Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers?)
- Thread starter Frontier
- Start date
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
More like a pretty healthy 65 year old trying to be 50.
More like a pretty healthy 65 year old trying to be 50.
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
This is the movie I would make...
War of the Roses with Claire Danes and John Connor in the Bunker trying to kill each other on and off for 5 years, not giving a shit that there are 30 thousand Terminator Mark 2's right outside trying to drill into the Crystal Peak Complex.
Something had to turn Nick Stahl into that dick Christian Bale, and spending 5 years locked in a box, until he kills her, because she starts or finishes every sentence with the phrase "but I'm a Doctor" or "because I'm a Doctor" might just have been it.
This is the movie I would make...
War of the Roses with Claire Danes and John Connor in the Bunker trying to kill each other on and off for 5 years, not giving a shit that there are 30 thousand Terminator Mark 2's right outside trying to drill into the Crystal Peak Complex.
Something had to turn Nick Stahl into that dick Christian Bale, and spending 5 years locked in a box, until he kills her, because she starts or finishes every sentence with the phrase "but I'm a Doctor" or "because I'm a Doctor" might just have been it.
Last edited:
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
When were Terminator movies ever needed?
When were Terminator movies ever needed?
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
Ask Jim Cameron. 
Ask Jim Cameron. Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
It doesn't matter. Point is that he's too old and it looks odd if he's trying to play a young character.
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.
It doesn't matter. Point is that he's too old and it looks odd if he's trying to play a young character.
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.
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.
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.
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
The success of a reboot entirely depends on the quality of the script, not on the presence of an actor.
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.
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
And how many of them were any good?
And how many of them were any good?
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
How about if this time Arnold plays Kyle Reese?
How about if this time Arnold plays Kyle Reese?
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
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.
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.
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Re: Future of the "Terminator" Franchise (Discussion, Rumors, Spoilers
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.
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.
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.
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.
