T4 Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins

ShiverinEskimo · 14-02-2008 12:47pm

And all members of the Wu-Tang Clan.

Neo# · 14-02-2008 2:41pm

constitutionus wrote: »

i hope they stick in things like the first terminators with the rubber skin that stood out a mile. be a nice nod to the first film

I think that was just the dodgy effects of the time and not something written into the script.:D

TheDoc · 14-02-2008 3:14pm

originally the termiantor was going to be a skinny run of the mill guy who could fit in.

Its kinda the perfect killing machine as you wouldnt see it coming,

originally the guy who plays the white cop ( of the black/white pair) was to be cast as the terminator.

After arnie pulled some diva muscle he got the role, and the film had to be overhauled.

I think a less then ripped terminator could well work, in a well put way

constitutionus · 14-02-2008 4:33pm

i thought micheal beihn was meant to be the terminator and arnie was meant to by kyle and cameron switched it?

it was the right move for the film but yeah its kinda fun to see summer glau kick arse in the sarah connor chronicles. sweet little petite thing that can punch you through a wall

worth remembering the strength in a terminators in the endoskeleton. not the flesh so we dont really need an uber buff bloke to play him ala what someone else already said about robert patrick.

lizann · 15-02-2008 11:34am

Robert Patrick was great in T2 and his is not a big buff actor

AARRRGH · 15-02-2008 11:38am

I actually enjoyed T3! I have no complaints about T2.

AARRRGH · 15-02-2008 11:39am

lizann wrote: »

Robert Patrick was great in T2 and his is not a big buff actor

Yeah, he was really creepy.

Kur4mA · 15-02-2008 12:21pm

Eire 4Ever wrote: »

You mean Christian Bale yes?

Oops! Sorry yeah, I had just watched True Romance, lol.

Eire 4Ever · 20-02-2008 12:50pm

lizann wrote: »

Robert Patrick was great in T2 and his is not a big buff actor

Yes i must agree Patrick was great in T2

ShiverinEskimo · 20-02-2008 1:43pm

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

Robert Patrick wasn't a beefy mofo and he made a great T-1000

lizann wrote:

Robert Patrick was great in T2 and his is not a big buff actor

Aw yea, Ignore ShiverinEskimo but all credit to lizann for making a good point.

Aw yea, so that's how it is. Right so. I get the hint. mumble mumble grumble.

Vic Vinegar · 20-02-2008 1:46pm

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

Aw yea, Ignore ShiverinEskimo but all credit to lizann for making a good point.

Aw yea, so that's how it is. Right so. I get the hint. mumble mumble grumble.

Awww....

Credit + 3 for you!!

Mrs Roy Keane · 20-02-2008 4:33pm

lizann wrote: »

Robert Patrick was great in T2 and his is not a big buff actor

Robert Patrick is a great actor who is terribly underrated.

He was snubbed for Walk the Line

Karl Hungus · 20-02-2008 4:46pm

I'd wholeheartedly agree about Robert Patrick being under rated, he's usually excellent most films I've seen him in.

20-02-2008 4:55pm

Robert Patrick is a truely fantastic actor, and his brother ain't a bad musicial either. Like many great actors he seems stuck doing straight to DVD crime thrillers when he should by rights be making a regular appearence in your local cinema.

Karl Hungus · 20-02-2008 5:01pm

He did have a small part in Flags of Our Fathers, which was pretty damned good. Managed to steal every scene he was in, too.

AARRRGH · 20-02-2008 5:42pm

lizann wrote: »

Robert Patrick was great in T2 and his is not a big buff actor

I think part of what made his role work though was that Arnie was this huge monster of a man, yet the more advanced robot was a slim, weird looking guy.

He may not have appeared so impressive alongside another normal sized actor.

senordingdong · 20-02-2008 7:58pm

In fairness to Patrick, he has been getting alot of good exposure since the X Files.

senordingdong · 20-02-2008 7:59pm

In fairness to Patrick, he has been getting alot of good exposure since the X Files.

lizann · 21-02-2008 11:33am

He deserved an Best Supporting Actor Nomination for WTL

21-02-2008 12:54pm

I didn't think he was all that good in X-Files. I haven't watched those seasons in a while though. It might have something to do with those ones being crap.

I know I've pointed out this before but ..

Terminator 1 - 18's
though, according to IMDB, The Terminator has be re-rated to 15's
Terminator 2 - 15's
Terminator 3 - 12's
Terminator 4 - PG?

So are we expecting a child-friendly version where Arnie walks along with the roses case and actually pulls out a dozen roses this time?

Guy:Incognito · 21-02-2008 10:17pm

This has probably bee covered millions of times all over tinternet but why do the Terminators in 4 need skin and the like? Surely they only needed to be done up to look like humans to blend in when going back in time. In a post apocalyptic war, make up really wouldnt be an issue I'd have thought.

TerrorFirmer · 21-02-2008 10:24pm

The rating was little to do with the problems of Terminator 3 - the violence in the movie was quite satisfactory and didn't necessarily feel dumbed down. In comparison to T2 though, T3 actually feels like one giant scene rather then a structured movie. Having come from watching the 2h 40m cut of T2, T3 clocking in at 1h 40m does tend to leave you feeling...'Is that it?'. It lacks the grittiness of the first two movies and owing to a string of poorly placed jokes and innuendos, the apocalyptic, brooding feel never takes off the ground. It needed more fleshing out, the plot in itself was fine but it just didn't sit together convincingly. A watchable movie in itself but just not a true Terminator movie....particularly after watching the Sarah Connor Chronicles, it just feels like a TV show.

Also, as above, there are so many questions you can't help but continuously ask. Like, why are Terminators sent back in chronological order? How does Techcom know when exactly to send back soldiers/terminators to protect the target? Why can't they send Terminators back to pre T1 timeframe in which Sarah Connor is far more vulnerable? Perhaps there's a limit on the technology that hasn't been explained.

The guy · 21-02-2008 10:24pm

Could it get any worse than T3?

constitutionus · 23-02-2008 12:46am

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

The rating was little to do with the problems of Terminator 3 - the violence in the movie was quite satisfactory and didn't necessarily feel dumbed down. In comparison to T2 though, T3 actually feels like one giant scene rather then a structured movie. Having come from watching the 2h 40m cut of T2, T3 clocking in at 1h 40m does tend to leave you feeling...'Is that it?'. It lacks the grittiness of the first two movies and owing to a string of poorly placed jokes and innuendos, the apocalyptic, brooding feel never takes off the ground. It needed more fleshing out, the plot in itself was fine but it just didn't sit together convincingly. A watchable movie in itself but just not a true Terminator movie....particularly after watching the Sarah Connor Chronicles, it just feels like a TV show.

Also, as above, there are so many questions you can't help but continuously ask. Like, why are Terminators sent back in chronological order? How does Techcom know when exactly to send back soldiers/terminators to protect the target? Why can't they send Terminators back to pre T1 timeframe in which Sarah Connor is far more vulnerable? Perhaps there's a limit on the technology that hasn't been explained.

one good thing about these series of films is its a chance to address that. i was going to say maybe they cant choose exactly where they arrive. maybe there was really only ONE time shift that resulted in three different arrival points. i.e all terminator versions went back at the same time to preform the hit along with kyle and the reprogramed arnie that the rebels got their hands on who got sucked along for the ride. then each group got seperated in the timestream to appear when they "did"

but youd have to ignore whats going on in the TV show completly and seeing as im half asleep theres probably a few plot holes ya'd have to plug

TheDoc · 23-02-2008 1:13am

the reason for having skiined terminators in the future wars is that they infiltrated human bases and strongholds performing assassinations.

The Freeman · 23-02-2008 11:32am

senordingdong wrote: »

In fairness to Patrick, he has been getting alot of good exposure since the X Files.

and lets not forget about his performance in the sopranos which was some of his best work

senordingdong · 24-02-2008 4:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Terminator 1 - 18's
though, according to IMDB, The Terminator has be re-rated to 15's
Terminator 2 - 15's
Terminator 3 - 12's
Terminator 4 - PG?

So are we expecting a child-friendly version where Arnie walks along with the roses case and actually pulls out a dozen roses this time?

Actually it's a Kindergarden Cop cross-over.

My name is Todd · 28-02-2008 2:44pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7266714.stm

Release date has been confirmed - 22nd of May 2009. It will be released the same weekend as Night at the Museum II.

Despite all my reservations I'm actually a small bit excited by this. I have faith in Bale alone.

JP Liz · 21-06-2008 8:41pm

I like the casting of Christian Bale

Is Arnie in this movie?????????????????

JP Liz · 24-09-2008 3:28pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKygxKvpl7g

Released June 2009

T4 Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins

Comments