|
I really like the weird, alien ways John Connor moves in this. Specifically when he rights himself after Arnold shoots him just after he is introduced, and how is walking upright in the vertical bus. Nanomachines, son.
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Because they have a rabid fan base and they think that it's better to titillate their nostalgic senses by showing them poo poo they remember. I guess. I just mean once they set up the Alien, Predator, Jurassic and Terminator "worlds", it would seem like the movies would practically write themselves. You sort of made my point by pointing out what Nolan did with Batman in as much as "why was that so loving hard to write and film?" What Nolan did wasn't so much "new" as it was faithful. The movie we all knew could be made. For a more recent example, look at what Netflix did with Daredevil. poo poo was awesome and it was all written 20 or 30 years ago. I don't think it's so much a failure of trying something new. Sometimes that's exactly what fucks it up. I think it's more a failure to simply trust the foundation of the material and the universe and not get too gimmicky and tricky with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
I know it's sequel bait, but the who sent back Pops felt oddly clever. The entire series about Person A finding out that Person B did something important, and sending Person C to take out Person B. Someone being smart enough to realize this and prevent anyone from knowing felt smart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Jurassic ___ and Terminator are actually very constrained franchises, especially compared to something like Predator which is basically "big game hunter: future edition". Like imagine making a franchise about Inception, except it was basically the same thing of Leonardo Dicaprio being chased by his dead wife over and over. What's interesting about this new Terminator film is that it's actually doing interesting stuff and retconning major parts of the franchise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Was not impressed by the characterization of Kyle Reese as a buff super-soldier and not an impoverished, rat-eating guerrilla. ----- When Simmons's character revealed that he knew the team from having interacted with them in 1984 (alluding to "having more hair"), I was really, really hoping he was one of the punks. Swing and a miss. I'm at least glad that his character didn't die and has the opportunity to reappear in the future ----- Considering the team got itself in tons of hot water - getting a hospital and police precinct shot up, as well as causing another police incident on the Golden Gate Bridge, and, most importantly, leveling the Dyson facility, causing the cancellation of a billion-subscriber multimedia AI app - the ending was bizarrely optimistic. These guys did about a hundred Timothy McVeighs worth of damage. No, you don't get a happy ending after that. The sequel has something to work with on that front. Bring on Angry Dyson. It's Sam Raimi-era Spider-Man all over again  Though for the same reasons, T3 should never have happened and the entire team would have gotten the electric chair treatment for their collateral damage The Gooniest Goon fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Jul 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
RE: unearned ending I don't need "Pops" as a character in the next movie even if Arnold wants to be in the next one. He had a good death scene that was immediately redacted. Kind of sucks even if they are planning a franchise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
The Gooniest Goon posted:T3 should never have happened and the entire team would have gotten the electric chair treatment for their collateral damage They'd have to be arrested and charged first, and iirc T3 outright says they just got the gently caress out of dodge and laid low.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
How different would this movie series have been if Lance Henriksen got to be the T-800? Reading about him showing up to the reading/audition with gold foil on his teeth in a leather jacket and kicking the door in is pretty adorable. E: Or OJ Simpson. One of the funniest footnotes in cinema history is Cameron turning down Simpson because he didn't think he'd be believable as a killer. E2: With Sting as Kyle Reese. E3: The studio wanted Reese to have a robot dog. Goddamn do I love reading production notes about Cameron movies. Firstborn fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Jul 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:Sting as Kyle Reese All I can think of is a Kyle Reese who screams like Feyd-Rautha for the entire movie
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Just got back from a showing and I still can't decide whether it's worse than Salvation or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:RE: unearned ending I feel like that ending was what it was for like 50% "bad rear end" fanservice and 50% an excuse if arnold dies or won't come back to have an excuse to have a different actor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It's funny that people complained about Salvation because touching a robot should instantly kill you or whatever, when the boyfriend in that scene gets in a lengthy fight and tossed around. He wasn't John or Sarah. The reaper only touched Sarah as it died, and never touched John. The first two antagonist Terminators provided a lasting sense of dread every time they came on screen because they were basically death coming for Sarah and John, and if they ever caught up, they would end, which also tied into the original Terminator's classical Death look. It tied into the natural feel of death, which touched innate fear into the viewer, since Cameron purposely put you in their perspectives when chased. Terminator 3, and especially Salvation lost that sense of dread, and a big part of that is the perspective change. If that was a major appeal of the films for someone, their complaints would be obvious if you put a slight bit of effort into seeing things from their perspective.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Saw it on a matinee today and I enjoyed it despite the cast being terrible (aside from Arnie of course). Good times, bad time travel, decent Terminator effects.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Darko posted:He wasn't John or Sarah. The reaper only touched Sarah as it died, and never touched John. The first two antagonist Terminators provided a lasting sense of dread every time they came on screen because they were basically death coming for Sarah and John, and if they ever caught up, they would end, which also tied into the original Terminator's classical Death look. It tied into the natural feel of death, which touched innate fear into the viewer, since Cameron purposely put you in their perspectives when chased. Terminator 3, and especially Salvation lost that sense of dread, and a big part of that is the perspective change. If that was a major appeal of the films for someone, their complaints would be obvious if you put a slight bit of effort into seeing things from their perspective. Like it's designed to be lazy when it kills anyone else? I don't buy it. Terminator 1 is NON CANON.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Like it's designed to be lazy when it kills anyone else? I don't buy it. Terminator 1 is NON CANON. The T800 had Sarah under the laser pointer in the nightclub for an astonishing length of time, too, for something that's supposed to be instant death. Relentless, not efficient.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
What's the chemistry like between Sarah and Kyle in this? I know the producers were saying that this was a love story above all else. That was my favorite aspect of the first one. Do Sarah and Kyle have any good romantic scenes. Is their a love scene?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
Like, really, what made the escalation between T1 and T2 work so well was the fact that the terminator was an unstoppable force you could see coming from a mile away, and T2 gave it a countering force to bounce off of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Like it's designed to be lazy when it kills anyone else? I don't buy it. Terminator 1 is NON CANON. maybe you should ask yourself why the filmmakers made it that way?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:maybe you should ask yourself why the filmmakers made it that way? Seems like you should be asking Darko that, not SMG.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
American Incel posted:What's the chemistry like between Sarah and Kyle in this? Nearly non existent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:It's baffling at this point that someone makes a Predator reboot set on a different planet, with a new set of characters, yet still has the main character cover himself in mud and yell "COME ON! DO IT! KILL ME I'M HERE KILL ME!!!" Predators simultaneously reveres the original and doesn't understand it. Billy's pointless, doomed last stand is reimagined as a sword fight where the human inexplicably managed to kill him. It's not a tactical realism issue, it's just thematically rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:14
|
|
American Incel posted:What's the chemistry like between Sarah and Kyle in this? I know the producers were saying that this was a love story above all else. That was my favorite aspect of the first one. Do Sarah and Kyle have any good romantic scenes. Is their a love scene? No. No.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Predators simultaneously reveres the original and doesn't understand it. Billy's pointless, doomed last stand is reimagined as a sword fight where the human inexplicably managed to kill him. It's not a tactical realism issue, it's just thematically rear end. How is that "not understanding" it? It seems like Predators was deliberately turning the original scene on its head to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
American Incel posted:What's the chemistry like between Sarah and Kyle in this? I know the producers were saying that this was a love story above all else. That's definitely a lie. The film is practically an anti-romance, where all their interactions are - by design - extremely awkward. The basic story involves the two of them mostly just learning not to despise eachother. Picture it like a buddy-cop film with mild sexual tension.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
A Terminator Vs. Predator movie would've been better than Genisys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:I really like the weird, alien ways John Connor moves in this. Specifically when he rights himself after Arnold shoots him just after he is introduced, and how is walking upright in the vertical bus. Nanomachines, son. For me this is without a doubt the best visual effect in a film with a lot of visual effects. The movements are so unusual and eerie that it really sells the idea that the T-JC (or whatever) is so far beyond them that it doesn't even seem to follow the same rules of physics
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
T1 was a perfect movie. It was a complete story and everything that happened in the movie had a purpose. It was neat, the story was incredible, and it was all tied together. T2 was full of things that didn't make it into T1. I loved it when I was little, especially with the kid protagonist being my age. But if you watch the T1 bonus features you'll realize that everything in T2 is stuff that James Cameron wanted to put in T1 but couldn't because of money, technology, or Arnold being a sexy beast. It was a good movie but its nowhere near as memorable as the original. T3 and T4 sucked rear end. I won't watch T5. Jews did 9/11.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Well that was the first movie I've walked out on in over a dozen years. A total loving abortion. I think I had around 30 minutes left of the film but I would have left earlier, but I guess I was stubborn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 05:43
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:How is that "not understanding" it? It seems like Predators was deliberately turning the original scene on its head to me. I don't see how those are mutually exclusive. You can invert a classic scene to do something interesting with it, or you can do it because you love both the original and katanas. Rodriguez did not do anything interesting with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 05:43
|
|
|
Immortan posted:A Terminator Vs. Predator movie would've been better than Genisys. AvP was a better movie then Genisys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I don't see how those are mutually exclusive. You can invert a classic scene to do something interesting with it, or you can do it because you love both the original and katanas. Rodriguez did not do anything interesting with it. Yeah. I liked the Hanzo sword fight scene, but it wasn't nearly as iconic as Billy's sacrifice in the first film. I wish they just made that scene it's own thing. Goddamn I hate callbacks so much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
GATOS Y VATOS posted:AvP was a better movie then Genisys. It must be James Cameron said it was a good film as well!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I guess. I just mean once they set up the Alien, Predator, Jurassic and Terminator "worlds", it would seem like the movies would practically write themselves. You sort of made my point by pointing out what Nolan did with Batman in as much as "why was that so loving hard to write and film?" What Nolan did wasn't so much "new" as it was faithful. The movie we all knew could be made. For a more recent example, look at what Netflix did with Daredevil. poo poo was awesome and it was all written 20 or 30 years ago. What you're describing - where filmmakers simply record a preestablished 'universe' - are called "Let's Plays". Movies aren't made that way, though it might seem it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 09:26
|
|
|
I'm thinking that maybe the marketing people actually made the right call by spoiling the John Connor twist. When the second trailer came out I was furious at them spoiling something that big... but it does also make the movie sound more interesting. Now with all the talk in this thread about how unique the Connor effects and movements are, I'm really excited to see that in action. I'd still have seen it anyway, because I'm a die-hard fan, but I'm now actually hyped about this film. I just hope there aren't a load of people that decided not to see it because "I don't need to see it, the trailer showed the whole movie".
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
I'm watching Terminator 1 again to see how well they matched or what they changed when they recreated the 1984 sequences. 1) garbage truck driver curses a lot more in T1 2) blond right punk at observatory has a mohawk cut in T5, long hair in T1, Paxton has the wacky hair in T1 3) in T1, all 3 punks pull switchblades, just the one in T5 4) 3 cops come out of first squad cars to hit the alleyway in T1 5) the alleyway chase is more protracted in T1 with more turns and doubling back, etc 6) Reese shoots through a padlock to enter the department store from ground level in T1, then exits via fire escape that he uses to enter in T5 7) Biehn was sporting longer hair vs Courtney's short hair 8) lots of scarring on Reese's body in T1, T5 Reese seems fairly unmarked
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 10:26
|
|
|
How do these scripts get the greenlight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It's funny that people complained about Salvation because touching a robot should instantly kill you or whatever, when the boyfriend in that scene gets in a lengthy fight and tossed around. And then he died, is the point. ruby idiot railed posted:The T800 had Sarah under the laser pointer in the nightclub for an astonishing length of time, too, for something that's supposed to be instant death. That scene also plays in slow motion, if you haven't noticed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I guess. I just mean once they set up the Alien, Predator, Jurassic and Terminator "worlds", it would seem like the movies would practically write themselves. bwahahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
I saw it yesterday. My hopes were it would be kind of fun, although I never expected to walk out thinking 'hm that was a good movie'. I like Terminator 1 very much and Terminator 2 is all right, has some cool atmosphere but sorry I take robots too seriously and Arnold's jokes are a problem for me... I guess I forgot how boring Terminator 3 was - this is boring in the same kind of way, except more so, because now it feels like a modern franchise movie which I usually skip. Jai Courtney is a bad choice for Kyle Rhys because he's totally normal and has no war torn animal style about him at all like the original one did, who was a lot more entertaining to watch because he was constantly freaking out. Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor was okay - she's got a big puffy cute face but that's okay. Some of her acting was bad in the emotional scenes which tended to come out of nowhere after 5 mins of light hearted comedy routine. Arnold didn't do much interesting and is only effective because he is a ghost of the first movie. The movie just jumps in to a bunch of plot and nothing really seems to matter or have any personality. It feels very messy. Then it slows down a bit for lots of jokes at the expense of Arnold. He's totally cuddly from start to finish. There are several villains who get dispatched without ever getting an interesting moment, and then John shows up later and he's actually all right because the actor they got to play him feels like a bad guy so he did okay with that role I think. It's still way too messy and light though. There's one scene where he is in Cyberdyne HQ or whatever it is, and that was kind of interesting, but the way it happens between two action chases and him wearing different clothes and stuff just feels weird pacing wise. I feel like there is just a lot of stuff in this movie which doesn't really have any impact. The action is really boring! It's pretty boring overall. I'll probably watch the sequels because this is the one franchise like this I always get a little excitement over because I imagine how cool it could be, but really, it's just the first movie and the deep fascination I have with one relentless killing machine pursuing you and having to deal with that. I wish they'd scale back ALL of this worldbuilding stuff and all these extra characters and villains and just focus on one killing machine hunting a person down for any reason. Pretty scattered thoughts I guess. I can't think of anything too coherent to say about it other than nothing alone was terrible about it, except how they write Arnold (but that's just the franchise now, so oh well), and nothing in particular stood out as being good. It all just happened and I don't feel like there was much care put into it except as a product.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
Oh also - It's all way too clean. This is something that I think happened years ago, and you can even see it in T2 but not to the same extent. There's no sense of danger of that these movies are even trying to be for adults. Something I thought early on in the movie was 'Sarah and Rhys aren't going to actually have sex, they're just going to make jokes about it and do bits where they are forced to be physically close to each other' which is a weird trend I've noticed in a lot of big franchises. People don't actually have sex anymore like grown ups do, they all act like 15 year olds because, yeah the movies are most geared towards teens and young adults. Cos Terminator is the kind of concept that kids find cool. Kids want to watch killer robots, I know I did, but for whatever reason in 1984 and 1991 when the first two movies came out, they still had actually threat, swearing, real people behaviours and all of that in it. John Connor, as much as he served to make the movie more kid friendly, was also a swearing and delinquent little nuisance. There's an element of grit in the stories, not loads, but just enough to entice you into thinking 'these are actual people'. Kyle Rhys in the first movie is a skeevy weirdo who steals trousers from homeless men and wears them without washing them. Then him and Sarah gently caress without a lot of fanfare in a slimey motel somewhere. There's just a lot of details and personality that doesn't automatically read as 'heroic' in the first 2 movies which is enough to get you caring about what is going on. The characters in this movie are written to play towards fanfiction trends that don't even exist yet, they pre-install all that stuff and whitewash the characters to the extent that they don't even swear. Because it's supposed to be good for kids, I suppose. But the first Terminator was good for kids too, except that it was actually a little scary and dangerous around the edges. That was part of the fascination - WHOAH the terminator says 'gently caress you rear end in a top hat', i just saw a lady's boobs and the police are all smoking cynics. The age certificate on it saying that you weren't supposed to be seeing it, but of course they knew you would want to. Now they clean it up so much that all of that is gone, the parents can feel safe taking their kids with them to the movies to go see it, and everyone leaves kind of bored because nothing interesting seems to happen. Who cares if robots take over the world in the future or whatever, there are 20 franchises a year that put out installments where comparable things happen. Terminator was cool cos it was a sleazy, neon chase through the night. Now it's just anothey clean and shiny franchise with a mythology. I was reminded of having these thoughts during the movie when I went on rottentomatoes just now to see what else was coming out and one of their banner articles is 'Is Terminator Genisys too dark for your kids?'. real_slime fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Jul 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2015 14:55
|
|