RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,214
Posts: 5,404,859
Members: 24,760
Currently online: 706
Newest member: R.Data

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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 June 11 2014, 04:30 PM   #91
Savage Dragon
TheSeeker
 
Savage Dragon's Avatar
 
Location: New York, NY
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

JD wrote: View Post
I just watched Salvation for the first time and I actually really enjoyed it. As much as I'm looking forward to seeing Emilia Clarke and Arnie's return (well beyond being a CGI face in Salvation), I am kind of disappointed we aren't getting at least one more movie in that setting.
You know, I really like it too. It was better than that shitfest that was T3.
Savage Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 11:37 AM   #92
Saul
Rear Admiral
 
Saul's Avatar
 
Location: 東京
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

Hummm, I find T3 quite entertaining. Salvation on the other hand bored me in many many ways. Acting, action etc.

I'd rank them this way

T2
T1
T3
The Sarah Connor Chronicles
Terminator Salvation
__________________
"It's not that you can see the strings, it's that 40 years later you're still looking at them." - Steven Moffat
"This movie was big. Imagine how big it could have been with me in it?" William Shatner
Saul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 03:09 PM   #93
trekkiebaggio
Vice Admiral
 
trekkiebaggio's Avatar
 
Location: Dancing to the Jailhouse Rock
View trekkiebaggio's Twitter Profile
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

JD wrote: View Post
So does some of it take place pre Judgement Day then?
I did a survey about certain elements in the film, and one of the things it asked about was recreating scenes from the first film but putting a new spin on them.
__________________
Angelic Hellfire - My novel.

Man of Yesterday - My blog: movie, books and board game reviews.
trekkiebaggio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 03:26 PM   #94
DevilEyes
Rear Admiral
 
DevilEyes's Avatar
 
Location: basking in the warmth of the Fire Caves
View DevilEyes's Twitter Profile
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

Professor Zoom wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post

Uh, Linda Hamilton didn't look like that in The Terminator...
Uh, that's why I wrote Linda Hamilton from T2.
I know what you wrote. The question is, why would you think she's supposed to look like Linda Hamilton from T2? The film seems to be covering the part of the story where Kyle Reese is still alive.

Mister Fandango wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post
My eyes hurt from seeing this non-word...
"Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that 'there is no such word.' There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance."
Merriam-Webster.com
So, if it exists as a word, what does it mean? It can't mean "regardless", because it doesn't make sense - "irregardless" should mean the opposite of "regardless", just as "irrespective" is the opposite of "respective" or "irresponsible" is the opposite of "responsible"! So, it should mean... regarding? With regard to? If I say that something is "not untrue" or make up the word "nonincorrect", that means I'm saying it's correct/true, right? I mean... non-wrong? Non-unwrong? Non-unimwrong? Non-unimwrongless?

Guy Gardener wrote: View Post
Mister Fandango wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post
My eyes hurt from seeing this non-word...
"Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that 'there is no such word.' There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance."
Merriam-Webster.com
I looked it up the other day for other reasons.

Irregardless is a word commonly used in place of regardless or irrespective, which has caused controversy since the early twentieth century, though the word appeared in print as early as 1795.[1] Most dictionaries list it as "nonstandard" or "incorrect" usage, and recommend that "regardless" should be used instead.[2][3][4
Seventeen fucking ninety five is a long time ago, and general consensus should trump the 6 or seven librarians that give a damn about the erosion of the English language into garbage.

So yes, I used a word that is probably not real, but I also used it to fuck with the people who get fucked by things like that happening, so to those that were bothered, congratulations on successfully and wittingly being fucked by me, you're welcome.
If I have been fucked by you, I never noticed. Maybe you just aren't memorable...
__________________
Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

my Buffy/Angel rewatch

Last edited by DevilEyes; June 12 2014 at 03:43 PM.
DevilEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 05:38 PM   #95
AvBaur
Captain
 
AvBaur's Avatar
 
Location: Munich, Germany
View AvBaur's Twitter Profile
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

DevilEyes wrote: View Post
So, if it exists as a word, what does it mean? It can't mean "regardless", because it doesn't make sense - "irregardless" should mean the opposite of "regardless", just as "irrespective" is the opposite of "respective" or "irresponsible" is the opposite of "responsible"! So, it should mean... regarding? With regard to?
"Irregardless" means the same as "regardless" - just like "literally" now means the same as "figuratively."
__________________
HIPSTERS IN HELL - my webcomic: http://www.hipsters-comic.com
AvBaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 06:50 PM   #96
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
 
Mister Fandango's Avatar
 
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

DevilEyes wrote: View Post
So, if it exists as a word, what does it mean? It can't mean "regardless", because it doesn't make sense - "irregardless" should mean the opposite of "regardless", just as "irrespective" is the opposite of "respective" or "irresponsible" is the opposite of "responsible"! So, it should mean... regarding? With regard to? If I say that something is "not untrue" or make up the word "nonincorrect", that means I'm saying it's correct/true, right? I mean... non-wrong? Non-unwrong? Non-unimwrong? Non-unimwrongless?
It's adorable that you're trying to act like English, especially spoken English, is a perfectly logical language. Some of my favorite examples follow.

Since there's no time like the present, I guess this was a great time to present this present to you.

If lawyers are disbarred, and clergymen defrocked, does it not follow that electricians can be delighted, musicians denoted, cowboys deranged, or models deposed? Laundry workers could decrease, eventually becoming depressed and depleted. Heck, bed makers could be debunked, baseball players debased, landscapers deflowered, software engineers detested, underwear manufacturers debriefed, and even musicians could decompose.

There's no egg in eggplant, no pine or apple in pineapple.
Quicksand works slowly; boxing rings are square. Hammers don't ham, grocers don't groce. And why don't haberdashers haberdash?

A writer writes, but do fingers fing?

So yeah, keep whining about irregardless. It's clearly the only issue the language has.
__________________
WildStar
Mister Fandango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 06:56 PM   #97
Professor Zoom
Vice Admiral
 
Professor Zoom's Avatar
 
Location: Idealistic
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

Gaith wrote: View Post
JD wrote: View Post
So does some of it take place pre Judgement Day then?
Seeing as how the movie's Johhn actor is significant older than its Sarah, I think we can assume some time shenanigans.
Terminator: Time Shenanigans.

DevilEyes wrote: View Post
Professor Zoom wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post

Uh, Linda Hamilton didn't look like that in The Terminator...
Uh, that's why I wrote Linda Hamilton from T2.
I know what you wrote. The question is, why would you think she's supposed to look like Linda Hamilton from T2? The film seems to be covering the part of the story where Kyle Reese is still alive.
I'm beginning to suspect you don't know what I wrote. I wrote, when I think of Sarah Connor I think of Linda Hamilton from T2 and Sarah from the TV show. In other words, I think of someone who looks like they can hold a gun.

I get WHEN the movie taking place, I get WHICH Sarah Connor we may be dealing with, I'm saying, AGAIN, when I think of Sarah Connor, I don't think of either the whiney one from T1 or what looks like a 14 year old girl who looks ridiculous holding a gun.

I prefer my Sarah Connor more badass.

Get it now?
__________________
Batman does not eat nachos.
Professor Zoom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 08:26 PM   #98
Turtletrekker
Vice Admiral
 
Turtletrekker's Avatar
 
Location: Tacoma, Washington
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

Mister Fandango wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post
So, if it exists as a word, what does it mean? It can't mean "regardless", because it doesn't make sense - "irregardless" should mean the opposite of "regardless", just as "irrespective" is the opposite of "respective" or "irresponsible" is the opposite of "responsible"! So, it should mean... regarding? With regard to? If I say that something is "not untrue" or make up the word "nonincorrect", that means I'm saying it's correct/true, right? I mean... non-wrong? Non-unwrong? Non-unimwrong? Non-unimwrongless?
It's adorable that you're trying to act like English, especially spoken English, is a perfectly logical language. Some of my favorite examples follow.

Since there's no time like the present, I guess this was a great time to present this present to you.

If lawyers are disbarred, and clergymen defrocked, does it not follow that electricians can be delighted, musicians denoted, cowboys deranged, or models deposed? Laundry workers could decrease, eventually becoming depressed and depleted. Heck, bed makers could be debunked, baseball players debased, landscapers deflowered, software engineers detested, underwear manufacturers debriefed, and even musicians could decompose.

There's no egg in eggplant, no pine or apple in pineapple.
Quicksand works slowly; boxing rings are square. Hammers don't ham, grocers don't groce. And why don't haberdashers haberdash?

A writer writes, but do fingers fing?

So yeah, keep whining about irregardless. It's clearly the only issue the language has.
We drive on parkways and park on driveways. What's up with that?
__________________
I hate having thoughts on the top of my head. They usually jump off and commit suicide.
Turtletrekker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 12 2014, 08:30 PM   #99
JoeZhang
Vice Admiral
 
JoeZhang's Avatar
 
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

DevilEyes wrote: View Post



So, if it exists as a word, what does it mean? It can't mean "regardless", because it doesn't make sense - "irregardless" should mean the opposite of "regardless", just as "irrespective" is the opposite of "respective" or "irresponsible" is the opposite of "responsible"! So, it should mean... regarding? With regard to? If I say that something is "not untrue" or make up the word "nonincorrect", that means I'm saying it's correct/true, right? I mean... non-wrong? Non-unwrong? Non-unimwrong? Non-unimwrongless?
I agree just like Flammable and inflammable mean opposite things.
JoeZhang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2014, 12:34 AM   #100
JD
Admiral
 
JD's Avatar
 
Location: Arizona, USA
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

JD wrote: View Post
So does some of it take place pre Judgement Day then?
I was actually asking about the Salvation sequel comic here, not the new movie. It looks like I should have been clearer about that.
__________________
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it is not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett, Equal Rites
JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 13 2014, 02:56 AM   #101
theenglish
Rear Admiral
 
theenglish's Avatar
 
Location: Suriname
Re: Emilia Clarke cast as Sarah Connor in Terminator reboot

AvBaur wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post
So, if it exists as a word, what does it mean? It can't mean "regardless", because it doesn't make sense - "irregardless" should mean the opposite of "regardless", just as "irrespective" is the opposite of "respective" or "irresponsible" is the opposite of "responsible"! So, it should mean... regarding? With regard to?
"Irregardless" means the same as "regardless" - just like "literally" now means the same as "figuratively."
Or like inflammable means the opposite of flammable...oh, wait.

English as a language is determined by how it is used. Word meaning is determined by how it comes to be used in conversation as acceptable English. Irregardless has been used for over 150 years as a word in print so it should be accepted as common usage.

One of the reasons the OED is such a great dictionary is because it is a biography of the English language. Words become included based on their use in English not based on whether somebody says a word should be or not be.
theenglish is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
emilia clarke, 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 12:31 AM.

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