Terminator 5

ricero

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=30801

Arnie making a comeback to the terminator franchise .

Personally i would love it.

your thoughts ?

Handsome Bob

I don't like the de-aging process, Jeff Bridges just looked........weird in Tron. Ironically enough I thought a better effort was made with Arnie in Terminator Salvation.

I wouldn't want to see Arnie playing another character either such as a scientist or army general, so aye, I'm afraid to say that Arnie should stay away. Especially if they're putting a Fast and Furious director at the helm. Jebus, and I didn't think you could downgrade from Cameron anymore than McG!

Agricola

Cant see it being anything other than a cash in. They'll have to do a CGI Arnie again, this time with dialogue, but its not something Id be interested in. If Jeff Bridges in Tron is where that tech is at, then its afew years off before we can start resurrecting old actors to their former glory in any realistic way.

If they want more of these films they should just ditch Arnie and explore the stories of other characters. They went the right way with salvation but just got a lightweight director.

Schism

Hey who knows, Arnie might be getting back into shape ala Sly. They're about the same age after all.

If he does who wouldn't pay to see him crushing skulls again?

Handsome Bob

Schism wrote: »

Hey who knows, Arnie might be getting back into shape ala Sly. They're about the same age after all.

If he does who wouldn't pay to see him crushing skulls again?

But it's Terminator, Sly got away with it in The Expendables because he was only playing a human. Whereas with Terminator, in shape or not in shape, a sixty something year old looking cyborg isn't going to cut it.

Magic Eight Ball

Schism wrote: »

who wouldn't pay to see him crushing skulls again?

ME!
It's a backward step to have Arnold Schwarzenegger returning to headline the franchise.
Blatant cash in if I ever saw one.

You know, I used to be really bummed whenever they'd make a non-Cameron sequel. But at this point, who cares?
I gave up on ever seeing another official entry into the cannon (I'm sorry, but everything sans Cameron doesn't count; I don't give a **** what anyone says). As far as I'm concerned, the series- and the story- ended with T2. Perfect movie, perfect ending, and whatever they do now is just glorified fan fiction.

Kess73

LZ5by5 wrote: »

But it's Terminator, Sly got away with it in The Expendables because he was only playing a human. Whereas with Terminator, in shape or not in shape, a sixty something year old looking cyborg isn't going to cut it.

That pretty much hits the nail on the head for me. I thought Schwarzenegger looked too old for the part in Terminator III, and that was filmed almost ten years ago.

TheDoc

Pity cause I genuinely enjoyed Salvation and was hoping the series could kick on with the futuristic war.

Heres hoping Cameron gets sick of people wrecking his franchise and can come back to do things right

Duggy747

Arnie's back Yaaaaay!

Arnie's choosing questionable projects on his comeback Eeeeh?

His other projects which he's mention like a WWII action movie and another one where he plays a sherrif sound far more interesting than him returning to a water-downed franchise.

Necronomicon

I refuse to get excited about anything Terminator related, Arnie or not. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me two or more times, shame on me.

ziedth

Personally I think it could only work if he played a general or something cause the Jeff Bridges thing isn't there yet(although I can't wait till it's seemless) and he is much much to old to come back as a terminator.

having said all that, I will always have a soft spot for the franchise as T2 was that film I watched 100 times as a kid so i'll remain excited. just drop McG for god sake.

pixelburp

Tiring that the movies still persist on bringing back Arnie: I mean you'd think someone would quietly point out that an infiltration cyborg is a bit pointless if they all look alike. At least the TV quickly dispensed with that notion, but I dunno; is it showing a little contempt for the audience that they must persist with Arnie turning up? His star can't be that big that they couldn't just hire another A-Lister to be a Terminator. Or do something different, and make a Terminator movie ala The Thing, where nobody quite knows who is a robot & who isn't.

GavRedKing

Dont think I can take a 60 odd year old cyborg seriously to be honest.

Unless hes coming back to offer something to the story then I dont think theres a point putting him in it for just the sake of it.

roboshatner

I will have all heard the news that Justin Lin is directing Terminator or is going to direct.

I seen some silly article where it said that Vin Diesel would be a terminator but that is laughable http://www.joblo.com/arrow/index.php?id=27848

I'll admit Diesel was cool in Pitch Black.

I am not a WWF Fan at all can't stand it but for many years the rock has been tipped for terminator to replace.

In the Walking Tall Aka The Rundown Arnie does a cameo in it and has voiced saying he would like him replace him.

Not sure if he would be a good replacement but who else is there..... Stallone ? That would be funny if that happened like in Last Action Hero.

Voice what think about this

The Stath?

Tipsy McSwagger

If Cameron ain't directing I ain't interested. As for The Rock no thanks.

candy-gal1

Oh this should be great, if its true!
But it has to be Arnie in it, none of this changing actors in classics c***
:rolleyes:

roboshatner

He's a bit small height wise

Remember watching the first esp of Terminator scc and they had a different terminator that was made look like Arnie it was kinda funny but worked tv show wise he got killed in the end of it.

Papa Smut wrote: »

The Stath?

Jonny7

theres a Terminator 4?

Galvasean

Jonny7 wrote: »

theres a Terminator 4?

There's a Terminator 3?

Jumpy

NO. There is not a 3 or a 4.

*shakes fist threateningly*

Jumpy

Papa Smut wrote: »

The Stath?

OY! Are yoo Sarah Connah?

GavRedKing

He certainly has the physique for it anyway, it would depend oh his role inthe film.

If he was one of the main stars I'd have my doubts but if hi spart was more visual, why not cast him?

dlofnep

He's a much better actor than Arnie, that's for sure.

Skerries

shut it you nonce!

Magic Eight Ball

Some of the names getting dropped in this thread are ridiculous.
Who said the Terminator has to be a body builder? The guy is supposed to be an infiltration unit, remember Cameron originally envisioned Henriksen playing the role.

Robert Patrick, the least physically imposing of all the actors arguably gave the most menacing performance as a Terminator.

dlofnep

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

Robert Patrick, the least physically imposing of all the actors arguably gave the most menacing performance as a Terminator.

Agreed. My uncle looks the spit of him, and used to always scare the shíte out of me as a kid doing T1000 impressions.

ziedth

that's actually a good point Magic. Although I think Robert Patrick is a little harder looking then Kristanna Loken

Personally, I like the rock as an action star and I'd be willing to give him a fair go in this.

seamus

I think the justification for using Arnie was that the Terminator needed to be large to accomodate the machine underneath, 6 foot tall, 4 feet wide.

Indeed, even in the original Terminator, there's a flash-forward which shows the terminator infiltrating the human base, and again they used a bodybuilder to portray it;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco_Columbu

Although he's only 5'5", which doesn't come across in the movie, so they must have used camera trickery to make him appear taller.

Patrick is an obvious choice for a liquid metal Terminator because there is no "bulk" to accomodate.

The Rock wouldn't be an inconsistent choice for a T-101, though he may be a little bit too big. But Vin Diesel may be a little bit too small. Maybe more suitable for a slimmed-down, but not liquid terminator model.

Phony Scott

Terminator 5...how did Cameron's classic come to this? It'll probably have a pathetic title like Terminators, because, you know, the letter s is shaped like the number 5...

I loved Schwarzenegger's films way back when and I honestly hoped for a serious attempt at a comeback, but this smacks of laziness.

dlofnep

I thought the last one was actually decent. Better than Terminator 3 anyway.

Suspiria79

Maybe Arnie will play a human in it? No one on here knows otherwise. We will just have to see.

ricero

yea maybe there could be an origin story of how the terminator looks like Arnie and Arnie could maybe play a rambo - esque/ mad max loner human action type hero killing the robots.

Simian!

I presume this will take over from Terminator Salvation and continue on? They can't just create another film in the franchise and essentially ignore the previous one, the way Salvation did with T3. All the talk of the sale of the franchise does have me worried though. Looking forward to the end of this messing when the rights revert back to Cameron in 2018 - the terminator universe will have been royally raped by then.

I can't see Arnie returning in any sort of an action role here. I'd say it might be an extended cameo of some sort (to sell a few extra seats), but I've no idea how they're going to crowbar him in and have the movie taken seriously.

allanb49

There are 2 real Terminator movies

Then 1 Remake and 1 set in the universe

remake

Then the tv show in another timeline

iMax

ricero wrote: »

yea maybe there could be an origin story of how the terminator looks like Arnie and Arnie could maybe play a rambo - esque/ mad max loner human action type hero killing the robots.

Already covered (but cut from final release thankfully) in T3

Sad Professor

^ Is that real? God it's horrendous!

allanb49 wrote: »

There are 2 real Terminator movies

Then 1 Remake and 1 set in the universe

remake

Then the tv show in another timeline

I'm actually impressed by the little visual references Mostow made to T2. Hardly justifies calling it a remake though. There are just as many references if not more shared by the first two films. As brilliant as it is, T2 is just a rehash of the first film with a few twists thrown in (something which as Aliens demonstrated, Cameron is very good at). And assuming that they actually succeeded in changing time at the end, it actually completely contradicts the time travel logic of the first film, which depicts a closed causal loop in which time can't be changed.

However, I'd still agree that there are only two real Terminator films. For that reason I don't really care how many of them they make. I'll just ignore them and pretend they don't exist.

iMax

It's real alright (I set it to start at 50 seconds, but you can rewind it to the start of the clip for context). But as it's cut they could re-do the origin.

Personally don't mind T3, not as good, (bit like the godfather series), but I consider it part of the storyline. 4 to me is an attempt to reboot the series - not even in the same league as star wars episode 1, 2 & 3, from the beginning this time, it's standalone & has no connection apart from the brief image of Swarzenegger, which is necessary for the timeline. Other than that it's nothing to do with the originals.

Loved TSCC though. they had it right, shame it got canned, but at least they had enough time to wrap it up.

Naikon

This will be terrible.

roboshatner

To be honest I do remember noticing all that when I see terminator 3 in the cinema.

Also as I posted that thread on the rock as the new Terminator did you guys here the news....

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/original-cast-returning-for-terminator-5-but-its-not-arnolds-next-film

Im praying Edward Furlong returns as the one True John Connor

Sad Professor wrote: »

^ Is that real? God it's horrendous!


I'm actually impressed by the little visual references Mostow made to T2. Hardly justifies calling it a remake though. There are just as many references if not more shared by the first two films. As brilliant as it is, T2 is just a rehash of the first film with a few twists thrown in (something which as Aliens demonstrated, Cameron is very good at). And assuming that they actually succeeded in changing time at the end, it actually completely contradicts the time travel logic of the first film, which depicts a closed causal loop in which time can't be changed.

However, I'd still agree that there are only two real Terminator films. For that reason I don't really care how many of them they make. I'll just ignore them and pretend they don't exist.

d.anthony

AM I seriously in the minority in thinking Salvation was pretty damn good? And I'm a diehard Terminator fan...

Hated the 3rd, but I thought Salvation was awesome, especially the way it had all the nods to the previous films. I thought it continued the story perfectly.

Handsome Bob

I liked Salvation for what it was, I certainly feel it's one of the better action films of the recent years. Sure it's not up to the standard of T1&2 but that was always unlikely to happen.

It would have elevated to great status had McG had the bottle to make the decisions that were necessary in regards to the script at the early stages of production.

d.anthony

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I liked Salvation for what it was, I certainly feel it's one of the better action films of the recent years. Sure it's not up to the standard of T1&2 but that was always unlikely to happen.

It would have elevated to great status had McG had the bottle to make the decisions that were necessary in regards to the script at the early stages of production.

What changes did he make? Are they known?

Handsome Bob

d.anthony wrote: »

What changes did he make? Are they known?

There's an original script out there, written by the guys who wrote catwoman. It made a few ballsy (some say stupid) decisions in regards to the mythology of the franchise. Once those details were leaked fans went nuts and McG eventually to decided to make rewrites, though he didn't bring Jonathon Nolan in to do this until filming had already started.

So basically what we got were two films in one: you can still see the guts of what the original script put out there, but with some key changes. The rewrites didn't mesh with the original script all that well and that's why some people pan the film. This is a good article on the whole thing:

http://www.chud.com/19577/exclusive-what-went-wrong-with-terminator-salvation/

Sad Professor

I always got the impression that Bale was inspired by that brief glimpse we got of adult Connor at the start of T2, and that he signed on to Salvation and forced them to re-write it just so he could play that part. He seems to have been on a completely different wavelength to everyone else on the film. In fairness, he probably had the right idea, but I think Cameron's idea of Connor was thrown out the window when they gave him a wife and a family. However, Bale just brooded and grunted his way through the movie as if he was oblivious to this.

d.anthony

What caused these massive changes? And what were they? The biggest
change came when McG flew to the UK to talk to Christian Bale about
starring in the fourth Terminator movie. The director wanted the Batman
star to play Marcus Wright, the cyborg protagonist of the script. But
Bale focused on another part: John Connor. The only problem is that
John Connor had about three minutes of screen time in the entire film;
most of Connor’s moments were played offscreen. In the original script
John Connor was the secretive leader of the Resistance. He lived on the
HQ sub, and almost no one saw his face, so as to keep him hidden from
the robots. Connor made radio addresses and existed as a legend for the
fighting men and women of the Resistance, but in the original script
Connor didn’t show up onscreen until the last minutes of the movie.

After reading that, I think they missed a trick. Connor being just a voice would have made the move far better.

Thanks for posting that article!

EDIT: Just that bit though. The rest is a dogs dinner, frankly!

That Devin Faraci article is hard to take seriously when you consider that the same man wrote this 4 star review of the film.

Dempsey

d.anthony wrote: »

After reading that, I think they missed a trick. Connor being just a voice would have made the move far better.

Thanks for posting that article!

Jonathan Nolan was just after a paycheck. Bale should also stick to acting and know his place in the creative process.

I liked T4, T3 is non canon in my mind, but I do think they could have done alot more with what they had and the tacked on stuff to cater Bale's ego did ruin a very promising film. He should have waited until Public Enemies to have his "bigger than jesus" moment.

Sad Professor

Bale wouldn't have been able to push Mann around like he did McG though.

d.anthony

Dempsey wrote: »

Jonathan Nolan was just after a paycheck. Bale should also stick to acting and know his place in the creative process.

I liked T4, T3 is non canon in my mind, but I do think they could have done alot more with what they had and the tacked on stuff to cater Bale's ego did ruin a very promising film. He should have waited until Public Enemies to have his "bigger than jesus" moment.

Bale aside, do you really thin the story went that much off the rails?

I've loved the Terminator films since I was a 5-year-old, complete die-hard, only films I could watch again and again without getting bored (well, apart from T3), and I genuinely thought TS was really good, fitted in really well.

Maybe it was the the nostalgia factor they put in it, eg. GNR You Could Be Mine, Kyles Nike Vandals, how John got his scar, Marcus teaching Kyle that shotgun trick... I dunno

But I just thought it was amazing

Handsome Bob

Sad Professor wrote: »

Bale wouldn't have been able to push Mann around like he did McG though.

That was the main thing that stood out from the leaked tape for me. McG stayed silent, and when Bale asked him to say something, McG meekly (almost afraid) said that he had nothing to say.

When a director is intimidated and scared of an actor, you know that he isn't exactly running a tight, confident, ship on set. That was the first instance that made me fear for the movie.