Terminator Franchise

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5197
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » December 13th, 2007, 4:20 am

Wendy's Jane wrote:Okay, they're planning not one, but THREE new films?!?! That's a bit of a gamble, isn't it?
Well, that's just it, y'see:
Studios don't dare use "IV" on their sequels anymore (unless they're Saw sequels, which never care about being different from each other anyway :wink: )--
And nowadays, you're more likely to see "Colon" titles on the fourth movie (": the Confrontation")--instead of that terrible Roman numeral everyone always laughs at--to make it look as if it's "This week's episode" of the general concept, rather than one linear flogged-out franchise.

And if it's "This week's episode"...why, it could be about ANYTHING, then, couldn't it? As long as the producers still own the title to put in front of it.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 10007
Joined: September 1st, 2006

Post by Daniel » July 21st, 2008, 9:47 pm

Okay, I snipped the last few posts relating to The Sarah Conner Chronicles, and moved them to their own thread here, and renamed this thread to reflect the actual title of the upcoming sequel! :)

Here's our first glimpse - Teaser trailer! (originally attached to The Dark Knight.)

Doesn't really give much away, (too much flashing!) but I think it looks OK. I wonder if Comic-Con will be seeing the same preview or more. Probably the latter. Lucky for those attending! ;)

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 6634
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Post by Dacey » December 10th, 2008, 3:43 pm

Brand new trailer:

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=51189

Those bikes look pretty awesome.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 25321
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » December 11th, 2008, 8:40 am

They do.

I have a itty bitty hope for this, even if, at heart, I know that the Terminator franchise began in 1984 and ended in 1991. ;)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 347
Joined: May 25th, 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
Contact:

Post by Vernadyn » December 11th, 2008, 2:44 pm

Well, I personally enjoyed T2:3D at Universal Hollywood. Quite an experience, and even the preshow is neat. I don't know if some would call it a sequel, but it does continue the Terminator story in a more satisfying manner than Terminator 3 did.

GeorgeC

Post by GeorgeC » December 12th, 2008, 2:28 am

I know this is one more franchise I'm less anxious to see more of.

I pretty much gave up on the Sarah Connor Chronicles and its silliness (went downhill from the pilot) and basically question whether you can continue the series without James Cameron and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Those are the two guys who really defined this series AND its true central character, the Terminator series 800(? The Arnold-bot)!

I have my doubts...

As for Christian Bale, he's entering yet another role people just can't seem to do for more than two films. John Connor is quickly becoming as interchangeable as Batman in live-action!

You guys can have this... I'm not buying it on home video let alone watching this thing in a theater.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: January 23rd, 2006
Location: The Middle of Nowhere

Post by eddievalient » December 12th, 2008, 8:57 am

George, you should give the TV series another chance. I'll admit season one was somewhat lackluster, but it gets a LOT better in season two.
The Official Lugofilm Ltd Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/bartsimpson83

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 3197
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Josh » December 18th, 2008, 9:32 am

After seeing the trailers, I'm more excited about Terminator Salvation than I was at first. I had been intrigued by the film, due to the involvement of such folks as Christian Bale, Paul Haggis and Jonathan Nolan. However, now that I've viewed more footage, I'm very eager to see Terminator Salvation.

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 6634
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Post by Dacey » May 29th, 2009, 11:48 am

Okay. I'm going to stand by something I said several months ago, and repeat that three films was a gamble.

Especially since it looks like "Terminator 5" may not see the light of day now.

"Salvation" is not making nearly as much money as some people were expecting. Having seen the film, it's easy to see why more people aren't going. It feels NOTHING like a "Terminator" film. There is virtually no humor, with the only "jokes" being references to the original three films. Only one of the action sequences (the only with the bikes) comes even close to measuring up to the amazing action found in "T2" and "T3." And Christian Bale's John Conner is pretty darn close to being just plain boring.

Whether people like to admit it or not, Arnold was the star of these films. He is the face of the franchise, and without him, things just don't seem right. Yes, he does have a cameo in the film, as rumored. But it's a cameo that lasts for only five seconds or so. What a letdown!

Having said that, the special effects *are* incredible here. But without the heart and soul of the first three films, what's the point?
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: January 23rd, 2006
Location: The Middle of Nowhere

Post by eddievalient » May 29th, 2009, 12:42 pm

The point is to prove that they don't need Arnold to tell a good story. They don't. He would have been welcome, of course, but the film works just fine without him (as did the TV series). I would hate not getting the other two planned films, but at least this one didn't end on a cliffhanger as such. I know how the story of the future goes, but I want to SEE it, darn it!
The Official Lugofilm Ltd Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/bartsimpson83

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 442
Joined: November 22nd, 2006
Location: Boston, MA

Post by Rodney » May 29th, 2009, 4:35 pm

I watched it this week and I enjoyed it. I didn't love is as much as say, Terminator 2, but it was definitely miles better than Terminator 3. I would go see a sequel. Fans of actions and sci-fi should enjoy it. It was cool to have the plot advance to the future.

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 6634
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Post by Dacey » May 31st, 2009, 11:28 am

I'm not saying that they *couldn't* tell a story without Arnold.

I'm just saying that they didn't tell a story at all.

The opening was murky. The middle section was better, but not very much about the "Terminator" plot at all. And the ending, in my opinion, was just bad.

Where were the answers about why John Conner is such a great leader? Wasn't that the reason to make this movie in the first place? They didn't tackle *any* of that stuff in the film. I'm guessing that they're planning on saving that stuff on future chapters, but if the future chapters don't get made, this movie is sort of meaningless.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 9047
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Terminator Salvation

Post by ShyViolet » July 8th, 2020, 11:46 am

OK so this doesn’t specifically have to do with the last few Terminator films, (Dark Fate, Salvation, etc...) but with the original Cameron trilogy (I realize of course that Cameron had no creative input into T3, but it still exists in the same world as 1 and 2.)


An interesting proposal:


Would Terminator 2 have faded into obscurity if not for Terminator 3?


An unequivocal "YES." (Hear me out! :))




Our idea of AI in 1991 was just so unbelievably different than nowadays (or even 2003). With the current looming implications of what artificial intelligence might mean, coupled with our lives being so completely enmeshed with technology, saving the world by throwing a three-inch chip from a monster cyborg into liquid metal lava plus having a pre-Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger sacrifice himself while giving a thumbs-up gesture had the potential to become quite dated, even with the (still) fantastic CGI and extremely moving "human" story. "If [artificial intelligence] can learn the value of human life, maybe we can too," couldn’t be more out of place for the times we currently live in.

Having John Conner actually grow up and be forced into battling Skynet despite everything he’d experienced in T2 ("Our destiny was never to stop Judgement Day...it was merely to survive it,") was actually a brilliant way to cap off the saga while simultaneously preserving the cinematic, narrative and thematic value of T1 and T2 ...John is nothing less than the audience’s stand-in; he basically has to forget everything he’d learned when he was eleven years old. This is why the audience so completely identifies with him at the film’s conclusion. (Being that T3 is nearly 20 years old, many fans nowadays describe the film’s last scene as incredibly haunting, despite following what many consider to be a serviceable but occasionally lackluster story.)

Seeing John Conner finally step up to the plate and take command at Crystal Peak alongside his "future" wife is somehow astoundingly moving, even though it basically goes against everything James Cameron was trying to say at the conclusion of the last film.

Because that 1991 post Cold War era that Cameron penned T2 in is LONG GONE. Cameron’s musings on man’s destructive nature portrayed AI as oddly irrelevant to the world’s real issues despite being the ostensible center of the film. Put it this way: Skynet/AI was basically just another nuclear bomb, a tool made by human beings despite apparently becoming "self-aware." Interesting how T-800 is really the only AI character in the film that really seems "self-aware" at least on some level; neither the T-1000 nor the actual Skynet computer system exhibit any potential for a unique consciousness; they exist almost exclusively in a movie universe and are both completely one-dimensional villains.

And at the end of the day, all our heroes had to do in order to destroy the Skynet supercomputer with the power to launch nuclear weapons was throw the wafer-shaped T-1000 chip into the liquid nitrogen; and then the only truly self-aware AI character in the film sacrifices themselves. This feels very simplistic, because with the exception of Arnie, the AI in Cameron’s script are the basic equivalent of a modern operating system that exists almost exclusively as a plot device and nothing more. Meaning that incinerating Skynet, despite the brilliantly heart-stopping action sequences devised by Cameron, is no more complicated than uploading the virus to the enormous alien mothership would be in Independence Day, another tremendous summer blockbuster released five years later. (By then aliens invasions had VERY much usurped cyborgs as the popular go-to sci-fi villains.)

In contrast, as T3 John is led by the new T-800 not to Skynet’s theoretical control center but a deserted "fallout shelter for VIPs" which, along with the very tellingly outdated computers that are "thirty years old", he finally realizes that defeating Skynet the way he had at age 11 was a dead dream. ("The Terminator knew...he tried to tell us. But I didn’t want to hear it."). It was merely a fantasy, an illusion right from the start.

T3’s last shot of light fading from the mechanical eye of the original T-800 model first conceived for the 1984 film is an extremely effective and very appropriate shorthand symbol for a letting go of the past/embracing an unknown (and most likely hellish) future. Once again, in every way the reverse of Cameron’s vision. Yet it is still an ingenious resolution to a sci-fi trilogy that is equal parts anachronistic and timeless.
Last edited by ShyViolet on July 8th, 2020, 12:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 9047
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Terminator Salvation

Post by ShyViolet » July 8th, 2020, 11:50 am

T2’s (theatrical) ending, as described above.

https://youtu.be/Lo5M1i1a0Kc


T3’s far more ambiguous one:


https://youtu.be/UaeNI97PeQs


EDIT: oops posted T2 ending twice. Fixed now. :)
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5197
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re: Terminator Salvation

Post by EricJ » July 8th, 2020, 2:22 pm

ShyViolet wrote:
July 8th, 2020, 11:46 am
An interesting proposal:

Would Terminator 2 have faded into obscurity if not for Terminator 3?
An unequivocal "YES." (Hear me out! :))
A realistic "...NnnnnNO."

Terminator 1 might have faded into 80's B-movie obscurity, if T2 hadn't come along at historically the same neato period within a year of "Jurassic Park", and made Hollywood go gaga over the "new miracle" of CGI effects.
Up to that point, we were still ooo'ing over the water aliens from "The Abyss" (talk about "fading into obscurity"), but any collection of Great American 90's Movie Scenes always included some shot of the T-1000. Usually the one where he slurps through the prison bars.

Also, it was the first movie that recognized kids thought Schwarzenegger was the STAR of the movie, rather than a villain in a cleverer-than-usual 80's woman-in-jeopardy sci-fi chase film.
It would have been nice if we had had the "Senator John Connor" ending, so that James Cameron could bookend the movie and move on, rather than see frustrated fanboys cry "Hey, you didn't give us our war!" and cheap property-buying wannabe owners trying to appease them, but you know how studios hate to commit to endings.

Post Reply