Terminator: Dark Fate **Spoilers from post 983**

pixelburp

But as UltimateJohnny says, the Machine War isn't that interesting or unique a hook to hang a franchise off in the first place; it's a boilerplate apocalypse by way of some interesting Sam Winston designs and never meant to do anything except act as an inciting incident for the plot (future leader killed in the crib)

Salvation didn't fail because it set itself in daylight (as if that really matters?), it ultimately failed because there's literally no interesting stories to tell about this place. I mean sure, you can fashion stories, but not enough to build a Blockbuster franchise & get bums on seats.

Face it, Terminator the Franchise succeeded because Arnie was a memorable villain-then-hero, and those first two films were visceral, disposable chase films. That's it. It's the same with the aforementioned Alien & Predator franchises; once subsequent films tried to expand the 'mythology', it all fell apart.

Church on Tuesday

pixelburp wrote: »

But as UltimateJohnny says, the Machine War isn't that interesting or unique a hook to hang a franchise off in the first place; it's a boilerplate apocalypse by way of some interesting Sam Winston designs and never meant to do anything except act as an inciting incident for the plot (future leader killed in the crib)

Salvation didn't fail because it set itself in daylight (as if that really matters?), it ultimately failed because there's literally no interesting stories to tell about this place. I mean sure, you can fashion stories, but not enough to build a Blockbuster franchise & get bums on seats.

Face it, Terminator the Franchise succeeded because Arnie was a memorable villain-then-hero, and those first two films were visceral, disposable chase films. That's it. It's the same with the aforementioned Alien & Predator franchises; once subsequent films tried to expand the 'mythology', it all fell apart.

Well, it does; it's stated in the original that humanity only engage with machines at night and stay underground after that.

What's the alternative then? have endless regurgitation of the same old tired tropes? The future war could be written as a kind of WW2 saga against machines in the future, after that it could go off in any direction really.

pixelburp

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Well, it does; it's stated in the original that humanity only engage with machines at night and stay underground after that.

What's the alternative then? have endless regurgitation of the same old tired tropes? The future war could be written as a kind of WW2 saga against machines in the future, after that it could go off in any direction really.

Crazy idea?

The world stops making Terminator movies. Or rather, the world stops attending them and rewarding nostalgia fracking.

yourdeadwright

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Well, it does; it's stated in the original that humanity only engage with machines at night and stay underground after that.

What's the alternative then? have endless regurgitation of the same old tired tropes? The future war could be written as a kind of WW2 saga against machines in the future, after that it could go off in any direction really.

The alternative is to leave it alone and let it be,
Go make movies about something else,

Church on Tuesday

yourdeadwright wrote: »

The alternative is to leave it alone and let it be,
Go make movies about something else,

That should have been done after T2.

Church on Tuesday

pixelburp wrote: »

Crazy idea?

The world stops making Terminator movies. Or rather, the world stops attending them and rewarding nostalgia fracking.

Yeah, we all know this franchise is a dead horse but if the suits are going to keep flogging it (which they will) then at least try something a bit different. Anything really at this stage but NOT a rehashing of what has come before.

The problem though as another poster pointed out, is that you simply cannot; the franchise is too limited. There's a fan theory going around now for Dark Fate that because there has been so many trips back from the future, that the timeline is now screwed hence John Connor suddenly no longer exists and now it's been passed off to another protagonist.

It's all pretty ridiculous as this stage.

Wheeliebin30

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Well, it does; it's stated in the original that humanity only engage with machines at night and stay underground after that.

What's the alternative then? have endless regurgitation of the same old tired tropes? The future war could be written as a kind of WW2 saga against machines in the future, after that it could go off in any direction really.

And in the future war have the story around the time machine and how it happened and how they tried to stop it.

Also the story of who Arnie was before using his skin for the endoskeleton.

Church on Tuesday

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

And in the future war have the story around the time machine and how it happened and how they tried to stop it.

Also the story of who Arnie was before using his skin for the endoskeleton.

Well that's one story you could tell I guess but that was already hinted at in Salvation and Genysis.

I don't personally want or indeed need another Terminator film. But if there IS going to be a new trilogy of films at least try and do something different. That's why, in spite of it's many many flaws, I have a soft spot for Salvation; it at least tried to do something new.

OU812

I like T3. It's not *as* good as the other two but it was a great end to the trilogy. Salvation & Genesis are pretty mediocre movies by anyone's standards. Not altogether 100% with them booting it out of canon with the new one.

batgoat

pixelburp wrote: »

But as UltimateJohnny says, the Machine War isn't that interesting or unique a hook to hang a franchise off in the first place; it's a boilerplate apocalypse by way of some interesting Sam Winston designs and never meant to do anything except act as an inciting incident for the plot (future leader killed in the crib)

Salvation didn't fail because it set itself in daylight (as if that really matters?), it ultimately failed because there's literally no interesting stories to tell about this place. I mean sure, you can fashion stories, but not enough to build a Blockbuster franchise & get bums on seats.

Face it, Terminator the Franchise succeeded because Arnie was a memorable villain-then-hero, and those first two films were visceral, disposable chase films. That's it. It's the same with the aforementioned Alien & Predator franchises; once subsequent films tried to expand the 'mythology', it all fell apart.

I would say The Sarah Conor Chronicles probably had the most interesting plots of anything since the original films. If it had shorter seasons rather than those 20 plus episodes, I think it had the most potential.

Dades

sugarman wrote: »

They kind of did, it ended up as a deleted scene in T3.

Ha - like that scene!

py2006

silverharp wrote: »

On the other hand you will never forget this guy

Didn't he tweet that he was training for a big movie last year?

Goodshape

py2006 wrote: »

Didn't he tweet that he was training for a big movie last year?

He said he was training for a film and people got excited. But he said it wasn't for that film.

https://twitter.com/robertpatrickT2/status/1028071308922245121

yermanoffthetv

OU812 wrote: »

I like T3. It's not *as* good as the other two but it was a great end to the trilogy. Salvation & Genesis are pretty mediocre movies by anyone's standards. Not altogether 100% with them booting it out of canon with the new one.

T3 had a decent overall plot and cast just executed extremely poorly and ends up being very mediocre. I actually thought skynet spreading through the internet the way it did was very clever. The ending was also good too and an interesting plot twist. It needed to be much bleaker in tone and quite literally darker. Christiana Lokens character the Tx was flawed from the beginning in that it was ridiculously overpowered yet completely ineffective to the point of being silly (flamethrower arm, really?)

Also her character wasn't developed sufficiently to portray menace. The bit where she murdered the future generals should have set up her character akin to when the T1000 murdered John Connors parents in T2, a real psychopath. Instead they relegated her to being a bit of eyecandy and an occasional silly fight scene, a bloody wasted opportunity and damn shame. The cgi was quite frankly awful the entire movie, thats all I have to say about it.

Gags like the glasses or when Arnie grins can work in a scene only if they an interwoven with something extremely dark or graphic to balance the humor. Like the whole "Ill be back" scene in T1 when he did come back,...in a truck and drove it into the guy he delivered the line to.

Salvation and Genysis were a hot mess. Too many faults to mention.

Once you start dropping things from canon you better be damn sure you make something that equals or betters the original movies. The teaser for T6 did not leave me with a good impression. Horrendous cgi, lame choreography, weak looking characters and its not at all dark!

SirLemonhead

T3 is my least favourite of the movies, I think. A poorly thought out and designed villain, the awful humour that just reduces a lot of it to parody (Talk to the hand is still cringe), and John Connor making countless stupid decisions throughout.

Two grown men aren't able to lift a terminator now. The idea that a T800 is incredibly heavy.. where did that come from?!

It also bugs me how they show the US dropping bombs on itself during the end. Would have been cool to see things from the Russian side, and their retaliation going into effect.

Anyway, I'll reserve judgement on the new movie until I see it. Sarah looks badass. Not sure what I think of the new enemy Terminator. I hope it's not all physics defying CGI laden matrix style fight scenes... Those slow lumbering fight scenes between the T1000 and T800 in the steel mill in T2 haven't been beaten yet.

py2006

Don't think this is actually a second trailer but it does she more clips.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcVbkkSjOP8

Kermit.de.frog

Will Grandma Sarah Connor be enough to save the movie?


That's the question.

Kermit.de.frog

Been a big plot leak for this on Reddit following a test screening apparently. I wonder if it's genuine. Not going to go in to in case it is real with spoilers. Some actually interesting plot lines.

But other stuff we have all seen before from the other movies as well.

This to me looks a mish mash of ideas from all the other movies.

I don't understand these test screenings. Seems risky for the studio.

If this is true, and it does make a lot of sense based on clips and pics that's very serious for the studio surely?

Itssoeasy

Being a huge fan if the terminator franchise and having seen no 3.4,and 5 in the cinema I hadnt seen the terminator 6 until ten minutes ago and while its great to see Linda Hamilton back its a bit weird, is Arnie a cyborg or human in the trailer?

BrookieD

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Being a huge fan if the terminator franchise and having seen no 3.4,and 5 in the cinema I hadnt seen the terminator 6 until ten minutes ago and while its great to see Linda Hamilton back its a bit weird, is Arnie a cyborg or human in the trailer?

If you want that answer google reddit spoilers/leak of the test screening

Slydice

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Being a huge fan if the terminator franchise and having seen no 3.4,and 5 in the cinema I hadnt seen the terminator 6 until ten minutes ago and while its great to see Linda Hamilton back its a bit weird, is Arnie a cyborg or human in the trailer?

if you want speculation, then maybe he's a terminator or maybe he's the dude the machines used for a mold for the original terminators. My guess is that is an alternate timeline/reality/thingamabob now.

silverharp

the director seems to be using the Ghostbusters playbook which seems odd given the nature of the franchise , i get the whiff of failure about this movie


https://twitter.com/IndieWire/status/1149022978270613504

pixelburp

silverharp wrote: »

the director seems to be using the Ghostbusters playbook which seems odd given the nature of the franchise , i get the whiff of failure about this movie

Hang on, there HAVE been trolls flinging their sh*t over the presence of a female (a FEMALE????) in the action lead. Even in this very thread, you only have to go back a few pages and its a disaster zone of intellectualism such as "Big action movies need a male lead. It's ****e otherwise." ��

The film does look a bit pants - I will not die on this particular hill unless the final film surprises - but don't act sniffy a Director might defend his work from idiots online who haven't even seen it, and who dump on it for ... well, yes, misogynistic reasons

Now, if the film sucks, and they STILL trot out the misogyny reason, that's different.

Tony EH

Every film after the first has been worse and worse and I've no doubt, whatsoever, that this entry will be absolute crap.

BUT...

...to complain about a film IN THIS BLOODY SERIES having a female lead has to be one of the most stupid, mind-numbing, idiotic, childish, foolish, brainless, thoughtless, absurd and ridiculous items of drivel I have ever heard.

Tazzimus

T1 and T2 were the pinnacle, everything else was downhill. (I did like Salvation though)
It's not a story that can fill 6 or 7 movies, same with Predator and Alien.

py2006

Thats a worrying comment from somebody involved in a movie before it comes out.

It happened with GB as well, some of the cast resorted to insulting men.

silverharp

pixelburp wrote: »

Hang on, there HAVE been trolls flinging their sh*t over the presence of a female (a FEMALE????) in the action lead. Even in this very thread, you only have to go back a few pages and its a disaster zone of intellectualism such as "Big action movies need a male lead. It's ****e otherwise." ��

The film does look a bit pants - I will not die on this particular hill unless the final film surprises - but don't act sniffy a Director might defend his work from idiots online who haven't even seen it, and who dump on it for ... well, yes, misogynistic reasons

Now, if the film sucks, and they STILL trot out the misogyny reason, that's different.

or he knows its a dog of a movie and just getting some covering fire in? You can find any opinion out there but if the majority of criticism is coming from people who thought the Sarah Conners character rocked because she was well written then they cant really be labelled misogynistic for getting a smell of poo poo from this one.

Church on Tuesday

Tony EH wrote: »

Every film after the first has been worse and worse and I've no doubt, whatsoever, that this entry will be absolute crap.

BUT...

...to complain about a film IN THIS BLOODY SERIES having a female lead has to be one of the most stupid, mind-numbing, idiotic, childish, foolish, brainless, thoughtless, absurd and ridiculous items of drivel I have ever heard.

It has three female leads because it's simply a product of it's time.

It's pandering to the current 'let's shoehorn a woke agenda into every little thing' climate that we all currently reside in and ruining fun franchises along the way for good measure.

So many re-shoots this late in the game is really not a good sign either.

Meh, it's Genyisis for the SJW generation. I'll stick to T1 and T2 as my go to Terminator films with a proper and realistic female character to boot and not just for the sake of rote tokenism for the industry ideal these days.

pixelburp

silverharp wrote: »

or he knows its a dog of a movie and just getting some covering fire in? You can find any opinion out there but if the majority of criticism is coming from people who thought the Sarah Conners character rocked because she was well written then they cant really be labelled misogynistic for getting a smell of poo poo from this one.

I think you're putting words in his mouth, and I'd wager Miller is mature enough not to conflate legitimate criticism of a film (which doesn't look great, I've already admitted) with the kind of kneejerk misogyny seen even here on Boards, which'd be a much more sober environment than the screeching hordes of Twitter. I get the desire to presume this is Ghostbusters 2016, but maybe take each case on its own merits.

"You can find any opinion out there", true; but we live in an era where Rotten Tomatoes has to redevelop its comments section because of misogynists trashing the Captain Marvel page before it even came out.

johnny_ultimate

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

ruining fun franchises along the way for good measure.

Friend, this stopped being a ‘fun franchise’ a very long time ago. Three weak to godawful films does an awful lot more damage to a series than a few women joining the cast.