MovieChat Forums > conanurdevilish > Replies
conanurdevilish's Replies
Well several issues with this logic. The first being the obvious problem is that the movie presents is that being a human/terminator augment isn't desirable. Due to what I'm sure is lack of medicine in the future, being a human augment is a risk in itself, so unless you're in dire need of it, I don't think many people would immediately want to go that route.
Next I'm pretty certain there are scientific evidence suggesting women actually have a higher pain threshold than men. It's primarily their bodies require it in order to go through the child birth phase while men's bodies never naturally have to go through such ordeals.
Finally you're mixing up sport analogies with medical health. While it's true larger folks need more medicine due to the medicine needing to spread out more to have a proper effect, the same can't really be said for ailments. Give the same type of organ failure to 100 different type of men and women, and the men aren't going to fare any better than the women. If anything men tend to have a bigger history of internal issues and failures than women. There's a reason statistically women tend to have a longer life expectancy than men.
EDIT: To further add the sport analogy vs medical health thing. The reason there's divisions in sports is because the organizations like it that way. Don't know about you, but back when I was in regular school and high school, PE puts males and females in the same teams and the results are always interesting. They put weight division in sports too even though that's proven not to be necessary. Also male athletes are far more likelier to use performing enhancing drugs than woman athletes.
Also many male athletes have a tendency to suffer from physical and mental issues, sometimes even death, in the long haul in comparison to even everyday people
Yes you get. Also the term you're looking for is indeed called McGuffin over at TV tropes. As you mentioned, this movie does show John is interchangeable. And pretty much every outing post T2 including the TV series (whose incarnation I hate so much I only consider him John Baum) has John wildly different that it was hard for me to have any attachment to him in the long haul because it showed what happens when you try to gave a human mcguffin storylines.
Ironically for being a big Terminator fan, the only one I've seen in theatres was this recent one Dark Fate. It quite enjoyed the time and felt it was worth my money.
My family would often borrow movies from the video store in the past, so that's why I didn't see the other ones. I do recall seeing the 1st Matrix movie in theatres though, so clearly I went a few times to the cinema, but I think it was all the bad reception I heard about T3 and Terminator Salvation that made me hesitant in wanting to watch them in theatres. I decided to see how the T-1000 and T-800 in Genysis were handled on a cam recording and after only 20 minutes, I got the impression I was going to hate that movie because it was giving me bad Sarah Connor Chronicles vibes, so I waited for that one to come out on DVD.
<blockquote>You want to have a hybrid human terminator then at least be logical about it, the hybrid human portion would logically needed to have been the most robust male you could have found not some skarny woman.</blockquote>
Is this a troll post or something? Terminator parts work just fine regardless if it's attached to a male or female. This is as stupid as the people complaining the why the villain Terminator is Mexican despite the movie takes place in Mexico.
Also there was already a terminator/human hybrid like that in the past. It was played by Sam Worthington in Terminator Salvation, and many people thought he was bland and boring while MacKenzie Davis actually got praised for her performance.
Yes Terminators actually kill people effectively in this movie. Honestly I wasn't too bothered by Salvation's throwinator tactics because I could at least excuse that to Skynet still being in the early stages and probably still has some kinks to sort out.
Sarah Connor Chronicles and Genysis were when Terminators really bothered me with their inability to kill anyone and dying so easily. I think even the T-600s in Salvation put up more of a fight than those loser robots from TSCC and Genysis.
T1's realism was due to a combination of small budget and Cameron purposely downplaying the Terminator's powers in the first 30 minutes or so to make it a big reveal when Kyle Reese goes into details about the future. He did the same thing with the T-1000 in T2 where the machine collapses in the mall after Arnold empties his shotgun into it so people can see the liquid metal healing, but later in the movie Arnold and Sarah are unloading entire shotgun and handgun clips into it like in the hospital chase and it's not showing any signs of collapsing.
T2 the theme park ride looks to be the power levels he actually wanted Terminators to be like as they're taking a bunch of plasma shots and holding open massive blast doors in that one.
I think Arnold just gives it his all and this film does have a lot of talented people. So I think it's understandable for Arnold to be surprised by this. Even the population who weren't fans of the direction Dark Fate took but aren't raging bigots/misogynist admit things like the acting and directing were top notch. The last 4 Terminator outings were also mixed at best and widely panned at worst, so sadly people been tuning off of Terminator for the last 15 years or so.
<blockquote>original idea? john wick is a steven seagal movie with keanu reeves</blockquote>
Exactly. Movies like John Wick and Expendables were made specifically to be nostalgia trips that reminds people of action movies of the 80s and 90s. That's what their whole appeal was. The exact opposite of what an original idea is.
<blockquote>in fact I'd go further and point out that the TV series wasn't called the "John Connor Chronicles." </blockquote>
While it was called "Sarah Connor Chronicles", but the series was becoming more and more about that vortex of suck known as John Baum the more it progressed that by season 2, Sarah felt like a supporting character in her own show. I remember reading an interview from the creators about what season 3 would've been about, and looked like they were going to use the excuse that Sarah went MIA at the end of season 2 to make the series even more about John Baum and his stupid Twilight love triangle storyline and his moronic CW teen drama. If that's the direction the series was heading, then I'm glad the series got cancelled. It's actually ironic Thomas Dekker went on to play a actual CW character involved in one of those Twilight style love triangles, and this character wasn't as insufferable as John Baum.
<blockquote>Sarah has generally remained at the heart of the story across most of the films.</blockquote>
Yes exactly. That's why Tim Miller and the writers thought it was a better idea to make the human side of the film more about Sarah again.
<blockquote>Thing is, even in "Terminator," Reese pointed out that killing John at the end of the war would accomplish nothing.</blockquote>
You got to remember the future in T1 and T2 (even T2's future has been tweak slightly from T1) are drastically different from the future in T3 and Salvation. In T1 and T2 Skynet had a system core that gave it a glaring weakness. There should be some scripts out there floating around of the original T2 and I think even T1 extended war scenes showing this weakness where after the core got destroyed, the majority of Skynet's machines turned off.
T3 and Salvation did not have such weaknesses and it was ambiguous if human even won which is what the intended Salvation trilogy was relying on to draw people in. T3's future was basically Skynet going "we won this fight, we just have to make sure no one tries to stop Skynet from existing again, so send in T-X to keep everything on course for us."
<blockquote>Remember, the T-X "lost it" when she tasted John Connor's blood, and immediately started hunting him as her primary target.</blockquote>
Well yeah, John was still the biggest target, Skynet just wasn't anticipating to encounter him this early.
Well the dudebro entry of this franchise Terminator Salvation didn't do very well despite both the franchise and theatre box office was in better shape back then, so why not try a different approach?
continued...
<blockquote>Just come up with a new AI threat storyline and call it something else - make it original.</blockquote>
Now this is reminding me of the Star Wars: Fallen Jedi Order situation where the original creators were planning to make a original game series with their idea, but someone at EA suggested that the ideas would work well for a Star Wars game and to transfer them over to the SW lore. The game was well received and likely would've been more successful than the original game the creators wanted to make due to the name recognition.
<blockquote>I still believe if they wanted to make DF a direct sequel to T2 with Arnie and Linda then it had to include John. It didn't have to be, ( and shouldn't have been), the story told in DF.</blockquote>
Considering neither you or any of the people online who complained about John dying was able to come up with a better story idea that didn't just sound like rehashing T2, T3 or worse TS with more fanservice thrown in like a moronic MCU film, that just says this franchise needed to branch out.
The Terminator franchise is also in a rough spot similar to Star Wars, Predator, Alien and Robocop to a lesser extent where they were seen as being more intelligent than many of the franchises around that 80s era like the many shameless slasher genres. So the bar was always much higher to come up with new ideas and approaches with each installment. Look at the franchise there that thought it was a good idea to keep on rehasing the original film, Predator, and look what those movies have become now. It's now seen as the worse of the bunch with worse box office of the bunch. Even Star Wars is slowly getting there with how Disney has been handling the material.
The TV series and Genysis thought it was a good idea to attempt a T1/T2 style reboot/direct sequel approach with many of the same rehashed characters and it turned many people off. This isn't the Michael Myers wankfest saga, they needed to do something new in hopes to revive the franchise.
<blockquote>If the franchise needed to go in a different direction, then they should have had totally new characters and not bring Arnie and Linda back.</blockquote>
They needed to connect the film with T2 in some way, and bringing back both Linda and Arnold was the best way to do so. The writers did say they were going to make the movie regardless if they can get Linda or Arnold back, but preferably they wanted Sarah back as a emotional core and Arnold back because Cameron wanted Arnold's last outing to be his movie since T1 was what jumpstarted both their careers.
<blockquote>I don't think you can change the theme of the Terminator franchise because if you change it too much then why call it a Terminator movie?</blockquote>
This is coming across as what I call Michael Myers crybaby syndrome. Where tons of fanboys were crying in Halloween 3 "Where's Michael Myers? Why is this film called Halloween 3 if there's no Michael?" Um yeah, it's called Halloween and not The Michael Myers chronicles. I must be in the minority that when seeing the Halloween movies on the shelf of my local video store in the 90s and saw part 3 called "Season of the Witch" that I easily got that the Halloween franchise was intended to be an anthology. I was a pretty young kid back then and even I could figure that out. Honestly I would've loved for the Halloween films to have gone it's original direction of being an anthology since Halloween is my fave holiday and I know there's tons of horror topics that can be centered around that holiday. Movies that also use that idea like Trick r Treat are also films I love. Instead a good idea devolves into the Michael Myers wankfest saga. It's as facepalming as people claiming you can't have X-men films without Wolverine or you can't have Resident Evil films without Alice.
Back to Terminator, as long as the movie is about a killer robot called a Terminator created by a AI that humanity is fighting against in the future, it's a Terminator movie.
<blockquote>I did not want to see the franchise go off in new directions.</blockquote>
The franchise needed to go in a new direction in my opinion. If they keep the old direction, then I'm sure many will be asking "Why ain't I just watching T2 instead? Why ain't I just watching T3 instead?" Because not going off in new direction sounds like it will just be T2 again or T3 again with different casting.
My main issue with the movie was that they didn't go enough into new directions. Reading info about this movie before any trailers even came out, the writers were talking about reflecting today's society where humans become more reliant on technology and I thought they did not do enough of a good job there. Outside the car factory scene, the scenes of Rev-9 using all the satellites and cameras in the world to make searching for his target easier and the concept of Grace, I felt there needed to be a better connect with that idea. I felt the biggest shortcoming was rehashing the whole military leader vs AI machine angle. They should not have done that. I was hoping the Dani character was going to make something important looking at her job, and people like John Connor aren't needed anymore in this new machine landscape. I could think of many things that something could've been and it makes it more apparent John really had no where else to go in this new future.
<blockquote>I do have a question - how do you copy and paste comments and then grey them out? I've tried everything and can't seem to get anything to work. I'm on a Mac if that matters.</blockquote>
To copy and paste, you simply highlight the words you want to copy. Afterwards you can either go to the top of your window where "edit" is and select "copy" or you can do it quicker by holding "ctrl" and "c" at the same time. At least that's how it works for me, but I'm using a PC laptop.
To grey them out, underneath the "add reply" button is a clickable "formatting help" that opens a tab showing you how to format the post with the options they have.
Well it's reported it was Cameron's idea to kill off John, so you only have the man himself to blame for this.
continued...
3) Not sure if you meant to have John killed off by Rev-9 or actually Legion. For Rev-9 to kill off John, again that means Sarah gets no storyline since she's already trying to kill Rev-9 to help Dani, so nothing will come out of that. T-800 100% gets no storyline. So two characters I'm sure many people prefers over John will lose their storylines just so a character who's going to die anyways gets a bit more screentime. Yeah I'm sure that's going to go well. I rather have a proper use of a character as oppose to a half ass excuse to pander to fanservice. That's why I hate franchises like the MCU because they have no balls and will always sacrifice story, continuity, logic, reason and character arcs just because it gets some fanboys/girls cheering to go buy their merchandise.
4) If you mean actually Legion, than that's even worse. Legion likely won't even be up and operational until movie 3, so John will have to be alive for the entire trilogy? So you want a character who's likely going to be written as dead weight to live for the entire trilogy just because a certain group of T1/T2 purist can't let go of a character who was already losing his importance in the last 4 Terminator outings? That sounds like a terrible idea. Why not drag back Dr. Silberman back into the franchise while we're at it then?
<blockquote>he damn well knew what he was doing and thought by bringing Linda back it would make this one seem more like the true sequel to T2 than T3 or Salvation.</blockquote>
Well yeah, the creators of Dark Fate were pretty vocal about them thinking Sarah was the real heart of the films instead of the misadventures of the ever changing John Connor.
<blockquote>Hell, he could even have been killed off fighting Legion as an adult if that is where the story really needed to go and I think most die hard fans could have bought into that.</blockquote>
Several problems, and rather big problems here though.
1) T-800 would not have a storyline in the movie. T-800's storyline completely requires him to kill John and have a lot of time pass by since then. While I do agree with those that think the T-800 taking this face turn is a slight bit farfetched without the aid of some sort of reprogramming, but this character arc for him completely requires him to have killed John. You're suggestion would require the T-800 just chasing John throughout the entire movie again. Considering this movie was planning to be Arnold's final swan song to the franchise, not giving him that story arc will be a issue for the writers.
2) Sarah won't have a storyline. Her storyline is completely reliant on losing John and becoming a wreck from it. The intended heart of the film won't have a storyline outside babysitting John again and not having much agency of her own. Yeah I think that completely defeats the point in making Sarah the emotional focus tying back to the originals.
<blockquote>Genysis was actually pretty decent, much better than T3 and Salvation.</blockquote>
The overwhelming majority was turned off by that movie though. Just like how the TV series might have a loyal fanbase, but the fact it went from 18 million viewers to struggling to keep 3 million viewers by season 2 makes it kind of obvious many people didn't like it and was turned away. Many people view Genysis as the worst out of the films, and ask anyone in person if they ever seen the Terminator films or even online. If they were able to make it past T3, TSCC and TS, TG was definitely the breaking point for them and why they stopped caring about Terminator.
<blockquote>It's just that movie studios care only for money and most people have zero taste in movies.</blockquote>
No arguments here, though in this landscape greedy movie studios and people having zero taste pretty much goes hand in hand. Just ask Disney who single handily can make this claim.
We are going to have to disagree here.
The reason the movie lost traction is due to a bunch of reasons, many of which wasn't Dark Fate's fault. Yes there is the population who didn't like Connor's handling because as said in the OP, he dies in opening scene. Those people tend to be T1 and T2 purest who likely would've had a problem with the film for any number of reasons even if they did kept John alive.
The general audience though, I talked to a lot of people throughout the year of 2019 about movies leading up to Dark Fate's release, and you won't believe how many people I encountered who didn't even know there was a Terminator movie coming out or cared. You can take a guess between T3, TSCC, TS or TG at which point did they lose interest in the franchise.
Then add movies in 2019 in general all struggled at the box office unless you were Disney or a superhero movie. Most people just wait for movies to hit streaming now and those who do watch in theatres, many of the general audiences are kids with their parents, and most wouldn't know anything about the Terminator films. Not all though because I have seen numerous kids at my Dark Fate screening. Only other exception is if you have a devoted cult like the Marvel and DC does.