Terminator: Dark Fate

The way I see it is...
Pre T1 film - All events of T1 has already occurred in multiple future timelines (Skynet exist, Sarah connor somepoint dies after John Connor, T101 sent to kill past Sarah Connor, Kyle Reese was led to his decision to be sent back due to John Connor knowledge of the past*of another pre T1 event lol*)
T1 film events occur in a timeline we are presented with
T2 Judgment day is prevented in one timeline we are presented with and theoretically should alter the future timelines after.
Now Dark Fate events is in the same timeline we have watched from T1&T2, theoretically though which goes back to my previous post..
John Connor death shouldn't really happen if futures have been altered, which leads to the development of Legion and a new resistance leadership.
 
If you factor in salvation theres a line where "skynet" says something along the lines of "time and again our best machines failed", like its aware of the multiple attempts to assassinate connor in the past.

Doesn't take much scrutiny to see the story doesn't make much sense.
 
There will never be another terminator film anywhere near as good as T1 or T2.

Film making is very different today than back in the 90s and very very different than the 80s.

T1 had a very dark and sinister feel to it. T2 had that blockbuster feel. The rest are just plain crap.

Kinda like the original RoboCop and that God awful remake.

Considering the film is making a loss, I don't know why they don't take a risk and make an 18 cert proper terminator. Thing is, back then scenes were a lot longer with dialogue and setting the film up. Today is wam bam blow stuff up, tell a joke, blow stuff up, tell another joke..... It's just boring.

I remember in the original John Conner talking to Sarah under the bridge. Telling her about the future. It was gritty. The actors were dirty, their hair was a mess, they looked broken. You dont get any of that these days. It will be laser lights and CGI eye candy with perfect makeup and pearly white teeth.

Everyone likes eating sweets, but if you eat nothing else for a few weeks you soon miss vegetables.
 
Last edited:
TheOracle said:
There will never be another terminator film anywhere near as good as T1 or T2.

Film making is very different today than back in the 90s and very very different than the 80s.

T1 had a very dark and sinister feel to it. T2 had that blockbuster feel. The rest are just plain crap.

Kinda like the original RoboCop and that God awful remake.
Click to expand...

It's amazing how some of those films age well because they are a product of their times. Sure, the effects are dated now, but they had heart and soul. Original concepts, things we hadn't seen before, effort put into characters and story. By constantly remaking those films, Hollywood prompts comparisons with the memory of a film that was enjoyed and highly rated because of it's time. By prioritising effects, you end up with a great looking, but ultimately soulless film made more for money than artistry.

There are some great Terminator franchise stories out there. Just look at what Dark Horse did with their licence. The only conclusion I can come to is that Hollywood is very broken and can't make good films any more because they are trying to copy old movies, force agendas, make money by mechanically copying the blockbuster formula, and trying to tell a good story with compelling characters is out of fashion. The industry at that level has lost its way, and too many big films are just not very entertaining.
 
Steampunk said:
There are some great Terminator franchise stories out there. Just look at what Dark Horse did with their licence. The only conclusion I can come to is that Hollywood is very broken and can't make good films any more because they are trying to copy old movies, force agendas, make money by mechanically copying the blockbuster formula, and trying to tell a good story with compelling characters is out of fashion. The industry at that level has lost its way, and too many big films are just not very entertaining.
Click to expand...

While people flock in their droves to the cinema to see sequel after sequel all while bemoaning the lack of originality in Holly wood, then routinely DON'T go and see new movies with fresh storylines (Joker being the exception) Holly wood will keep churning our derivative sequels and rehashes. The Lion King Disney remake? Widely seen as fairly poor, but box office gold. $1,654,735,262
 
TheOracle said:
I remember in the original John Conner talking to Sarah under the bridge. Telling her about the future. It was gritty. The actors were dirty, their hair was a mess, they looked broken. You dont get any of that these days. It will be laser lights and CGI eye candy with perfect makeup and pearly white teeth
Click to expand...

Now transpose that same scene but with the two latest leads from Genisys - Emilia Clarke and Jai Courtney - Neither have 1/4 of the ability needed to portray the characters from T1 for the reasons you mention. There's no grit, dirt, sweat etc (both look fantastically well made-up) and neither can act with that same "desperation/frustration" that the originals had, and that is why T1 is epic and T5678-Genesis on tour pt2 was a flop!
 
MissChief said:
While people flock in their droves to the cinema to see sequel after sequel all while bemoaning the lack of originality in Holly wood, then routinely DON'T go and see new movies with fresh storylines (Joker being the exception) Holly wood will keep churning our derivative sequels and rehashes. The Lion King Disney remake? Widely seen as fairly poor, but box office gold. $1,654,735,262
Click to expand...

Well yes. I've been to the cinema very little this year, because there's nothing much that attracted me that was worthy of the "cinema experience". I don't believe in rewarding people for producing rubbish. People go anyway, either for something to do or being fooled by the marketing hype machine, and money is made.

Things are changing I think. Looks at what's been happening at Disney Star Wars (ie movies going "into hiatus" after Episode 9). Agenda driven movies doing poorly at the box office. Maybe the tide is turning, because in the end, money is more important in Hollywood than anything else.
 
TheOracle said:
I remember in the original John Conner talking to Sarah under the bridge. Telling her about the future. It was gritty. The actors were dirty, their hair was a mess, they looked broken. You dont get any of that these days. It will be laser lights and CGI eye candy with perfect makeup and pearly white teeth.

Everyone likes eating sweets, but if you eat nothing else for a few weeks you soon miss vegetables.
Click to expand...
Don't you mean Kyle Reese and not John Connor?
 
Steampunk said:
Well yes. I've been to the cinema very little this year, because there's nothing much that attracted me that was worthy of the "cinema experience". I don't believe in rewarding people for producing rubbish. People go anyway, either for something to do or being fooled by the marketing hype machine, and money is made.

Things are changing I think. Looks at what's been happening at Disney Star Wars (ie movies going "into hiatus" after Episode 9). Agenda driven movies doing poorly at the box office. Maybe the tide is turning, because in the end, money is more important in Hollywood than anything else.
Click to expand...

Disney plan to make live action remakes of their whole animated portfolio.
 
Why the opening scene was so short:

The opening scene was originally longer as it featured dialogue between Sarah and John. This was cut from the final film as Cameron and Miller believed that the visual effects did not hold up well when the characters spoke.

ILM was responsible for those effects, strange that another company could do it in Genisys for the young Arnold but ILM couldn't make a good job of it in this.

A deleted shot was of "Carl" getting the skin torn off his arm by the rev-9, it's described as "dangling like a piece of beef jerky". But they thought it went too far and was removed.:confused: Because the eyeball scene in t1 and the arm skin scene in t2 were so much tamer, apparently.

The assembly cut of the movie was almost 3 hours long, be interesting to see what didn't make it in.


And a quote from Tim Miler:

Miller said the film was never meant to be better than Terminator 2. Regarding the mixed reception, Miller believed that audiences were predisposed to dislike the film after being disappointed by the last three films. Miller also believed that audiences "hate it because it's the sixth movie, and Hollywood should be making original movies and not repeating franchises".
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TheOracle said:
Today is wam bam blow stuff up, tell a joke, blow stuff up, tell another joke..... It's just boring.
Click to expand...
100% this! It is sad to see.


ianh said:
Now transpose that same scene but with the two latest leads from Genisys - Emilia Clarke and Jai Courtney - Neither have 1/4 of the ability needed to portray the characters from T1 for the reasons you mention. There's no grit, dirt, sweat etc (both look fantastically well made-up) and neither can act with that same "desperation/frustration" that the originals had, and that is why T1 is epic and T5678-Genesis on tour pt2 was a flop!
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was very bad casting.


Gerard said:
And a quote from Tim Miler:
Click to expand...

He would say that. Could not have been anything else could it? Delusional.

Was never meant to be better than T2? If they believed that from the start, no wonder they they failed. Why not aim to make something better and maybe at least match it? What a load of rubbish.
 
wolfie138 said:
slight thread detour; was watching an episode of Forged in Fire the other week and one of the competitors was called Kyle Reese :)
Click to expand...
Funny you mention that..I was watching Big bang theory with my GF while we was eating our dinner and they started talking about Terminator because they had a special guest of Summer Glau from the Terminator show.
In all honesty though who do you blame for the hot mess? Tim Miller? James Cameron?
James Cameron only involvement was being the producer and writer, while Time Miller was the director.
JC was involved in all of those when he did T1 and T2.
 
wolfie138 said:
he was "only" the writer?! that's the most critical part! the director can't polish a turd, he can only sprinkle glitter on it.
Click to expand...
I just don’t think he put in the passion or work required. Maybe if he had no other projects and he was only doing that and directing it, he would have done a better job. I also think he probably is not as good as he was when he was younger to be honest.
 
TNA said:
I just don’t think he put in the passion or work required. Maybe if he had no other projects and he was only doing that and directing it, he would have done a better job. I also think he probably is not as good as he was when he was younger to be honest.
Click to expand...
I just think he's massively overrated. every hit he's had has been a rip-off of other people's work except to T2 (and that just tore apart the canon he'd set up in the first film), and possibly Abyss, which he set up as the most realistic underwater film/plot ever then ***** it up by having the "let's swim outside in t-shirts despite the fact we're x miles down and would be squashed into paste" sequence. there's comments on another board that he ripped into T3 because they killed off Sarah offscreen/off hand, and then he did basically the exact same thing w/ John.
 
wolfie138 said:
there's comments on another board that he ripped into T3 because they killed off Sarah offscreen/off hand, and then he did basically the exact same thing w/ John.
Click to expand...


I'd prefer they kill Connor off than have Furlong reprise the role looking how he does now. Might have been a different story had he not been a junkie for the last decade plus, he was meant to be in T3 as well but was replaced at the last minute, supposedly due to problems over his addictions.

And with how Connor was killed off it makes sense, Skynet as far as they were concerned was dead and the future was going to be different, no more Terminators etc so makes sense that a few years down the line they would have let their guard down. The scene could have been longer or fleshed out more but as said above the cg looked ropey when they spoke, so its either go with an edited version of what they had, or go the ropey cg avenue which would have led to more online whinging about how "the effects in t2 looked better" which seems to be the opinion of the Mr Magoo appreciation society.
 
i'm kinda baffled how a production like this w/ cameron attached could be denied budget for "ropey" CGI on a project that was lauded so hugely, surely the studios would have/could have hoyed more cash at it to bring it up to par? unless of course they saw early versions and thought the film wasn't worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom