Terminator 6 (film) - The coolest/best thing I've ever heard Schwarzenegger say

[Neil]

"In March next year, I am shooting Terminator 6, James Cameron and David Ellison are back on board and then comes Conan."

[JDP]

"In March next year, I am shooting Terminator 6, James Cameron and David Ellison are back on board and then comes Conan."

The Terminator franchise should have been over and done with by the second installment. But the Conan franchise should have gone on for at least a couple more films after the first one. The original intention of the producers was for Schwarzenegger to make three Conan films, but only two were made (and the second one was weak compared to the first one, which was a great fantasy/action film) since Schwarzenegger walked his way out of the contract for a third Conan film by making Red Sonja instead (which once again was not as good as the first Conan movie.) So the way I see it, Schwarzenegger owes fans at least one more Conan movie.

[Neil]

The Terminator franchise should have been over and done with by the second installment. But the Conan franchise should have gone on for at least a couple more films after the first one. The original intention of the producers was for Schwarzenegger to make three Conan films, but only two were made (and the second one was weak compared to the first one, which was a great fantasy/action film) since Schwarzenegger walked his way out of the contract for a third Conan film by making Red Sonja instead (which once again was not as good as the first Conan movie.) So the way I see it, Schwarzenegger owes fans at least one more Conan movie.
I have some hope Cameron can deliver a meaningful/solid Terminator film...

And I'm hoping a Conan film with an aging Schwarzenegger can still be great!

[shootemindehead]

I'm going to say that he's just too old now at 70+. It'll be a parody, if the makers aren't very careful.

Missing out of a few Conans here and there when Arnie was in his prime ws one of cinemas greatest "crimes". It's just a pity that the second one was shite.

As for another Terminator? No...just no. Don't care who's involved, but that thing should be put out of our misery.

[EvilNed]

I'm going to say that he's just too old now at 70+. It'll be a parody, if the makers aren't very careful.

Missing out of a few Conans here and there when Arnie was in his prime ws one of cinemas greatest "crimes". It's just a pity that the second one was shite.

As for another Terminator? No...just no. Don't care who's involved, but that thing should be put out of our misery.

I'm in agreement with Terminator, but not Conan. I still think Arnold as an aging Conan could be a good film, as long as he's supported by a great cast and competent script.

As for Terminator. Just drop it. Cameron's got no talent anymore.

[Neil]

As for Terminator. Just drop it. Cameron's got no talent anymore.

No talent? I'd rather watch Avatar than most of the scifi films of the last decade? I'd rather watch Avatar than most/all of the recent Star Wars films for example...

I can understand why you might think he's gone off the boil, but when you use needlessly black and white comments like, "no talent..." Really?

[EvilNed]

No talent? I'd rather watch Avatar than most of the scifi films of the last decade? I'd rather watch Avatar than most/all of the recent Star Wars films for example...

I can understand why you might think he's gone off the boil, but when you use needlessly black and white comments like, "no talent..." Really?

Neil, I know you're a sucker for high concept Hollywood films but when I say "No talent" I mean "No talent".

To be fair, I base this almost solely on Avatar, which was a mess and a piece of shit. But also partly on comments he's made on other films, which makes me distrust his judgement wholly. He did praise the last Terminator film, for instance. Nobody in their right mind would praise it. Shrug it off as empty and mediocre entertainment perhaps, but praise it? No way.

[MinionZombie]

Neil, I know you're a sucker for high concept Hollywood films but when I say "No talent" I mean "No talent".

To be fair, I base this almost solely on Avatar, which was a mess and a piece of shit. But also partly on comments he's made on other films, which makes me distrust his judgement wholly. He did praise the last Terminator film, for instance. Nobody in their right mind would praise it. Shrug it off as empty and mediocre entertainment perhaps, but praise it? No way.

He likely praised it because he was paid to, or was asked to do so as a favour. I never believed a word of what he said in praise of Genisys, anyway. :lol:

To say that JC has "no talent" - especially putting it all down to a single movie - is rather silly, Ned. :rolleyes: Sure, the script for Avatar is rather unoriginal and fairly predictable (with a vast amount of exposition to provide understanding to all the tech and socio-political issues going on in the wider story and setting), but visually the film is spectacular. The world-building is on-point. Hopefully, in bring on other writers, the Avatar sequels will have better scripts to go with the visual grandeur.

[EvilNed]

He likely praised it because he was paid to, or was asked to do so as a favour. I never believed a word of what he said in praise of Genisys, anyway. :lol:

To say that JC has "no talent" - especially putting it all down to a single movie - is rather silly, Ned. :rolleyes: Sure, the script for Avatar is rather unoriginal and fairly predictable (with a vast amount of exposition to provide understanding to all the tech and socio-political issues going on in the wider story and setting), but visually the film is spectacular. The world-building is on-point. Hopefully, in bring on other writers, the Avatar sequels will have better scripts to go with the visual grandeur.

I disagree wholeheartedly. Avatar looked dreadful. It was as imagenary in it's designs as an Asylum production.

[Neil]

I disagree wholeheartedly. Avatar looked dreadful. It was as imagenary in it's designs as an Asylum production.

OK.. I'm calling you out as tainted and polarised I'm afraid on this ;)

I can see why people have issues with Avatar, but at the end of the day, it was a solid production, with a reasonable story and reasonable acting, all underlined by utterly ground breaking technology, which at least should result in a mediocre opinion of it (IMHO)...

[EvilNed]

OK.. I'm calling you out as tainted and polarised I'm afraid on this ;)

I can see why people have issues with Avatar, but at the end of the day, it was a solid production, with a reasonable story and reasonable acting, all underlined by utterly ground breaking technology, which at least should result in a mediocre opinion of it (IMHO)...

It was a solid production from a technical viewpoint.

But it was by no means a reasonable story... Or creative designs.
It felt like a hackjob. A 200 million dollar hackjob, I'll give you that, but still a hackjob. You can tell where Cameron's focus was: On the 3D and the CGI.

[Neil]

Linda is back in too! - http://ew.com/movies/2017/09/20/james-cameron-linda-hamilton-next-terminator-movie/?utm_campaign=entertainmentweekly&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&xid=entertainment-weekly_socialflow_twitter

[MinionZombie]

I see JC is producing and Tim Miller (Deadpool) is directing.

I take it that LH and JC have buried the hatchet (IIRC their divorce was acrimonious? I think the movement of the rights to Terminator away from JC in the first place was a result of the settlement) ... anyway, it'll be interesting to see what goes on with this one, but after three duff T-movies in a row, even the involvement of the mighty T-originator himself only goes so far to outweigh all that dreck. :shifty: Well see, eh?

[Neil]

Summer 2019 - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/78643

[shootemindehead]

Summer 2019 - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/78643


So excited, loving so far hearing that they are going to pretend Terminator 3-5 never existed....

Oh dear.

I hate that crap.

Not that I'll be watching this anyway. I've long since tuned out of this stuff.

[Neil]

I take it that LH and JC have buried the hatchet...


Linda and I have a great relationship. We've stayed friends through the thick and thin of it all. And she is the mother of my eldest daughter. [They were married from 1997 to 1999.] So I called her up, and I said: 'Look, we could rest on our laurels. It's ours to lose, in a sense. We created this thing several decades ago. But, here's what can be really cool. You can come back and show everybody how it's done.' Because in my mind, it hasn't been done a whole lot since the way she did it back in '91.

http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1708340/how-james-cameron-convinced-linda-hamilton-to-return-for-the-new-terminator-movie

[EvilNed]

So this will be the third time they've tried to get the franchise back together again?

[Neil]

So this will be the third time they've tried to get the franchise back together again?

There's never been a "try" for Cameron? He made no.1, he made no.2 and now he's making his no.3...

[MinionZombie]

I'm fine with ignoring shitty (or sub-par) sequels.

I would love to see Neill Blomkamp's sequel to Aliens, for example. Snuffing out Hicks and Newt in the opening credits of Alien 3 (with body doubles and a couple of scrappy pictures) blew goats. Alien 3 is still a pretty good flick (it is David Fincher, after all), but it was a slap in the face to fans of the previous film in some ways.

If you can have tangential plot lines in other forms of media, why not in cinema as well?

Frankly, considering how dodgy T3, Salvation, and Genisys were, it's a relief that the new flick is ignoring them ... whether the new one will be a third failed reboot of the franchise or not remains to be seen (hopefully it'll work this time!). That all said, I think the ending of T2 was perfect - the humans won - the nuclear war was averted. It was done and dusted. It's part of the reason why T3 was so insulting, sweeping aside the established facts like "yeah, nah, ignore what we just said and also ignore the established level of resiliance of the T-800s for good measure" ... pfft.

And no, that doesn't go against what I said elsewhere in this post. T3 was a direct sequel to T2 and completely buggered up the established story and tech through poor writing and lack of attention to detail (plus some truly shit ideas). A tangential sequel to Aliens would be like an alternative timeline ... where's Doc Brown? I need him to draw me a diagram. :D

[shootemindehead]

Never bothered me in the slightest that they killed off Newt and Hicks. In fact, it made Ripley a stronger character. FFS people die. I've never understood all the fanboi whinging about that. Fucking stupid.

Plus, Alien Blomkamp would have been rubbish. The guy's got one note in him. I'm glad after the studio say how crap 'Chappie' was that they jettisoned the idea. His first effort was good. But, his subsequent films have been poor.

Unfortunately, they didn't do the same with Ridley's nonsense and now he's ruined 'Alien' in any case.

I wish hollywood would just leave good things alone.

[EvilNed]

There's never been a "try" for Cameron? He made no.1, he made no.2 and now he's making his no.3...

I don't think Cameron will be as involved as people seem to think.
He's probably up to his ears in Avatar.

[MinionZombie]

Plus, Alien Blomkamp would have been rubbish. The guy's got one note in him. I'm glad after the studio say how crap 'Chappie' was that they jettisoned the idea. His first effort was good. But, his subsequent films have been poor.

Eh? I thought Chappie was quite good. Indebted to the likes of Robocop and Short Circuit, sure, but damn good fun. I've seen it a couple of times. District 9 was excellent. Shame about Elysium - despite a few flashes of 'insane movie violence', it took itself far too seriously and was ridiculously preachy at times, not to mention rather plot holey (the rich folk in space have a whole host of these machines lying around in storage, are constantly having to defend against rogue poor folks trying to get at their medical marvel machines ... erm, why not send some to Earth? and so on).

[Neil]

I don't think Cameron will be as involved as people seem to think.
He's probably up to his ears in Avatar.

As long as he's involved with the story, that's one huge tick for me...

[EvilNed]

As long as he's involved with the story, that's one huge tick for me...

I don't think he cares about story anymore. But I'm willing to be surprised, even though I think this franchise should be retired.

[shootemindehead]

Eh? I thought Chappie was quite good. Indebted to the likes of Robocop and Short Circuit, sure, but damn good fun. I've seen it a couple of times. District 9 was excellent. Shame about Elysium - despite a few flashes of 'insane movie violence', it took itself far too seriously and was ridiculously preachy at times, not to mention rather plot holey (the rich folk in space have a whole host of these machines lying around in storage, are constantly having to defend against rogue poor folks trying to get at their medical marvel machines ... erm, why not send some to Earth? and so on).

'Chappie' didn't do much for me at all Mini. 'Elysium' was a shame, as you put it, despite good ideas (and just WTF was Jodie Foster doing?). I agree, 'District 9' was very good and I think that Blomkamp has shot his bolt with that. But, Blomkamp is a director that has a distinct feel. The type of which brings him down, because it's too distinctive. I just don't think his proposed Alien thingy would have been any use in the end.

Besides, I VERY much dislike the idea of subtracting 'Alien 3' from the series, which I think is a very good picture and the fitting end to Ripley's story. Ripley is dead. Hicks is dead. Newt is dead. Alien fans need to deal with it. Although, I don't think many people will disagree with pretending that 'Alien Resurrection' never happened.

But, Alien, as a film series isn't dead. It just needs to get away from Ripley. She had her time. It's a big universe, with lots of stories.

Unfortunately though, we have Scott who seems determined to destroy the franchise all by himself with his piss poor explanations for things that don't need explanations. So, it's probably doomed anyway.

[JDP]

I don't think he cares about story anymore. But I'm willing to be surprised, even though I think this franchise should be retired.

It should have been "retired" after the second film. In fact, I don't recognize any of the Terminator films after that one. They never happened, as far as I am concerned. The story was over and done with by the second film. Period.

[EvilNed]

It should have been "retired" after the second film. In fact, I don't recognize any of the Terminator films after that one. They never happened, as far as I am concerned. The story was over and done with by the second film. Period.

Definetly. But I can't really blame them for trying to make a third film. However, the fourth film was really unnecessary and Genisys was just boring.

[bassman]

The same body double used for the young Arnold in the last film is returning, and here you can see the new John Connor. Looks like this will feature time travel to the past again....

https://scontent-vie1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/33941976_985829928247484_5561202622129504256_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=0&oh=0541f486177912631a9758b6595bdb7b&oe=5BC1BD6C

[Neil]

The same body double used for the young Arnold in the last film is returning, and here you can see the new John Connor. Looks like this will feature time travel to the past again....

https://scontent-vie1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/33941976_985829928247484_5561202622129504256_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=0&oh=0541f486177912631a9758b6595bdb7b&oe=5BC1BD6C

No! My fingers are still crossed with this one if Cameron is involved! It will be good!

[bassman]

There have been a few new tidbits about the Cameron-involved sequel coming out recently....

First, this graphic was shown recently at CinemaCon. Of course the picture of Sarah is from T2, but the interesting part is the title reveal. Of course, it could be changed before release, but as of now the title is simply “Terminator”. What is going on with this recent trend of giving sequels/reboots the same title as the original?!? Dropping “The” from the title does not make it any different, folks.
https://i.imgur.com/hQtr5Aa.jpg

Gabriel Luna has been cast as one of the Terminators. I’m not familiar with the actor(he’s Ghost Rider on Marvel’s Agents of Shield), and he doesn’t look like a terminator to me, but I suppose he could be a T1000 like Robert Patrick.
https://www-indiewire-com.cdn.ampproject.org/ii/w1200/www.indiewire.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/screen-shot-2018-04-13-at-5-37-23-pm.png?w=670&h=377&crop=1

I’m not going to post the pictures as to which character it is, but it appears there might be human/terminator hybrids again, as the character has surgical scarring over their entire body. It could be something else of course, but the photos give the appearance of surgically implanted robotics. So with this and the “young terminator” body double returning, meaning time travel to previous films is possible, it’s seeming like they could possibly be recycling ideas from previous sequels?? I would think that Cameron and all those involved would want to avoid these similarities...

- - - Updated - - -

The real Sarah is back! :hyper:

https://i.imgur.com/LiAZNZB.jpg

[Neil]

I'm hoping that just as Cameron has put ladies in strong meaningful eading roles in the past, he can equally put "older" ladies in strong meaningful leading roles too... It will be refreshing to see a 60+yr old lady in a positive action...

[MinionZombie]

I'm hoping that just as Cameron has put ladies in strong meaningful eading roles in the past, he can equally put "older" ladies in strong meaningful leading roles too... It will be refreshing to see a 60+yr old lady in a positive action...

What I liked most about the likes of Ripley in Aliens, and Sarah Connor in T1 and T2, was that they were human. They weren't cynical power fantasies, they weren't politically motivated, they weren't tokenism or anything like that. JC wrote to the character's journey as it would make sense to do. Ripley and Connor both have their struggles and have to earn their successes, things don't go their way automatically, they're not instantly brilliant at everything (e.g. Ripley leaps to drive the APC to rescue the Colonial Marines after Gorman's loss of leadership, but she's driving it for the first time - so she's banging into walls to begin with until she gets the jist of it - meanwhile Sarah Connor in T1 is very different to how she is in T2, but the intervening years of backstory has it make total sense as well as be earned).

You absolutely root for these characters for numerous reasons, right down to a core emotional level.

Too often "strong female character" gets interpreted very simply as: 'She kicks ass. The end.' Whereas, of course, "strong" really means "complex". Men and women both have their failings, their struggles, their successes etc, they both make mistakes and get in their own way, they both have their failings that they need to overcome through action - and making a female character complex and interesting, someone worth following and being emotionally invested in as they face challenges, challenge themselves, and learn from their losses and wins, that's the key and it's all you really need to do. :)

[EvilNed]

You mean they are everything Rey in Star Wars isn't?

[MinionZombie]

You mean they are everything Rey in Star Wars isn't?

While Rey was too capable from the get-go in Ep7, she faced far more challenges and struggles and defeats in Ep8, which made her character far stronger and interesting, making me root for her more. I liked her in Ep7, but there wasn't much depth to her journey in terms of her learning - whereas in Ep8 she's literally training to become stronger at using and understanding the Force. She makes mistakes, learns from them, grows etc ... but there wasn't much of that in Ep7. I'm glad Rian Johnson sorted that out and gave Rey a much more satisfying arc in Ep8.

[EvilNed]

While Rey was too capable from the get-go in Ep7, she faced far more challenges and struggles and defeats in Ep8, which made her character far stronger and interesting, making me root for her more. I liked her in Ep7, but there wasn't much depth to her journey in terms of her learning - whereas in Ep8 she's literally training to become stronger at using and understanding the Force. She makes mistakes, learns from them, grows etc ... but there wasn't much of that in Ep7. I'm glad Rian Johnson sorted that out and gave Rey a much more satisfying arc in Ep8.

What challenges? What defeats?

She faces off against 6 of the Emperors guards about a week after the first time she picks up a lightsaber and defeats them all.

She lifts rocks off the ground as if she'd been trained in the force.

I can't think of a single setback she had that forced her to grow as a character.

[MinionZombie]

She believes in the fairytale version of the Jedi, but is confronted by a harsh reality. She believes her parents were of some importance, but it's then revealed to her that they were nothing of the sort and sold her off for drinking money, she's not some God-in-waiting, she's just a pleb - but she has the power to make a change, she just has to wield it and shake off what she thought should be happening and recognise what is happening. Her dealings with Kylo aren't simple either - neither of them get what they want, they both want each other to join each other's side, but neither of them accept.

Various aspects like that. She faces far more in Ep8 than she does in Ep7.

But anyway, we've gone off topic ... back to Terminator "6".

http://digitalspyuk.cdnds.net/18/25/768x1152/gallery-1529578888-linda-hamilton-terminator.jpg

Linda Hamilton looking ready. :cool:

[shootemindehead]

She believes in the fairytale version of the Jedi, but is confronted by a harsh reality.

She thought Luke Skywalker and the Jedi were "a myth" a couple of days before the events in 'The Last Jedi'. She knew nothing about Jedi's, the Force or any of that nonsense. Yet, she's able to master everything in the blink of an eye. That's what makes her character so poor. She's a simplistc wishfulfilment. Able to anything that the script requires of her. She's a great pilot, a great engineer, a great swordsman, great Jedi, speaks droid, speaks wookee, etc, and all while being stuck on a backwater planet, labouring as a tinker.

Perhaps IX will offer some explanation as to just how she's able to do all of this at such a tender age and without any indication at earning such abilities.

But, with Jar Jar Abrams (one of the worst things to happen to cinema in 20 years) at the helm, I won't be holding my breath. More than likely we'll just get another "generic space action" picture and this sequel trilogy can be put to bed.

[MinionZombie]

But then so many folks in the SW universe can speak droid and wookie, so...

I do agree that she was too capable from the get-go, but I do feel her arc was better handled in Ep8 ... although the passage of time is a little unclear in the film, so it does seem as if Rey's time with Luke is short, which undermines her learning and being challenged.

[shootemindehead]

But how would she? She lives in the arse of an AT AT and works as cheap labour for food by some fat git behind a grill...and apparently has done this since she was abandoned by her folks as a small kid.

Again, she has done nothing to actually earn her knowledge.

Now, if she'd been shown to have worked with droids, like Luke, or been knocking around the galaxy freighting crap from here to there with a wookiee, like Han Solo. Then her knowledge would make a bit of sense. But, none of that is shown or even indicated. She's just brilliant at everything, straight out of the box, without the history to be so or even the hint of a history.

I mean she, literally, does as Jedi mind trick out of nowhere. The fans know what that is, but she hasn't been shown to have a clue. In fact, she actually states it's all a "myth". Her character actually eliminates the possibility of such knowledge.

That's just awful writing.

As to her arc...think of it this way. Her's is a character that was found by happenstance by BB8. She leaves her home because the First Order come looking for the droid. She does Jedi minds tricks and sword fights like a pro, out of nowhere. She then goes to Leia and the restistance who, bizarrely, decide to send her (someone randomer they JUST met) to go find Luke. She farts about with Luke in Kerry for a bit and then she decides to go and save Kylo Ren (a guy SHE just met). She swordfights again like a pro, against highly skilled (supposedly) blokes, hand picked by Snoke (presumably). She then fies off again to save the resistance, by mind lifting some rocks.

All of that in the space of a few days, at best.

She may have been slightly better in 'The Last Jedi', but it's not by much and over all her character is terribly written and not just for a Star Wars film, but for any film. But, part of the reason she is so badly handle is that the other two members of the stooges, Finn and Poe take up too much screen time, that should have been devoted to her. JJ only wrote them into the script so it matched the star numbers of the original film. But they should have been even in the film at all. They're completely unneeded. 'The Force Awakens' should have focused on just Rey primarily. Poe should just have been killed after he released BB8 and Finn just shouldn't have been even written. When we first see Rey, she's pretty much the same, but we see that she's a sort of self taught Force layman, as it were, who has some skill. But, is frustrated at her lack of control and clearly needs training. Perhaps, she's come across some ancient Jedi texts somehow and has learned some stuff from those. But her knowledge is incomplete. She could be shown in her AT AT house trying to force stuff, but failing and getting pissed off. The film can pretty much play out as does. But, at least, the audience sees that she's already skilled in some way and when she succeeds at something Forcey, it isn't completely out of nowhere.

'The Last Jedi' should primarilly have focused on Rey and Luke on the island. With her being trained in a more fullfilling way. The resisitance and the First Order are still having a barney out in space, but there's no stupid muntiny subplot and no wasting time on Paddy Power planet. However, Luke should eventually agree to go back with her to help save his sister. The idea that Luke Skywalker won't budge from his hidey hole and go help Leia is one of the worst character assassinations in fiction I've ever seen. He can die on the salt planet saving her and what's left of the rersistance. Or better yet, remain alive and help build the resistance in IX, cos Carrie Fisher's dead.

[bassman]

They released this first official image and I’ve been seeing people all over the net flipping out about it saying that they’ve turned the “male action franchise” into females, SJW’s, etc. That makes no sense, the franchise has always been centered around a female! And now because they’ve released a picture of Sarah with two new female characters, that’s cause for concern?!? I fear for humanity...

http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/davis-terminator-xl.jpg

[Moon Knight]

Old man Conan can be great if done well. The original is such a classic.

[shootemindehead]

They released this first official image and I’ve been seeing people all over the net flipping out about it saying that they’ve turned the “male action franchise” into females, SJW’s, etc. That makes no sense, the franchise has always been centered around a female! And now because they’ve released a picture of Sarah with two new female characters, that’s cause for concern?!? I fear for humanity...

I suppose it probably has something to do with 5ft nothing girls kicking the shit out of 6ft tall muscle bound blokes that get a lot of people's goats. In a way, I kind of agree. I'm sick of seeing that nonsense myself. A "strong female character" doesn't always have to mean a mere slip of a girl beating the crap out of someone who's obviously physically stronger. That's kind of intellectually insulting to everyone concerned.

In any case, there are more obvious problems with that image. Yer wan in the middle is probably a female Terminator, sent back (again), so the good guys can have a robot too. :rolleyes:
The girl on the left is probably Sarah's grandkid. Perhaps John is brown bread in this timeline.

It might have been nice JUST to have Sarah duking it out with another robot?

In any case, as I've said before numerous times on here, the Terminator franchise is as dead as Dillinger. But, this is rectconning the series and takes place after 'Terminator 2', therefore forgetting 3, 4 and 5. So maybe it might be worth checking out and hopefully Arnie is nowhere to be seen.

I won't get my hopes up though.

[EvilNed]

Isnt that a guy in the middle?

Anyway, I don't really care. Genisys promised to deliver something that delivered on the quality of T1 and T2 but it didn't.
The franchise is by far more mediocre (or shit) than good at this point.

[bassman]

Isnt that a guy in the middle?


That’s Mackenzie Davis from Halt and Catch Fire, Blade Runner 2049, and Black Mirror-San Junipiero. That might not be the most flattering picture, but I’ve always thought she was attractive.:shifty:

[Moon Knight]

That’s Mackenzie Davis from Halt and Catch Fire, Blade Runner 2049, and Black Mirror-San Junipiero. That might not be the most flattering picture, but I’ve always thought she was attractive.:shifty:

San Junipero!

[Neil]

Old man Conan can be great if done well. The original is such a classic.

I hope we get a good solid Conan film with Arni in it soon!

[Moon Knight]

I hope we get a good solid Conan film with Arni in it soon!

The original soundtrack played such a massive role making that film the timeless treasure that it is. My biggest fear with sequels/remakes/ect, is the music is never memorable.

Just look at how awesome the original Terminator theme was. These days the soundscape is such an afterthought.

[shootemindehead]

Aye, Poledouris' soundtrack is one of the few that I can listen to all the way through. It's fantastic.

[bassman]

Behind the scenes video about shooting in Hungary:

8A2NvaN1BoU

It’s not much really, just passing it along until we get our first trailer! Arnold looks to be in great shape for his age...

[bassman]

The current title for this new attempt is Terminator: Dark Fate, according to Cameron. I see the connections to the classic “no fate” references, but honestly, I thought the title would be something more definitive. Something that suggests “forget those others, this is after T2, we’re different”. Instead.....it just kinda feels like a generic title?

[EvilNed]

The last two Arnie helmed Terminator's haven't been Box Office-gold. They've done alright. But Genisys probably only broke even, if even that. One more performance like that and the franchise is undone. I don't think Arnie pulls crowds anymore - in the US at least.

[bassman]

First poster, with the first trailer premiering tomorrow:

https://www.joblo.com/assets/images/joblo/posters/2019/05/terminator-dark-fate-teaser-poster.jpg

I like that the tag line is already telling the audience that this is supposed to be the first sequel since Judgment Day.

I’m still crossing fingers that they can magically pull this off, so hopefully the trailer doesn’t bring my hopes down!

[MinionZombie]

Yeah, good tag line to say screw the other sequels ('cos yeah, they weren't good) ... now, do you all think this is the last chance for the Terminator franchise? We've had three sequels that didn't work out, so blimey, this really has to stick the landing.

It won't be T2 or T1 quality wise, but it has to be much better that T3, T4, and T5.

[Neil]

bxPeVTIanzs

[MinionZombie]

The bad Terminator left me feeling kinda ... meh ... just felt more 'blank' rather than 'intimidating/scary', you know?

The trailer itself was ... okay ... of course, could just be an iffy trailer. Trailers don't always correspond. T4 had an awesome trailer (mostly because of the use of NIN and choice imagery), but the movie itself was pretty shite. We'll see...

[Neil]

^ Not a trailer :) Featurette :)

[bassman]

^ Not a trailer :) Featurette :)

I believe he’s referencing the trailer that was released today.

I’m 50/50 on the trailer at this point. Liked some of what I saw, but some of the rest also makes me apprehensive....

[Neil]

I believe he’s referencing the trailer that was released today.

I’m 50/50 on the trailer at this point. Liked some of what I saw, but some of the rest also makes me apprehensive....

Didn't even know the trailer was out yet :)

jCyEX6u-Yhs

[bassman]

As I mentioned before, certain elements of the trailer feel good to me, but then there is the flashy CGI and dark endoskeleton terminator that reminds me of the one from Genisys. I’ve never understood why the newer films try to make the robots matte black instead of the silver used for both the terminator models in the good films? Silver worked from the start and feels right, why make the new ones dark to where it ultimately doesn’t feel the same?

As usual, I’ll reserve final judgment for the film itself, but hopefully the next trailers can win me over a bit more because this one has me a touch concerned....

[MinionZombie]

Yep, I was referring to the actual trailer. :D

It's also quite a generic trailer, what with the choice and style of music ... it's like there's just one guy editing all the trailers in Hollywood with a worn out cookie cutter.

What is good, though, is having Linda Hamilton back.

[Moon Knight]

Dammit ain’t watching if Edward Furlong ain’t back as well!

[JDP]

Plot summary: a cyborg-clone of 80s-90s James Cameron is sent back in time in order to kill the 2000s James Cameron. It will then take his place and make good movies again.

[ProfessorChaos]

i'm not even going to bother posting the trailer, but holy hell does it look shitty. this series should have stopped like four movies ago....

[MinionZombie]

KQcU9LxTg3Q

A little BTS clip with some movie clips in it.

The movie's going to be R-Rated, so at least they're ditching soft-ass PG-13.

I do still worry about the plight of 'super Terminators' (see the point blank assault rifle clip) that we've had in recent sequels where they survive damage they really shouldn't be able to survive (remember T4 and the molten steel that only temporarily stopped them, the same type of stuff that utterly destroyed all the Cyberdyne tech in T2!!!)

[bassman]

They also announced at Comic Con yesterday that Furlong has in fact returned as John Conner....

[MinionZombie]

They also announced at Comic Con yesterday that Furlong has in fact returned as John Conner....

I just read that before coming here.

Hopefully the guy can get himself back on track, and hopefully child stars are more looked after these days and guided better to try and avoid some of the usual pitfalls ... although there's only so much you can do to help. Fingers crossed his return works out nicely.

Although I still kinda feel that T2 was the ideal ending, to be honest. I'll still check this one out ... at the very least it'd be nice if it was better than T3 through T5.

[Neil]

Fingers so very very very crossed!

[bassman]

I had a thought about Furlong’s appearance in this film. Total nerd fanboy theory, but hear me out....

Earlier in the year we heard/saw that a young actor was cast to play young John, as well as the body double for younger Arnold. We see no sign of John in the trailers yet they’re fine saying he’s in the movie. What if they’re taking the popular de-aging technology we’ve seen in recent years, and they’re actually combining these two actors to make scenes set shortly after T2? We know Cameron loves pushing technology. John doesn’t make it out of these early scenes alive, altering judgment day, thus we have the trailers with just Sarah hunting the Terminators...

[MinionZombie]

Latest trailer.

r2ilzzdPgJ4

This one looks better than the last trailer. I'm still quite trepidatious though, after three dud sequels in a row, but at least this one appears to have the best chance going into it.

[ProfessorChaos]

sorry, i still think this looks like absolute hot garbage. fucking hard pass, just like the last one.

i've said it before, but it bears repeating: they should have stopped after the first one....the second is okay, but that is where they totally should have drawn the line.

[bassman]

Hoping for the best, but a lot of what we’ve seen doesn’t excite me like I’d hoped it would. The Terminator series is like the hard drug of fandom. Those first couple times were amazing, but now we’re chasing the dragon...

[Neil]

Reviews seem fairly good...

[MinionZombie]

Reviews seem fairly good...

Saw one earlier that gave it an 8/10. Seems that getting Sarah Connor back has been a huge help in that regard. The review said it's the best since T2 ... so best of the films after T2, but how close to T2 is more the point. I'd imagine there'll still be a fair bit of water between T2 and T6, and at this point they were due for a sequel that wasn't an arse up. Will have to see for myself, of course ... although this whole thing about the Terminator 'hiding' as a drapery salesman rubbed me the wrong way. A guy looking like that ... a drapery salesman? I don't need a cheap, crap joke. Just have him hiding out as a mechanic or lumberjack or something.

[Neil]

Seeing it on Wed... Going in with mediocre expectations...

[MinionZombie]

iEuQQvckXQY

Kermode's review - mediocre, basically, but the best of the films after T2 (although, ultimately, not really much point going beyond T2).

I'll watch it when it rolls around onto TV. I'll be interested to see Sarah Connor again, but T2 was the perfect ending.

[ProfessorChaos]

I hope this movie flops harder than a whale falling off a truck transporting it to SeaWorld. Maybe then they will finally quit beating a dead horse that should have been left alone 20 years ago.

[Neil]

Hmmm.... I'd give it a charitable 6/10...

The story line was rather poor generally, pi$$ing far too much on the original story arc. And the action felt a little too ramped up and therefore broke engagement. ie: Humans surviving impossible scenarios.

[MinionZombie]

And the action felt a little too ramped up and therefore broke engagement. ie: Humans surviving impossible scenarios.

Dang ... considering the tone of T1 and T2, that shouldn't be the case. For instance, remember how in T2 when Sarah gets skewered in the shoulder? She goes for the rest of the movie barely being able to use that arm - and she's exhausted by the fight. Similarly in T1, in the factory, she was exhausted and that big chunk of metal in her leg slowed her way down and she had to crawl.

Too much 'big action' turns it into a generic action movie, and the first two Terminators are not that.

Sure, I'm yet to see T6, but it's disappointing to hear that about the action being too overblown. Do we also get more of that 'super Terminator' nonsense with the T-800 surviving far more punishment than what was possible in the first two movies? (e.g. In Salvation a T-800 being doused in molten steel only temporarily halted it, whereas in T2 molten steel absolutely destroyed all trace of the technology!)

[Moon Knight]

Damn, MZ, you just reminded me on why the original two Terminator movies worked so well. This saddens me.

[MinionZombie]

Damn, MZ, you just reminded me on why the original two Terminator movies worked so well. This saddens me.

I'm here to provide a service! :D

https://paulwalternewbury.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/image231.jpg

[ProfessorChaos]

all the reviews keep saying this is the best since T2....but considering the competition, that's not saying much. i also keep seeing lots of comments about how derivative this one is of all its predecessors, and how pretty much everything in it has already been done better in the previous entries.

oh, and having heard some spoilers, those who are excited about the return of edward furlong as john connor are in for a real shock.
can't have the hero be a white guy anymore, so let's kill him off right at the beginning of the this one and make the future leader of the new resistance a latino female teenager!

it seems as if plenty of foks are starting to see that this franchise should have never even became a franchise, and is creatively bankrupt and has been for a couple of decades.

[Neil]

Wow... Seems to be somewhat tanking in the cinemas...

[EvilNed]

Wow... Seems to be somewhat tanking in the cinemas...

As some reviewers have pointed out,

Part of the problem is that the film is catering to a crowd that's not really interested.
A film with Arnold Schwarzenegger should be targeted at Schwarzenegger fans. Not the College kids of today. Generally you want your protagonist to be what your target audience is - it's not surprise most superheroes are young males for instance. However in this case (and some others, like Ghostbusters) they seem to think that their perceived evolved sentimentalities will somehow overcome general preference. Naive and folly.

Again, I'm not saying I disagree with what the film is doing. But they can't expect to make your money back if they don't target the correct audience.

[ProfessorChaos]

^

well, when you pretty much piss all over the established storyline and theme time and time again, and then right before the film is released it's revealed that you took it to a whole new level this go-around, it's to be expected.

i'm beyond glad this thing bombed. they've been trying to tell the same damn story with slightly different twists for so long it's no wonder it failed once again. the redlettermedia crew pretty much hit the nail on the head in their latest "half in the bag" video about this turd-fest: in a nutshell, the terminator franchise is about like taco bell. they keep trying to take the same handful of ingredients and make something new and exciting, but it all pretty much tastes the same....and apparently people don't like the taste of these films anymore.

i've said it before but it bears repeating: the perfect ending to this tale was done already in t2. no need to take it any further. in my head cannon, the whole story was wrapped up with a nice little bow almost 30 years ago.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/gFwZfXIqD0eNW/source.gif

[EvilNed]

Here's a breakdown of the age and gender of this film;
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6450804/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt

And here's one of Joker;
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7286456/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt

Joker was seen by a much younger crowd.
Terminator was not.
You could argue that Joker was not played by a young actor - sure - but he is an underdog and that resonates with people regardless of age. But if they really wanted to draw in their crowd with this film they probably should have fronted it with Furlong in addition to Arnold and Hamilton. Add an interesting choice as the Terminator - maybe a wild card like Jeff Bridges (a cult favorite), lower the budget and expectations somewhat and focus more on drama and action. I assure you, you'd have a hit on your hands.

Don't try to outdo Marvel or Star Wars. That's not what this is.

[MinionZombie]

Still yet to see T6, although I do agree with Prof - T2 was the perfect ending and will, for me, always be the true ending. In some ways it's kind of a shame they didn't keep the alternative/extended ending on T2 just to hammer home that fact.

T3 turned it into a comedy and killing off Sarah was a dumb idea. There were a few bits of decent action, but just saying "nah, the ending of T2 didn't matter whatsoever" was a slap in the face of the audience.

T4 could have been good - I'd wanted a film set in the future war for a long time, but it was PG-13 McG gibberish with no logic or appreciation for the previous films (well, T1 and T2). Nine Inch Nails made the trailer awesome, and it had a couple of cool moments in the film (the T-600s were pretty creepy and intimidating), but they totally missed the mark with it.

T5 had a gimmicky opening, which would have made an awesome fan film, but as part of the actual franchise? Nope. Again, more iffy jokes, and shitting all over John Connor was a dumb idea and they didn't do justice to Kyle Reese either. The odd moment here or there, but pretty forgettable.

T6 - I'll see it eventually, therefore my opinion is still to be formed.

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles had some good stuff, although it occasionally suffered from the lower TV budgets, and season two absolutely screwed the pooch with far too many episodes leading to the worst case of filler I have ever seen in any TV show. It stuck the landing in the final couple of episodes (which promised an intriguing third season), but by then the damage had already been done and it got shit-canned.

I think what should have happened with the Terminator franchise is alternative stories within the universe - specifically the future war - disconnected from the Connor's story entirely. You'd then have much more freedom to move both in terms of storytelling but also in terms of fan service. It might have also been interesting to see other comic book tales get adapted as a sort of 'side project', like RoboCop vs Terminator.

[MinionZombie]

Well, I've seen the new Terminator movie ("Dark Fate") ... ... ... I'm not even sure if I can say it was the "least naff" of the four most recent films.

I liked some elements/ideas - obviously to have Sarah Connor back was good (e.g. when she first turns up firing that massive shotgun), but I despised the opening scene:
Killing off John Connor was such a lazy 'gotcha' fuck you to the audience and spits on what came before.

I also liked another idea that related to Arnie's T-800:
What does a Terminator do once it has completed its mission? That was a nifty idea.
But Christ on a bike, the whole 'Carl the drapery man' idea was asinine and just silly for the sake of being silly. Have him be a mechanic/repairman for crying out loud. All that drapery talk was stupid, verging on "talk to the hand" (T3) at times. Enough with trying to undercut the T-800 with silly 'humour', alright?

The Rev-9, or whatever it was called, was kinda interesting - particularly that idea of it being able to split into two parts, the base endoskeleton and the sort of liquid metal part - but they made it too silly at times (all those tentacle spikes).

There wasn't so much of the 'super Terminator' bullshit (e.g. when the T-800 gets its arm ripped off), but the new bad Terminator was basically a super villain. The last few movies just seem like they're too lazy to write situations which simultaneously give the humans a fair chance while also providing enough tension and challenge.

I couldn't be doing with the 'augment' idea, either ... just felt too silly, especially with this metabolism weakness they chucked in ... not much cop if it can only fight for a brief time before collapsing, eh? That's who you send back to protect you? Hmmm...

There was also some unnecessary wokery going on, too - the attempt to 'hide' who Dani was 'because she wasn't ready to know yet' was lame as all get out, and you could tell almost immediately that she was a resistance leader (and you certainly knew it was her during that flashback where they're getting her brought in on a stretcher). Indeed, the "She's John" bit was thuddingly clunky and cringe as hell, as was the whole thing of Sarah just assuming that Dani was another mother of a MALE resistance leader (low-key "yuck, men" tone drizzled in for good measure by the writers). It was a pretty pointless attempt to hide something from the audience that we could already guess quite quickly, and there was no proper reason to hide it from any of the characters in the film.

Another thing that irked me - the opening action sequences - so the Terminators aren't even bothered to keep a low profile? And another thing - both drop in from a high point, for what reason? To look cool? They managed to drop them in at ground level before, so why can't they manage it now? Stupid. And to do it so publicly as well. Why? I liked the 'freezing of the area' just before the arrival idea, but beyond that it was cringey.

Also, a lot fo the set pieces just felt like a case of 'what big shit can we do now?'. It just felt like a lot of stuff happening. None of it really gelled together, for me at least. The whole movie kinda felt a bit redundant. It threw away all of the previous franchise history just so it could, what, do almost the same exact thing again? But with a gender-swapped resistance leader and different designs for this "Legion" A.I. junk.

T2 is where it actually ends. They won. The end.

You could have done a future war movie that tied into the continuity, in a Rogue One-like fashion, (e.g. the smashing of Skynet's defense grid and the mission to send Kyle Reese back in time), or you could just have a general future war-set movie that doesn't include any references to the established good guy characters (Sarah and John Connor) and getting caught in that loop. It's an impossible place to put yourself. Make no changes and you're just beholden to the established narratives of previous (and superior) films. Make changes and you'll inevitably shit all over what came before.

You've got this big scale future war and there's what, no other really important people who Skynet could seek to snuff out? It was only John Connor ... he had no super important hierarchy of supporters with a range of skills who attacked Skynet in different ways?

So yeah ... a couple of good ideas, but far too much CGI, too many dodgy physics moments, a poor story filled with stolen and re-heated ideas that come out mis-shapen and unappetising. There's no twice as many naff Terminator movies as there are good Terminator movies! :stunned:

[Daoyinyang]

I wonder if the new one will go back to Skynet or if they'll stick with Legion from Dark Fate.

[MinionZombie]

I wonder if the new one will go back to Skynet or if they'll stick with Legion from Dark Fate.

What? There's going to be another Terminator movie??? :stunned:

[bassman]

What? There's going to be another Terminator movie??? :stunned:

I surely wouldn’t think so! Three failures in a row should suggest we won’t see another Terminator for a looong time. I’d wager we won’t see another entry until someone remakes the original, likely a decade or two away.

[JDP]

Hopefully it will never happen (either a remake of the first one or any other new sequel/prequel.) Everything after T2 = pure nonsense intended to milk the Terminator cow, to the very last drop.

[Neil]

Hopefully it will never happen (either a remake of the first one or any other new sequel/prequel.) Everything after T2 = pure nonsense intended to milk the Terminator cow, to the very last drop.

You and your milking cows to the last drop fetish :)


Can you imagine what a remake of the original Terminator flick would be like? As good as the Total Recall remake maybe?

[JDP]

You and your milking cows to the last drop fetish :)

https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/80cf83d6-8265-4ccc-b238-2ac9a56d0027/d2p0gxd-341d7e47-38cb-46a0-b01e-068b2e20b445.jpg/v1/fill/w_900,h_563,q_75,strp/terminator_cow_by_thomasweihs_d2p0gxd-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI 1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOiIsImlzcyI6InVybjphcHA6 Iiwib2JqIjpbW3siaGVpZ2h0IjoiPD01NjMiLCJwYXRoIjoiXC 9mXC84MGNmODNkNi04MjY1LTRjY2MtYjIzOC0yYWM5YTU2ZDAw MjdcL2QycDBneGQtMzQxZDdlNDctMzhjYi00NmEwLWIwMWUtMD Y4YjJlMjBiNDQ1LmpwZyIsIndpZHRoIjoiPD05MDAifV1dLCJh dWQiOlsidXJuOnNlcnZpY2U6aW1hZ2Uub3BlcmF0aW9ucyJdfQ .LLJDn-ops4hPQLx9BGwe_qoLg8hJK8q1DNzagumHPjA


Can you imagine what a remake of the original Terminator flick would be like? As good as the Total Recall remake maybe?

The first Terminator movie is one of those quintessential films that should NEVER be fucked with, under no pretext. It's like trying to remake John Carpenter's The Thing. "No", just... "NO!" "N" and "O", spells "NO". For fuck's sake, "NO!" means "NO!"

[bassman]

I certainly agree with you. Most movie fans would. But, it’s the entertainment BUSINESS. For the very same reasons we saw four lower-quality sequels after T2, it’s inevitable that a remake WILL happen at some point.

To be fair, Carpenter’s The Thing is a remake itself. Much like Cronenberg’s The Fly, it’s a rare example of an amazing remake. The most we can do is hope that when Terminator is remade, it’s someone with a good vision. But if you’re expecting it to never happen, you’re only fooling yourself, ya know?

[beat_truck]

But.... But....They remade Carpenter's The Fog and that was.... never mind.:barf:

[MinionZombie]

Can you imagine what a remake of the original Terminator flick would be like?

An orgy of iffy CGI, relentless editing and shaky cam, blunt force on-the-nose dialogue obsessed with identity politics over complex characterisation mistaking "strong" for "brilliant at everything", crowbarred-in 'humour' where people state what has literally just happened (or is going to happen) with an ounce of incredulity, copying all of the key scenes we remember but doing them worse and replacing effective practical effects with shite CGI copies (a la ANOES 2010), and cap it all off with the themetune remixed by fucking Fall Out Boy?


The first Terminator movie is one of those quintessential films that should NEVER be fucked with, under no pretext. It's like trying to remake John Carpenter's The Thing. "No", just... "NO!" "N" and "O", spells "NO". For fuck's sake, "NO!" means "NO!"

So in other words you're open to the possibility? :lol::D


I certainly agree with you. Most movie fans would. But, it’s the entertainment BUSINESS. For the very same reasons we saw four lower-quality sequels after T2, it’s inevitable that a remake WILL happen at some point.

To be fair, Carpenter’s The Thing is a remake itself. Much like Cronenberg’s The Fly, it’s a rare example of an amazing remake. The most we can do is hope that when Terminator is remade, it’s someone with a good vision. But if you’re expecting it to never happen, you’re only fooling yourself, ya know?

I'd argue that JC's The Thing is as much a re-telling of the source book as it is a remake of The Thing From Another World. It's a combination of both, but I've never considered The Thing 1982 to be a 'remake' per se.

However, yes, not all remakes are bad - but at the same time, not all films (very few, in fact) need to be remade. If you can really bring something new to it, with a talented writer and director team in charge (e.g. The Fly 1986, as you say), then there can be something to get out of it. Sometimes a 're-quel' may be in order.

As for Terminator - you could maybe do a 'Rogue One' by making future war movie that tells the story of the resistance (lead by JOHN CONNOR, alright, none of this "Legion" bullshit) smashing Skynet's defence grid and making their way to the Time Displacement machine in order to send Kyle Reese back in time and then that links up with T1.

Or, make a future war movie (or movie series, if the first proves good enough) that is set elsewhere in the Terminator world with totally different characters. Surely Skynet has a stranglehold over the entire globe, not just Los Angeles/the USA. You could tell parallel stories in 2 or 3 locations around the world as a coordinated effort to bring down Skynet unfolds. In fact, you could tie that in to the smashing of Skynet's defence grid, that that is what it was leading towards. You'd start the movie small and then keep expanding outwards to reveal a much bigger globally coordinated action to take down Skynet.

Tell a story or stories within the established world (i.e. Legion etc can fuck right off) with the established T-800s and T-1000s (and T-600s, HKs etc) but with new characters ... and get rid of the 'super Terminator' bullshit, too.


But.... But....They remade Carpenter's The Fog and that was.... never mind.:barf:

:lol::lol::lol:

I saw a couple of clips of that one time ... woof ... what a turd.

[JDP]

I'd argue that JC's The Thing is as much a re-telling of the source book as it is a remake of The Thing From Another World. It's a combination of both, but I've never considered The Thing 1982 to be a 'remake' per se.

Yes, John Carpenter's movie is not really a "remake" of the 1950s movie. His film is actually closer to the original source material. And just like The Terminator, it should NOT be fucked with, EVER!

The chances of a remake surpassing or even just matching the original are very slim. Very few of them have managed to do that. The mentioned 1986 The Fly remake and the 1978 remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers being examples of those rare instances. And also notice that the few examples that can be found were made in past decades as well, like the 1970s and 80s. I can't recall any more modern remakes that have managed to pull the "matching/surpassing the original" act. Most of the time they do in fact stink to high heaven.

[shootemindehead]

The first Terminator movie is one of those quintessential films that should NEVER be fucked with, under no pretext.

You're too late lad. It's already been destroyed with a load of insipid sequels.

[MinionZombie]

The chances of a remake surpassing or even just matching the original are very slim. Very few of them have managed to do that. The mentioned 1986 The Fly remake and the 1978 remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers being examples of those rare instances. And also notice that the few examples that can be found were made in past decades as well, like the 1970s and 80s. I can't recall any more modern remakes that have managed to pull the "matching/surpassing the original" act. Most of the time they do in fact stink to high heaven.

The '78 IOTBS is a good one. Matches the 1950s original, but it has its own 70s spin on it while also living up to what the material should be. The '78 version also works as a sort of 'joint project' beside the original, never denigrating it or ignoring it ... you could almost, at a stretch, consider it a sort of 'sequel'/'sidequel' of sorts as Kevin McCarthy turns up at one point wailing panic.

There have been some good remakes, although pretty much all the good ones never match let alone surpass the original. I'd argue that "The Crazies" (2010) pretty much sits alongside The Crazies (1973), though. I think each film does certain things better than the other, so they both kind of even out in terms of hits and misses. I'd still take the original over the remake, mind, but the remake worked surprisingly well.

I would like to see more films that didn't quite work first time around get remade, films that you could do something cool with - like "Drive-In Massacre", which I've always had an odd fascination with as something I'd like to remake.

[beat_truck]

I am so sick of remakes and reboots that are pure garbage that I just flat out refuse to watch them anymore unless I hear from multiple sources that they are worth watching. I have wasted enough time and money on turds over the years. I surely hope that they don't attempt to remake The Terminator, but I would not be very surprised if they do. God forbid Hollyweird does anything new and original instead of lazy, repetitive cash-ins.

I was talking to someone yesterday, and I asked, do they not realize they are making dog shit when they are in the process of filming it? Don't they play these movies before test audiences and realize that they are garbage before they release them, or what? Or is the average person just an idiot and will eat up any crap that the studios pump out? I just don't understand how this many horrid remakes get released into the wild.

Just look at The Wicker Man. Did they not realize that they were making a complete joke of a movie, or did they just not care?:confused:

And yes, the remake of The Fog was a steaming pile of a with a complete WTF of an ending. I am ashamed to say I wasted money on it.:duh:

[JDP]

The "remake" bullshit has gotten so bad that even Cabin Fever, which just came out in 2002, was "remade" in 2016!

[shootemindehead]

The '78 IOTBS is a good one. Matches the 1950s original, but it has its own 70s spin on it while also living up to what the material should be. The '78 version also works as a sort of 'joint project' beside the original, never denigrating it or ignoring it ... you could almost, at a stretch, consider it a sort of 'sequel'/'sidequel' of sorts as Kevin McCarthy turns up at one point wailing panic.

There have been some good remakes, although pretty much all the good ones never match let alone surpass the original. I'd argue that "The Crazies" (2010) pretty much sits alongside The Crazies (1973), though. I think each film does certain things better than the other, so they both kind of even out in terms of hits and misses. I'd still take the original over the remake, mind, but the remake worked surprisingly well.

I would like to see more films that didn't quite work first time around get remade, films that you could do something cool with - like "Drive-In Massacre", which I've always had an odd fascination with as something I'd like to remake.

I'd argue that both the 1978 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' and the 2010 'The Crazies' are very much the superiors to their older incarnations. Especially so in the case of the Romero film. And something like 'The Fly' offers up a different take with regards to special effects and a level of disgust that the original wasn't able to reach.

But generally, with respect to remakes, I am against them. They rarely, rarely, work in part or in whole. And sure, Hollywood has had a history of remaking movies. But there's a difference to remaking like say, 'Ben-Hur' as a talkie in the 50's and doing it again in the 2010's. The dynamic of remaking a silent film into a colour, talking, picture offers up a brand new experience. But just remaking something that's essentially just separated by a period of time is pointless.

I suppose remaking junk like 'The Toolbox Murders' or having another go at mediocre movies doesn't bother me as much as remaking films that were good when they were done before. I reckon Hollywood never understood the concept of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[EvilNed]

To be fair, Carpenter’s The Thing is a remake itself. Much like Cronenberg’s The Fly, it’s a rare example of an amazing remake. The most we can do is hope that when Terminator is remade, it’s someone with a good vision. But if you’re expecting it to never happen, you’re only fooling yourself, ya know?

The source material of The Thing was not the original film, but the novel on which the original film was very losely based.

As for remakes, I'm actually starting to get around to the idea of them. Don't like em? Don't watch em. Worst case scenario it brings new attention to the original. Best case - we get a great film. So what's the fuzz?

[JDP]

Imagine someone trying to "rewrite" Homer, or Chaucer, or Shakespeare, or Cervantes, or Victor Hugo, or Jules Verne, or Edgar Alan Poe, etc.

"NO!", just "NO!", "N" and "O" and "!" = "NO!"

[beat_truck]

I always though of Shakespeare as ancient gibberish that I resented having been forced down our throats in school, but to each their own.:D

[JDP]

If you think that reading Shakespeare in the original 17th century English versions is tough, try reading Chaucer, Gower or Langland in their original Middle English!

[beat_truck]

I though it was more dull than tough. Classic literature just isn't my thing, though. I think the last book I read was Johnny Cash's autobiography.:) That was at least interesting to me.

I have Undead by John Russo, World War Z, and a couple Stephen King books that I would like to read. I am just not an avid reader and have a hard time actually sitting down and doing it.

[shootemindehead]

The source material of The Thing was not the original film, but the novel on which the original film was very losely based.

As for remakes, I'm actually starting to get around to the idea of them. Don't like em? Don't watch em. Worst case scenario it brings new attention to the original. Best case - we get a great film. So what's the fuzz?

It's the laziness and cheapness of the general idea, I suppose, coupled with the fact that they are nearly always a piss poor version of the original film and in the minds of some, if can have a stymieing affect to some degree. It irks the fuck out of me when I talk about 'Dawn of the Dead' to some people and they say "Oh yeah, Ving Rhames was great in that".

In certain cases the worse film can over shadow the better one. Stuff like the remake of 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' are destined to be dumped into the memory hole though.

- - - Updated - - -


Imagine someone trying to "rewrite" Homer, or Chaucer, or Shakespeare, or Cervantes, or Victor Hugo, or Jules Verne, or Edgar Alan Poe, etc.

"NO!", just "NO!", "N" and "O" and "!" = "NO!"

Their books/plays may not have been rewritten. But their stories have, in every screenplay that adapted them.

[EvilNed]

Imagine someone trying to "rewrite" Homer, or Chaucer, or Shakespeare, or Cervantes, or Victor Hugo, or Jules Verne, or Edgar Alan Poe, etc.

"NO!", just "NO!", "N" and "O" and "!" = "NO!"

This has been done literally hundreds of times.

[JDP]

This has been done literally hundreds of times.

"Adaptations" to other media than writing is one thing, attempting to "remake" the literary works themselves is a wholly different one. I can't recall anyone who has tried to "remake" The Canterbury Tales, for example. And when someone has the audacity to try to do such things, the result almost invariably can't hold a candle to the original writings. Same with movies.

[EvilNed]

"Adaptations" to other media than writing is one thing, attempting to "remake" the literary works themselves is a wholly different one. I can't recall anyone who has tried to "remake" The Canterbury Tales, for example. And when someone has the audacity to try to do such things, the result almost invariably can't hold a candle to the original writings. Same with movies.

The purpose is not always that a work should be held in higher regard than it's source material. Works of art are not always rated on a scale, and may have different purposes. Often the purpose is to update the story to fit a modern narrative, to bring the story to a wider audience and introduce it to younger people. Remakes are very rarely meant for people who know, and love, the original - however those people always do end up watching / reading it anyway...

[shootemindehead]

Works of art are not always rated on a scale

Dr. J. Evans Pritchard would disagree with you Neddy. :D