I need your clothes, your boots and your mobility scooter.
Sez the T:OAP ;-)
I thought his last 3 movies ... Last Stand, Sabatage & Escape Plan were watchable (despite being commercial flops) so providing this latest roles been tailored ta take his age into consideration it shouldn't really matter! ... if that makes sense?
Even though I knew she was cast as Sarah, it took me a few seconds to realise it was Emilia Clarke. (no, it wasn't the hair)
As with Total Recall and Robocop I'll give it a watch at some point but will more than likely just accept that it exists and then ignore it completely.
I'll certainly be getting a cinema ticket next year! ... 👍 .... the haters / Internet experts need ta get a life! 😇 ... it's just a movie for Christ sake! 😉... watch it & move on with ya lives! 👍
FFS, talk about easily-pleased.
This is exactly the right, sap-like, utterly servile attitude needed for Hollywood to make as little effort as possible.
I was quite excited about the prospect of another Terminator film, but having seen the trailer I now have serious reservations. I've not minded any of the previous sequels, and was kind of hoping that any new Terminator film would follow on from Salvation, but this idea of a reboot/rehash just seems pointless, other than to make some cash off the back of the original classic. I'm guessing this is going to be a 12A, possibly a 15, which is just going to miss the point - the Terminator is a killing machine, let it kill in all it's gory detail, not in a sanistised, child firlendly, mumsnet approved way.
To add to the awfulness of this movie is Jai Courtney cast as Reese. A terrible actor, totally charmless and unlikable. He was awful in Die Hard 5 (which was awful anyway) and everything else he appears in. God knows how he continues to get these big gigs.
To add to the awfulness of this movie is Jai Courtney cast as Reese. A terrible actor, totally charmless and unlikable. He was awful in Die Hard 5 (which was awful anyway) and everything else he appears in. God knows how he continues to get these big gigs.
He was good in Spartacus.
Don't see how you can call the film awful when it hasn't been released yet.
So it's cinematic release was an 18, but you can bet this remake will be a 12A, so my point still stands,, it'll be aimed at a 12A audience rather than an adult one, so violence (or lack of it) aside, this still leaves me with reservations as to how much it'll appeal to me personally even from a storyline point of view.
So it's cinematic release was an 18, but you can bet this remake will be a 12A, so my point still stands,, it'll be aimed at a 12A audience rather than an adult one, so violence (or lack of it) aside, this still leaves me with reservations as to how much it'll appeal to me personally even from a storyline point of view.
Only an 18 because of James Ferman. The other examiners recommended a 15 originally. Once JF left the BBFC it was downgraded to 15 at the next opportunity.
Either way, certificate doesn't bother me. A good script/story is more important than the amount of blood onscreen.
Meh, very underwhelmed. Looks like they're just throwing everything into the basket in an attempt to keep everyone happy. We've got Arnie as the T800 again, a new T-1000, Sarah Connor, Kyle Reese, 1984, post nuclear war, pre-nuclear attempts to sabotage the war... I'm a big fan of the franchise but damn if I'm a bit fed up of seeing all that again.
I thought it looked like an awful parody. I think the new 'alternate timeline' idea could work, but after that trailer I am doubtful. I couldn't stop rolling my eyes.
Every single T movie since the first 2 originals forget why the first 2 worked so well: they were the right mix of character development, character arc, story arc, action, suspense, explosions, horror and grit played by convincing actors. Even Arnold was convincing. All T movies since the first two seem to think 'yeah all we need is a ton of explosions, people running around and badass looking robots'. No. There was a grit, realism and light and shade in the first two movies that made you comfortably suspend your disbelief. The first two movies are love stories – (of different kinds) – that just played against the backdrop of sci fi/action chaos. All writers and directors since the first two seem to forget that and make the story framework the actual story line.
I know nothing of the actress who plays Sarah Connor, but she's not convincing. She seems to being playing 'homage', rather than, for example, Lena Heady's version in SCC with her own take on the character, but still keeping true to the character. You believe Linda Hamilton and Lena Heady's versions of the character are intelligent, tough, formidable women. This new actress looks like a typical 'tits and ass with guns' actress. To me she looks like she'd cry if she broke a nail.
And who the heck is this actor taking on the Michael Biehn role? The character of Kyle Reese is the main reason Terminator has a disproportionately high ratio of female fans in relation to what is typical for this genre. Michael Beihn is obviously too old for the role now, but his character was not a soulless muscle mary that this new actor seems to look like. I know nothing of the actor, but the role of Kyle Reese is iconic to many fans of the Terminator films and he's just doesn't seem right. Michael Biehn had presence and portrayed his character with the right amount of tough vulnerability that was relate-able and accessible.
But the thing that stopped me suspending my disbelief during the trailer were the endless 'head nods' to the first two originals. It just makes it look like a cheap mash up of the first two films, without any of the good bits. It seems like they thought 'how can we make this different enough, but same enough to call this a reboot?'. Which is fine, do something different and creative with the framework of an alternate timeline. But it seems they just go and do a cheap mash up? I'll pass and wait for it to come out on Amazon Prime.
And who the heck is this actor taking on the Michael Biehn role? The character of Kyle Reese is the main reason Terminator has a disproportionately high ratio of female fans in relation to what is typical for this genre. Michael Beihn is obviously too old for the role now, but his character was not a soulless muscle mary that this new actor seems to look like. I know nothing of the actor, but the role of Kyle Reese is iconic to many fans of the Terminator films and he's just doesn't seem right. Michael Biehn had presence and portrayed his character with the right amount of tough vulnerability that was relate-able and accessible.
Jai Courntey - see my earlier post. This guy is poor choice for the Reese role. He's a terrible actor with a face you want to smack. Cannot warm to this guy at all and I'm not the only one. He's pretty unpopular if you look around the movie forums. Beihn was superb and a hard act to follow but surely they could have done better than this.
They really need to just stop with this shit, that looks awful. Arnie needs to just let it go, along with his attempts to revive his movie career. The Last Stand, Escape Plan and Sabotage died at the box office because he's no longer relevant, action movie stars have changed and evolved since the bulging bicep ones of the 80's. He's too old to be dragging his sagging body around in films like this any more. Just do King Conan to please your fans and then sod off and enjoy your retirement.
Should have left it alone after the first one which was a great film...I know T2 gets a lot of love but personally that was the start of the rot and everything else has continued to go downhill.
I thought the trailer was terrible. A lot of quick sequences, coupled with not so impressive action. Also found it difficult to take the new Sarah Conner seriously; she looks really young (I know she's age appropriate in real life). But I would've cast a taller, more built actress for the part. And, to be honest, was there no female Americans available for the part ?
The only part that seemed promising, was the Asian Terminator. Even that's partly based on evoking memoires of a similar character from T2.
begins with the time loop of T1 being completed, john wins war, skynet sends T101 back to 1984 to kill Sarah, john sends kyle back to protect but upon his arrival the timeline has been altered to an alternative one where skynet had already sent back a terminator to kill Sarah in her pre-teens, a reprogrammed t101 also came destroyed that terminator and then raised her and trained up to face her destiny (hence he's older)
NOW kyle finds himself in this alternate timeline skynet has therefore send back a T1000 to kill him to stop him from mating with Sarah and making John exist in the first place, but they take it on themselves to try and stop skynet from ever existing in the first place whilst trying to avoid getting killed by the T1000
A subplot will be when the original T101 from the original timeline turns up to kill sarah (the first movie) and the aging reprogrammed 101 takes him out.
That made sense in my head but was hard writing it all out. a cluster**** mash up reboot sequel prequel put simply
Should have left it alone after the first one which was a great film...I know T2 gets a lot of love but personally that was the start of the rot and everything else has continued to go downhill.
I think most people would agree that the original is the best. There are some who prefer T2. The first was such a great idea for a film. Perfectly cast, believable characters and the right amount of action and tension.
T2 was a good addition with an extension of the story with the twist of a reprogrammed Terminator and it did a lot for sfx of the time (although dated now). But agree that this is where it started to go wrong. They saw cgi-fests as the way to go but forgot about decent story telling and characterisation.
I know nothing of the actress who plays Sarah Connor, but she's not convincing. She seems to being playing 'homage', rather than, for example, Lena Heady's version in SCC with her own take on the character, but still keeping true to the character. You believe Linda Hamilton and Lena Heady's versions of the character are intelligent, tough, formidable women. This new actress looks like a typical 'tits and ass with guns' actress. To me she looks like she'd cry if she broke a nail.
Emilia Clarke. Most famous for playing Daenerys Targaryan in Game of Thrones.
Her stock is quite high with the success of GoT.
Only an 18 because of James Ferman. The other examiners recommended a 15 originally. Once JF left the BBFC it was downgraded to 15 at the next opportunity.
Regardless of the reasons, it was still an 18 on release.
Either way, certificate doesn't bother me. A good script/story is more important than the amount of blood onscreen.
The certificate ddoesn't bother me either, unless the clamouring for a 12A means diluting the storytelling in order to attain it, which is what I suspect will happen here. I'll still go see it - it's a new Terminator movie afterall, but as I originaly said, I have my reservations as to how good it's going to be.
Comments
Sez the T:OAP ;-)
I thought his last 3 movies ... Last Stand, Sabatage & Escape Plan were watchable (despite being commercial flops) so providing this latest roles been tailored ta take his age into consideration it shouldn't really matter!
As with Total Recall and Robocop I'll give it a watch at some point but will more than likely just accept that it exists and then ignore it completely.
This is exactly the right, sap-like, utterly servile attitude needed for Hollywood to make as little effort as possible.
Yeah, well done.
The first 2 Terminators are 15 certificates
means nothing, this will 100% be a 12A. Its the default setting for all action films these days. Very depressing.
He was good in Spartacus.
Don't see how you can call the film awful when it hasn't been released yet.
"In the UK, The Terminator was originally rated as a 18. When the film was released to DVD, it was re-rated to a 15. "
http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/The_Terminator_%28film%29
So it's cinematic release was an 18, but you can bet this remake will be a 12A, so my point still stands,, it'll be aimed at a 12A audience rather than an adult one, so violence (or lack of it) aside, this still leaves me with reservations as to how much it'll appeal to me personally even from a storyline point of view.
Spartacus is hardly a high bench mark for acting. A fun show, but a soulless, glorified graphic cartoon really.
If it turns out to be an amazing film I will be VERY surprised.
Only an 18 because of James Ferman. The other examiners recommended a 15 originally. Once JF left the BBFC it was downgraded to 15 at the next opportunity.
Either way, certificate doesn't bother me. A good script/story is more important than the amount of blood onscreen.
Not really! ... I've just got more important things to worry about then 1 of 150ish movies I'll be watching next year! ;-)
(It's 2 hours entertainment nothing more)
Every single T movie since the first 2 originals forget why the first 2 worked so well: they were the right mix of character development, character arc, story arc, action, suspense, explosions, horror and grit played by convincing actors. Even Arnold was convincing. All T movies since the first two seem to think 'yeah all we need is a ton of explosions, people running around and badass looking robots'. No. There was a grit, realism and light and shade in the first two movies that made you comfortably suspend your disbelief. The first two movies are love stories – (of different kinds) – that just played against the backdrop of sci fi/action chaos. All writers and directors since the first two seem to forget that and make the story framework the actual story line.
I know nothing of the actress who plays Sarah Connor, but she's not convincing. She seems to being playing 'homage', rather than, for example, Lena Heady's version in SCC with her own take on the character, but still keeping true to the character. You believe Linda Hamilton and Lena Heady's versions of the character are intelligent, tough, formidable women. This new actress looks like a typical 'tits and ass with guns' actress. To me she looks like she'd cry if she broke a nail.
And who the heck is this actor taking on the Michael Biehn role? The character of Kyle Reese is the main reason Terminator has a disproportionately high ratio of female fans in relation to what is typical for this genre. Michael Beihn is obviously too old for the role now, but his character was not a soulless muscle mary that this new actor seems to look like. I know nothing of the actor, but the role of Kyle Reese is iconic to many fans of the Terminator films and he's just doesn't seem right. Michael Biehn had presence and portrayed his character with the right amount of tough vulnerability that was relate-able and accessible.
But the thing that stopped me suspending my disbelief during the trailer were the endless 'head nods' to the first two originals. It just makes it look like a cheap mash up of the first two films, without any of the good bits. It seems like they thought 'how can we make this different enough, but same enough to call this a reboot?'. Which is fine, do something different and creative with the framework of an alternate timeline. But it seems they just go and do a cheap mash up? I'll pass and wait for it to come out on Amazon Prime.
Then why are you on here wasting your time defending your opinion?
Is the audience really demanding another 3 movies?
The only part that seemed promising, was the Asian Terminator. Even that's partly based on evoking memoires of a similar character from T2.
begins with the time loop of T1 being completed, john wins war, skynet sends T101 back to 1984 to kill Sarah, john sends kyle back to protect but upon his arrival the timeline has been altered to an alternative one where skynet had already sent back a terminator to kill Sarah in her pre-teens, a reprogrammed t101 also came destroyed that terminator and then raised her and trained up to face her destiny (hence he's older)
NOW kyle finds himself in this alternate timeline skynet has therefore send back a T1000 to kill him to stop him from mating with Sarah and making John exist in the first place, but they take it on themselves to try and stop skynet from ever existing in the first place whilst trying to avoid getting killed by the T1000
A subplot will be when the original T101 from the original timeline turns up to kill sarah (the first movie) and the aging reprogrammed 101 takes him out.
That made sense in my head but was hard writing it all out. a cluster**** mash up reboot sequel prequel put simply
I think most people would agree that the original is the best. There are some who prefer T2. The first was such a great idea for a film. Perfectly cast, believable characters and the right amount of action and tension.
T2 was a good addition with an extension of the story with the twist of a reprogrammed Terminator and it did a lot for sfx of the time (although dated now). But agree that this is where it started to go wrong. They saw cgi-fests as the way to go but forgot about decent story telling and characterisation.
Emilia Clarke. Most famous for playing Daenerys Targaryan in Game of Thrones.
Her stock is quite high with the success of GoT.
Regardless of the reasons, it was still an 18 on release.
The certificate ddoesn't bother me either, unless the clamouring for a 12A means diluting the storytelling in order to attain it, which is what I suspect will happen here. I'll still go see it - it's a new Terminator movie afterall, but as I originaly said, I have my reservations as to how good it's going to be.