Terminator: Reboot

[Takeru]

Admiral James Kirk wrote:

---

If you were Skynet and creating a terminator then that would be the smart thing to do. However if you were a director casting the lead villain in a movie that wouldn't be so smart.

But I'm not a director, I'm Skynet.

Don't get me wrong a terminator who isn't built like a Sherman tank isn't a bad idea, since they are infiltrator units. However you still have to cast somebody intimidating in the part.

All you need is a great actor, probably not Patrick Schwarzenegger, but someone with his looks could be good. A pretty boy who looks like a weak shrimp and can turn on his intimidating killer machine stare on command would be my first choice for the Terminator.

[Sephiroth]

I'd say let Dillahunt take a shot at the big screen, he does a good terminator

[Trekker4747]

The Internet is Skynet and the end has already begun!

[The Borgified Corpse]

I agree Ryan Gosling (or his Hollywood twin Ben Foster) would be a great Terminator. And I'll watch Jennifer Lawrence in just about anything.

Sindatur wrote:

---

I don't do Facebook, MySpace or Twitter either, too much exposure of your computer, IMHO.

I avoid it specifically to avoid being easily tracked down by Skynet.

davejames wrote:

---

I'm with James Cameron on this one. The two best stories were already told in T1 and T2, and with the coolest Terminator you could ever have in Swarzenegger.

Actually, James Cameron has been working as an unofficial consultant on Terminator 5, which would bring back Arnie as the T-800 again.

"I was talking to him back in fall about a new Terminator film and quietly advising on that, I suppose you could say. I was trying to be as encouraging as possible. Frankly, at that time, I thought it needed to be more about him. I told him he should not do it until it's focused on his character or he shouldn't do it. I think there are some great stories that can be told about that character that haven't even been thought of yet."

http://www.movieweb.com/news/james-c...s-on-the-t-800

[Locutus of Bored]

Mr. Laser Beam wrote:

---

Essentially, every Terminator film was a reboot.

The first film was a closed loop. Subsequent ones, including the TV series, always rebooted it. There's not a consistent one in the bunch.

There are some arguments in favor of T1 not being a predestination paradox and there being an existing timeline where John Connor has a different father than Kyle Reese, didn't learn to fight the Machines from his mother (or at least, she wasn't informed of them before the war and couldn't prepare him for leadership until after Judgment Day), and where Skynet was developed and started a nuclear war without the technology from the future first spurring on its creation.

http://io9.com/5191092/10-different-...nator-universe

Personally, I kind of prefer the closed loop of T1, but since the other films and TV shows ditch the closed loop idea and establish that each incident of time travel creates alternate timelines, this makes sense as well.

[Disruptor]

The inconspicuous terminator idea made me realize if they did a remake the "big reveal" would be that one of the normal average-built human characters was a second Terminator. Probably "Kyle Reese"...not the real Kyle Reese. A terminator killed Kyle, skinned him and is now wearing Reese's pieces.

Prompting people online to say "I guessed that early on..."

[Tom]

Dont forget the other 3 sequels to Terminator, The Matrix, 1, 2 and 3!! LOL. Set in the the 22nd century of the Terminator universe .. LOL i joke, but you know there is no proof that they could not be connected if John Connor failed and the machines enslaved all the humans.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Terminator and Matrix couldn't be connected, if only for the fact that Skynet didn't want to enslave humanity - it wanted to *destroy* it.

Unlike the Matrix, where the machines lived off the energy generated by human bodies and so it wouldn't have been in their best interests to let humanity die.

[Tom]

Mr. Laser Beam wrote:

---

^ Terminator and Matrix couldn't be connected, if only for the fact that Skynet didn't want to enslave humanity - it wanted to *destroy* it.

Unlike the Matrix, where the machines lived off the energy generated by human bodies and so it wouldn't have been in their best interests to let humanity die.

Not according to Terminator: Salvation, remember they took them to a slave camp in San francisco. The still needed human to do some things, otherwise why capture them at all??

...So the humans led by john connor revolt, and think they killed skynet only to find out they did not, and Skynet lives. the humans then get desperate and blacken the sky but that does not work becuse Skynet learns it can get its energy from a human being ... etc..

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Tom wrote:

---

Not according to Terminator: Salvation, remember they took them to a slave camp in San francisco. The still needed human to do some things, otherwise why capture them at all??

Just a means to an end. It seems clear that Skynet really did want to wipe out humanity. Otherwise, why start a nuclear war to begin with? That alone means extinction.

[The Borgified Corpse]

Mr. Laser Beam wrote:

---

Terminator and Matrix couldn't be connected, if only for the fact that Skynet didn't want to enslave humanity - it wanted to *destroy* it.

Unlike the Matrix, where the machines lived off the energy generated by human bodies and so it wouldn't have been in their best interests to let humanity die.

You could argue that as Skynet's intelligence & self-awareness increased, that it started to develop human-like emotions, such as hatred, resentment, & a desire for revenge. It always seemed to me that the machines in The Matrix were motivated by some complex sense of hatred of humans in addition to their logical goals of survival. The machines created the Matrix as a replica of Earth during the pinnacle of human civilization to mock us.

As for the Terminator timeline being a closed loop, I infinitely prefer that version. And if it hadn't been for James Cameron pinning a date on Judgment Day in T2, the movies could still exist as one closed loop.

[Gary7]

Dream wrote:

---

They already rebooted the franchise with the tv show. Didn't work out.

Good point. And, it wasn't very long ago either. To try rebooting the franchise yet again, more time will have to pass. Just my $0.02.

[Admiral James Kirk]

I'm fine with a continuation rather than a reboot. Well I'm fine with it so long as McG's stupid idea for T5 never comes to fruition. It was just a dumb excuse to bring back Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn.

[StarTrek1701]

Dream wrote:

---

They already rebooted the franchise with the tv show. Didn't work out.

The same thing was said about a certain..other..beloved franchise of ours circa 2005, no?

[Sephiroth]

The whole thing of the scrawny, emotional Terminator is logical, but I dont think it would work. It was the inhuman qualities of Arnold's Terminator that made the character, as it was with Garrett Dillahunt's Cromartie/John Henry. Terminators are unnatural and I think are best portrayed as such.