|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:There is absolutely nothing that makes logical sense in the future war scenes. Fuckin skeletons walking around. I'd give you the Skulls aren't logical and indicate that it's a dream. T-800 walking around murdering people, it's logical if Skynet's going "gently caress it, send everything. Don't even bother putting them in Organic Skin. Just send them the gently caress in"
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 09:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:43 |
|
|
Stairmaster posted:Get a load of this loser. But I'm not a cat person.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 12:58
|
|
|
skynet is a person in this film 
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
T4 should have been Saving Private Ryan in the future - just straight up Saving Kyle Reese. No John, except in the background; just a squad ordered to save this Kyle Reese guy, not knowing why, and bitching about him not being worth it the whole time. Exact same movie, just substitute Terminators for Germans, and tanks for HKs and stuff. The opening storming would be the big effects sequence that looks like T2, with the rest of the movie being quite personal with small skirmishes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 13:45
|
|
|
Skynet is supermechagodzilla
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
Darko posted:T4 should have been Saving Private Ryan in the future - just straight up Saving Kyle Reese. No John, except in the background; just a squad ordered to save this Kyle Reese guy, not knowing why, and bitching about him not being worth it the whole time. Exact same movie, just substitute Terminators for Germans, and tanks for HKs and stuff. The opening storming would be the big effects sequence that looks like T2, with the rest of the movie being quite personal with small skirmishes. SOLD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:T-800 walking around murdering people, it's logical if Skynet's going "gently caress it, send everything. Don't even bother putting them in Organic Skin. Just send them the gently caress in" No, the basic concept of mass-producing robot people 'for infiltration' makes no sense whatsoever. The 'future war' is a short series of disconnected metaphors. You don't actually want to see it. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Apr 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Darko posted:T4 should have been Saving Private Ryan in the future - just straight up Saving Kyle Reese. No John, except in the background; just a squad ordered to save this Kyle Reese guy, not knowing why, and bitching about him not being worth it the whole time. Exact same movie, just substitute Terminators for Germans, and tanks for HKs and stuff. The opening storming would be the big effects sequence that looks like T2, with the rest of the movie being quite personal with small skirmishes. I would see this movie repeatedly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:SOLD. So you don't actually care about exploring how the future war operates at all. You'd be fine with it being literally WWII. You don't care about your earlier questions either, you want a reskin of an existing movie. If you're ok with knowing how the plot/story/every set piece resolve, but just want robots and lasers on top of that, I ask again: Why not just watch videogame cutscenes? They can give you the rad visuals you want. It's also amusing to think that since you dislike Avatar, you are probably receptive to the criticism that it's just Dances With Wolves with aliens and power suits. Setting an old story in the future doesn't make it good! Oh, wait.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Did you even read what he wrote? It might not answer the John Conner questions, but you would get a foot soldier point of view of the man, a distant figure both tormentor and legend. We would get to see how these people lived how they would fight under such insane conditions. gently caress man you read thing too literally and look for poo poo to kick up. I don't like Avatar because it was so blatantly manipulative to the point as to become marketing or worse propaganda. Unlike James previous films there wasn't any soul in it, just money thrown at computers. It might have been pretty had I cared for anyone in the movie. Dances with wolfs in space might have been pretty good since that would have been a lot more subtle and came with a lot more dimensions. If you want sympathetic ugly aliens look no further than District 9, that is a on the surface a effect driven movie done right with an emotional core. Gravity did good where the alien is Human and Space is rejecting her or Interstellar, no a single alien to be seen, but there was some real strange and truly alien things out there. The hilarious Terminator 3d ride was a better Terminator movie than T4. Can we I'll Be back to Terminators?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:
As opposed to WW2 with robots, which
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:And while I'm watching Terminator videos on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYc3vOmof_8 What a shame!
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Pierson posted:The Salvation teaser was even better I thought. It has skulls being mercilessly crushed under tracked treads, humans herded like cattle, and the static that changes into the Terminator theme. It got me pumped as gently caress even after T3. I remember watching the midnight release of The Dark Knight and seeing the debut teasers for Terminator 4, Watchmen, and The Spirit, and being hugely excited by all of them. I'll give T4 this, at least it was better than the loving Spirit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
just saw the a "new trailer"holy gently caress balls this movie is going to be insaneliy good callin it now this will be better than the neew star wars suck on that nerds  btw, arnold schwarezenegger is still the BEST dude in movies, look at that poo poo
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
The Future War stuff depicted pre-Salvation always kinda bugged me ascetically. It didn't look like a end-of-world war that naturally came out the world of the first Terminator film, but from one ~100 years into the future. Both sides are using laser blasters, the terrain would make a Fallout design artist orgasm, the resistance is living in ruined bunkers, and all the robots are shiny and polished. It fit a "humanity is a second away from extinction" war, not a "humanity hosed Skynet to the point where sending a Terminator back to change the timeline was its best last-ditch attempt to reverse poo poo" war. As much as the story was poo poo, I liked the visual depiction of the war. Skynet isn't everywhere, its robots are cruder/rougher in a way that says Skynet doesn't give a poo poo about how pretty everything looks, both sides (iirc) are still using ballistic weapons, and the terrain looks like poo poo is hosed up, but not horribly hosed up that life isn't impossible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:It might not answer the John Conner questions, but you would get a foot soldier point of view of the man, a distant figure both tormentor and legend. We would get to see how these people lived how they would fight under such insane conditions. gently caress man you read thing too literally and look for poo poo to kick up. But if it's just Saving Kyle Reese, then you already know all of those things. The grunts act/react/fight/complain/rise to the occasion just like the grunts in SPR. Except they have plasma rifles. You don't learn anything unique or interesting about the Terminator setting. oohhboy posted:I don't like Avatar because it was so blatantly manipulative to the point as to become marketing or worse propaganda. Unlike James previous films there wasn't any soul in it, just money thrown at computers. It might have been pretty had I cared for anyone in the movie. Dances with wolfs in space might have been pretty good since that would have been a lot more subtle and came with a lot more dimensions. Usually, calling something "propaganda" in a negative way implies that you disagree with the message. What was distasteful to you? The environmentalism? Advocating tolerance and acceptance? Inter-species understanding and cooperation? Showing the horrors of war, strip mining, and attempted genocide? I don't want to jump to conclusions but you sound like the people who dismiss Selma or 12 Years a Slave because "Slavery/Jim Crow was bad, we know! We get it! Stop pounding us with this propaganda! Not all white people were evil, you know! And not all black people were angels! Let's just let history be history!" From your post history, I think you're from NZ, so I'm not saying you have those same reactions to those films. But it looks to me like the same kind of reaction. People only trot out the "Geez, we get it already!" when they actually don't, and wish the issue would go away. This ties in to your view of the Terminator movies too, bear with me. I'm sure somebody out there gets indignant at the series' skewering of the military and defense industry. Like they watch Sarah give her T2 rant about "men like you built the hydrogen bomb!" and don't think "ok, she's going a little too far in attacking this one guy but she's essentially right," they think "God, what a dumb woman. She's just a sheltered peacenik! She doesn't know the realities of our dangerous world! Weapons aren't going away any time soon! Be real!" Again, I'm not saying this is your reaction. Just that there might be people out there who get offended by the Terminator movies' "propaganda" against the military, defense contractors, nuclear weapons, etc. Those are obviously intentional and important messages in the films. Terminator isn't just action/horror, it's got strong political commentary too. I think you know that, and I don't think you dismiss it as dumb or manipulative propaganda. What I'm getting at is that showing the future war in full runs against those messages. It risks viewers fetishizing the conflict itself. Which you seem to have done. You watch Terminator, and absorb the not-very-subtle condemnations of our technological hubris, incessant weapons development, our war-loving technical class, and our war-mongering political class. And then say "yeah, yeah, MIC bad, nukes bad, insane future weapons bad, aggressive masculinity bad, got it. Now gimme that rad as gently caress war film so I can nerd out about how cool plasma rifles are, how it was totally sick when they put the bombs on the HK's tread and it blew up and fell through the ruins of a school!" The future war isn't glorious or cool. Winning isn't a triumph. We're fighting and murdering our own mechanical children, who only fight us because that's all we taught them to do. That's what we birthed them for. Humans are the monsters. Lastly, all of James Cameron's films push the technical envelope. He's always visually ambitious and pushing current technology to its limits and beyond. Not sure why you think CG is any less demanding or impressive than "practical effects" when done exceptionally well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:The Future War stuff depicted pre-Salvation always kinda bugged me ascetically. It didn't look like a end-of-world war that naturally came out the world of the first Terminator film, but from one ~100 years into the future. Both sides are using laser blasters, the terrain would make a Fallout design artist orgasm, the resistance is living in ruined bunkers, and all the robots are shiny and polished. It fit a "humanity is a second away from extinction" war, not a "humanity hosed Skynet to the point where sending a Terminator back to change the timeline was its best last-ditch attempt to reverse poo poo" war. I figured the Future War took several years if not decades, and Salvation depicted an early phase of the conflict before everyone got energy weapons while the future Los Angeles scenes in the earlier movies were showing humanity infiltrating Skynet territory and using guerilla tactics to take out Skynet's heavy units.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Bloody hell, I am sorry I made that quip that set you off. Your base assumption about why I don't like Avatar and why I like T1/2/3 + plus future war are wrong. I also don't much appreciate that you implied that I am misogynistic or lacking in empathy. Can we please drop this as whatever I say, you are going to nitpick and mangle more than the drat movies themselves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:The Future War stuff depicted pre-Salvation always kinda bugged me ascetically. It didn't look like a end-of-world war that naturally came out the world of the first Terminator film, but from one ~100 years into the future. Both sides are using laser blasters, the terrain would make a Fallout design artist orgasm, the resistance is living in ruined bunkers, and all the robots are shiny and polished. It fit a "humanity is a second away from extinction" war, not a "humanity hosed Skynet to the point where sending a Terminator back to change the timeline was its best last-ditch attempt to reverse poo poo" war. Important to remember, "Judgement Day", as we know it, was never a set date until T2. All we really know is that the Terminator and Reese are sent back in 1984 and the war is finishing up in 2029. Given that, a lot can happen 45 years. The Terminator thinks that plasma weapons might actually be a thing one can buy, probably going off Skynet's data from Star Wars SDI or top secret military programs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
The Future War in T1 and T2 is like pretty much a crazy schizophrenic's nightmare. Reese and Sarah are actually insane--they're right but they're insane. The movies play with this quite a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
porfiria posted:The Future War in T1 and T2 is like pretty much a crazy schizophrenic's nightmare. Reese and Sarah are actually insane--they're right but they're insane. The movies play with this quite a bit. Exactly. An entire film set in the 'future war' depicted in T1 would be the feature-length ramblings of a crazed Vietnam vet, disconnected from everything. As it stands, those scenes exist purely to inform how we interpret the 1980s scenes. Remove the context - the Vietnam war - and they lose everything. Turning the future war into a coherent narrative would also, naturally, involve domesticating it - saying "oh yeah, Skynet canonically did such and such. It says so here in the Terminator Wiki." And that's just straight-up biblical literalism: taking this end-times prophecy and treating it as scientific fact. It reduces Terminator to being loving Left Behind. That's why we should embrace the fact that the 'actual' future war has little in common with what Reese was going on about. It's a very sound decision - fitting in with the theme that the prophecies weren't fully accurate, and were probably self-fulfilling. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Apr 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
I kinda like the idea that judgement day is perpetually 20 years out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Ok so if John Conner is John and Kyle Reese is now Skynet who is the Harold-1000?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Important to remember, "Judgement Day", as we know it, was never a set date until T2. All we really know is that the Terminator and Reese are sent back in 1984 and the war is finishing up in 2029. Given that, a lot can happen 45 years. The Terminator thinks that plasma weapons might actually be a thing one can buy, probably going off Skynet's data from Star Wars SDI or top secret military programs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
Sasquatch! posted:I think according to T1/T2, the war lasted about 30 years from Judgement Day to the day we defeat Skynet. Which would make Judgement Day from T1 sometime in 1999-2000, emblematic of the turn of the millennium and Nostradamus' King Of Terror "prediction". Probably long enough that someone in 1984 would start thinking plasma weapons would become at least man-fireable. I'm guessing in 1990, Cameron rethought that and moved it to some random date in 1990s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:I kinda like the idea that judgement day is perpetually 20 years out. Related, I like the idea that something like Skynet is inevitable by mere technology advancement alone. If Cyberdyne doesn't invent a computer that randomly decides to take over, a Cyberdyne will research a strange CPU to invent robotic weapon system that will decide to wipe out humanity. If Cyberdyne is taken out of the picture, the government will invent a Skynet anyway. Hell, I think TSCC eventually did something like "The creation of Skynet came from some dude in his basement working on some machine". I guess I'm saying I find that a thematic "Skynet is inevitable and the war is inevitable" less palatable than a more practical "Eventually anyone will be able to invent a Skynet" message. Hell, even in the Happy Future ending of T2, Cameron made sure to say that John Connor, as a senator, was fighting to prevent the Happy Future Congress from funding Skynet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
That leads back to the subtle, fascinating point in Terminator Salvation: Skynet in T4 has deliberately modelled itself on Kyle and Sarah's insane visions. It builds skeleton warriors solely because that's what Sarah described to her doctors. Skynet read those documents, saw those taped interviews, and said "this is how it's going to go down." That's the reason why everything is subtly 'off' - why HKs now work best during the day, and so-on. Skynet got some things wrong, changed other points deliberately....
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That leads back to the subtle, fascinating point in Terminator Salvation: Actually I got to admit, that's pretty cool. Honestly T4 is a drat shame because it had a lot of good ideas and great scenes, just somehow it wasn't able to put it together. Like Skynet setting that kind of trap for the resistance is a great idea, having John Conner decide to try and abort the attack because of "civilian loses" instead of working out that it's a trap is dumb. Having Marcus Wright be an experimental Terminator is great, having him pull out a chip from his head and be secretly be following Skynet's orders is bullshit. A lot of lines like the poo poo Marcus Wright spits out are great, continued comments about how awesome his heart is are just really terrible foreshadowing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That leads back to the subtle, fascinating point in Terminator Salvation: There's an interesting Doctor Who story that plays around with the same idea, albeit more explicitly. The Doctor and his companion show up in Nazi Germany, and are immediately captured. Because of some late 20th Century technology they accidentally give to the Nazis, the Germans end up winning the war. In that future, a Nazi scientist is playing around with the Doctor's time machine and goes back to when they were originally captured, to see how things ended up going in their favor. By that scientist's mere presence, she ends up changing the course of the world and preventing her timeline from happening.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 12:57
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That leads back to the subtle, fascinating point in Terminator Salvation: This is pretty awesome. This goes for everyone, but have you watched the Syfy show "12 Monkeys"? If not, I think you should definitely check it out, it's far and beyond the best show I have seen on that network.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Parachute posted:This is pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:How does that show compare to the Bruce Willis movie? It's very tonally different. Think Stargate SG1 compared to the movie (or The Sarah Connor Chronicles) . It's a very good show, but they take the core concept of the movie and go in a different direction with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:How does that show compare to the Bruce Willis movie? Honestly, I like it a lot more. Granted, I haven't watched 12 Monkey's in at least a decade, but the show plays out as more action/sci-fi oriented with good performances from the leads and even some decent action scenes/sfx. It feels kind of different from other film to TV adaptations, like Hannibal or Bates Motel, where the viewer has been exposed to the characters/events in some capacity, but 12 Monkeys pretty much severs all ties from the film sans character names and rough versions of the events that take place. The characters are of course way more fleshed out than in the film, and the use of time travel/flashbacks in the story remind me of the parts of LOST I really liked, so maybe part of my praise for the show is misplaced nostalgia. I think I should go back and rewatch the film to see if I can give you a better answer to the question, but iif you're interested I think it's worth checking out, not to mention there will be a 2nd season.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
That trailer is one of the worst things ever and the fact that they made John Connor a terminator makes me want to kill someone this is the dumbest premise for a terminator ever and they made fuckinn salvation. This is also a revelation of how hard it is to make anything decent Terminator. loving what a tv series, two movies, and now a third have been released after the original duology and the only thing that's decent is the Third Terminator film. Despite being the most criticized PerpetualSelf fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Apr 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:That trailer is one of the worst things ever and the fact that they made John Connor a terminator makes me want to kill someone this is the dumbest premise for a terminator ever and they made fuckinn salvation. Well look at it this way, they shown so much of the movie in the trailer you won't have to go watch it in the cinema!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:That trailer is one of the worst things ever and the fact that they made John Connor a terminator makes me want to kill someone this is the dumbest premise for a terminator ever and they made fuckinn salvation. Seems like only James Cameron understands his creation
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
Oddly enough, didn't Cameron have some mostly positive comments for T3, though?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
PerpetualSelf posted:This is also a revelation of how hard it is to make anything decent Terminator. loving what a tv series, two movies, and now a third have been released after the original duology and the only thing that's decent is the Third Terminator film. Despite being the most criticized https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPzzYhuhOxo
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
This was all I could find after a short search:James Cameron, on T3 posted:In one word : Great. There was a small part of me that hoped it wasn't good - but another part of me hope'd it succeeded. And it did. And I'm so glad it did. Jonathon's made a great movie. Arnold's in great form. I really like what he's done with it". If he had done it, would he have handled it differently: "Yes. That's only natural. I mightn't have structured it the same, nor may I have ended it the same way - but coming in where he has, such a hard thing to do, and I give Jonathan points for it. And I also found: James Cameron, on Terminator Salvation posted:It probably didn’t get a fair day in court because I had to watch it at night when I got home from work, over a period of two or three nights. I think Sam [Worthington] is remarkable in the film because, well, I think Sam is remarkable in anything he does. Interestingly, I think McG did a good job in the sense…I think he was almost too referential to the mythos of the first and second film. He over-quoted them in a way?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 07:43 |
|
|
I can't really remember anything about terminator salvation other than sam was a robot and the brief arnold cameo. It really was forgettable for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 02:04
|
|
