Action-Adventure Terminator: Dark Fate

I think Terminator is just not the right material for him. Miller is a hip director, deep in trends. He isn't a visionary. He was perfect for DP with his sense of humor and utilitarian approach to visuals.
 
Miller and Cameron are good friends. thats the only reason why Miller got the job IMO. is their friendship over?
 
Listening to the whole interview and not the click bait title, he said they wouldn’t work together anymore because Miller likes his total creative control and Cameron was very involved in the editing. But after the fact, Cameron actually sent him a message saying he’d like for the two to grab a drink in December which Miller will do.

Miller also said that if he told you what notes they argued over, we would laugh because it wasn’t anything substantial but a line here or there that Miller absolutely loved but Cameron thought was slowing down the pace.
 
Unless you’re a director with the clout of James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, or even Chris Nolan then you’re never going to be afforded 100% creative freedom on a movie, especially movies that cost over a hundred million dollars to make and you’re only a second-time director.

If Miller wants total creative freedom perhaps self-financing a movie is the way to go. Obviously that’s not going to be possible if he doesn’t have that kind of money since I don’t think Miller is that wealthy. Also, making a smaller movie that doesn’t cost a lot could be an alternative(assuming he’s interested in making smaller movies).
 
Last edited:
Listening to the whole interview and not the click bait title.

A lesson many need to learn.

I feel bad for Miller. He seems to rub a lot of people the wrong way when quoted yet always comes off to me as likable when you see him speak. Dark Fate didn't pan out but I still think he has potential as a filmmaker.
 
A lesson many need to learn.

I feel bad for Miller. He seems to rub a lot of people the wrong way when quoted yet always comes off to me as likable when you see him speak. Dark Fate didn't pan out but I still think he has potential as a filmmaker.

Yeah.
I dont think his wish of "full" creative Control is bad...but sometimes you need a few more eyes and soemeone who makes decisions for you.
Miller hasnt the kind of success to ask for full control, not on a project like Terminator.
He seems to have a very specific idea how his movies should be and doesnt want anybody to say otherwise, understandable but problematic too.

Not many can ask for something like that, it would be a shame if it would hurt his career, he is good but not this good i think.
 
Dude doesn't have a resume that would give him free reign over a franchise like that. Directors like Gunn, Coogler, Reeves, and Waititi did work that rightfully keeps meddlesome producers off their back during the process.
 
This is just my theory but critics labelling this as "the best Terminator movie since T2" inadvertently hurt the movie even more.

The reason I say that is because when you do that, it subtly damns the movie with faint praise. And what I mean by that is no audience is going to care about another sequel that is not as good as T2. Arguably each failed movie, you can say the same freaking thing.
 
Miller is talented, no doubt. I do question his abilities as a writer, but as a director, he is fine and still refining his craft. As long as his appeal isn't also bringing along a sfx company that can be shortchanged.
 
I'd be curious to know what Miller wanted that was significantly different from his cut.

In previous interviews, he made it seem like he was all in for Cameron's ideas with the prologue.
 
I'd be curious to know what Miller wanted that was significantly different from his cut.

In previous interviews, he made it seem like he was all in for Cameron's ideas with the prologue.

First off he wanted the humans to lose. Cameron wanted them to win

Terminator: Dark Fate Director on Why He Won't Work With James Cameron Again - IGN

One of the biggest creative differences the two had was around the plot direction of the movie. Miller wanted Dark Fate's antagonist, Legion (basically the updated version of Skynet) to win against the humans, while Cameron instead wanted to mirror his first two films in the franchise and tell another story of the humans overcoming the robots.

"[I suggested] Legion is so powerful, the only way to beat it is going back in time and strangle it in the crib," recalls Miller. "Jim says, 'What's dramatic about the humans losing?' And I say, 'Well, What's dramatic about the humans winning and they just need to keep on winning?' I like a last stand. It's not his thing."
 
Last edited:
Eh, I wouldn’t be interested in just remaking his first two films either.
 
To be fair, guys, Tim Miller doesn't ever speak about wanting 100% creative control, and aknowledges that, of course, the producers had final cut. He's merely talking about having a certain amount of control over his movies, being the credited director, which means he probably didn't get enough of it.

There's a difference between wanting final cut (which is not what he's talking about) and wanting to have the possibility to make creative decisions, instead of becoming a mere "executor" on set.

And honestly his original idea to have humanity lose, with time travel being the only option would have brought much needed diversion to the franchise, and it would have upped the stakes, because as he says himself, it would've been a "last stand." And after two movies, that's actually what you need.

There probably were big disagreements during development and pre-production, with the editing phase just being the icing on the cake.

I think Terminator is just not the right material for him. Miller is a hip director, deep in trends. He isn't a visionary. He was perfect for DP with his sense of humor and utilitarian approach to visuals.

I honestly don't agree, as I think it's a pretty simplistic take on Tim Miller as a director. Because with the script "Deadpool" have, he could've thrived in "trends" and could have made it flashy to a fault --- which he didn't.
 
Last edited:
Unless you’re a director with the clout of James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, or even Chris Nolan then you’re never going to be afforded 100% creative freedom on a movie, especially movies that cost over a hundred million dollars to make and you’re only a second-time director.


 
To be fair, guys, Tim Miller doesn't ever speak about wanting 100% creative control, and aknowledges that, of course, the producers had final cut. He's merely talking about having a certain amount of control over his movies, being the credited director, which means he probably didn't get enough of it.

There's a difference between wanting final cut (which is not what he's talking about) and wanting to have the possibility to make creative decisions, instead of becoming a mere "executor" on set.

And honestly his original idea to have humanity lose, with time travel being the only option would have brought much needed diversion to the franchise, and it would have upped the stakes, because as he says himself, it would've been a "last stand." And after two movies, that's actually what you need.

There probably were big disagreements during development and pre-production, with the editing phase just being the icing on the cake.



I honestly don't agree, as I think it's a pretty simplistic take on Tim Miller as a director. Because with the script "Deadpool" have, he could've thrived in "trends" and could have made it flashy to a fault --- which he didn't.

I'm not sure what Tim Miller expected. This wasn't his world and characters. And fans didn't want his vision. What they really wanted was the true Cameron sequel. And it feels like we still didn't get that here.
 
He's lucky he didn't get the Rian Johnson treatment due to the public knowing Cameron was somewhat attached.
 
I wouldn’t say that. It definitely got much better reviews than the last two.
 
That wasn’t the statement. The statement was his involvement added nothing. It did critically.
 
I question if Cameron being involved really brought anything to the table critically since it seems like Miller generally had the better ideas like having the humans losing this time to Legion(The Skynet stand-in) in order to increase the stakes as opposed to Cameron’s ideas of rehashing the humans already being victorious in battle against Legion. Not to mention the controversial opening scene was Cameron’s idea, not Miller’s. Now that isn’t to say, Cameron probably didn’t contribute good ideas but I’m just not sure his involvement majorly strengthened the critically reception in any real way.
 
I question if Cameron being involved really brought anything to the table critically since it seems Miller generally had the better ideas like having the humans losing this time to Legion(The Skynet stand-in) as opposed to Cameron’s ideas of rehashing the humans already being victorious in battle against the Skynet. Not to mention the opening scene was Cameron’s idea, not Miller’s. That isn’t to say, Cameron probably didn’t contribute good ideas but I’m not sure his involvement made much of a difference.
Why would Legion send anyone to the past if they're winning?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"