Terminator franchise reboot
- Thread starter Old Man
- Start date
I did not rate it much either. Was worth watching for me though, as I enjoy the terminator franchise, well t1 + t2. Lol. I would not call crap, just could have been better in my opinion.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,549
- Location
- North Wales
Even through all the negativity surrounding this film i actually really enjoyed it. Didn't realise there was a short scene at the end of the credits, the lights in the cinema came back on when the credits came on so i assumed there wasn't one.
Heh. We always wait a few minutes for people to leave and as a result did not miss out. It was funny, people leaving just stood still suddenly and started watching. Lol
I really liked the film despite how silly it got, the are however two things that got me with it:
--------------------------
It was excellent until they killed off Cromartie, that cold almost psycho like Terminator style is what got the original Terminator film green lit in the first place (was originally going to star Lance Henriksen not Arnie but he was busy when the time came to shoot), though Shirley Manson's portrayal of the T-1000 was also really good.
1: I cannot kill Sarah Connor because I am programmed to protect Sarah Connor, here please take this and kill Sarah Connor - >.< This one scene is so stupid it almost brings down the whole film with it's stupidity, I mean did nobody seriously proof watch this?
2: The start of the film with the T-1000 scenes were AWESOME, I genuinely believe that the story of the T-1000 coming for Sarah, being stopped by Arnie then going after Reese would have been strong enough for a film, they didn't need to take the plot full retard. Terminator 1/2 worked because they were simple, this would have worked too without Robojohn.
2: The start of the film with the T-1000 scenes were AWESOME, I genuinely believe that the story of the T-1000 coming for Sarah, being stopped by Arnie then going after Reese would have been strong enough for a film, they didn't need to take the plot full retard. Terminator 1/2 worked because they were simple, this would have worked too without Robojohn.
--------------------------
It was excellent until they killed off Cromartie, that cold almost psycho like Terminator style is what got the original Terminator film green lit in the first place (was originally going to star Lance Henriksen not Arnie but he was busy when the time came to shoot), though Shirley Manson's portrayal of the T-1000 was also really good.
Last edited:
Then it definitely would have just been another T2 clone with different actors.
I have been thinking more and more about Jurassic World and Terminator Gyn**** and I've gone from being fairly ambivalent about the films to generally being quite angry at the filmmakers.
Seriously. Can they (Hollywood) stop ruining great franchises, These make Prometheus look good.
Suspended
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2015
- Posts
- 2,634
I think it's more to do with the era in which these movies come out, back then it was all new and no one was expecting it, now it's all CGI and computers, with no real passion for the story imo... you can't replicate something that fantastic to begin with and make it better, these films set the standard at the time and will never be beaten.
That is not an answer to the horrific writing, plot holes, acting, argh.. The effects in both Jurassic World and Terminator are absolutely excellent, everything else is a disaster.
At least Jurassic World had that music and ******* dinosaurs.
Suspended
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2015
- Posts
- 2,634
As I say it's a different era now, back then it was fresh better directors producers, actors, Cameron, Spielberg... it's all gone to crap.
Blame Hollywood too.
I agree it is an different era of filmmaking; however that does not excuse the horrific writing for example.
Was happy with it until the john conner storyline. Then i thought it was purely retarded and I pretty much switched off. Some nice nods to the old films but not much t2 stuff I thought. I like the future war stuff they should have made more of that. Salvation ruined it for me.
im rambling. An ok film but pushing the story way too far.
im rambling. An ok film but pushing the story way too far.
I'm going to go against the grain here and say I really liked this movie. Yes it wasn't as good as the original two and trying to keep track of the timelines was difficult with all the jumping backwards but otherwise I thought it was awesome 
But then I went into it with very low expectations. I was pleasantly surprised
But then I went into it with very low expectations. I was pleasantly surprised
Hollywood studios have been learning that they can increasingly put out a lower quality of film for some time now, with a good chance it will rake the money in.
Pirates 5, for example. What a pile of **** that was, yet made something like $1bn. Critics crucified it, yet people went to see it in their droves anyway.
The Transformers films. Four of them have been absolute garbage. I'm guessing each one made a $1bn, despite getting each one getting crucified by critics; but not just that, audiences also gave each one a low score, bar the first film.
The standard has dropped so low, you've got people going to see poor films and are being entertained. The poor guy above and someone else went in with very low expectations, in order to get something out of the film.
And then, you've got the people that don't really care about what makes a good blockbuster film, just as long as it's full of silly action and SFX, regardless of whether it makes any kind of sense or not.
As long as people keep paying money to watch rubbish, Hollywood studios will keep putting out rubbish to for people to watch.
Last edited:
Hollywood studios have been learning that they can increasingly put out a lower quality of film for some time now, with a good chance it will rake the money in.
Pirates 5, for example. What a pile of **** that was, yet made something like $1bn. Critics crucified it, yet people went to see it in their droves anyway.
The Transformers films. Four of them have been absolute garbage. I'm guessing each one made a $1bn, despite getting each one getting crucified by critics; but not just that, audiences also gave each one a low score, bar the first film.
The standard has dropped so low, you've got people going to see poor films and are being entertained. The poor guy above and someone else went in with very low expectations, in order to get something out of the film.
And then, you've got the people that don't really care about what makes a good blockbuster film, just as long as it's full of silly action and SFX, regardless of whether it makes any kind of sense or not.
As long as people keep paying money to watch rubbish, Hollywood studios will keep putting out rubbish to for people to watch.
Sad but true
Yeah I'm embarrassed to have paid to see Jurassic World and put money in the studios pocket. I'm not making the same mistake with this pos. T1 and T2 are great films... this and the other sequels **** all over them
Summer blockbuster does not have to mean braindead bull.
Watched this afternoon and really enjoyed it, but then I didn't think either T3 or T4 were *that* bad, although both pale in comparison to 1/2.
Obviously going to be holes in any time-travel based story, let alone when trying to reboot/reinterpret Terminator, but one thing did get me...
Obviously going to be holes in any time-travel based story, let alone when trying to reboot/reinterpret Terminator, but one thing did get me...
How did John Connor travel back in time after he was altered by Skynet? It had already been established that inorganic matter, unless encased in organic matter, couldn't be sent (tinfoil in a microwave analogy) and, by that point, there was nothing organic left. The fact that he would have been unable to use the machine was proven by the fact it ultimately destroyed him.