Terminator Reboot

[MikeandRaph87]

One thing I always thought was that Swartzenegger 's T-800 character was the exact same one frim the first and second film just regramed to do the oppisite of his mission. I do not. Elieve it was mentioned in Judgment Day.

[Purse Grabbin Puke]

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

One thing I always thought was that Swartzenegger 's T-800 character was the exact same one frim the first and second film just regramed to do the oppisite of his mission. I do not. Elieve it was mentioned in Judgment Day.

No, there is a canceled concept of the T-800 then Kyle, then a T-1000 all going through the portal within a few minutes of each other, then John reprograms a T-800 to protect himself in 1994. Two different terminators.

[MikeandRaph87]

Originally Posted by Purse Grabbin Puke

No, there is a canceled concept of the T-800 then Kyle, then a T-1000 all going through the portal within a few minutes of each other, then John reprograms a T-800 to protect himself in 1994. Two different terminators.

Its fuuny how they are identical and played by the same actor yet completely different characters. That is forgetting about the alternate timeline with "Pops" which would make a third. Being the same actor I always assumed it was the antagonist from T-1 reformed / reprogrammed.

[NinjaPug]

Finally got to see this. Yikes. Terrible script and terrible casting choices. I really like both Clarke's but both were horribly miscast especially Emilia. Jai Courtney? Lol - he's bad no matter what. I'm glad future movies have been put on indefinite hold despite China bolstering it's global box office. I hope the rights revert back to Cameron so people stop trying to make this into something it's not - a viable franchise.

I must have missed it but how exactly was history changed or is that something supposed to be left open ended for a sequel? And why time travel into the future to stop something right before it occurs when you could take your time leading up to it to make sure it never happens?

[Andrew NDB]

Emilia Clarke reveals she is relieved she doesn't have to reprise the part, and that the director was chewed up on the set.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/new...-99/ar-AAxKDiE

[newfan]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainm...ime/ar-AAyWTuC

[ZariusTwo]

[joe-eyeball]

That’s a long teaser trailer! It looks alright I guess. Does anyone know if Arnold’s role is a small one or not?

[ProactiveMan]

Looks like more of the same.

[Andrew NDB]

Oh no...

Well, it's not a bad trailer. It's just there's not one thing to be excited about a third trilogy starter following the two failed trilogy starters. The whole thing seems to hinge on us supposed to be excited about seeing Linda Hamilton return as Sarah Connor with guns blazing, which I don't care about.

A nanite Terminator? We got that in the last movie and it was dumb.

Old Man Arnie/"Pops"? Last one.

Aircraft mayhem? Last one.

A truck smashing through stuff on a road? Pretty much every Terminator movie ever.

A Terminator that thinks it's human, or has been augmented? We got that two movies ago. The whole movie revolved around that.

I also suspect the Mackenzie Davis character is going to be a very polarizing one. I'm very suspicious. John Connor has clearly been killed off again for the third time, so I wonder if the Dani Ramos character is Sarah's granddaughter?

Plus side: Cameron HAS said it will be rated R for sure. So at least this will be the first time since 2003 it won't be played down for 13 year-olds, if nothing else.

Originally Posted by joe-eyeball

That’s a long teaser trailer! It looks alright I guess. Does anyone know if Arnold’s role is a small one or not?

Last I read, he was playing two parts. One, a human (I'm guessing that's him in the trailer) and two, an evil Terminator, probably CGI de-aged. Then all outlets stopped saying that and I couldn't find the articles anymore.

[newfan]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Oh no...

Well, it's not a bad trailer. It's just there's not one thing to be excited about a third trilogy starter following the two failed trilogy starters. The whole thing seems to hinge on us supposed to be excited about seeing Linda Hamilton return as Sarah Connor with guns blazing, which I don't care about.

A nanite Terminator? We got that in the last movie and it was dumb.

Old Man Arnie/"Pops"? Last one.

Aircraft mayhem? Last one.

A truck smashing through stuff on a road? Pretty much every Terminator movie ever.

A Terminator that thinks it's human, or has been augmented? We got that two movies ago. The whole movie revolved around that.

I also suspect the Mackenzie Davis character is going to be a very polarizing one. I'm very suspicious. John Connor has clearly been killed off again for the third time, so I wonder if the Dani Ramos character is Sarah's granddaughter?

Plus side: Cameron HAS said it will be rated R for sure. So at least this will be the first time since 2003 it won't be played down for 13 year-olds, if nothing else.



Last I read, he was playing two parts. One, a human (I'm guessing that's him in the trailer) and two, an evil Terminator, probably CGI de-aged. Then all outlets stopped saying that and I couldn't find the articles anymore.

Okay, deleted and re-posted, that last one didn't post properly.

Oh, well Arnie being human is at least a first, I assume playing the person the design was based on. He also hasn't been bad since the first one so there's that different at least, even if not new.
I wondered about John here also, and the young girl.

R rated too, maybe a 15 here rather than 18 but still, older.

Much of the same from the look but I plan to go and see it.

Welcome back btw

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by newfan

Oh, well Arnie being human is at least a first, I assume playing the person the design was based on.

They did that before already, too, and it was stupid.

[sdp]

Is the second terminator really any good though? I mean it's definitely entertaining and iconic, but it retcons the ending of the original film, it makes no sense for the terminators to all use Arnold's face since that defeats the purpose, you have a kid outrunning the upgraded version of the T-800.

I think the series took a downturn from there, a reboot should've been a sequel to Terminator 1 ignoring even the second film. But I guess with time travel shenanigans all sequels can be canon. This movie is going to suck if John Connor is dead, I mean that's the whole purpose of the series.

[Prowler]

I'll always prefer the first one. Mostly because the Terminator was the bad guy there.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

They did that before already, too, and it was stupid.

What, the T3 deleted scene? The Sgt. Candy thing? That was stupid, but they can do a lot better than that.

Though the time for that should have been a long time ago. It's hard to believe the machines would bother to take an old man and for some reason de-age him to be the staple of their skinsuit models.

Originally Posted by sdp

Is the second terminator really any good though? I mean it's definitely entertaining and iconic, but it retcons the ending of the original film, it makes no sense for the terminators to all use Arnold's face since that defeats the purpose, you have a kid outrunning the upgraded version of the T-800.

Yeah, I mean he's the 101st skinsuit model... so there should be 99 other skinsuit models that don't look like Arnold or Franco Columbo.

I think the series took a downturn from there, a reboot should've been a sequel to Terminator 1 ignoring even the second film. But I guess with time travel shenanigans all sequels can be canon. This movie is going to suck if John Connor is dead, I mean that's the whole purpose of the series.

I think after T2 the only involvement of Arnold should have been as a human. They had him as a villain in T1 and a protector in T2... not much else to do "new" at that point but to see him as a human. Anything else is retread.

Also, no more time travel. That should have stopped with 2.

Originally Posted by Prowler

I'll always prefer the first one. Mostly because the Terminator was the bad guy there.

As I get older I definitely like the first one better now.

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

Its fuuny how they are identical and played by the same actor yet completely different characters. That is forgetting about the alternate timeline with "Pops" which would make a third. Being the same actor I always assumed it was the antagonist from T-1 reformed / reprogrammed.

We've had 5 model 101s. The T-800 in T1, the T-800 in T2, the T-850 in T3, the T-800 at the end of T4 (and it can't be the same one from T1 since it's set in... 2018, isn't it?), and the T-800 in T5. All completely different characters played by Arnold.

Kind of like Star Trek with original Enterprise and Kirk and Spock and all that, if Terminator as a franchise can't outgrow Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sarah Connor and John Connor and all that... then maybe it doesn't deserve to.

[Wildcat]

I also said T2 was very repetitive. It’s cool and everything just not really much of a follow up. That’s fine for some movies but Terminator has a deep storyline.

The trailer looks fine. I do not mind them reusing ideas as long as they fit. A human being part machine makes sense. If that technology was real people would definitely use it.

Killing off John Conner could be creative. Whenever he died surely someone else would lead the fight against Skynet. This girl could start a new resistance or ambush them after they thought it won.

I brought up the T-Infinity but that would be about a bunch of time traveling. I’d like that. Miller and Cameron would not

I had a pretty wild idea. Instead of Skynet sending back a terminator to kill anyone it sends back a ship or drone that leaves to colonize Mars (or all the planets) and then invades earth from space to ensure humans can not reach them.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Prowler

I'll always prefer the first one. Mostly because the Terminator was the bad guy there.

Same here. I like it, because of thick 80-s atmosphere and general sense of dread and threat. And Terminator looks like an unstoppable monster in this movie, but a monster which someday can become reality.
T2 is a great movie, but it had certainly lost a lot of what made T1 great.

Originally Posted by Wildcat

Killing off John Conner could be creative. Whenever he died surely someone else would lead the fight against Skynet. This girl could start a new resistance or ambush them after they thought it won.

I brought up the T-Infinity but that would be about a bunch of time traveling. I’d like that. Miller and Cameron would not

I had a pretty wild idea. Instead of Skynet sending back a terminator to kill anyone it sends back a ship or drone that leaves to colonize Mars (or all the planets) and then invades earth from space to ensure humans can not reach them.

I feel like killing John Connor is probably the least creative thing you can do with the Terminator story at this point. It just smells of desperation to do something "new".

T-Infinity and establishing of the multiverse could have been a cool thing, but I am not sure how it would work in the movie format and I feel like it is very removed from the idea of the audience on what Terminator is.

Skynet trying to colonize Mars...reminds me of the certain part of RoboCop vs Terminator comic book, where Skynet went onto colonizing universe.

[Wildcat]

Wow I didn’t know an idea like had been used. I haven’t actually read the comics. I found about T-Infinity just reading about terminator online and I thought it sounded pretty awesome.

They could have kept 3-5 canon and said they were part of the multiverse. As well as Dark Fate. Being the prime timeline. Something similar to Turtles Forever where it wants to wipe out the original so nobody becomes the hero.

T3 ended with Skynet taking over. Salvation ended with Skynet still in control and in Genisys evil John Conner survived. Maybe the original timeline could be the only one where it lost and it needs to erase it.

As for a new “John Connor” I think it could interesting. There’s other reasons why he might die (either in the past, present or future) so that could change situations.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Sumac

I feel like killing John Connor is probably the least creative thing you can do with the Terminator story at this point. It just smells of desperation to do something "new".

You're back! I thought you were toast.

And no, killing John isn't new at all. In T3 it was well established that the T-850 in the movie killed him in the future. And in T5 we know that John was plucked from 2029 and killed off-screen and made into the physical representation of SkyNET.

T-Infinity and establishing of the multiverse could have been a cool thing, but I am not sure how it would work in the movie format and I feel like it is very removed from the idea of the audience on what Terminator is.

I don't know about T-Infinity, but I like the idea of SkyNET learning and evolving from other timelines, something they kind of showed in Genisys and strongly implied in Salvation. Like that's the one constant... SkyNET constantly changing its approach and learning from all of the other timelines.

But yeah, how to show that on screen coherently and satisfyingly? Not sure.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

You're back! I thought you were toast.

Nice to see you too!
Little worthless nuisances can't hurt me.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

And no, killing John isn't new at all. In T3 it was well established that the T-850 in the movie killed him in the future. And in T5 we know that John was plucked from 2029 and killed off-screen and made into the physical representation of SkyNET.

It's still had happened in the future, after John had established Resistance (Techcom, does anyone still remember its name in continuity?).
In this case, his death carries less weight, than if he is killed in the past, before the war.

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I don't know about T-Infinity, but I like the idea of SkyNET learning and evolving from other timelines, something they kind of showed in Genisys and strongly implied in Salvation. Like that's the one constant... SkyNET constantly changing its approach and learning from all of the other timelines.

But yeah, how to show that on screen coherently and satisfyingly? Not sure.

That was the role of T-Infinity in the comic books - it was traveling through different universes trying to ensure that Skynet will win in every single one of them.