• 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!

2009 VS 1991

It is interestering how the two franchises have done. I would think Terminator might be on hold for some time. Trek had been on life support but now is doing just fine.
 
What I don't get about T4 is...was there any push by a fan base to continue it? I mean, T3 didn't even clear a profit domestically and that was 6 years ago. The TV series has performed "meh" at best even with Fox throwing TONS of promotion at it.
 
Terminator is one of those franchises that will always have someone wanting to make another one solely due to the success of the 2nd one.
 
I think there's just more they can do with Star Trek than with Terminator, and I think the new movie proved that.

I'm not saying they've exhausted all possibilities with the Terminator franchise. I see a lot more room in the Trek universe.
 
I think there's just more they can do with Star Trek than with Terminator, and I think the new movie proved that.

I'm not saying they've exhausted all possibilities with the Terminator franchise. I see a lot more room in the Trek universe.

I agree - Terminator doesn't have the possiblities for stories that ST does. I was surprised they tried a number 4 - I remember thinking as I watched the trailer "What could they possibly do that is new and different?"
 
There's only so much you can do without an iconic figure like Schwarzenegger as your lead in a niche genre film...
 
I think there's just more they can do with Star Trek than with Terminator, and I think the new movie proved that.

I'm not saying they've exhausted all possibilities with the Terminator franchise. I see a lot more room in the Trek universe.
I disagree. Did any of us expect Marcus? A novel idea even if it was pulled off a little roughly for most people's taste.

I even think there's room for some truly intelligent and impressive stories. Do I think we'll get that? unlikely.

X
 
Another Terminator movie is a possibility since its fairly likely everyone involved might make some money back. WB only paid $50 million for the domestic rights, and Sony paid $75 million for the international rights. WB probably spent at least another $50 million in marketing.

The film is likely going to finish with $130 million domestic and $200 million international.

So, they could do a fifth one, but spend less money and hopefully focus more on story and less on CGI.
 
Another Terminator movie is a possibility since its fairly likely everyone involved might make some money back. WB only paid $50 million for the domestic rights, and Sony paid $75 million for the international rights. WB probably spent at least another $50 million in marketing.

The film is likely going to finish with $130 million domestic and $200 million international.

So, they could do a fifth one, but spend less money and hopefully focus more on story and less on CGI.

A little less "I don't meet many nice men nowadays." A little less "Let's have a veterinarian do a field heart transpant." A little less "We captured Kyle but we're not killing him even though that would mean we would win." A little less the people are more robotic than the machines.
 
I don't know, I think the Terminator "franchise" was out of ideas after the first movie.
The only reason the second one was so good, was because Cameron did what he did with the Alien sequel; Made the exact same movie on a grander scale.
The Terminator in the end is simply a horror film. And like Psycho and Jaws before it, no matter how good it may be, it's kind of a one trick pony.
Star Trek on the other hand is practically a genre unto itself.
 
The only reason the second one was so good, was because Cameron did what he did with the Alien sequel; Made the exact same movie on a grander scale.

I don't think so; Because Aliens was an action movie whilst Alien was more of a suspense\horror piece. But I agree with what you said about the Terminator.
 
There was no real push for Terminator, it was just McG looking for something and he bought the rights or something.
 
The only reason the second one was so good, was because Cameron did what he did with the Alien sequel; Made the exact same movie on a grander scale.

I don't think so; Because Aliens was an action movie whilst Alien was more of a suspense\horror piece. But I agree with what you said about the Terminator.

Well I only meant the broad strokes are the same, in so far as Ripley wakes up, groups with a bunch of characters that systematically get picked off until she narrowly escapes an exploding facility, only to face off against a stowaway alien who almost gets the better of her, until she manages to eject it into space, allowing her to finally strip down to her undies and go back to sleep.
The originality here is in the details, an area where the film excels.
 
Well I only meant the broad strokes are the same, in so far as Ripley wakes up, groups with a bunch of characters that systematically get picked off until she narrowly escapes an exploding facility, only to face off against a stowaway alien who almost gets the better of her, until she manages to eject it into space, allowing her to finally strip down to her undies and go back to sleep.
The originality here is in the details, an area where the film excels.
A3 is the only movie that broke this theme and it is the most disliked of the franchise.
 
They should finish off Terminator for good (baring the inevitable crappy remakes 50 years later ala TDTESS) in one more movie and make an ending that will probably upset people like John being killed and Skynet winning.

Trek got her second/third/forth (or so) wind with XI, so hopefully it will keep running on Good for a while.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top