Terminator: Genisys - Part 4

[Tg11]

YOU ARE TERMINATED!!!!!!!!! I can't wait until July 1st until this movie comes out and I can't wait to see Jason Clarke as John Connor because he is partly the reason why I am so excited about this film because I know he will make a great John Connor but even more excited that Lee Byung Hun will be the new T-1000 taking over Robert Patrick's role because if anyone can replace Robert Patrick as the T-1000 then Lee Byung Hun would be perfect

 

[Green Goblin]

Am I the only one who thinks this movie doesn't look that great?

 

[DarkKnight88]

Am I the only one who thinks this movie doesn't look that great?

Have you missed the last dozen pages?

 

[MadVillainy]

Have you missed the last dozen pages?

haha I was about to post the same damn thing

 

[Supernova]

This franchise is beyond screwed, at this point I'm not even mad I'm just sad.

 

[Mysteryman]

For Terminator Salvation, They were overselling all the robots they had and The Future War setting.
This time, they seem to be overselling the convoluted storyline.

 

[Bren]

YOU ARE TERMINATED!!!!!!!!! I can't wait until July 1st until this movie comes out and I can't wait to see Jason Clarke as John Connor because he is partly the reason why I am so excited about this film because I know he will make a great John Connor but even more excited that Lee Byung Hun will be the new T-1000 taking over Robert Patrick's role because if anyone can replace Robert Patrick as the T-1000 then Lee Byung Hun would be perfect

Full stops are not illegal.

 

[Teelie]

Am I the only one who thinks this movie doesn't look that great?

Have you missed the last dozen pages?

haha I was about to post the same damn thing

Really. I want this to be a good movie but if the leaked spoilers are even remotely true...

 

[Rowsdower!]

Even if they're NOT true, I still think this movie will be bad, based off of what we know so far and how the trailers look. The concept is a just a half-assed attempt to pull a JJ Abrams' Star Trek with the Terminator franchise.

And look at it this way: those spoilers likely came from a leaked version of the script. Maybe there have been rewrites since then, and maybe there haven't. But there were similar leaks during the production of Terminator Salvation about things that didn't make it into the final version (John only having a bit part and becoming a Terminator at the end). And while those things would have made the movie even worse, what we got still sucked. So one way or the other, Terminator Gynessiesyssessss will probably be terrible.

 

[I Am The Knight]

This is my most anticipated terrible movie of the year!

 

[Rowsdower!]

Hahaha yeah. Mine too. I try not to judge movies too harshly before they come out, but sometimes you just get a bad feeling about a movie.


Or in the case of this movie, you get a "This is going to be worse than a colonoscopy" feeling.

 

[Mysteryman]

I certainly hope it won't be that bad .
The title change really baffles me though.

 

[samsnee]

https://gma.yahoo.com/terminator-ge...tor-salvation-123707536--abc-news-movies.html

Arnold straight up slams the fourth film: "IT SUCKED."

But though he's trying to make us forget...he was involved in that one as well!

Would love to see someone mash this up with Bale's confused interview face, immediately followed by a clip of Bale's T:S on-set rant...

Was he involved in Salvation? I know they used his likeness but I don't think he had any input on the movie.

I'm in the minority but I like T3. It doesn't top T2 but I bought the ending. It still has it's cringeworthy moments (Talk to the hand) but it doesn't insult my intelligence like Salvation did. The only thing redeemable from that was Anton Yelchin.

 

[JackMercy]

Was he involved in Salvation? I know they used his likeness but I don't think he had any input on the movie.

I'm in the minority but I like T3. It doesn't top T2 but I bought the ending. It still has it's cringeworthy moments (Talk to the hand) but it doesn't insult my intelligence like Salvation did. The only thing redeemable from that was Anton Yelchin.

He lent permission to use his likeness (and likely got paid for it), even if it was only "his head." That's being "involved" officially, as far as I am concerned. In lending the rights to a version of himself to appear, he is legally agreeing to be part of (and effectively endorsing) the production. Plus, he is known to have visited the set/production at least once.

Arnie's being a bit hypocritical here, but what else is new?

P.S. Agreed on T3 -- it remains watchable (and even enjoyable, in moments) for me -- and the ending makes it all worth it... whereas I don't anticipate watching Salvation ever again, following one theatrical viewing.

P.P.S. I ran into McG at an airport soon after Salvation was released -- I gave him the "I know who you are, and you know I know who you are, and your film was awful" look. I think he got it.

 

[titansupes]

P.P.S. I ran into McG at an airport soon after Salvation was released -- I gave him the "I know who you are, and you know I know who you are, and your film was awful" look. I think he got it.

 

[Supernova]

He lent permission to use his likeness (and likely got paid for it), even if it was only "his head." That's being "involved" officially, as far as I am concerned. In lending the rights to a version of himself to appear, he is legally agreeing to be part of (and effectively endorsing) the production. Plus, he is known to have visited the set/production at least once.

Arnie's being a bit hypocritical here, but what else is new?

P.S. Agreed on T3 -- it remains watchable (and even enjoyable, in moments) for me -- and the ending makes it all worth it... whereas I don't anticipate watching Salvation ever again, following one theatrical viewing.

P.P.S. I ran into McG at an airport soon after Salvation was released -- I gave him the "I know who you are, and you know I know who you are, and your film was awful" look. I think he got it.

Bet you his bank account made Him smile though after this while he was sitting in first Class

 

[Rocketman]

I don't think this franchise is screwed (yet), but I do think they made a huge mistake by bringing Arnold back, and basically relying on him for success. If they were going to reboot this, they should've just done it. He looks old, and I don't care what excuse they make in the story, the dude is 70 and he's playing a robot. I don't agree with the notion that Arnold is the only key to making this series successful and that Salvation was the proof of that. Salvation just wasn't a good movie. You don't need Arnold to make a good movie.

The whole problem with everything after T2 is that we don't know which timeline to follow, and that includes The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Now with Genisys, the storyline in the old movies still counts, but it's being reset. That leaves us with 5 separate continuities - it's just too convoluted. There are hundreds of questions to be asked.

What they should've done is COMPLETELY IGNORE the past movies and TV show, and LITERALLY start from scratch, without Arnold. Tell the entire story again as if it were the first time, just like with Batman Begins, just like with Casino Royale, just like with Man of Steel, just like with The Amazing Spider-Man. That's how you do it. Superman Returns is an example of what you don't do, and now I'm seeing the same thing with Genisys.

Get an actor to play the Terminator who is younger and is an action star. Hell, there are dozens. The Rock, Jason Momoa, Vin Diesel, Jeremy Renner, Chris Hemsworth, Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum, Tom Hardy, Idris Elba, Javier Bardem. They could all EASILY carry the franchise, and they barely don't even need to speak.

Breathe new life into the series, don't rely on same star from 30 years ago who barely had any dialogue. He has no character. There's no personality or character there. The T-101 is a completely blank slate. He doesn't even have a name. It's not like they have to follow an arc. He's not Indiana Jones or James Bond - and hell, they ARE recasting them. Meanwhile, they're sticking to the 70 year old actor who played an emotionless robot who hardly speaks. It's a ROBOT. Get someone else.

 

[Alien Anal]

I don't think this franchise is screwed (yet), but I do think they made a huge mistake by bringing Arnold back, and basically relying on him for success. If they were going to reboot this, they should've just done it. He looks old, and I don't care what excuse they make in the story, the dude is 70 and he's playing a robot. I don't agree with the notion that Arnold is the only key to making this series successful and that Salvation was the proof of that. Salvation just wasn't a good movie. You don't need Arnold to make a good movie.

The whole problem with everything after T2 is that we don't know which timeline to follow, and that includes The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Now with Genisys, the storyline in the old movies still counts, but it's being reset. That leaves us with 5 separate continuities - it's just too convoluted. There are hundreds of questions to be asked.

What they should've done is COMPLETELY IGNORE the past movies and TV show, and LITERALLY start from scratch, without Arnold. Tell the entire story again as if it were the first time, just like with Batman Begins, just like with Casino Royale, just like with Man of Steel, just like with The Amazing Spider-Man. That's how you do it. Superman Returns is an example of what you don't do, and now I'm seeing the same thing with Genisys.

Get an actor to play the Terminator who is younger and is an action star. Hell, there are dozens. The Rock, Jason Momoa, Vin Diesel, Jeremy Renner, Chris Hemsworth, Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum, Tom Hardy, Idris Elba, Javier Bardem. They could all EASILY carry the franchise, and they barely don't even need to speak.

Breathe new life into the series, don't rely on same star from 30 years ago who barely had any dialogue. He has no character. There's no personality or character there. The T-101 is a completely blank slate. He doesn't even have a name. It's not like they have to follow an arc. He's not Indiana Jones or James Bond - and hell, they ARE recasting them. Meanwhile, they're sticking to the 70 year old actor who played an emotionless robot who hardly speaks. It's a ROBOT. Get someone else.

yeh I pretty much agree with this. I feel like The Guest is the closest thing we will get to fresh reboot

 

[Rowsdower!]

The Guest... now THAT is a movie that would get a sequel if there was any justice in this world.

 

[MadVillainy]

I don't think this franchise is screwed (yet), but I do think they made a huge mistake by bringing Arnold back, and basically relying on him for success. If they were going to reboot this, they should've just done it. He looks old, and I don't care what excuse they make in the story, the dude is 70 and he's playing a robot. I don't agree with the notion that Arnold is the only key to making this series successful and that Salvation was the proof of that. Salvation just wasn't a good movie. You don't need Arnold to make a good movie.

The whole problem with everything after T2 is that we don't know which timeline to follow, and that includes The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Now with Genisys, the storyline in the old movies still counts, but it's being reset. That leaves us with 5 separate continuities - it's just too convoluted. There are hundreds of questions to be asked.

What they should've done is COMPLETELY IGNORE the past movies and TV show, and LITERALLY start from scratch, without Arnold. Tell the entire story again as if it were the first time, just like with Batman Begins, just like with Casino Royale, just like with Man of Steel, just like with The Amazing Spider-Man. That's how you do it. Superman Returns is an example of what you don't do, and now I'm seeing the same thing with Genisys.

Get an actor to play the Terminator who is younger and is an action star. Hell, there are dozens. The Rock, Jason Momoa, Vin Diesel, Jeremy Renner, Chris Hemsworth, Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum, Tom Hardy, Idris Elba, Javier Bardem. They could all EASILY carry the franchise, and they barely don't even need to speak.

Breathe new life into the series, don't rely on same star from 30 years ago who barely had any dialogue. He has no character. There's no personality or character there. The T-101 is a completely blank slate. He doesn't even have a name. It's not like they have to follow an arc. He's not Indiana Jones or James Bond - and hell, they ARE recasting them. Meanwhile, they're sticking to the 70 year old actor who played an emotionless robot who hardly speaks. It's a ROBOT. Get someone else.

This x1000

Bringing back Arnold was a mistake to me, I was never really with the idea. Especially as a Terminator.
I definetly think that The Rock should've been considered as a Terminator. Vin Diesel and Tom Hardy are 2 other good choices too

And I love Terminator, but yeah by living in the past when it comes to continuing the franchise is a mistake.

I still think Future War was/is the way to go. You see the Fast & Furious franchise; it started as one thing and completely evolved into something else while staying successful. Terminator should've looked at that.

And also I still think it's a really stupid notion that James Cameron is the only one who can make a good Terminator movie. That's so stupid to me

All this being said, I think they were fine leaving it off after T2 or T3. But if theyre so adamant about continuing it there are so many better ways they could've gone about it

EDIT: He's a bit older but I think Clive Owen could've/would've been a good choice for a Terminator too

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, it is a dumb notion that Cameron is the only one who can make a good Terminator movie. The problem is, we've had hacks like Jonathan Mostow, McG and Alan Taylor taking turns at ruining the franchise.

 

[Fallen Angel]

The right's to the Terminator franchise will go back to Cameron in the not to distant future but he's busy with 10 Avatar movies to actually consider making another Terminator movie.

 

[Rowsdower!]

The rights actually revert back to him?

 

[Fallen Angel]

The rights actually revert back to him?

Yep

http://www.slashfilm.com/james-cameron-regains-terminator-rights-in-2019/

Turns out Megan Ellison is financing 33% of the new Terminator, and her brother David, of Skydance Productions, is providing another 33%. Paramount is picking up the remaining third, which is part of what got Schwarzenegger back on board for good. (Skydance and Paramount have partnered on films such as Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol and Jack Reacher.)
In all the data about this new Terminator installment, there’s one glaring bit: the Ellisons may only have the franchise rights until 2019, when they’ll revert back to series creator James Cameron.



Franchise creator James Cameron — who has stayed on the sidelines since directing the first two classic films — is the beneficiary of changes in copyright law.


Basically North American rights to the franchise revert back to him in 2019. That is because the copyright reversion now takes place after 35 years, and The Terminator was made in 1984.

Realistically, is James Cameron likely to do another Terminator movie? Not at all. But he could license the rights back to Ellison and/or Paramount, especially if the new film(s) work well. He could give them to someone else, or just let it be.

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

Or! Just don't make any more Terminator movies...evert: