RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,888
Posts: 5,476,213
Members: 25,049
Currently online: 725
Newest member: RikersBeard

TrekToday headlines

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 2 2013, 04:33 PM   #46
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
Arnold Schwarzenegger is way too old to be the Terminator. He looks like someone who is 80 trying to be 50. Yeah, they could try and digitally de-age him, but that would just be spending a lot of money on something pretty questionable.

A reboot makes sense at this point, but I'm almost thinking there just isn't any need for any more Terminator movies.
More like a pretty healthy 65 year old trying to be 50.
It doesn't matter. Point is that he's too old and it looks odd if he's trying to play a young character.

Pingfah wrote: View Post
Ryan8bit wrote: View Post
A reboot makes sense at this point, but I'm almost thinking there just isn't any need for any more Terminator movies.
When were Terminator movies ever needed?
I knew when I was writing "need" that someone would jump all over that.

Of course no one actually needs Terminator or any movie for that matter. This is "need" in the artistic sense meaning that a work either does or doesn't need something to be complete.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2 2013, 04:39 PM   #47
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

The Terminator franchise is Arnie. If he's not there playing a Terminator then I'm out.

Pay the special effects guys whatever they need to de-age Arnie and then use the £10 or so that you have left to improvise the rest.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2 2013, 04:56 PM   #48
tighr
Commodore
 
tighr's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

Shazam! wrote: View Post
The Terminator franchise is Arnie. If he's not there playing a Terminator then I'm out.
That's ridiculous. Plenty of films have been rebooted without the actor who made the role/series initially famous.

The success of a reboot entirely depends on the quality of the script, not on the presence of an actor.
__________________
~Tighr™: Not helping the situation since 1983
tighr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2 2013, 05:10 PM   #49
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

tighr wrote: View Post
Shazam! wrote: View Post
The Terminator franchise is Arnie. If he's not there playing a Terminator then I'm out.
That's ridiculous. Plenty of films have been rebooted without the actor who made the role/series initially famous.
And how many of them were any good?
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2 2013, 05:39 PM   #50
Guy Gardener
Fleet Admiral
 
Guy Gardener's Avatar
 
Location: In the lap of squalor I assure you.
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

How about if this time Arnold plays Kyle Reese?
__________________
"Glitter is the herpes of arts and craft."

Troy Yingst. My Life as Liz
Guy Gardener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 2 2013, 06:00 PM   #51
tighr
Commodore
 
tighr's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

Shazam! wrote: View Post
tighr wrote: View Post
Shazam! wrote: View Post
The Terminator franchise is Arnie. If he's not there playing a Terminator then I'm out.
That's ridiculous. Plenty of films have been rebooted without the actor who made the role/series initially famous.
And how many of them were any good?
I seem to recall Christian Bale's Batman being extremely popular, despite Michael Keaton being known for the role, and it brought him success. In fact, I remember how disappointing it was that he wasn't back for the third film, replaced by Val Kilmer in that dud of a movie.

Star Trek (oh yeah, this is the forum for that franchise!) has been massively successful, despite what some folks here think. Shatner is nowhere to be seen.

Other reboots are basically remakes of older movies or foreign movies, and done really well, but that doesn't really count as far as this discussion. Maybe something like Ocean's 11, but a lot of younger folks probably haven't seen the Rat Pack version.
__________________
~Tighr™: Not helping the situation since 1983
tighr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3 2013, 10:19 PM   #52
Pingfah
Admiral
 
Pingfah's Avatar
 
Location: Pingfah
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

Ryan8bit wrote: View Post


I knew when I was writing "need" that someone would jump all over that.

Of course no one actually needs Terminator or any movie for that matter. This is "need" in the artistic sense meaning that a work either does or doesn't need something to be complete.
I knew exactly what you meant by it, and it is that need I am disputing. Terminator didn't need T2 to be complete, it was a complete piece of work in it's own right, and T2 sure as hell didn't need T3 or T4. Surely each piece of work deserves to be judged on its own merit?

The "need" in the sense that you describe it will be defined by the film itself, not by other films. I've never understood this aversion people have to sequels or reboots, a good film is a good film, who cares what came before or after it.
__________________
So it goes.
Pingfah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 12:14 AM   #53
Frontier
Vice Admiral
 
Frontier's Avatar
 
Location: Fifth Circle of Hell, IE: Pennsylvania
View Frontier's Twitter Profile Send a message via AIM to Frontier
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

One thing I hope they'll do (which I know they won't, because they haven't thus far) is bring back the full Terminator theme music. Not just the drum-beat "dun-dun, dun-dun-dun" but the whole thing. That'd be nice.
__________________
Me on Tumblr
Me on Twitter

Frontier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 02:26 PM   #54
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

There have been so many Terminator wannabes. Arnold defined that role. Just like only Bruce Willis can be John McClane, only Sylvester Stallone can be John Rambo, and only Harrison Ford can be Indiana Jones and Han Solo, only Arnold can be The Terminator. Other actors can play different Terminators, like Robert Patrick played the T-1000. But the T-101, that's only Arnold.

And yeah, Chris Pine ain't no Captain Kirk either. He's a different character with the same name. Shatner defined that role, just like the guys listed above defined their roles.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 5 2013, 05:31 PM   #55
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

Pingfah wrote: View Post
Ryan8bit wrote: View Post


I knew when I was writing "need" that someone would jump all over that.

Of course no one actually needs Terminator or any movie for that matter. This is "need" in the artistic sense meaning that a work either does or doesn't need something to be complete.
I knew exactly what you meant by it, and it is that need I am disputing. Terminator didn't need T2 to be complete, it was a complete piece of work in it's own right, and T2 sure as hell didn't need T3 or T4. Surely each piece of work deserves to be judged on its own merit?

The "need" in the sense that you describe it will be defined by the film itself, not by other films. I've never understood this aversion people have to sequels or reboots, a good film is a good film, who cares what came before or after it.
Ok, maybe I should phrase it this way: Does the end of T2 really beg for a sequel? In a sense, I can understand a sequel to T1, but not so much to T2. And of course, everything that's suppose to have followed T2 has had to bend over backwards to try and make it work, and failed in the process.

I just think that there is a time to acknowledge when something is done and to stop milking it. I think some series have seemingly unending potential to continue, and others don't have as much. Star Trek is the kind of franchise that works in continuing because that's just part of its premise. Star Wars probably works even better because of its more fantastical setting. Something like The Hunger Games trilogy is probably best left at the trilogy and nothing more (and even that might be pushing it). Or Back to the Future, whose creators have admirably claimed that it is complete and that there won't be a BTTF4 as long as they're alive.

I feel that the first two Terminator movies were complete. That doesn't rule out the possibility of a sequel being able to be written by a good writer. Unfortunately, that was not T3 and TS. Because of those and SCC, I have my doubts about any future Terminator movies. I'd be fine with it if I felt there was something good to be contributed to the franchise, but so far it's been pretty dismal in comparison.

All that said, because I love Terminator, I will still give these presumably rebooted movies a chance. Even if I feel they aren't artistically necessary, I'm still curious as to what they might do.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 5 2013, 10:30 PM   #56
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers

Franchises die when the creation process starts with "We need a new film, get me some ideas". Good films always start with someone going "I have an idea, let's try a film!"

Terminator 2 was great because Cameron had all those ideas ready. Terminator 2 is what Terminator 1 would have been like had the technology been there already, so Cameron put all those ideas in some drawer and ten years later did the film he always wanted to do to begin with.

Terminator 3 and 4 are the result of producers saying "We need a new Terminator film. Go make shit up."

And Terminator 5 will be no different.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
arnold schwarzenegger, terminator

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.