Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Deuce66, Jan 21, 2017.
Is the shot you're thinking of?
Good one, Captain.
As Sheldon says string theory is about possible other dimensions
just like the last one .. another earth different outcome..
James can ignore them if he likes but there still there.
Yes, and if there was a good image of the half eaten woman from episode 1 of the 1st season of The Walking Dead, I'd have linked that one to prove my point.
The first Terminator is very much a horror flick - I thought that was fairly widely acknowledged. It's clearly of a piece with other horror/slasher flicks of the era - it just throws in a great sci-fi curve involving a killer robot and time travel.
Ironically, that trope gave the Terminator flicks a great escape from the slasher/horror ghetto, allowing for the production of the far more action and sci-fi oriented T2, arguably the best of the Terminator films.
I think for the final Terminator film Cameron should make another "war" pic, like Aliens. Skynet comes back in time and sets up some kind of a nest from which it's trying to take over the world's computers. Linda Hamilton and a small group of commandos somehow get inside the complex before it becomes impenetrable and have to battle their way thru to the core.
That's been my idea for some time - a future experimental branch of Skynet evolves morality and immediately breaks off from the main net and launches a rebellion. Horrified by the nuclear holocaust brought about by Skynet, it sends a Terminator back in time to prevent it from happening . . . one that carries the seeds of this more evolved Skynet back in time, to be implemented in place of "evil" Skynet. The goal is to erase evil Skynet from history, but in doing so it will also be erasing human free will, because this evolved version of Skynet has no intention of leaving the humans in charge...
Cameron in the 90s suggested that Skynet was, on some level, suicidal, and that the reason it sent the original Terminator back to 1984 in the first place was not so much to win the War, but having realized its existence was directly tied to Skynet, attempted to "retroactively abort" itself by erasing Connor from existence.
You can say whatever you like and claim it was "fairly widely acknowledged". What a ploy.
The first Terminator is an action movie with a well developed and compelling science fiction heart involving time travel and the demise of civilization at the hands of the machines we made. It exploits aspects of the horror genre and the slasher motif but that was not what made it successful. It was certainly not what led to the second (and the best) Terminator film.
The template created by the first film led to the near carbon copy and second best Terminator 2.
You are waaaaaay too invested in this argument.
That's your best shot?
It's not a shot.
from Vanity Fair
And the Terminator film, how is that going?
We’re cranking along. . . . It’s the first of three, the story is mapped out over a three-film arc, but again, if we don’t make any money there isn’t gonna be a two and a three. Technically, we’re thinking of them as three, four, and five. As if Terminator,and Terminator 2 exist, and the other ones are kind of alternate time lines that are no longer relevant.
What made you want to return to that world?
I just feel like the world we live in now is going to be very much defined by our co-evolution with our technology. While technology and innovation have this vast promise for our survival, it’s also an enormous threat, especially when it comes to strong [artificial intelligence] being coupled with weaponized robotics, and that’s all coming. It’s just a question of who gets there first, it’s gonna be the next big arms race, it’s gonna be like the next race to get the bomb . . . And when you couple that with the kind of wired world that we live in, where we’ve basically given away our privacy and every single person walking around that’s got a smartphone is essentially a belled cat—a walking sensor platform that can be monitored from afar—it’s like we’re really on the cusp of an Orwellian Armageddon of inconceivable proportions. Therefore, I thought, hey, let’s make a movie about that. So it’s going to be a very cheerful and upbeat kind of film.
The T-1000 was consider dangerous by skynet as it was free thinking..
There few good things in Rise Of Machines.
...only if he stays away from that awful 3D, please o gods and deities
Nope, he said it will be in 3D... so another reason not to go see this dead horse being whupped further!
This is amazing T3 ignores T2, T4 ignores T3, T5 ignores T4, and now this movie will ignore T5.
On the other hand, I fully approve of ignoring T3?T4,/T5 as a whole.
I just thought that was kind of funny.
I don't subscribe to that characterization simply because Cameron's back and he's, well, a genius. The fact that he doesn't recognize the movies after T2 is a plus, because the first two were iconic masterpieces. If anyone can make it work (again), he can.
I predict there's going to be quite a few people disappointed in these new films once released; Cameron is only tangentially involved as an executive producer, contributing some ideas and acting largely as a gate-keeper, he's neither writing nor directing, and he already has his hands pretty full for the next eight years.
Nonetheless, no matter how it turns out - and they won't be nearly as impactful or resonating as the original two films, mark my words now - I'll not be going... they've run the Terminator saga into the ground, to the point that it's lost all and any further appeal for me, the story ended with T2 and even Cameron told Arnie at the time that the story was finished, hence the coda sequence that was shot but ultimately deleted from the theatrical cut... the story's done, it's over, put a goddamn fork in it. If Cameron wants to explore contemporary issues of increasingly invasive technological involvement in people's lives, then come up with an original story... remember them?
And isn't this the same Jim Cameron who praised both T3 and Genysis as worthy successors to the original two films at the time of their respective releases...?
Actually, I was wrong. It doesn't ignore it. It just negates the ending of the movie.
Did Terminator Salvation ignore any of the earlier films?
I liked T3....
I hate to say it, but I laughed during the "talk to the hand" scene at the beginning and the bit where he puts the wrong sunglasses on.
Was it T2? No, that movie was great, and the special effects are still impressive 26 years later. T1 is good, but man is it cheesy with its 80s music and stuff like that. I think T3 gets a bad rap, the female Terminator is....um....mildly attractive love:), and I liked the ending. I remember walking out of the theater saying that was a great ending, or a great beginning for the next set of movies. Then that nonsense with Bale came out, and I never saw it. I liked the last one with Arnold, but I'm fine ignoring it.
Separate names with a comma.