Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
The original movie, if memory serves me, did far better on home media like HBO and rentals than in the box office, which is one of the reasons it took so long to make T2.
Maybe DARK FATE will have the same... fate. (I just realized the pun while I was writing it.)
Maybe not quite as much because I think Tim Miller turned off a lot of people by preemptively saying that you're a misogynist troll if you don't like the movie. People don't like it when you call them horrible names just because they don't like a movie. And it makes it look like your movie is no good if you have to resort to attacking your critics rather than promoting the virtues of the film. Certainly, of all the fanbases to be accused of sexism, you're going to lob that critique at Terminator fans? Really?! Sarah Connor has consistently been held up as one of the godmothers of sci-fi action heroes. And I don't recall anyone having a problem with Cameron on The Sarah Connor Chronicles either.
TSCC was a different time. The world changed with GamerGate in 2014, and he-man woman-haters became louder, more visible, and more effective at recruiting. Just a couple weeks ago, I had the incredibly bizarre experience of being linked to a behind-the-scenes video about the VFX in the prologue of Dark Fate, and there was a half-assed subliminal message in the title card, where it read "feminism is cancer" before flipping to "Terminator: Dark Fate." I have no idea what the hell the deal was with that (I assume the person who re-uploaded an official video decided to redo the title card as weird YouTube radicalizing propaganda), but it definitely indicates an environment where being stridently and overtly against one arbitrary female-led film (and for another arbitrary one, as happened with Alita) is a part of the culture.
That's exactly my point. Without the previous 3 films tarnishing the brand, I think Dark Fate would have managed a box office performance closer to what T3 or Salvation did.
Maybe not quite as much because I think Tim Miller turned off a lot of people by preemptively saying that you're a misogynist troll if you don't like the movie. People don't like it when you call them horrible names just because they don't like a movie. And it makes it look like your movie is no good if you have to resort to attacking your critics rather than promoting the virtues of the film.
it definitely indicates an environment where being stridently and overtly against one arbitrary female-led film (and for another arbitrary one, as happened with Alita) is a part of the culture.
Well, I paid to see Dark Fate in a theater, and I was embarrassed for Sarah when the movie had her assume, for no reason, that Dani was the mother of the future resistance leader, and not the leader herself. So, Miller can kindly stay off any nearby high horses.
Well, I paid to see Dark Fate in a theater, and I was embarrassed for Sarah when the movie had her assume, for no reason, that Dani was the mother of the future resistance leader, and not the leader herself. So, Miller can kindly stay off any nearby high horses.
The original movie, if memory serves me, did far better on home media like HBO and rentals than in the box office, which is one of the reasons it took so long to make T2.
Maybe DARK FATE will have the same... fate. (I just realized the pun while I was writing it.)
I liked it and I thought it was a great Terminator movie.
I'm just going to forget all of the bad movies after T2 and consider this T3.
Cuz those others sucked...hard
I liked it and I thought it was a great Terminator movie.
I'm just going to forget all of the bad movies after T2 and consider this T3.
Cuz those others sucked...hard
Rented this over the weekend courtesy of AmazonPrime. Went in with fairly low expectations, but was reasonably entertained. Basically a good popcorn romp, nothing more. I enjoyed myself. B-
I bought Dark Fate when it came out on home video. I had seen it once in the theater and had walked out of the theater thinking it was a decent film for the most part, but not that ambitious. Watching some of it again, on home video, I thought the action flowed much better, that Rev-9 was more indomitable the second go round for me than the first.
I can't really say I changed my opinion on the film. After looking at the some of the special features, Tim Miller talked about how he had brought a lot of writers on board to come up with the story; and that made me think about how lackluster the story we got in the film was. I wonder if Miller was holding back for the sequel and third film. If so, that was a major mistake. He had a good cast here, but the avoidance to do more with the Terminator mythos beyond
killing off John Connor
, which we had already seen in Genisys and was alluded to in Rise of the Machines was a waste.
I still didn't buy Dani as the new Resistance leader. Doesn't mean that she shouldn't have been, but maybe if they had just showed her doing that in a way different than we had seen John Connor do it. It made it seem even more unnecessary to kill Connor off if all they were going to do was replace him with Dani.
Carl was cool, though his existence made no sense without Skynet still being around. But I did like the idea of a Terminator having a family, I liked his relationship with Sarah, and if this was the best idea they could come up with to get Arnold in the film then I was fine with it. That being said, his death scene felt like a retread too. They could've taken him out in a different way.
Rise of the Machines, Salvation, and Genisys have legitimate issues, but I can give them credit for each bringing something different to the table. The Terminatrix had the new power of controlling machines which could make her very deadly, but really, that ending which boldly went against Terminator 2, is what sold me on that film. Salvation was the most ambitious of this lot, being set in the Future War, having a Connor who hadn't yet become the main Resistance leader, the Marcus Terminator, something of a Reese origin story, etc. And Genisys was bold, or crazy enough to upend all the previous films, introducing alternate universes, killing off John Connor and leaving a younger Sarah in her future, perhaps to become the leader of the Resistance in her own right. It also changed Arnold's Terminator into a T-1000 and even gave Skynet a physical form.
And while these films met with varying degrees of success they did try to bring something interesting to the Terminator universe. In comparison, Dark Fate wasn't as ambitious.
Maybe the word "great" was a bit much, LOL.
We ain't talking Shakespeare here folks. It's a sci-fi movie about fighting robots.
I was entertained, it had just enough nostalgia and the fights were fun.
But I still think it was better than all of the crap that came between T2 and this movie.
But that is kind of like saying "this bologna sandwich is better than that bologna sandwich."
In the end they are all still just bologna sandwiches.
Well, I paid to see Dark Fate in a theater, and I was embarrassed for Sarah when the movie had her assume, for no reason, that Dani was the mother of the future resistance leader, and not the leader herself.
I don't know, purely from a character standpoint it seemed consistent with her outlook in T2. Her assumption in DF wasn't that a women couldn't be "the saviour" but that others would only see a woman as a walking incubator for "the saviour".
Also, I'm not sure how anyone could miss that Sarah was and is a militant feminist (literally), I mean just look at John's reaction. He's heard this rant before...a lot.
It's hard to reason that Judgement Day is only 4 weeks upstream.
Being Human had a great take on a baby messiah. Because there was a prophecy baby, all other heroes sat back and waited, and waited, and waited, for the prophecy baby to tack a whack at the apocalypse, who never got around to saving the world.
It was actually an evil prophecy, to help out evil, so the baby all grown up, time traveled back and killed herself before she put heroism into a holding pattern as evil set up shop and closeded down people.
I don't know, purely from a character standpoint it seemed consistent with her outlook in T2. Her assumption in DF wasn't that a women couldn't be "the saviour" but that others would only see a woman as a walking incubator for "the saviour".
It's a question of basic math. James Cameron made Sarah the mother of the savior in T1 because, by the time of his figuring of the future war and the time displacement device (2029), Sarah, assuming she was born the same year as Hamilton, would be 73 - not exactly prime fighting age, especially in a post-nuclear wasteland. (Also, Sarah had to be the mother to make a closed time loop story, which all the sequels necessarily threw out.)
By 2020, however, 2029 is less than a decade away. Granted, the Legion future is a different timeline than the Skynet future, but machines and AI have come a long way since 1984. So, when presented with a 30-ish woman (though Reyes could well have been playing several years younger) who she's told is the future of humanity, Sarah has no logical reason to assume the alleged savior will be the woman's son, rather than the woman herself - but the movie's male writers have her do so anyway.
Didn't Dark Fate Sarah also specifically assume the alleged new savior would be a son of Dani's, and not a daughter? In which case, your post is more bluster than cogent reasoning.
I was reading the latest issue of Cinefex yesterday, and one of the fun things about the magazine is they discuss the visual effects of the movie in roughly plot-order, so they serve as a very rough synopsis of the movie as it was being made. Sometimes things are glossed over because they're irrelevant or to obscure spoilers, but sometimes they reflect an earlier version of the movie (the big example being Will Smith's I am Legend, whose breakdown described the original ending well before it was publicized anywhere else).
Anyway, the article mentions as an aside that Dani being the resistance leader is revealed in Grace's first flashback, where she was fighting the terminators with her squad and was injured, rather than being a twist late in the film. It could be Sarah's ongoing belief that Dani was the new Sarah and not the new John was something that was added late in the movie, perhaps to underscore the generational shift on a meta-level (a woman going from being the hero's mother to the hero, or the meme going around a couple years ago with clips from Star Wars and Wonder Woman about how the princesses of '80s films have become the generals of today's).
It's a question of basic math. James Cameron made Sarah the mother of the savior in T1 because, by the time of his figuring of the future war and the time displacement device (2029), Sarah, assuming she was born the same year as Hamilton, would be 73 - not exactly prime fighting age, especially in a post-nuclear wasteland. (Also, Sarah had to be the mother to make a closed time loop story, which all the sequels necessarily threw out.)
I think it had less to do with the math of when the future war happened and more to do with wanting the twist of Kyle Reese being John's father without realizing it. Also there's a certain poetry to the idea that, while we might think that our own lives are meaningless, we have no idea what we might do that has a profound impact on generations not yet born. In that respect, having her be a second hand savior feels a bit more apt.
Were it not for those elements, I don't think Cameron would have had any qualms with moving up the dates of the future sequences to be in the '90s or early '00s or something with Sarah being the leader. The Terminator was made in the '80s, back when everyone seemed to assume that we would be nuking ourselves sooner rather than later anyway.
