Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 142
  1. #61

    Default

    spoilers:
    I just saw the movie today. It was kind of a mixed bag for me. I enjoyed the performances and the plot was fine for a Terminator movie. I'm somewhat indifferent towards John being killed off because outside of Terminator 2 the character is more or less a McGuffin. So my feeling is if they want to move on to a new resistance leader so be it.

    But Rev-9 was pretty dull as a villain, and Sarah's and T-800's inclusion in the plot was so forced that I feel it took away from the new characters, even if I enjoyed Linda Hamilton's return.

    Overall I'd give it a C+. It probably is the best Terminator film since T2 but I don't know if that's really saying a whole lot.
    end of spoilers

  2. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    In all seriousness, the opening scene reminded me of Alien 3 (another horrible sequel that denigrated its far superior predecessor). Those who have seen both films will know what I mean.
    Speaking of Alien 3, here's what Cameron had to say about it when Neill Blomkamp's Alien film seemed likely to happen:

    “I thought [the decision to eliminate Newt, Hicks, and Bishop] was dumb,” says Cameron, who was at Comic-Con to celebrate Aliens’ 30th anniversary, and the corresponding new Blu-ray that’s out Sept. 13. “I thought it was a huge slap in the face to the fans. [Alien 3 director] David Fincher is a friend of mine, and he’s an amazing filmmaker, unquestionably. That was kind of his first big gig, and he was getting vectored around by the studio, and he dropped into the production late, and they had a horrible script, and they were re-writing it on the fly. It was just a mess. I think it was a big mistake. Certainly, had we been involved we would not have done that, because we felt we earned something with the audience for those characters.”

    Ironic, hypocritical, or both?

  3. #63
    Niffleheim
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    6,996

    Default

    Did Cameron have any input in the writing or direction of characters' POV in the movie? I thought he was just a glorified familiar name being used to peddle the movie.

  4. #64
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    7,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tofali View Post
    Did Cameron have any input in the writing or direction of characters' POV in the movie? I thought he was just a glorified familiar name being used to peddle the movie.
    He is. All his attention went to the Avatar sequels. I think he read the first drift of the script and has been involved since.

  5. #65
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12,261

    Default

    Honestly I'm conflicted about this film. There's multiple things about it that I do quite like, but they REALLY need to stop copying the same formula from the first two, it's only weighing things down at this point.

    Salvation, for all of it's problems, at least TRIED to change up the formula for example.

  6. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Punisher007 View Post
    Honestly I'm conflicted about this film. There's multiple things about it that I do quite like, but they REALLY need to stop copying the same formula from the first two, it's only weighing things down at this point.

    Salvation, for all of it's problems, at least TRIED to change up the formula for example.
    It's like whoever is in charge of the franchise, even with the constant changing of hands, decided John was expendable as early as T3. T5 was the start (and maybe T6 will be the end?) of saying he can be deleted entirely, not simply die at some point.

    Salvation...that will always be a huge what if to me, as in what if they stuck with the script instead of chickening out. The whole reason the movie revolved around Marcus was because HE was going to be John Connor going forward. The script had it where John Connor got killed and his wife grafted his face onto Marcus. So the mythic hero we've been hearing about all along, and the same one who sent Kyle Reese to the future, was really Marcus wearing John's face and using John's name, the only one knowing the truth being John's wife Kate.

    I think the producers et al figured audiences would rebel or something and it was changed to a battlefield heart transplant instead. I guess going forward they figured people would figure John is almost superhuman because of his heart and not because he's a sophisticated cyborg imposter instead. But the film bombed so we never got to find out if that would have worked or not.

    I've always seen Genisys as a full reversal of this. That they had cold feet before in killing John last time, so NOW they're like "Screw it we'll kill him this time, kill him EARLY, and even make him the villain!" They went too far in the other direction.

  7. #67
    Extraordinary Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,938

    Thumbs up

    The main problem with the Terminator films, aside from Salvation, is they insist on telling the exact same story, in the exact same way, again and again, and again. They add in a few new characters and shiny special effects but it is just another movie about a robot sent back in time, to kill a future savior, who is in turn protected by a warrior from the future.
    Last edited by Celgress; 11-03-2019 at 04:30 PM.
    "So you've come to the end now alive but dead inside."

  8. #68
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,532

    Default

    I enjoyed it. The opening scene was one heck of shocking.

  9. #69
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    7,654

    Default

    The movie bombed in the box office
    https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/11...?sf111826849=1

  10. #70
    Extraordinary Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,938

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Immortal Weapon View Post
    Sometimes the system works.
    "So you've come to the end now alive but dead inside."

  11. #71
    Extraordinary Member Cyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,651

    Default

    I also enjoyed the film overall and certainly more than the last few outings (and also the last few John Connors were annoying as hell, so I'm glad the opening scene happened), but I'm not surprised it tanked, either. I like how Sarah was portrayed, and even that she was included in the first place, and I thought the acting was fine, but at this point after so many movies and so many attempts to recreate T2 (guys, even T1 isn't like T2, and that's the boat that launched the fleet), getting Linda Hamilton and James Cameron on board reeked of desperation.

    Fun fact: Arnold's body double Brett Azar from Genisys and Josh Friedman, creator of the Sarah Connor Chronicles also worked on this film. After rebooting the franchise yet again to cut off everything from T3-on, I just like it when staff from pre-reboot material or other iterations come back for a new one.

  12. #72
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,325

    Default

    I am cautiously optimistic.

    spoilers:


    The time travel issues are easy enough to accept. The "Terminator" movies have always seemed to run on the assumption that time traveler are isolated from the changes they cause. (More time travel stories should work form this. It would spare us some gibberwank.)

    end of spoilers

    I think the producers et al figured audiences would rebel or something and it was changed to a battlefield heart transplant instead. I guess going forward they figured people would figure John is almost superhuman because of his heart and not because he's a sophisticated cyborg imposter instead. But the film bombed so we never got to find out if that would have worked or not.
    From what I heard, Bale demanded a more significant role, so Connor's role was rewritten (from the less significant role it was meant to be).


    I've always seen Genisys as a full reversal of this. That they had cold feet before in killing John last time, so NOW they're like "Screw it we'll kill him this time, kill him EARLY, and even make him the villain!" They went too far in the other direction.
    I think that the point was to set up for a more evolved Skynet. (Skynet would not have been benign. But, Skynet would have wanted people to thrived because happy people make better computers.)

    "Genisys" strongly implied that Skynet sent both the Guardian and the T-1000 to kill young Sarah in the early 70s. It makes sense that Skynet would want to co-opt the hard-to-kill John Connor. Having a Terminator raise Sarah (John's mother) is one way to do that.

    (I also wonder if there were effectively 2 Skynets in "Genisys".)


    The movie bombed in the box office
    https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/11...?sf111826849=1
    Looks like I need to see this one quickly....
    Current pull-file:

    Iron Man 2020
    2020 misc (assorted one-shots and minis)
    Transformers
    Transformers: Galaxies
    X-Force
    X-Men


    -----------------------------
    - http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

  13. #73
    Formerly Blackdragon6 Emperor-of-Dragons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    950

    Default

    I said this elsewhere, but if they want the Terminator to continue as a franchise they need to stop recycling the plot points from T2. But they won't commit to it. Nostalgia is a helluva drug lol. Salvation was a step in the right direction but they abandoned it. Hell salvation itself abandoned it own concept halfway through the same film lol. In hindsight The Sarah Connor Chronicles deserved better imo.
    Who's ever over the franchise is either too nostalgic or to scared (or both) to do anything different.

  14. #74
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12,261

    Default

    What I liked:

    -Most of the performance were really good. Hamilton is great, Davis makes for a easily convincing action hero, Natalia Reyes also works fine despite kind of being pushed to the background repeatedly.

    -The return to an R-rating was appreciated and there is some cool action here.

    -I actually kind of like what they did with the T-800 here and Arnold mostly plays it the right way I think.

    -The ideas behind Sarah, Grace, Dani, and "Carl's" characters are kind of interesting.

    -I actually liked the first act for the most part.

    -Etc.

    What I was ambivalent/conflicted about:

    -What they do with a certain character at the beginning.

    -The second act wasn't terrible, but it did start to drag a bit for me.

    -The CGI was inconsistent in quality.

    What Didn't Work:

    -The Rev-9 is a boring villain. I like Gabriel Luna, but you can tell they kind of wanted him to be in the vein of Robert Patrick, but he doesn't even come close to having the presence or intimidation factor that the T-1000 did.

    -I mentioned the recycled story already, but there were also too many nods and callbacks to the other films as well imo.

    -The last act is kind of a mess.

    -While I like the ideas behind the characters, they weren't fully fleshed-out enough imo.

    -Etc.

    Overall, I'd probably give it a C+. I do think that it's probably the best since T2, but that ain't a hard bar to clear really.

    -
    Last edited by Punisher007; 11-04-2019 at 12:08 PM.

  15. #75
    For honor... Madam-Shogun-Assassin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Between L.A. & Savanna G.A.
    Posts
    882

    Default

    I haven't seen it yet, but the fact that it bombs proves it needs to die. For one, people behind the scenes are squabbling, and don't know what the messaging of the film is. On top of that you have people saying it's about John Connor vs. No its not! It's Sarah's story!! Vs more time travel vs less time travel, then there's more future war vs less future war.

    It's damaged goods, and the fandom is too fractured.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •