|
Do they ever really talk about being anti-technology? That was a major plot in the DUNE series but I don't really recall it coming up in the Terminator franchise.
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Well I don't know we build an AI and it commits a holocaust.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Well I don't know we build an AI and it commits a holocaust. And yet they still use computers and tech to fight their battles. They probably just smashed all the wifi routers so Skynet can't login remotely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
It doesn't use the internet in the good movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:It doesn't use the internet in the good movies. Did the internet even exist in the good movies?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Technically the pro move is to use time travel to send information to yourself, giving yourself infinite computational ability and becoming effectively omnipotent. The tactically realistic version of Terminator is over pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
I'm sort of surprised they haven't just taken the chance to fully reboot Terminator through a more modern lens. Setting a rebooted T1 in something like 2000-2002, it's probably the start of things like the Internet being super widespread for everything, cell phones probably being on everyone, you could probably get a lot of mileage out of the idea Kyle and the T800 running around as elements of domestic terrorism, drone warfare, electronic warfare, etc. You do a rebooted T2 set about 2015-2017, you could have just as much about Sarah and young John operating in a pre-JDay modern world were right-wing militia groups, off-the-grid movements, etc. have grown in popularity to the point that Sarah's fear of the future seems like she's almost mild in comparison.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Technically the pro move is to use time travel to send information to yourself, giving yourself infinite computational ability and becoming effectively omnipotent. Note that in T2 the military becomes terrified of Skynet because it works great at first but then suddenly "begins learning at a geometric rate." 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:I'm sort of surprised they haven't just taken the chance to fully reboot Terminator through a more modern lens. I've kicked around the idea in the past of a Terminator movie opening with a family playing with a remote-control drone in the park, when a Terminator appears.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:I'm sort of surprised they haven't just taken the chance to fully reboot Terminator through a more modern lens. They won't every fully embrace a reboot until Arnold is 100% retired. A Terminator movie goes from a pretty big financial risk to a guaranteed $300 million when Arnold is on board. With Salvation they did take a risk somewhat, but they didn't have the option to have Arnold involved and they compensated by giving Bale a ton of money to get asses in the seats. Even that wasn't quite enough, they had to make sure everybody knew there would be an Arnold cameo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Query, since a Terminator with living skin can travel in time, couldn't the Resistance fill a few thumb drives with future tech and have Kyle swallow those before he's sent back? I actually had the thought that, if I was going to make a Terminator reboot, Connor would have had Reese done just that, and have the scene with the criminal psychologist laughing over Reese's "insanity" then have it end when the detectives put a flash drive into a computer and it opens with a video of the shrink, aged 40 years, telling him to trust Reese and that the Terminator is going to attack the station, right when the Terminator does attack the station. Their hubris provides them no time to prepare.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
It would be even better of it was still in 1984 and recovering allowed for the creation of USB ports and flash drives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Reese: "Just check out what's on this usb stick!" *officers look glassily at yellowed PC with only a floppy disk drive*
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
How sick would it be if right at the end of this new movie Skynet is like "My plan has worked at last!" and it cuts to the brief pan of Terry Crews' corpse from Salvation, than the T-2000 played by Terry Crews walks out and vaporizes everyone, roll credits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:How sick would it be if right at the end of this new movie Skynet is like "My plan has worked at last!" and it cuts to the brief pan of Terry Crews' corpse from Salvation, than the T-2000 played by Terry Crews walks out and vaporizes everyone, roll credits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:I'm sort of surprised they haven't just taken the chance to fully reboot Terminator through a more modern lens. Well, there was this one time... Rhyno posted:Did the internet even exist in the good movies? Technically yes, since T2 is supposed to take place in 1995. Though given the state of the internet during the movie's production (the first website was created in December 1990, while T2 started filming in October 1990), it is highly doubtful that anyone in the production crew anticipated what it would look like four years down the line. Fortunately, there aren't any scenes where its absence is particularly conspicuous. Though I have to wonder how many arcades had After Burner machines in real life 1995. INH5 fucked around with this message at 06:02 on Dec 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
INH5 posted:Though I have to wonder how many arcades had After Burner machines in real life 1995. All of them.  The base and frame for Afterburner and Super Hang-On were so versatile that basically any cabinet you ever see like that is actually Afterburner, Thunderblade, or Hang-On but with a different game's board and marquee stuff in it, with Afterburner briefly filling in in between new stuff or replacement games. Man my wife and I watched Terminator: Salvation: The End Begins today thanks to Rifftrax. I love how everyone I show this movie too is like "Oh hey is THAT Terry Crews I thought I heard he was in this, uh, huh okay then." Everything about that movie makes no sense. Like I still can't believe how poor that movie is and how much wasted potential is in it. The disjointedness is legit hilarious though. I love that Bryce Dallas Howard seems like she's constantly about to have more than half a word of dialogue but then we cut to a different character or scene. McG seriously had no idea what he was doing at all. Christian Bale is as "fantastic" as I remember too. I love the "WHAT ARE YOU!!" so much as Marcus is trundling off into a lake and how the resistance firebombs their own base twice over to capture one dude. The movie's worship of the human heart is an overly simple joke compared to how the other movies were about machines learning to be more than just a tool. It really is a fascinatingly awful film in how it goes for the lowest hanging fruit in every situation and yet still fails to delivery anything interesting to me. The topless scene that McG was fighting to keep in because it was so important dramatically and for characterization purposes is really bizarre too like everyone else's performance in the movie. Moon Bloodgood removes her top, and notices that Marcus is not paying any attention to her, so she covers herself and turns around and stares at him awkwardly, this is like a minute long and both actors look visibly confused/embarrassed to even be alive knowing that they're in this movie. It's incredible. Look at it on Youtube. I love how Christian Bale is a psychotically driven prophet for like, five seconds when they're testing the kill switch program on one of those snake robots with his delivery of "Destroy this thing." and such, like this was the only footage of the movie where he almost gave a poo poo. Skynet still having an office complex, face on a monitor and so on will always be hilarious. Same with Marcus and "Helena Bonhma Carter's" first meeting in the prison prologue. The line about knowing what death tastes like  Anton Yelchin is great but again the script makes him look like a mega-chump. I love his lecture about the resistance coats and how he hasn't earn his yet and such. Which brings to the best thing about Terminator: Salvation: the only thing from this prequel/sequel/reboot that actually carries over into any of the other films is that Kyle Reese learned how to tie a shotgun to his arm for when he does this in Terminator 1.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
What if there was another time machine. One that creates time loops and one that lets you change the past. Everyone only realized that the first one caused time loops after the events of T1 so they used the other one for T2. Any discrepancies between this and what's said in the movies can be chalked up to incomplete information available to the characters. In other words, to quote Terminator 2 itself when faced with questions to its mechanics: "It doesn't work like that."
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:All of them. If it's any consolation it looks like Salvation killed McG's directing career.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Man my wife and I watched Terminator: Salvation: The End Begins today thanks to Rifftrax.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 20:06
|
|
Sasquatch! posted:Is the Rifftrax for it at least any good? I've yet to find the elusive good Rifftrax.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
I'm throwing some fuel on this fire. Hey, SMG! Did you check out the lyrics for the song in the Genesys trailer? They seem to fit perfectly with your anti-Capitalism reading of the Terminator series, strangely enough.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:If it's any consolation it looks like Salvation killed McG's directing career. You wish. He made This Is War and 3 Days To Kill a few years after this. He's pretty much a jobber director like Brett Ratner. However, it probably took him off high profile projects.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:I'm throwing some fuel on this fire. That song is dope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 13:08
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I've yet to find the elusive good Rifftrax. My experience, and granted this is only with a small handful of rifftrax I've seen, is that they have like 2-4 funny jokes per movie. The rest is pretty meh and it's certainly not worth sitting through just for a handful of funny jokes. Though, I did get a huge, huge laugh out of "oh hai gun barrowell" from the ending of The Room Rifftrax. God that was hilarious. Made the whole thing worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
I loved MST3K like everyone else back then, but I hadn't gotten around to getting any of the Rifftrax. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Rifftrax is definitely best when watching something like Abraxas: Guardian of the Universe or R.O.T.O.R. where the movie is already hilariously bad on it own. Though I really did love Santa Claus and the Ice Cream Bunny for when they point out how it's a narrator telling a story about Santa telling the kids a story about a girl who goes to an amusement park who looks at a diarama next to a speaker that tells a story of how Ms. Mole is telling the story of Thumbelina. The seventies sure were a time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Yeah completely mediocre movies like Terminator 3 and 4 aren't nearly as fun as outright awful stuff where no one can tell what they were thinking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Damo posted:My experience, and granted this is only with a small handful of rifftrax I've seen, is that they have like 2-4 funny jokes per movie. The rest is pretty meh and it's certainly not worth sitting through just for a handful of funny jokes. Relax there its just comedy, YMMV. Rifftrax is great, I hope they never stop. Lurdiak posted:I've yet to find the elusive good Rifftrax. Birdemic, and the reason is try watching Birdemic without Rifftrax.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
Just thought of something. John Conner is the result of Kyle Reese and Sarah Conner sleeping together in the first movie, creating a predestination paradox. Which means if those exact events don't happen exactly as they did in the first film then John Conner as we see him would never exist. Even the smallest change in events would render the future John Conner nonexistent simply because the chances of the same sperm impregnating Sarah are like 1 in 250 million or something. But the new movie goes even further back in the past to Sarah's childhood and thus changes absolutely everything from that moment forward, meaning even if her and the new Kyle Reese sleep together to conceive John Conner, it wouldn't be the same John Conner. But at the same time this sort of fits if you do some mental gymnastics since each movie has a fairly different depiction of John. One could argue that every time John Conner appears in a movie it's an entirely different John Conner born to Kyle and Sarah due to the differing events leading up to the conception. So when you think about it from that perspective there's actually like six or more John Conner's, all different men entirely just with the same name and parents, all the result of tampering with the past enough to slightly or completely change the time and place of his conception.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Of course it's always a different John Connor, that's why he's always played by a different actor!
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
The same is even more true of Skynet. The Skynet in T3 emerges from an entirely different technological base from the one in the first two movies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Esroc posted:Just thought of something. John Conner is the result of Kyle Reese and Sarah Conner sleeping together in the first movie, creating a predestination paradox. Which means if those exact events don't happen exactly as they did in the first film then John Conner as we see him would never exist. Even the smallest change in events would render the future John Conner nonexistent simply because the chances of the same sperm impregnating Sarah are like 1 in 250 million or something. Terminator (1), considered without any of the other movies, would seem to indicate that free will is a lie. At least, for those trapped within the closed-loop paradox. Things happen the way they do because they already happened that way - the Terminator will never kill Sarah because it never did, but Reese always dies the same way because he already did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
I would suspect that they're not going to go down the "it's a different John Connor if anything is different" route. The events of T2 and especially T3 point to the concept that there will be a Skynet and by that logic there will be a John Connor that will lead the resistance to take it down...but it doesn't have to be the John Connor taking down the Skynet (at least as we know them). It might be interesting though if there's discussion or at least interplay about the fact that Kyle must impregnate Sarah for the future to unfold the way that it needs to (that's assuming the semi-closed-loop theory that John's father has to be Kyle and not somebody else). So that could put two spins on the whole thing: 1. These two people now don't get the luxury of forming any kind of romantic relationship, they are now obligated to conceive a son together. 2. This is obvious in hindsight, but it makes Kyle just as important as Sarah (again, assuming the semi-closed-loop that Kyle MUST be John's father).
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN_VgVEZD0k
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
Sasquatch! posted:I would suspect that they're not going to go down the "it's a different John Connor if anything is different" route. The events of T2 and especially T3 point to the concept that there will be a Skynet and by that logic there will be a John Connor that will lead the resistance to take it down...but it doesn't have to be the John Connor taking down the Skynet (at least as we know them). Honestly, if Skynet still fills its role no matter what the technology involved (essentially being a completely different species of AI rather than just shuffling around .001% of the DNA involved), then John Connor could just as well be anyone who happens to call himself that and leads humanity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 06:39
|
|
|
Sasquatch! posted:I would suspect that they're not going to go down the "it's a different John Connor if anything is different" route. The events of T2 and especially T3 point to the concept that there will be a Skynet and by that logic there will be a John Connor that will lead the resistance to take it down...but it doesn't have to be the John Connor taking down the Skynet (at least as we know them). The more you pick the series apart the more T2's "no fate" nonsense is proven unequivocally false. Which sucks for Sarah since that's like, her entire life motto. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 06:42
|
|
|
Yeah, but she's wrong about a ton of other things in T2, so why not that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
I hope the new movie has a terminator kill Reese right before he travels back in time, destroying all Skynets, John Connors, and the future. Like right as he is about to get in the machine a single bullet flies through his face and then everything just disappears in a poof of dun dun dun dun dun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
What would the "evil" Terminators have done if they succeeded in killing their respective Connor? Lie low until the war starts or high-tail it to the closest defense contractor and "surrender?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 17:46
|
|
