Terminator Reboot... A Stand Alone Trilogy

Tools    





That guy with the Alien avatar.
Just looking at the posts on this thread, about 7 out of every 10 people dislike the direction Hollywood is going. Ergo, Hollywood doesn't care about making quality films anymore, just money.



No matter how much they try, they won't get to the level of Terminator II.



Registered User
If you understood the whole premise and why he's in the film both young and old (other than the fact that he's gotten older), than maybe you wouldn't feel so negative. Or maybe you would since most of the people on here aren't giving this film a chance. Just bashing it before it even comes out.
Just because "they put it in the plot" doesn't make it a good decision - that's the entire point. There's no reason why they couldn't just pick a different plot.

Putting him in the lead role sounds like too much of a 'cash grab' move and gives me doubts about this. To be honest though I'm a lot more annoyed by the new Sarah Conner, and the excessive CGI action scenes in the trailer.

Besides, Arnold doesn't have a cameo, he's in the entire movie.
I was saying he should be limited to just a cameo or a short role, not the lead role



Just saw the new trailer and it looks friggin awesome. The "new threat" that they keep talking about is obviously John Conner. I love the new twist in this. This is going to kick major ass and it's gonna be a wild ride. A nostalgic ride back to the 80's with Arnie done right as far as the eye can see.

Emilia Clarke looks like a young Linda Hamilton and is perfect as Sarah Connor. I just love how not only the original first Terminators are tied into this but and redone in a way we never seen before .... but the timelines are tied together in a way that makes the whole story fit together perfectly to add more depth and clarity.

This is going to be one of this summer's must see films.



The Director is a nobody, just like T3 and T Salvation, which is the clearest indication that this will fail.
Nobody had heard of James Cameron when he made The Terminator either.



Welcome to the human race...
Nobody had heard of James Cameron when he made The Terminator either.
Yeah, but there's a world of difference between a newcomer directing his second film ever based on an idea he himself had and a director who's had about twenty years of experience in being a for-hire director whose only other major film is also part of a long-established franchise that does not place major emphasis on who directs each installment.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



This is what I have trouble with...





But none those actors are in Terminator: Genysis except Jason Clarke. And plus as long as the story and movie are good, doesn't matter what age an actor is. It's the character they play that matters.



Welcome to the human race...
Does that mean you don't have any trouble with the differences between Linda Hamilton, Lena Headey, and Emilia Clarke?



Welcome to the human race...
But none those actors are in Terminator: Genysis except Jason Clarke. And plus as long as the story and movie are good, doesn't matter what age an actor is. It's the character they play that matters.
A, he included Jai Courtney who is most definitely in Genysis by the looks of things. B, it's not so much the age as it is the considerable difference in appearance that matters.



They could at least get the makeup right though.


They've all changed a tiny amount, including the hair... but Clarke's makeup is totally different.


Unless it's using alternate realities and all that like in Abrams' Star Trek.



Exactly... the change in actor is needed I suppose... but they should at least get an actor who looks like the part.


Anton Yelchin was a great choice as a young Reese... Yelchin even copied Biehn's speech patterns.
Jai Courtney is not only a bad actor, he looks totally wrong for the role.
The scene in the trailer where he's naked he's all muscly and ripped like a Terminator. Reese was never a musclehead.



Registered User
Wish they had taken a cue from Mad Max Fury Road and held off on all the CGI.



Welcome to the human race...
Wish they had taken a cue from Mad Max Fury Road and held off on all the CGI.
When it comes to usage of CGI, you can't really compare the two, though. Terminator movies have always relied on effects more so than Mad Max movies because Terminator had to build up a whole universe where robots of varying types and abilities existed (and thus needed effects both practical and computer-generated), while the main draw of Mad Max was the car culture that quite understandably didn't mean CGI was necessary. Considering how CGI played such a huge part in making Terminator 2 the most beloved film in the series, it would seem remiss of the sequels to abandon it completely (though I agree that they should at least make it good enough so that the films don't end up looking like shiny, incomprehensible messes).



My name's Bobby Peru, like the country.
Hideous imposter masquerading as a Terminator sequel.. Probably due to a virtual army of unidentified assassins...(the studio)
__________________
"A flying saucer? You mean the kind from up there?"
"Yeah, either that or its counterpart"

Their assumption was that Jerry was already dead when I arrived, and I just nodded my head. What else could I tell them? "He had to do it, Officer, or else he would’ve turned into a worm-monster and been very unhappy."



Hideous imposter masquerading as a Terminator sequel.
The film is neither a sequel nor a reboot. Quoting actor Jai Courtney:

" It starts in a place we’re familiar with from the early films and then, you know, circumstances change. It somewhat shifts the course of events from that point. It’s not necessarily a sequel or a reboot. I don’t even know how you brand it correctly. We’re not remaking one of the early Terminator movies. And it doesn’t necessarily carry on from the point where we left off.”



Nobody had heard of James Cameron when he made The Terminator either.
Yeah, but there's a world of difference between a newcomer directing his second film ever based on an idea he himself had and a director who's had about twenty years of experience in being a for-hire director whose only other major film is also part of a long-established franchise that does not place major emphasis on who directs each installment.
Indeed, but my brief comment was based solely on the notion that a non-big name director isn't worthy of making a Terminator film (or any decent genre piece).

Alan Taylor has actually made some good movies (I liked Pallookaville and have heard good things about the The Emperor's New Clothes and Thor: The Dark World) plus his high profile T.V. work whilst not as glamorous certainly suggests adaptability. He may not be an auteur like Cameron but in my opinion that's not what the Terminator franchise needs at this stage. On paper Taylor has a far more impressive resume than Cameron did after Piranha II: The Spawning. Have you seen that film? Maltin summed it up well when he said something like You'd've needed to be psychic to spot any talent there.

I'm cautiously optimistic about Terminator Genisys in that I'm not expecting a classic, but think it has the potential to be a lot of fun. I like the contrivance of bringing Arnold back playing his age, because he was sorely missed in Salvation which only really works as a spin-off movie. Arnold is the franchise and his return can only be a good thing in my eyes.

I'm also in the minority of liking Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines which is insanely underrated on these pages because of what? Some well written humor early on? Yes I say well written because it certainly made me laugh, and was exactly in keeping with the Terminator's pattern of behavior considering the biker brawl in Judgement Day. If Genisys is as good as Rise of the Machines I'll be more than satisfied.