unsympathetic on screen massacres in film history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1bd5-AX9Wo

Cameron has made some good movies, but he only made one masterpiece.
The following is probably my favourite scene of all time. The terrifying slow walk across the background, the cinematography, the zoning/blurring out of the music, what an adrenaline rush from something so eerie and dreamlike. The sounds of the gun, the looks,music. Pure goosebumps. Pure mastery.

I loved that 1984 Los Angeles felt it as dark and dingy as the future it would become.

Dempsey

Not a hope that any hollywood studio will allow that again!

pixelburp

It's a classic case of being a victim of its own success though; Terminator 1 had a tiny budget, no stars, little expectations and so all the creative freedoms that come with that, enabling a raw tale told with glorious analogue stylings; cue the millions of dollars from the box office, its lead becoming a household name, and decades worth of acclaim. It evolved into an A-list franchise and can never really go back to its 'indie' roots so to speak. Heck, even if it got handed over to a group of fans, there's an equally good chance it'd suffocate under misplaced affection - see the third Predator film for an example of that.

JP Liz V1

Matt Smith (Doctor Who) will play a new character with a strong connection to John Connor Source

Soft Falling Rain

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Matt Smith (Doctor Who) will play a new character with a strong connection to John Connor Source

Given Jason Clarke is John Connor, could MS be passable as his son? He can't be Reese as that is marked for Jai Courtney.

Adamantium

This is a very low-key reboot of a once huge series.

I remember with Salvation, they couldn't wait to play up and promote months beforehand up how it was like T1,T2 levels of "grit, DNA of those films".

They might have something very worthwhile here.

But holy hell, recreating scenes from the first two is something that is very dangerous creatively..

Adamantium

Adamantium wrote: »

This is a very low-key reboot of a once huge series.

I remember with Salvation, they couldn't wait to play up and promote months beforehand up how it was like T1,T2 levels of "grit, DNA of those films".

They might have something very worthwhile here.

To be fair Salvation had a really interesting script and huge potential but the addition of Bale and the less talented Nolan brother saw the film altered drastically in order to have Bale front and center. Marcus was supposed to be at the forefront with John's role being small. Would have liked to see the film as originally intended as it did seem like they were trying to take a few risks but then opted to play it safe.

Adamantium

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APq4yDiGmAM

T1 retrospective. From the early 90's. Love Arnold's rambles.

Jumboman

Does anyone know why cameron pulled out of making Terminator 3 ? in mid to late 90s he was planing to direct T3 but it never happened.

Soft Falling Rain

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To be fair Salvation had a really interesting script and huge potential but the addition of Bale and the less talented Nolan brother saw the film altered drastically in order to have Bale front and center. Marcus was supposed to be at the forefront with John's role being small. Would have liked to see the film as originally intended as it did seem like they were trying to take a few risks but then opted to play it safe.

A few risks that would have made the film bomb even harder. Bale was not the problem, it was the man in the director's seat and it still perplexes me to this day how the **** he got that job.

Adamantium

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

A few risks that would have made the film bomb even harder. Bale was not the problem, it was the man in the director's seat and it still perplexes me to this day how the **** he got that job.

I remember seeing the trailers and thinking "Wow, he can really prove the all the haters wrong, look past his name and music video background+Charlie's angels, the script won't let them down at the very least".

I remember wanting so desprately hard to look past the initials and he was aying all the right things. I then saw the bastardised and just plain boring movie that it was. 2018, my arse, how hard is to do the global future war finally, Saving Private Ryan style?

Older me has now realised that, If they did the future war war proper they'd have reached the series dead end so to speak, so instead they'll keep making movies to fill the gap without ever actually getting there to the final story of how SKYNET and the machines were beaten during a final mounted major assault one fateful night in 2029, time travellers sent back,complex destroyed. War is over, humanity moves on as best it can.

I think its a series that it fairly cut and dry story wise, the constant cock tease of time travelling faffing around is and anxiety of impending doom has been done and I doubt it can be bettered.

Adamantium

Jumboman wrote: »

Does anyone know why cameron pulled out of making Terminator 3 ? in mid to late 90s he was planing to direct T3 but it never happened.

I think he was busy with Titanic and he sold the rights, he now say that he wish he could send himself back (ironically enough), and give it a post note "Don't sell".

I think this was around the time when he was gonna do Spiderman that he sold the rights. I think he was gonna do Spiderman then T3. After he found out the rights to Spiderman were going to Sony he just said "**** it" it and did Titanic as an excuse to go film the wreckage of the ship.

T2 was a definitive ending as you could get within the realms of that universe breaking its own internal laws (T2 itself might have been stretching it as well).

I known in T2 they had a much lengthier future war scene in the script where we the Resistance breaking into Cheyenne Mountain (NORAD SKYNET headquarters) on the night they win the war. Having lost, In a last ditch attempt to save itself, SKYNET sends back two terminators, one to kill Sarah Connor in 1984, the other to 1995.


Kyle Reese, the T-800 AND and another T800 and T-1000 been sent back in time in quick succession to their respective time periods (1984 and 1995). We see the circle been completed

The time displacment tech that SKYNET was working is then immedately destroyed by the Resistance, never to be used again or to fall into the hands of anybody else. War is over

A whole movie of that could be T3. A prequel and end to a complete trilogy

Soft Falling Rain

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

A few risks that would have made the film bomb even harder. Bale was not the problem, it was the man in the director's seat and it still perplexes me to this day how the **** he got that job.

Nothing wrong with the direction in Salvation. It looked great and had a number of well realised set pieces. McG may have a stupid name and some terrible films behind him but he showed real promise with Salvation. The huge rewrites are what caused the film the most damage.

ps3lover

Deleted User wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the direction in Salvation. It looked great and had a number of well realised set pieces. McG may have a stupid name and some terrible films behind him but he showed real promise with Salvation. The huge rewrites are what caused the film the most damage.

McG and the producers admitted these rewrites where to fit the PG13 rating. They stated that was a mistake.

ps3lover

ps3lover wrote: »

McG and the producers admitted these rewrites where to fit the PG13 rating. They stated that was a mistake.

There were rewrites for a PG13 rating but I'm talking about the rewrites which saw John Connor go from having a minor role to being the star of the film. Before Bale was hired and the Nolan brought on at his insistence, the film was very much about Marcus with Connor living in a bunker and unseen for much of the film.

Soft Falling Rain

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the direction in Salvation. It looked great and had a number of well realised set pieces. McG may have a stupid name and some terrible films behind him but he showed real promise with Salvation. The huge rewrites are what caused the film the most damage.

Here's two major aspects of the original script:

1. John Connor is a paranoid hermit who is little inspiration to the resistance. He ends up murdered easily enough only for his face to be grafted onto a machine who proves to be the real inspiration for the resistance.

2. Skynet are actually the good guys.

Two plot points that makes an absolute farce of what Cameron established.

Soft Falling Rain

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

Here's two major aspects of the original script:

1. John Connor is a paranoid hermit who is little inspiration to the resistance. He ends up murdered easily enough only for his face to be grafted onto a machine who proves to be the real inspiration for the resistance.

2. Skynet are actually the good guys.

Two plot points that makes an absolute farce of what Cameron established.

The Connor not being the folk hero he was supposed to was a far more interesting spin that what we got. Surely living your whole life with the knowledge that you must single handedly lead humanity to victory would take its tole on any man and it would have been interesting to see the affects of it. The whole taking his skin bit was never going to work and was bound to be changed during production.

As for Skynet being the good guys, that's actually quite an interesting take on it and one which would have been more interesting than the generic humans fight back story that we got.

Jumboman

Arnie is too out of shape to be still playing Terminator. I cant see why he cant get in to shape when stallone is able to and hes even older than arnie and he was never even a bodybuilder.

Jumboman

Jumboman wrote: »

Arnie is too out of shape to be still playing Terminator. I cant see why he cant get in to shape when stallone is able to and hes even older than arnie and he was never even a bodybuilder.

Nobody knows if he is playing one of the terminators or a scientist or what exactly. He's a man of what, 60 years of age and at this stage he may not fancy spending hours in the gym every day.

Jumboman

Deleted User wrote: »

Nobody knows if he is playing one of the terminators or a scientist or what exactly. He's a man of what, 60 years of age and at this stage he may not fancy spending hours in the gym every day.

Well stallone is even older than he is yet he is able to get into shape.

Stallone didn't have heart surgery and govern a state. Plenty of time to keep in shape!

Jumboman

Jumboman wrote: »

Well stallone is even older than he is yet he is able to get into shape.

Again, what if Arnie doesn't fancy spending hours in the gym. Just because Stallone is in shape didn't mean that Arnie needs to be. I'm sure he could get back into shape if he wanted to

.jacksparrow.

Adamantium wrote: »

I remember seeing the trailers and thinking "Wow, he can really prove the all the haters wrong, look past his name and music video background+Charlie's angels, the script won't let them down at the very least".

I remember wanting so desprately hard to look past the initials and he was aying all the right things. I then saw the bastardised and just plain boring movie that it was. 2018, my arse, how hard is to do the global future war finally, Saving Private Ryan style?

Older me has now realised that, If they did the future war war proper they'd have reached the series dead end so to speak, so instead they'll keep making movies to fill the gap without ever actually getting there to the final story of how SKYNET and the machines were beaten during a final mounted major assault one fateful night in 2029, time travellers sent back,complex destroyed. War is over, humanity moves on as best it can.

I think its a series that it fairly cut and dry story wise, the constant cock tease of time travelling faffing around is and anxiety of impending doom has been done and I doubt it can be bettered.

Exactly, all any die hard terminator fan has wanted is a film of the future war they touched on in the previous movies.

It could have so many great stories and scenes.

The rumours of this new film been in the 60s with Sarah's grandparents is just pure ****e. The saga is dead unless we see the future war.

Frank Bullitt

And Arnie doesn't take HGH by the bucket like Stallone.

Jumboman

Deleted User wrote: »

Again, what if Arnie doesn't fancy spending hours in the gym. Just because Stallone is in shape didn't mean that Arnie needs to be. I'm sure he could get back into shape if he wanted to

I'm not even a bodybuilder or fitness fanatic and I'm in better shape than arine. He seems to be just lazy there is no reason why he cant get into shape if stallone can.

SouthTippBass

Jumboman wrote: »

I'm not even a bodybuilder or fitness fanatic and I'm in better shape than arine. He seems to be just lazy there is no reason why he cant get into shape if stallone can.

Arnold might be a lot of things, but lazy is definitely not one of them.

JP Liz V1

Is Arnie's son Patrick also in this or was that just a rumour?

Jumboman

SouthTippBass wrote: »

Arnold might be a lot of things, but lazy is definitely not one of them.

He woundn't look like he does in the 2nd picture without being lazy.

Adamantium

T2's original future war scene script:

http://www.hopeofthefuture.net/deletedscenes/t2omit04.html

Trivia: The concept/design of the time machine was reused in Robert Zemeckis Contact in 1997.








Another omitted part from the future war is the interior of SKYNET's time-displacement complex and the time-displacement equipment. Originally, Reese was send back in the T2 opening.

The original 5/10/90 draft contained an extended future war scene that not only addressed the defeat of Skynet and the backstory of how Reese and the Terminator went back through time as mentioned in the first film, but also the backstory of the second film on how the second Terminator was sent through. Cut from the script after the first draft, the scene -- although rich in action and resonance to the first film and its concepts -- was a narrative tangent to the main story of the film and would have cost an inordinate amount of time, money, and effort to produce. This future scene also had the adult John Connor as its narrator.
The final Future War sequence was substantially reduced in both narrative and scope from the version in the original 5/10/90 draft --which included Skynet's defeat by the human Resistance and the time-displacement scene with Reese-- for a variety of reasons, not only due to the enormous cost of designing, building, and shooting the battle sequences, but also because the original longer version delayed the process of getting into the main plot, which begins with the arrival of the two Terminators. Through the course of production, the sequence was scaled down and simplified into a short documentary-style prologue, which actually enhanced its narrative value, for although it was not strictly necessary to the plot to show the war, its inclusion of the film serves as both a visceral illustration of what the characters in the film are fighting to prevent, and a narrative reminder to the audience of the world postulated by the first film.

pixelburp

Stallone in shape? The man's a steroid freak, there's nothing natural or attractive about his physique, it's gross. That saggy old-man skin bulging from unnatural muscle: yuck. Pretty pathetic too if I'm being doubly blunt. Act your age Sly.

I'm no fan of Arnie by any stretch but judging by that photo - and how TMZ has this thread become? - it looks to me like a man who is happy to let nature catch up with him. It does happen to us all you know, and there's a point where you either accept your body will slow down or become a mutant like Stallone. And at this stage, what does Arnie have to prove?

Jumboman wrote: »

I'm not even a bodybuilder or fitness fanatic and I'm in better shape than arine. He seems to be just lazy there is no reason why he cant get into shape if stallone can.

I'm fairly confident there's still muscle behind those extra rolls of fat. If I look like that when I'm in my 60s, perhaps minus the veins snaking around my arms, I'll be extremely happy.

B.A._Baracus

Deleted User wrote: »

Nobody knows if he is playing one of the terminators or a scientist or what exactly. He's a man of what, 60 years of age and at this stage he may not fancy spending hours in the gym every day.

I say arnold is playing a terminator. That picture from the new termintor set had him wearing the classic black leather pants and boots.

But it's funny. Reports are saying that Terminator 5 will be set in events from Terminator 1 all the way up to the future post judgement day war. That there is going to be alot of time travel in the story. But in T2 the T800 says its power can last up to 70 years or something and that the living tissue around him can heal.

My money is on that in Terminator 5 it will be stated that this "living tissue" can also age Which can explain a terminator in his 60s lol

Adamantium

Looks like an 80's cop car, and they're filming in New Orleans which is doubling for L.A.

http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/jk-simmons-terminator-genesis-details/

Back in March, J.K. Simmons jumped on board Alan Taylor’s Terminator: Genesis, which started production last month. Details about the high-profile sequel/reboot/re-launch of the beloved property have been kept under wraps, though we recently heard that it will connect to the original film through some clever time travel magic.

In Terminator: Genesis, Simmons will play a “weary and alcoholic detective who has followed a bizarre case involving Sarah Connor and robots for more than three decades.” When asked about his role in a new interview with Total Film, he said:

“I can tease very little but the character I play is a small role that I’m told becomes larger in the sequels, which are planned of course.”

Like many fans, Simmons himself was a little bit skeptical about a new Terminator. However, he was convinced to sign the dotted line once he read the script and saw who Taylor had cast in the major roles:

“When it was initially sent to me I was interested but a little sceptical about the project itself. And I read the script and it’s a wonderful script – it’s really smart and it has comedy, and obviously brilliant action and the sci-fi aspect of it, which is not a genre I’ve really been involved in before.

But it’s good storytelling and a fun little part. There’s Arnold, and Jason Clarke, Emilia Clarke and Jai Courtney who play the characters who have existed in the world before. Then the character I play is a new character to this universe.

I went out to New Orleans a few weeks ago for pre-production, and I had a table read and it was very affirming that these actors and this script were really smart and fun and good.”

If he shouts "Connor!!", like he does "Parker!!", I'll be happy

ozexpat

jaysus make it stop!

i think its time someone blew up hollywood

Adamantium

Well there the title....sort of funny how Gensys is the name of the company casing virus in Rise and Dawn of Planet of the Apes and Jason Clarke is appearing in this too as John Connor

Terminator on it's own, would have sufficed

And a behind the scenes snap:

B.A._Baracus

Stupid way to spell it :P
Yeah, we get it... SYS in the name stands for system while the Geni part most likely stands for .... erm ... Generation? :pac:

Adamantium

This sounds a bit contradictory given my previous contributions to the this thread, but I've never felt so non descript about a movie, bland, meh whatever.

At least with most continuning series the cast and crew inspire some intrigue even if the end product isn't always the best

SW Episode VII has an excellent crew and cast around it for example.

Terminator Salvation which was supposed to be a similar reboot, continuation had a impressive and intriguing/FITTING cast and great setting/world (Christian Bale, Bryce Dallas Howard, Anton Yelchin, Michael Ironside). I even appreciated/liked the Fallout 3/Mad Max setting over the stylized blue hues of the future scenes which we had seen in previous Terminator Films, there's got to be more than blues hues and perpetual nightime even after the biggest nuclear apocalypse, and sure enough.... there was.

Realisticaly it showed the enviornment after the Judgement Day caused by Skynet, as if it rose up in the real world (which is why T1 and T2 are unnerving, they feel close to the bone, as they strike into real fears).

We were finally behind the veil of Judgement Day to see if the series could survive after it, or maybe JD the Mac Guffin all along that needed to be dangled in front of us and the series was never supposed to make it happen/resolve it.



Though perhaps the idea of making a huge blockbuster that shows the savagery of the world ala Threads style in terms of the people, is a dream that not even would have Cameron would got the money to back in the 90's.

The movie itself ended up being a less of a turning point and more of a non-event in the end, but it was something very solid to build on.
A Saving Private Ryan style film is perhaps the level which we could realistically hope for in T4 and it didn't come, but it could have definitely been part of the make up of the sequel

Instead what are we getting? A regression, christ there actually dipping into time travel mechanics whole sale, I'm a huge fan of it, but it's going to moves away from the "reality" of the films. Its turning it in a bad comic book and that is sad. It's an immensely played out mechanic


The worst thing about it? I don't even care of it's bad, Terminator Salvation I did, Episode VII I do.

.jacksparrow.

One more film showing us Cameron's future war he touched on, then end it for good, no more time travel or timeline cluster****s.

Simple film, is all it needs.

This talk of time travel back to the 1950s makes me sad.

Duggy747

Still can't have any enthusiasm for the charisma vacuum that is Jai Courtney.

Thrill

Terminator 2 set for May 19, 2017, and Terminator 3 will follow on June 29, 2018.

The first sequel has the date to itself, but it arrives two weeks after one of those Mystery Marvel Movies and a week ahead of Warner Bros’ The Lego Movie 2.

Part 3 of the new cyborg showdown will be up against an untitled Fox/DreamWorks Animation/Blue Sky pic and arrives a week before another Marvel flick.

The Terminator reboot from Paramount and Skydance is set for a July 1, 2015 bow.

http://deadline.com/2014/09/terminator-sequels-release-dates-set-830260/

Agent Coulson

Well that's that then any chance this had at being good is gone I think.

Jai Courtney

"I would love to see it be rated R, but I don't think it will. I think in this day and age, it's much more likely to be PG-13. There were no f-bombs. But there'll be a healthy amount of movie violence."

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Terminator-Genisys-Rating-Going-Make-You-Happy-67632.html

Bacchus

Anything with huge budgets like this is going to be PG-13. 18s catches a much larger audience and therefore makes more money. This will be another washed down Terminator that will pale in comparison to the originals.

ps3lover

Didn't the R rated Terminator 2 and 3 make a lot more than the PG13 rated Salvation?
Didn't The Expendables 3 make a lot less than the R rated parts 1 and 2? The whole pg13 makes more money thing really isn't true.

Lamper.sffc

ps3lover wrote: »

Didn't the R rated Terminator 2 and 3 make a lot more than the PG13 rated Salvation?
Didn't The Expendables 3 make a lot less than the R rated parts 1 and 2? The whole pg13 makes more money thing really isn't true.

First movie was 18s, 2nd was 15s, 3rd was pg13. Violent movies dont do well nowadays. So no, it is more profitable to make movies pg13 otherwise they wouldnt do it.

Bacchus

ps3lover wrote: »

Didn't the R rated Terminator 2 and 3 make a lot more than the PG13 rated Salvation?
Didn't The Expendables 3 make a lot less than the R rated parts 1 and 2? The whole pg13 makes more money thing really isn't true.

Other factors at play? Salvation was critically panned.

Same goes for Expendables 3. I've not watch any of that series but I know plenty of people who really enjoyed the first two that thought the 3rd one was cr*p.

I don't pretend to think ratings alone determine profitability but you can't deny that lowering the rating increases the amount of people they can target. What studios don't seem to have copped on to in my humble opinion is that sometimes its better to stay true to the genre/story and make a great 18s movie instead of a watered down PG13 one.

Remakes seem to be the biggest offenders, the 'older' fan base is already there so they are guaranteed to do well enough from them alone. Lowering the rating gets in the younger audience who will fuel the success of sequels for years to come.

Bacchus

Lamper.sffc wrote: »

First movie was 18s, 2nd was 15s, 3rd was pg13. Violent movies dont do well nowadays. So no, it is more profitable to make movies pg13 otherwise they wouldnt do it.

I think in the US, the ratings system is a bit stricter and were all rated R over there. T3 was probably only given that rated cos of the flash nudity in it. Nothing else in that movie deserves an R rating.

pah

Thrill wrote: »

Terminator 2 set for May 19, 2017

there is only ONE Terminator 2

ps3lover

Bacchus wrote: »

Remakes seem to be the biggest offenders, the 'older' fan base is already there so they are guaranteed to do well enough from them alone. Lowering the rating gets in the younger audience who will fuel the success of sequels for years to come.

Didn't seem to help the Robocop or Total Recall remakes, both of which bombed.
Even Freddy Vs Jason did better than Alien Vs Predator in the US, it cost less to boot.

ps3lover

pah

ps3lover wrote: »

but how badly did the expendables 3 leak affect those figures I wonder

ps3lover

pah wrote: »

but how badly did the expendables 3 leak affect those figures I wonder

Apperently if every single American that downloaded it had gone to see it in the theatre it would have made an extra $4 million.