Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
There is a Terminator 5, but this is a fan trailer with 100% recycled footage and audio. I'm not even sure if principal photography has started, I know Emilia Clarke recently gave an interview where she talked about how hard a time she is having getting in shape.
Edward Furlong is neither in this movie, nor most likely any other tentpole movie again. He has serious insurability issues of the Lindsay Lohan type.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/19 23:01:38
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Last I heard, the new Terminator was supposed to be another time travel adventure, going back into the 50's or something...It's been a long time since I've looked into it.
Enough of the time travel. Can we just have the future war please?
Skynet should become aware that meddling in the past does not help them. They then choose not to invent time travel and the next movie can have an old Michael Biehn as a Kyle Reese who never went back in time to be John Conner's father.
If Terminator 5 doesn't have a variation of this music in it, then it can suck a fat one.
I think they have totally screwed this whole idea up beyond repair, frankly.
Movie one: You can go back in time and alter the future. Terrific.
Movie two: More of the same. No fate but what we make. Great.
Movie three, where it all goes wrong: The future is fated and you can't really change it much. This is very, very problematic for a lot of reasons, but lets go with the obvious: why is Skynet ever bothering with trying to kill John Connor? It's immutable. It's a kick in the shorts for the whole damn franchise.
Sarah Connor Chronicles: ignores movie 3, picks up after movie 2. Works really well. Lets Mrs. Manson do some acting work.
Movie four: picks up after movie three. Time travel is pretty much done now, but they still want to kill John Connor & Kyle Reese for reasons that at this point make no sense at all. Christian Bale delivers one of the worst John Connors yet.
I think they fumbled it badly in movie 3, the Sarah Connor Chronicles recovered the ball, and then handed it off to someone who ran the ball as fast as they could into their own end zone or home plate or whatever. Look, sports aren't really my bag but I think you get what I mean.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/20 00:53:35
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Agree with Ouze. For all it's series 2 problems, the TV series and its concept of multiple timelines did an admirable job of making sense of how the first movie's fated, singular timeline worked with the second film's concept of changing the future.
But that was all abandoned in favour of whatever the hell the fourth movie was, and at this point the franchise is a mess. A reboot is probably the best option, other than just leaving the damn thing along and making up new stories about an entirely different set of humanoid killer robots.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Yeah, the footage changes resolution several times, the last of the music lacked the "OOMPH" trailors have.
Never underestimate people will go for a prank
People who make fake trailers for movies should be shut into an elevator with Joan Rivers, Fran Drescher and Rosanne Barr on their periods, with a grenade so they can end it whenever they wish.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/20 02:27:28
"Holy Sh*&, you've opened my eyes and changed my mind about this topic, thanks Dakka OT!"
Ouze wrote: I think they have totally screwed this whole idea up beyond repair, frankly.
Movie one: You can go back in time and alter the future. Terrific.
Movie two: More of the same. No fate but what we make. Great.
Movie three, where it all goes wrong: The future is fated and you can't really change it much. This is very, very problematic for a lot of reasons, but lets go with the obvious: why is Skynet ever bothering with trying to kill John Connor? It's immutable. It's a kick in the shorts for the whole damn franchise.
Sarah Connor Chronicles: ignores movie 3, picks up after movie 2. Works really well. Lets Mrs. Manson do some acting work.
Movie four: picks up after movie three. Time travel is pretty much done now, but they still want to kill John Connor & Kyle Reese for reasons that at this point make no sense at all. Christian Bale delivers one of the worst John Connors yet.
I think they fumbled it badly in movie 3, the Sarah Connor Chronicles recovered the ball, and then handed it off to someone who ran the ball as fast as they could into their own end zone or home plate or whatever. Look, sports aren't really my bag but I think you get what I mean.
I like the novels by SM Stirling which also ignore the third film. He leaves the future war until the second half of the third book, and rightly so because they future war is dull. Do we really need a whole film about people running around between piles of skulls and burned out cars shooting lasers at each other? We know humanity is winning the war against the machines which is why skynet has tried to alter history, but has effectively forewarned humanity by giving them, especially John Connor, the opportunity to stockpile weapons and prepare, and which has pushed the odds even further against skynet. They probably should have stopped at the second film to be honest.
Ouze wrote: I think they have totally screwed this whole idea up beyond repair, frankl
Movie four: picks up after movie three. Time travel is pretty much done now, but they still want to kill John Connor & Kyle Reese for reasons that at this point make no sense at all. Christian Bale delivers one of the worst John Connors yet.
I agree on the batman Conner, but i liked the movie because future robot war and sexy A-10 pilot double win!
Movie four: picks up after movie three. Time travel is pretty much done now, but they still want to kill John Connor & Kyle Reese for reasons that at this point make no sense at all. Christian Bale delivers one of the worst John Connors yet.
That was one of those movies that went through all sorts of production hell and revisions. IIRC origianlly John Connor wasn't even in it, but just a voice on the radio and you followed a group of resistenace fighters inspired by him. Eventually the Marcus character was added, and then Bale wanted to be Connor and made the character more central. We also don't want to forget the ending that they changed from test screenings:
Spoiler:
John Connor dies from the T-101 but Marcus takes over and becomes John Connor to keep the resistance alive.
Apparently the script changed so much that the guy writing the novelization had to completely rewrite it after turning it in as it was nothing like what was about to be distributed.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
I liked all the terminator films for one reason or another, though I can't argue with the problems. In the 4th...... Ugh ya the bad is bad. I really wish they wouldn't have gone with the "oh your heart is so strong! " which leads up to "HE'S DYING WE NEED A STRONG HEART! WHO HAS A STRONG HEART?! " that whole thing made me roll my eyes
JSF wrote:... this is really quite an audacious move by GW, throwing out any pretext that this is a game and that its customers exist to do anything other than buy their overpriced products for the sake of it. The naked arrogance, greed and contempt for their audience is shocking.
I get what he's saying though. I've been waiting for a future war movie since the 80s. The closest we came was the 4th movie and I've already expressed his I feel on that.
Trailer is totally fake.
Audio is in terrible quality, and is definitely from other sources.
A majority of the video footage also appears to be recycled.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Trailer is totally fake.
Audio is in terrible quality, and is definitely from other sources.
A majority of the video footage also appears to be recycled.
But it shows what we actually want, a decent reboot.
That crap that they called the 4th... That one never existed IMO
Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
If Terminator 5 doesn't have a variation of this music in it, then it can suck a fat one.
QFT.
I barely acknowledge that 3 or 4 even existed tbh.
Total trainwrecks I enjoyed the TV series, pity they cancelled it, season 1 was very strong imo.
Dman137 wrote:
goobs is all you guys will ever be
By 1-irt: Still as long as Hissy keeps showing up this is one of the most entertaining threads ever.
SickSix wrote: I am boycotting any further remakes or reboots. Everyone else should do the same.
You would never be able to watch a movie, tv show, play a game, or read a book again.
Being influenced by something doesn't necessarily make it a remake.
Admittedly I am being a but broad in the interpretation, but retelling, remaking, reorganizing, rebooting, retooling et al. is as old as storytelling; as the saying goes there is nothing new under the sun. The question shouldn't be if something is a remake/reboot but if it is a good remake/reboot. Like anything some are and some aren't.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
SavageRobby wrote: At least T3 had Kristanna Loken. T4 was light in the eye candy department.
I did, generally speaking, like her performance. I think it's a shame that her career never really took off.
Still a pretty big turd of a movie if for how it shat all over the established canon if nothing else.
That being said, I will still... sigh... go to see a Terminator 5. My first "going out" date was to take a girl to go see Terminator 2 at the Allerton Theater, because I have always known what ladies like (sci-fi is a real panty dropper). I have a sentimental attachment to the franchise that way.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/20 20:10:09
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
SickSix wrote: I am boycotting any further remakes or reboots. Everyone else should do the same.
You would never be able to watch a movie, tv show, play a game, or read a book again.
Being influenced by something doesn't necessarily make it a remake.
Admittedly I am being a but broad in the interpretation, but retelling, remaking, reorganizing, rebooting, retooling et al. is as old as storytelling; as the saying goes there is nothing new under the sun. The question shouldn't be if something is a remake/reboot but if it is a good remake/reboot. Like anything some are and some aren't.
And if you're drinkin' well, you know that you're my friend and I say "I think I'll have myself a beer" 
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
~4100
~1660
