|
Post by Rebecca on Dec 23, 2008 17:26:24 GMT -5
Terminator SalvationRelease Date: May 22, 2009Directed by Joseph McGinty Nichol (known as McG), it is the fourth Terminator film and stars Christian Bale as John Connor and Sam Worthington as the Terminator Marcus Wright. It also introduces a young version of the first film's hero, Kyle Reese, played by Anton Yelchin. (Excerpt taken from Wikipedia)This is the first installment of a new trilogy in the Terminator series. Plot Summary: Set in post-apocalyptic 2018, John Connor is the man fated to lead the human resistance against Skynet and its army of Terminators. But the future Connor was raised to believe in is altered in part by the appearance of Marcus Wright, a stranger whose last memory is of being on death row. Connor must decide whether Marcus has been sent from the future, or rescued from the past. As Skynet prepares its final onslaught, Connor and Marcus both embark on an odyssey that takes them into the heart of Skynet’s operations, where they uncover the terrible secret behind the possible annihilation of mankind. (Excerpt taken from Imdb.com) Videos are updated as of March 6, 2009www.skynetresearch.com/Click here for another great info site. At the Terminator Salvation Comic Con panel, McG effused about many of the film’s details. Here are some of the more interesting tidbits after the break: 1. PG-13 Rating Rumors Debunked - At both the panel and the press conference, McG removed any doubts that he was under pressure to deliver a PG-13 rating for the film. Referring to the studio executives for this film, McG explained “I’ve been given their blessing to make the picture…and if it’s a rated R picture, then that’s that.” He elaborated that he’s not against the idea of a PG-13 rating, but that the ultimate rating will depend completely upon what the final vision for the film is.
2. 2018, and the Kyle Reese Backstory Explained - The film will take place in 2018, the first Terminator movie set exclusively post-Judgment Day. It will have aspects of war films, as the humans unite to battle Skynet (which will also be featured). A lot of attention will be given to the T-600s, less advanced versions of the T-800 (the terminator model that Arnold played in the first three films). Given the complex, interweaving, and conflicting timelines in the collective Terminator films and The Sarah Connor Chronicles, McG has opted not to adhere too strictly to the mythology established in these works, but has worked on maintaining the vision of the first films, Cameron’s in particular.
Furthermore, we’ll see how Kyle Reese developed as a young man. We will find out the genesis of some of Reese’s best lines, and also find out that “some of the best moves that Kyle Reese has learned, he’s learned from machines.”
3. Harvesters, Aerostats, and Hydrobots, Oh My! - According to McG, the film will feature the machines that were visible in quick, passing shots in previous Terminator films. In particular, McG suggested that the Harvesters will apparently play a prominent, Matrix-like role, gigantic machines that are “stomping through the future, harvesting people.”
4. Film Treatment Will Be Silver to the Extreme - The movie was filmed with color stock but will be treated with as much silver as a typical black and white film, about 3x as much as normal. This gives the film an ethereal quality that suggests something is visually “off.” McG explained that he took some inspiration for the film from Children of Men, and based on what I’ve seen so far (which is extremely limited), this sounds quite plausible.
5. The film will end on a cliffhanger - McG confirmed that the film will end on a cliffhanger at the Salvation press conference.
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Dec 23, 2008 18:56:40 GMT -5
Sort of stuck between Absolute Bullshit and Actually interesting.
Bale is a big step in the right direction, but probably not enough to balance the turding effect the name McG adds.
Overall I honestly don't care much about Terminator as a franchise. The first was a great, tense, low budget standalone. T2 was the sequel that was never needed, but an awesome film (my favourite). T3 was a bit of fun yet lacking. It was to be expected as Cameron was nothing to do with it, but despite being too light it did restore the timeloop and kinda settle everything. T4 will no doubt step further into pointless sequel territory as each film so far has, and I'm not particularly interested in the war the first 3 films described pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by hitnrun017 on Dec 23, 2008 19:10:16 GMT -5
I'm still undecided on this film. I wasn't planning on seeing it at all even though the first two are two of my favorite movies. Charlie's Angels director and Catwoman co-writer? Seriously? I also really don't like Rise of the Machines at all. But I'd be lying if I said I didn't think the new trailer was good. I'll see it, I'm just keeping my expectations low.
|
|
darkdahlia
Respected Watcher
http://thedahliapost.blogspot.com/[Mo0:24]
Posts: 584
|
Post by darkdahlia on Dec 23, 2008 19:28:51 GMT -5
ummmm I gonna see it cause Bale is hot. I'm not loving the fact that he has the same batman voice...I made fun of that when I saw the preview in the theatre. hehe I'm a mystery science theater 3000 type of movie goer. People think I'm hilarious.
|
|
Hallow Thorn
Bad Ass Wicca
Oh and You're Welcome
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,306
|
Post by Hallow Thorn on Dec 23, 2008 19:57:29 GMT -5
Yeah I can't wait for this film .... T1-T2 are the best Sci-fi films ever! ... Rise of the Machines sucked big time... but with out Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor, Michael Biehn as Kyle Reese and Arnold Schwarzenegger as The Terminator, it's not going to be the better than 1-2 but It already looks 10x better than T3.
|
|
cyclo
Common Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 79
|
Post by cyclo on Dec 23, 2008 21:20:56 GMT -5
I love the first two terminator films (huge james cameron fan), but the third was really 'meh', and i dont really expect much here. McG is laughable, and although I love Christian Bale, he doesn't seem like John Connor at all.
|
|
|
Post by Rebecca on Dec 26, 2008 17:48:25 GMT -5
I actually disagree. I think Bale will make a terrific adult-John Connor. Plus, he's hott. As for the director, meh. From what I've seen from the trailer, it looks like this movie could define his career. It's the screenwriters that are making me excited for the movie. Come on, Quantum of Solace? The Dark Knight? Two of the best movies to come out this year. I cannot wait to see how they will write the fourth installment. As evidenced by T3, everything has changed. This opens up endless possibilities for the script, only heightening my anticipation. I'm also really excited for Ah-nold. I know the Governator won't be collaborating in the film, but they've found a body double, and with today's CG and the mass amount of make-up used on Schwarzenegger's original role, it shouldn't be hard to create him, if only for a cameo.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Dec 26, 2008 22:52:55 GMT -5
I keep trying to convince myself that if Christian Bale signed on for this...the script must be pretty damn good. So I am looking forward to this. The first two in the franchise are amazing and I enjoyed the third for what it was (mindless action). As a Terminator film, part 3 really sucked, but as an action movie, it was pretty stellar. The new trailer that came out recently was great, so I am really hoping for the best here.
|
|
BenTaylor3907
Wise-cracking Sidekick
Illyria's Qwa'ha Xahn
~ Listening To Fear ~[Mo0:25]
Posts: 2,958
|
Post by BenTaylor3907 on Dec 29, 2008 15:58:39 GMT -5
Does Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles fit in with all this? I'm getting very confused.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Dec 29, 2008 16:10:13 GMT -5
Does Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles fit in with all this? I'm getting very confused. No. Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles is set during a different timeline. Terminator: Salvation, follows the events of Terminator, Terminator 2, and Terminator 3. T: TSCC follows the events of Terminator and Terminator 2, and erases the events in Terminator 3.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Dec 29, 2008 17:58:42 GMT -5
Does Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles fit in with all this? I'm getting very confused. No. Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles is set during a different timeline. Terminator: Salvation, follows the events of Terminator, Terminator 2, and Terminator 3. T: TSCC follows the events of Terminator and Terminator 2, and erases the events in Terminator 3. Darn! I'd rather this next movie follow the T:TSCC than T3, which I thought was pretty bad, overall. But I guess, given how the fate of SCC is still up in limbo after S2, and who knows how much closure we'll get at the end of it, making a movie that follows the continuities set by all three movies instead makes sense. But why McG? Didn't he make those ridiculous Charlie's Angels movies? As well as direct a bunch of Sugar Ray videos back in the day?
|
|
Hallow Thorn
Bad Ass Wicca
Oh and You're Welcome
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,306
|
Post by Hallow Thorn on Dec 30, 2008 18:34:30 GMT -5
I know? why McG, right?... But the trailer looks so cool!..
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Feb 27, 2009 16:08:19 GMT -5
I'm a big Terminator fan, and like T3 a lot tbh. It did no more damage to the story than T2 did in my opinion. It diluted the series with it's pointlessness. Whereas T2 elaborated beautifully on the universe established in the first movie, T3 just kind of copied the formula without adding to it. John was a pitiful protagonist compared to Sarah or even his ten-year-old self, and Arnie had completely outstayed his welcome. The whole film was just going through the motions. In light of SCC and T4, I don't mind T3 so much anymore. But at the time, when you had two perfect movies and one mediocre one, it stuck out like sore thumb. Yeah I get what you mean. Pointlessness is a side-effect with nearly every sequel. I liked T3's portrayal of John Connor, a man crushed by the weight of his destiny, although I would have prefered him getting a little more to actually do. T3 follows T2 somewhat, but the endings are dramatically different; and as a guy who likes the inevitability angle of timetravel, I much prefered that the film ends with Connor accepting his fate and being ready for the war ahead of him. It's pretty ballsy to end a film with the end of the world anyway imo. T3 changes some plot points, but I'd say no more than T2. T2 chewed up a number of things set up in the first, which was clearly a standalone film. Inconsistancies like: -Reese saying the time machine was destroyed so only the two of them could travel, -Only things with human skin going through the time machine, -John Connor's age. (10 in the film despite being clearly 13 or so, forgivable. Set in 1995 yet the Terminator mentions JD happening 3 years after, stupid) -The inevitability angle is changed for a happy ending. Luckily Cameron changed the ending so it's at least ambiguous. I never really understood why duplicate Arnie models would ever be made either to be honest. I've taken some things from 3 and applied them to the overall story to re-work it into a cohesive plot. For instance, I theorise that Judgement Day was always 2003; John merely had the other date fabricated so that when Sarah passes away from cancer in 1997, she believes she succeeded in saving him from his horrible future. I think 3 could have been much more, but I like it for what it is. I half look forward to and half dread T4. Terminator motorbikes? Pfft. I smell PG13
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Feb 27, 2009 17:17:15 GMT -5
It diluted the series with it's pointlessness. Whereas T2 elaborated beautifully on the universe established in the first movie, T3 just kind of copied the formula without adding to it. John was a pitiful protagonist compared to Sarah or even his ten-year-old self, and Arnie had completely outstayed his welcome. The whole film was just going through the motions. In light of SCC and T4, I don't mind T3 so much anymore. But at the time, when you had two perfect movies and one mediocre one, it stuck out like sore thumb. Yeah I get what you mean. Pointlessness is a side-effect with nearly every sequel. I liked T3's portrayal of John Connor, a man crushed by the weight of his destiny, although I would have prefered him getting a little more to actually do. T3 follows T2 somewhat, but the endings are dramatically different; and as a guy who likes the inevitability angle of timetravel, I much prefered that the film ends with Connor accepting his fate and being ready for the war ahead of him. It's pretty ballsy to end a film with the end of the world anyway imo. T3 changes some plot points, but I'd say no more than T2. T2 chewed up a number of things set up in the first, which was clearly a standalone film. Inconsistancies like: -Reese saying the time machine was destroyed so only the two of them could travel, -Only things with human skin going through the time machine, -John Connor's age. (10 in the film despite being clearly 13 or so, forgivable. Set in 1995 yet the Terminator mentions JD happening 3 years after, stupid) -The inevitability angle is changed for a happy ending. Luckily Cameron changed the ending so it's at least ambiguous. I never really understood why duplicate Arnie models would ever be made either to be honest. I've taken some things from 3 and applied them to the overall story to re-work it into a cohesive plot. For instance, I theorise that Judgement Day was always 2003; John merely had the other date fabricated so that when Sarah passes away from cancer in 1997, she believes she succeeded in saving him from his horrible future. I think 3 could have been much more, but I like it for what it is. I half look forward to and half dread T4. Terminator motorbikes? Pfft. I smell PG13 Thanks for moving this to the appropiate thread. I enjoy sequels, even unnecessary ones. But T2 set a standard that T3 really failed to continue and that was sad. For a while, I really thought that T3 had ruined the Terminator series but the TV series proved that only the first two movies are canon and everything else is just optional. It made me feel better and now I more or less accept T3 for what it is. I now follow Sarah Connor Chronicles, which is itself inferior to the Cameron movies, but features better character development and a more "human" story. I have some respect for T3's ballsy ending, but I still think the whole thing was pointless and we should have skipped straight to the future like T4. John Connor was too weak in T3; he's supposedly been trained for combat since early childhood but when a Hunter Killer swoops down, he lies cowering on the floor while Kate is left to fend it off. Just didn't feel much strength or personality from him, traits that Sarah clearly had as early as the first movie. Fanwank time: -There could have been more time machines in the future that John's soldiers tracked down? -The T-1000 could mimic human skin enough to fool the time machine's sensors. -Never noticed this... whatever. -I appreciate the note of hope. Wouldn't say it's a happy ending given the T-800's sacrifice, but at least they removed the sappy alt. ending. They wanted their star back from the last film, it was forgivable. Why wouldn't SkyNet mass produce the same models? I'm not that excited for T4, but they've got a better lead actor this time round, and all the self-parody of T3 seems to have been replaced with a grittier tone. It's about time we got a Terminator movie set in the future and it looks promising. At least they're doing something different from the previous films and the TV show.
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Feb 27, 2009 18:51:56 GMT -5
Thanks for moving this to the appropiate thread. They wanted their star back from the last film, it was forgivable. Why wouldn't SkyNet mass produce the same models? I'm not that excited for T4, but they've got a better lead actor this time round, and all the self-parody of T3 seems to have been replaced with a grittier tone. It's about time we got a Terminator movie set in the future and it looks promising. At least they're doing something different from the previous films and the TV show. Haha no problem. I feared we'd derail the topic if we continued in there. Yeah it's totally forgivable, just questionable as to why Skynet would mass produce the same face for an infiltration robot. I'd notice a dozen Arnie's trying to sneak in one after the other lol I like Bale but I hope he doesn't pull his Bat-voice for the film. He sounds a bit like he's doing a tough guy act in the trailers and it's not neccessary. I never pictured Connor being all that tough anyway. He'd mostly beat machines by outsmarting them cause we've seen how tough they are. The drastically different scenery is definately refreshing. I'm hoping it's as gritty as the trailer hints, but there's fears that this post-apocalypse war movie is gonna be all kinds of watered down. My greatest wish is that this film and the two sequels Bale has already signed on for is that we get to see this war develop in an interesting way, and hopefully visually it'll turn into the scenery we've seen in the snippets of T1-3 so everything ties up nicely. I think T3 itself would be partially redeemed if it became the final part of the first trilogy, with a second set post-judgement trilogy alongside it.
|
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Feb 27, 2009 20:16:45 GMT -5
Afraid I'm not going to able to watch this movie without wondering at what point did Bale lose it.
|
|
|
Post by Rebecca on Feb 28, 2009 19:10:01 GMT -5
Afraid I'm not going to able to watch this movie without wondering at what point did Bale lose it. Lose what? Honestly, I still laugh at the bat voice toward the end of Dark Knight, but he probably just lost his voice and the production team thought it added to the movie lol. John Connor not tough? I always imagined him as something between his mother and father, both immensely tough, which is why T3 didn't work for me. He should also be very intelligent and sexy. Where did this idea of the trilogy getting watered down come from? Link-ey?
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Mar 3, 2009 16:32:10 GMT -5
Don't need a link love; Charlie' Angels director, the ever looming PG-13 fear, and terminator motorbikes that I'm sure will look great in the accompanying playmates toy line. I think they're the common fears amongst fans.
I'd like it to be good, but I won't be heartbroken to hear it's as bad as some people speculate.
EDIT: There's a new trailer out.
|
|
|
Post by Rebecca on Mar 6, 2009 21:38:49 GMT -5
I guess I"m just wondering where these fears are coming from. Why should we be worried about the director just because he did Charlie's Angels? The movie was what it was, a comedy. It is a new genre for the director, so I can see some concern there, though this newest preview looks like awesomness. PG-13? Even Rise of the Machines was R, so the rating seems to have no reliable correlation, let alone causation in this series (R=/= good, good =/=R). So why even fret about it? Seems very unlikely it will score PG-13 anyway with all the violence, seems a wasted effort.
The motorbikes... I can actually see why they used them. It goes with the mythos that this new trilogy is trying to establish: the machines are evolving, and they're primates right now. It would make some sort of logic for them to use fast, established, lightweight technology for scouting purposes, which is exactly what those motorbikes looked like from the preview. Plus... I think they look pretty cool.
I think it's easy to speculate when a cult favorite like the Terminator is being reinvented. New players, new ideas. Cannot possibly hold a candle to the original. Well... poo-poo to the poo-pooing.
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Mar 9, 2009 18:09:48 GMT -5
Well rating honestly doesn't bother me much. It could be good and PG-13, but in an apocalyptic war movie following on from three R rated films, you can understand where a fanbase is coming from with the nerves. McG could prove himself with this. He talks a good game, and certainly seems eager to live up to Cameron. I don't actually fear him as much as studio interference, because as I previously mentioned there's a playmates toy deal, and there will likely be huge pressure to make this thing family friendly. Again, it could be a sound PG-13 film but it's a difficult mesh with its subject matter.
Motorbikes are stupid. Why those little things would be implemented in a barron, reckage covered landscape when flying robots already exist is a question that can only be answered with a "because it's cool" tbh.
|
|