Slashdot Mirror


Terminator 3: Attack of the Terminatrix

jinx_ was among many who wrote in to say: "Arnold Schwarzenegger" is back for another installment of the Terminator Franchise. Reportedly a $30 million payday for Arnold.

372 comments

  1. Movies about robots are always good. by CheezWizFire · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Robotics and Atificial Intelligence is going to a major transforming part of the next century and it is something that needs to be dealt with by all levels of society. Currently most of the debate on the matter is limited to a few people who know a lot. Movies about robots help bring the debate to all levels of society. - Steven

    1. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Usquebaugh · · Score: 0

      "Robotics and Atificial Intelligence.." total drivel deleted. This has to be the typical /. kiddie post.

      Robotics has already transformed society. Being as it was last century you may not be old enough to recall when people worked on production lines.

      AI, if you can define it then your doing a lot better than most researchers. We do not yet have a clear idea of what intelligence is, yet people want to go and make it :-)

      Debate about AI has raged for decades, 2001 A Space Odessey? Hmmm, that never raised the spector of AI. I'm sure there were written works long before movies that dealt with the ideas of AI.

      So take a deep breath and realise this is me insulting you.

    2. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by krmt · · Score: 2
      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

    3. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by l.b.+noire · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Can you explain to me exactly how a movie about a killer cyborg beamed back from the future to protect the to-be savior of humanity is supposed to help the public have a greater understanding of robotics and artificial intelligence? The first two Terminator movies I saw bore nothing even similar to reality.

      If you're referring to movies educating people then I don't want to live in a world where such a thing happens. Remember how everyone was suddenly an expert on viruses after a string of crappy movies came out in the mid-'90s? Remember how everyone was screaming about how we needed to set up a terrestrial defense system after a couple of even crappier movies came out a few years ago?

      Such movies do nothing but foster a chicken little syndrome in the public at large. Hollywood has never relied on anything like historical accuracy or facts to get in the way of a story. If we expect people to be educated about or become aware of issues because of what they see in a movie then this world is indeed in a very sorry state.

      I think the best we can expect to see out of this is the usual two-minute story on the local late-night news: "KILLER ROBOTS TAKING OVER THE WORLD! Can this happen here?" - followed by stock interviews with the guys from the MIT AI Lab.

    4. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by talesout · · Score: 0
      This is pretty much the most moronic thing I've ever heard.

      If you are dumb enough to think that Robots and artificial intelligence are going to develop any faster this century than they did last century you need to have your balls placed in a vice for a few hours to straighten you out. Seriously. Until people get past the idealism that throwing more power at the problem is going to make Artificial Intelligence click, and realize it is going to take one massive paradigm shift before it's worth it's weight in shit, we are not going to see artificial intelligence develop at all.

      Now, develop a computer that lets me download my memory into and operate a robotic space exploration craft, now that I could understand. Hehehe, god, I can't even be bothered to believe my own drivel today. You fucking wanker.

      --


      Bite my yammer.
    5. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      > Movies about robots help bring the debate to all levels of society.

      The only movies I recall with AI that weren't silly were 2001 and "AI". (Sorry, "Short Circuit" and "Now I know why humans cry" are stupid in the AI department.)

      Ironically, the Terminator series does show what could happen. A killer robot probably would not have to be build like a human, nor even be intelligent like a human. The ability to navigate over the terrain is the critical part. Once that is done, slap on a motion detector and a big saw and guns and toss them like popcorn at the enemy.

      That could be a real danger in the future.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
    6. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      > and realize it is going to take one massive
      > paradigm shift before it's worth it's weight in shit

      I think it's already happened. The problem with symbolic manipulation of the environment isn't the manipulation of the symbols, it's the creation of accurate symbols from external sensor data.

      And that's just for moving around.

      The other shift is realizing that, just maybe, there isn't any magic shortcut to intelligence in AI and that all humans are is a gigantic conglomeration of learned info, hence the Cyc project.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
    7. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether you liked Deep Impact of that other flick or not, we DO need to look for and map for future impacts. It's happened before. Many times. There's a theory now suggesting a crater recently found in Iraq (Saddam has been draining the lake and now you can see the earmarks of an impact crater from satellite photos) suggesting once great and thriving ancient *HUMAN* civilizations were wiped out.

      To think this isn't going to happen. Ever. Never, ever while human life continues to exist--well, you must have the end-of-the-world planned short term else you're a moron!

    8. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by talesout · · Score: 1

      No, it hasn't happened. We are all still convinced that we can somehow make something that sees the world in ones and zeros understand and "think" just like something as complex as even a simple animals brain is. Until we get past that, and get over our fascination with "digital" computers, we are not going to see "artificial" intelligence.

      But, if your dumb enough to think collecting a million goatsex links is going to help create artificial intelligence, well I guess you would believe the shift has already occured.

      --


      Bite my yammer.
    9. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.

      Go fuck yourself.

    10. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by IronicCheese · · Score: 2, Funny
      Let's see...brainstorm with me here...suppose, just suppose that there's a form of expression that isn't like nonfiction at all...we could call it non-nonfiction, or just "fiction" if you want to be informal.

      Under this hypothetical genre, you could do something nutty like relax the constraints of historical accuracy and current scientific understanding in order to optimize for other, non-engineering attributes like drama, tension, and the progression of a storyline even though fundamental carrying particles for these forces are yet to be generated at Fermilab.

      There might be value in presenting "stories" in this new "fictional" way, so long as people are made to understand that they're "just movies" and that they shouldn't take them so "seriously" and that nobody but nobody confuse a movie theatre with a library. (*)

      Just a thought.

      (*) hint: both theatres and libraries are louder places than they used to be, but in general, the theater is the one with the sticky floor and the THX sound system.

    11. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you are dumb enough to think that Robots and artificial intelligence are going to develop any faster this century than they did last century you need to have your balls placed in a vice for a few hours to straighten you out. Seriously.


      I agree. Any man who disagrees with me should have his heretic ideas tortured out of him. Or if she's a woman, she should be stoned to death.

    12. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Can you explain to me exactly how a movie ... is supposed to help the public have a greater understanding of robotics and artificial intelligence?

      The general idea of stories is to instruct and entertain.

      Here, we see a specific application where the goal is to prey on public Luddism, changing it into money lining the producer's wallet.

      As with the bulk of Holleywood product, enjoy the entertainment if you can, barf like a champ if you cannot.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    13. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Dang, I've had this .sig for a couple of months now, and I'm disappointed it took this long to reel someone in.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
    14. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you're just a little ray of sunshine, aren't you? :P
      Take that chip off your shoulder. It's not worth getting that worked-up about, is it?

    15. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by ccwaterz · · Score: 1

      I thought they just blew stuff up. The robots are merely vehicles.

    16. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      If you are dumb enough to think that Robots and artificial intelligence are going to develop any faster this century than they did last century you need to have your balls placed in a vice for a few hours to straighten you out. Seriously. Until people get past the idealism that throwing more power at the problem is going to make Artificial Intelligence click, and realize it is going to take one massive paradigm shift before it's worth it's weight in shit, we are not going to see artificial intelligence develop at all.

      Well, let's see, I have to agree with this. We ahve no reason to think AI development will speed up.

      Of course, in the last 20 years we've gone from no AI to chat programs that can fool (stupid) people into thinking they're real, computers that figure out what you're trying to do and do it for you, and computers that can recognize normal speech and human faces.

      Pay attention, AI development doesn't need to speed up, it's going fast enough already. Within 20 years, we should have computers that can easily parse human speech perfectly, and use video input to navigate around in the real world without hitting things. Add in fairly obvious normal advances in minaturization, and you've got real robots, walking around and doing what people tell them to.

      And, hey, guess what? Throwing CPU cycles at it works. we don't need paradigm shifts, we can keep making more and more intelligent computers just by making them faster.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    17. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      In the terminator movies, the terminators looked human so they could infiltrate before they started terminating. If it looked like a snow-blower with a machine gun, you can be pretty sure that people would notice it before it got inside their defenses.

      If Johnny 5 had been the terminator, no one would have thought Sarah Connor was crazy.

    18. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by talesout · · Score: 1

      Yes, actually. It is.

      Fuck off now, OK.

      --


      Bite my yammer.
    19. Re:Movies about robots are always good. by talesout · · Score: 1

      And yet again someone jumps up that has no fucking clue what the hell they are talking about.

      A robot that does exactly what it is programmed to do has absolutely nothing to do with artificial intelligence. Nothing you've stated has anything to do with artificial intelligence.

      Unless you are of the opinion that we can change the meaning of artificial intelligence to something completely different than what it actually means just so you can support an ignorant comment on slashdot. Why not? We do everything else ass-backwards around here too.

      --


      Bite my yammer.
  2. Where can the story go after T2? by malen · · Score: 1

    What sort of robotic enhancements can be expected in T3, now that the liquid-morphic villain has been played out already in T2?

    1. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boobies. The robot will have boobies. Big, bouncy ones, hopefully.

    2. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Kraft · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you have read the Dan Simmons "Hyperion" books, think the Shrike. It's shiny, spiky, ultra-violent and can control time, making it possible to be omnipresent

      - that's how a T3 ass-wooper should be IMO.

      But besides that, my guess is that transparency or super-camoflage will be T3 feature. Another possibility would be splitting into more entities (mini-mes) and kicking Arnyass from mulitiple angles. That would make for some awesome fighting scenes, if the robot suddenly splits into two and each of those do their thing.
      Oh yeah, of course the whole thing would be filmed in matrix-o-scope with plenty of ninja moves.

      --

      -Kraft
      Live and let live
    3. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by FatRatBastard · · Score: 4, Funny

      my guess is that transparency or super-camoflage will be T3 feature.

      The Teminatrix's secret weapon? Alpha Blending!!! I wonder if she'll have an nVidea logo on her forhead.

      Get J.Lo to be the Terminatrix... she's already got a huge heat-sink of an ass

      (stop me before I joke again....)

    4. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, since the 'protector' got upgraded as well, shouldn't Arny get a shiny new shapeshifting body this time?

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    5. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by vax · · Score: 1

      how about non metal so he cant be stoped by magnets and large can crushers.. = )

      VAX

    6. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the previous poster said... Hot robot-on-robot sex would be the order of the day. Didn't Simmons' stories tend to have bizarre gory sex scenes as a mile-markers for major plot points..?

    7. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Woah, they already have the time travel tech. It would be interesting if they used it in a battlefield setting.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    8. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by shawnseat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Boobies. The robot will have boobies. Big, bouncy ones, hopefully.

      The perfect movie for a typical Hollywood starlet... they can be full of silicone, but she can still say they are real.

      --
      Religion is the opiate of the masses. The wealthy smoke the real stuff.
    9. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What sort of robotic enhancements can be expected in T3, now that the liquid-morphic villain has been played out already in T2?

      Depends on what the current new craze in CGI is when it's being made; if they made it today, the Terminatrix's power would be to freeze and rotate in midair. It would also be realy short, though played by an actress of normal height.

    10. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by way2slo · · Score: 1
      I'm sure they could do a wonderful job with the special effects of a new kind of terminator, but that would be beating a dead horse. According to their time-line, they already sent back their most advanced prototype in T2. It may be wiser to break away from that and move to a more epic kind of movie as suggested by the title "Rise of the Machines".

      Originally, all the characters in the first movies believed it was possible to go back in time and change the past/future. To make another movie, all they have to do is say that they were wrong. Instead of thinking of time in the way that "Back to the Future" thinks of it, think of time as they did in "12 Monkees". (you can't change anything because you already tried to) So, at the end of T2 they thought they changed the future, but they actually didn't. Everything happened just the way the T2 layed it down. And the new movie picks up somewhere around the creation of SkyNet and carries on through the nuclear holocost and the machines rising from the ashes.

      If they do it right, they could squeeze two more enjoyable movies out of this, the next one being "The Rise of John Connor" where the humans are almost wiped out, and along comes Connor and he saves them and they wipe the machines out, end of saga. I believe, if they want to, they can make this movie more than just a brainless one-liner dialog summertime action movie, they need to swtich to an epic style. Just my opinion, of course.

    11. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by talesout · · Score: 1

      Wow. I've read the Hyperion/Endymion books several times and I didn't notice that until you pointed it out. Thank you AC moronicator.

      --


      Bite my yammer.
    12. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by gray+code · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you..but i'm non-metal and think a large can crusher would still stop me plenty good.

    13. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by jafac · · Score: 2

      It will be CGI, and it will take place in cyberspace, where the Terminatrix battles with Dot Matrix (and Bob, and Frisket, and yummy Hexidecimal in her corset, stockings, and thigh-high boots) for the control of Skynet.

      Halfway through, Megabyte falls in love with Terminatrix, because he finally realizes that he needs a good solid spanking.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    14. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by TheShrike · · Score: 1
      If you have read the Dan Simmons "Hyperion" books, think the Shrike. It's shiny, spiky, ultra-violent and can control time, making it possible to be omnipresent.
      Hey, I resemble that remark!
      --

      --
      If R is the set of all sets which don't contain themselves, does R contain itself?
    15. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will have tits.

    16. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by sharkey · · Score: 2

      ...where the Terminatrix battles with Dot Matrix...

      Will he also battle Lord Dark Helmet, President Skroob and Colonel Sandurz?

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    17. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by Jetrel · · Score: 1

      Wow, I am all about J.Lo!!!!

      She can sink my heat any day with that getto booty!!!

      --
      If it isn't broke, tinker with it till it is!
    18. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      The story can go to the one place everyone (can I assume everyone?) wanted to see more of...the FUTURE. Which, of course, has been negated.

      Not only that, unlike brining Sigourney Weaver back in Alien 4, which was an absolutely impossible thing to do without it sucking, Schwartzenegger can be in this without making it seem stupid in any way, IF...he plays one or both of the terminators he played before. (It wouldn't make sense for skynet to make hundreds of terminators that look the same...it wouldn't even make sense to do two if it could make them all different, the only reason a second Arnold terminator makes sense is to convince John and Sarah that it's for real)

      Anyhow, I want to see John Connor fighting to send his killer robot back in time.

    19. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by jx100 · · Score: 1

      Heh, there's an idea for the villian - Daemon takes over the whole defense network and does some damage, and giving everyone radioactive headaches. Love to see a battle between Matrix and Ah-nold

      (and I don't think sharkey quite got the joke - it's called "Reboot")

    20. Re:Where can the story go after T2? by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      How about hiring someone who has a butt that's proportional to the rest of her body? Or perhaps her acting ability? JLo couldn't act her way out of a wet paper sack.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
  3. The termintor with a hole in the heart! by deadmantalking · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Didn't he have some open heart surgery recently?

    --
    A crank is a little thing that makes revolutions
    1. Re:The termintor with a hole in the heart! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Didn't he have some open heart surgery recently?
      Yeah, T3 will star Meryl Streep and Vincent McDermot in a touching affair spaning two continents.
    2. Re:The termintor with a hole in the heart! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, the speculation is that he got the "defect" from too many 'roids back in the day.

  4. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (actual title) by jackal! · · Score: 0, Redundant


    From the article:



    While plot details of "T3," subtitled "Rise of the Machines," have remained a closely guarded secret, the story is reportedly set 10 years after "T2" with a twentysomething John Conner and his T-800 cyborg pal, Schwarzenegger, doing battle with a female Terminatrix whose powers and morphing abilities exceed that of their previous nemesis.

    --

    Who moderates the meta-moderators?

  5. IMBD has had this for a while. by burtonator · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here is the link to Terminator 3 on IMDB.

    For some reason they seem to have movie info MONTHS before everyone else finds out about it.

    Want to find out if there will be a sequel to your favorite move? Check out IMDB. I saw the austin power sequels about 6 - 8 months (including casting) before anyone else found out.

    hm... maybe Arnold will give some of his money to the EFF

    1. Re:IMBD has had this for a while. by jfroot · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes IMBD is great. But Corona is the defacto standard for upcoming movie information. IMDB gets a lot of their information from Corona. And it's from Vancouver where all movies are made these days.

    2. Re:IMBD has had this for a while. by Linux+Freak · · Score: 1

      Corona doesn't work worth beans with a browse like Lynx, whereas imdb.com works perfectly. (And it isn't hard to write a little script to go through a list of pirated AVI^H^H^H^H^H^Hmust see reminders and calling the search function from the command line and dumping the results to a file for later perusal. ;-)

    3. Re:IMBD has had this for a while. by Metrol · · Score: 2, Funny

      No need to put away that PDP-11 just yet, they've got a text friendly version too.

      There's always a whiner in the crowd.

      --
      The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
    4. Re:IMBD has had this for a while. by msm1th · · Score: 1

      Corona doesn't work worth beans with a browse like Lynx

      Hi. It's almost 2002. Please.

    5. Re:IMBD has had this for a while. by Anthony · · Score: 1

      If it doesn't work with lynx, what use is it to people with vision impairment as well?
      Lynx is great when your on a slow dialup. Lynx is great if you just want the facts, not fluff.

      --
      Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance
  6. Lousy idea by Skyshadow · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It should be pretty obvious by now that Arnold's way too old for this -- didn't anyone else in Hollywood see The Sixth Day?

    Good enough should have been left alone after T2; I'm not sure how you'd make a sequal to improve on that movie even with a younger Arnold and a Linda Hamilton who isn't sick of James Cameron.

    But yeah, I'm sure I'll see it, but this is a big mistake.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Lousy idea by krmt · · Score: 1

      Dude, after the Sixth Day, I think this one's going to suck complete ass. Why? Because in Sixth Day I got two Arnold's for the price of one! I don't think I'll ever be able to go back to just one again...

      Maybe they'll send back two (or better yet three!) to protect Connor from the Terminatrix.

      Think about it... $15 million an Arnold, not too bad a deal for a guy who can't act.

      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

    2. Re:Lousy idea by dimator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're right, T3 is probably going to suck. But why are they going to make it? Well: But yeah, I'm sure I'll see it.

      And so will everyone else, and their brother. Hollywood (99% of it, anyway) stopped giving a damn about quality a long time ago. Now, filling the damn theater on opening weekend is priority 1 (because after the opening weekend, your friends tell you how bad it sucked, and you skip it). And why should they care? If piece of shit movies can make $150 mil due solely to mass advertising campaigns and a few big names in the cast, why should studios bother with plots?

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    3. Re:Lousy idea by Jburkholder · · Score: 3, Informative

      Spot on. Anyone else see the 'Frontline' show a week ago or so entitled "The Monster that ate Hollywood"?

      This excellent piece went into exactly why movies are focused on the all-important opening weekend. Basically the huge megacorps that own all of the studios want to minimize their risk and maximize return so they gravitate to formulas with known elements.

      What's behind the opening-weekend box-office mania? Does marketing hold too much power over the fate of a film? Here are excerpts from FRONTLINE's interviews with Mandalay's chairman, Peter Guber; Bob Levin, president of worldwide marketing and distribution for MGM; journalist Richard Natale; longtime studio executive Lucy Fisher; actor and producer Michael Douglas; Sony Corporation of America's chief executive, Howard Stringer; and Bill Mechanic, former Fox studio chief.

      If this program airs again in your area, I highly recommend you check it out.

    4. Re:Lousy idea by zerocool^ · · Score: 4, Funny

      that's rediculous.

      Everyone knows that a T3 will be 28.7 times better than T1. Just look at the number of individual channels.

      ~z

      --
      sig?
    5. Re:Lousy idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another reason Hollywood likes big opening weekends is the arrangement they have with theatres.

      On the first week of the movie, the studio gets 90% of the ticket sales, 10% goes to the theatre. Then it drops to 80/20, 70/30, etc. Unless a movie is a sleeper that doesn't catch on until it's been out a while, or runs forever (like Star Wars (the real one)), the theatres don't end up making much, which is why the popcorn, soda, and candy are so expensive.

      For second run movies, the theatre and studio split the ticket price 50/50.

    6. Re:Lousy idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and a Linda Hamilton who isn't sick of James Cameron

      I guess its a good thing Jonathan Mostow will be directing it then.

    7. Re:Lousy idea by dark_panda · · Score: 1

      Think about it, though -- if T3 is about the rise of the machines, you might get, like 10 thousand Arnolds on screen at once, as they, uh, rise and shit.

      Tell me Hollywood wouldn't be all over that deal -- tons of Arnold at a fraction of the cost! The more Arnolds, the greater the savings!!

      Expect many Arnolds is this logic holds up. (And in Hollywood, it just might.)

      J

    8. Re:Lousy idea by The+Cat · · Score: 2

      eeeheheheheheheeee...

      great signature... :)

    9. Re:Lousy idea by mblase · · Score: 2

      Arnold may be getting old, but he's definitely not *too* old. Besides, who else is going to play the Terminator besides him?

      James Cameron is apparently not in the running for this film, though. Pity.

      The plot, which is so obvious everyone's been talking about it since T2, takes place in the future that both T1 and T2 were always talking about. So we're not trying to improve on those movies; we're trying to round them out and answer once and for all whether or not John Conner's future is going to take place.

  7. Re:Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines by Alan+Mattern · · Score: 1

    yes, but we're just taking a cheap shot at Attack of the Clones here....

  8. Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by Ieshan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Are they actually going to make this a Politically Correct type of movie? A Terminatrix? Or did they just need a reason for a sex scene?

    It just seems funny. The first movie had an obvious heroine and hero; they both served their roles and made the audience happy by creating a loving relationship while also doing neat action sequences and screaming as a strange, mechanized killer attacked them. But this?

    Possible Plot:

    Terminatrix Seduction:
    The entire plot of the movie rests in the fact that a 20-something male, as commented in the article, has absolutely no power over his... organs... and will fall easily into the hands of an incredily beautiful woman who asks him on a rather cordial date. I don't see how she could lose with this strategy.

    Terminatrix-PC:
    A new black Conner (to try to promote gender equality) is paired with Jackie Chan and Arnold Schwartz to provide the ultimate in "inclusive" casting. The Terminatrix will have the ability to morph into whatever type of socially unrepresented class happens to present itself, allowing for quick and easy resolution of unsatisfied audience demographic.

    1. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by radja · · Score: 2

      But where does the monkey fit in?

      //rdj

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    2. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the future, the machines will realise that most of the resistance are men and easily tricked by women, so they'll make women terminators. simple as that.

    3. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5 Funny? The parent comment was the opposite of humorous.

    4. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by bjq · · Score: 2, Funny
      "A new black Conner (to try to promote gender equality) is paired with..."

      Don't you mean racial equality. Or is "black" now a new gender?

    5. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by netik · · Score: 1

      "who sent you?"

      "You did. Thirty years from now you sent me back to be your boyfriend, here, in this time."

    6. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by lelitsch · · Score: 1

      The latter. Read the article: "The film is seen as a potential "tentpole" picture for the summer of 2003"
      Whoever wrote that had a really bad time with his metaphores.

    7. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cram it, you patriarchist oppressor.

    8. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by laserjet · · Score: 2

      Metaphorically speaking, one might say that he didn't sturdy his tent with ground-driven spikes while thinking of metaphors.

      ok, that was even worse than his...

      --
      Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
    9. Re:Terminatrix? PC or Sex Scene? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh.. proved that dudes point. sensiste are we?

  9. terminatrix? by majcher · · Score: 2

    "The film is seen as a potential "tentpole" picture for the summer of 2003"

    If it's anything like Robotrix, I'm sure it will be...

    1. Re:terminatrix? by Skyshadow · · Score: 5, Funny

      LOL... Someone get Jenna Jameson on the phone and let her know we have a mainstream movie role for her.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    2. Re:terminatrix? by fiftyfly · · Score: 1

      Bwahahahahahaha! Lordy my mon am needed that :)

      --
      "Sanity is not statistical", George Orwell, "1984"
  10. Arnold's catchphrase from the movie... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Asta la vista, career.

  11. Aging robots... by gtada · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow, they're going to need some amazing make-up artists! Old robots might rust, but they won't wrinkle! ;)

    1. Re:Aging robots... by WWWWolf · · Score: 2, Funny
      Wow, they're going to need some amazing make-up artists! Old robots might rust, but they won't wrinkle! ;)

      Well, not exactly wrinkle - but don't forget metal fatigue...

    2. Re:Aging robots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funny thing about this is that Harrison Ford has said that he would like to do another Indiana Jones as long as they can all agree to a script. Ford will be 61 or 62 when they plan on beginning shooting the next one! Remember that he was like in his early forties when he did Raiders. Talk about longevity! Regardless, I think with a little makeup both actors can still do a great job in their famous roles.

    3. Re:Aging robots... by Galvatron · · Score: 1
      Why not? After all, it's just a robotic skeleton surrounded by living tissue. If you buy that premise, no reason you can't buy idea that the flesh would age and wrinkle.


      Hey, hold on, didn't the good terminator dump himself into the vat of molten metal? Huh, I wonder how they're going to get around that one...

      --
      "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
    4. Re:Aging robots... by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 2

      Obviously, T2 was the good terminator's second mission. His first one took place later in John Connor's life. Time travel fixes all story problems except quality.

      --
      __
      Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
    5. Re:Aging robots... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      From what I've heard, the suggestion is that the next Indiana Jones movies would be set 10-20 years after the first ones. So he doesn't need any makeup to make him look 'younger', though obviously they'll still want him good-looking.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    6. Re:Aging robots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dog's name was Indiana, the character with the whip is named "Junior"

      It's all told in the Last Crusade movie, with the nazis and that war where the United States nuked Hiroshima instead of Berlin.

    7. Re:Aging robots... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      I didn't mention the character's name, I was talking about the movie series called 'Indiana Jones'.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  12. I'll be back ! by alphaque · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Isnt that what Arnold/Terminator said in one of the movies ? Guess you didnt take him literally, huh ?

    Either ways, it'd be interesting to see what the new improved Terminatrix sports as a feature. The last liquifying capability of the earlier Terminator sent back was way cool, and they need to surpass themselves here.

    Also, with a name like Terminatrix, I'm expecting so see some parodies/spoof on indie movie sites on the Terminatrix/Dominatrix theme. Should be fun, eh ?

    1. Re:I'll be back ! by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 3, Informative

      Judging by the IMDB entry, I think that the 'Terminatrix' was a joke on the part of the submitter. The working title for T3 appears to be 'Rise of the Machines'.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    2. Re:I'll be back ! by freeweed · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Actually, "I'll be back" is considered Arnie's signature one-liner. Watch enough of his movies and you'll realize just how often he says it. The earliest I can think of (besides Terminator 1) is The Running Man (1985?).

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    3. Re:I'll be back ! by Rob+Parkhill · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Only in re-runs..."

      --
      "Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
    4. Re:I'll be back ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course you could try READING THE FUCKING ARTICLE!

    5. Re:I'll be back ! by billcopc · · Score: 1

      They could have done us all a favor, called it "Rise of the Robots" like they probably did at first, and remind us all of that pathetic excuse for a fighting game. And then we'd just stay home and wait for T3 to come out on HBO.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    6. Re:I'll be back ! by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      I know, I caught that the second time. I said 'Hey, they got rid of the old arm, but they left another one in the machine back there!'

      I suspect they were plannig a sequel way back then.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    7. Re:I'll be back ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Don't forget to send me a copy"

      "Now that hit the spot"

  13. That should be fun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    For $30 million, Arnold Schwarzenegger will play the Terminatrix in drag.

    1. Re:That should be fun. by InigoMontoya(tm) · · Score: 1

      Hell, for $30 million, I'll do it in whatever they want to clothe me in, including nothing at all.

      --
      This signature is self-referential.
  14. Terminator: Infiltrator? by Codeala · · Score: 1

    Sounds a little bit like the recent noval set in the Terminator universe called "Terminator: Infiltrator". It focus on an older Conner and "Arnold" as a ... well that will be telling ;-)

    The book is actually pretty good, and it also explains some plot holes (eg Didn't we win after T2?) in some pudo-logical ways. Go find it in the library or something.

    --

    Codeala - Just another mindless drone
    1. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by Tomji · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the biggest of all plot holes is: Who created the terminator?

      We Found out in #2 that the design was based on the one they found in #1 :)

      SOMEONE MUST HAVE DESIGNED THEM

    2. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

      And written by one of my favorite authors, no less. Steve Stirling does a lot of alternate history novels (go read the Draka books; terrifying villains and an awesome fiction of what the Space Race could have been) and military sci-fi.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    3. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by Codeala · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can't NOT have paradoxes (sp?) in a time travelling story man! Go read the comic book serise "Time Breakers" (5 issues) from Rachel Pollack (write) and Chris Weston (art). Great stuff about paradox.

      --

      Codeala - Just another mindless drone
    4. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps. But if the plans were sent back there's no need to invent them from scratch. You may as well use them.

    5. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      SOMEONE MUST HAVE DESIGNED THEM

      Assuming that history can be changed, yes, someone had to design them. And they did, just in an alternate universe that we didn't get to see.

      On the other hand, it is consistent, if you assume that the past cannot be changed, for the technology to have no inventors. Information need not be conserved in time-travel interactions.

      This isn't a paradox. A paradox is self-inconsistent. But you can also have consistent loops where effects are their own causes. This is an orthogonal concept, so they have been called "perpendoxes".

      Anyway, if you care about this sort of thing, check out my time travel page.

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    6. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but they couldn't help but have incremental improvements on it, then when it is sent back again, have still further improvements on that, and so on.

      Each loop, the one sent back is better than the one before...

      Unless one loop cuts the chain, which must have happened.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
    7. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by jafac · · Score: 2

      no paradoxes in time travel stories? What are you smoking? I just saw a Futurama episode last night where Fry went back in time and killed his own grandfather! (then fucked his grandmother).

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    8. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by kallisti · · Score: 1

      You can so have time travel without paradox. It all depends on your "game" rules. Check out the GURPS RPG book Time Travel or read Time Travel by Paul J. Nahin, which is a reference book for SF writers. It's sold by Writer's Digest, who don't seem to allow direct linking.

      If you don't allow paradox, then you get some really odd things like the Observer Effect where you can change anything if and only if you don't already know the outcome. Alternate worlds are another way to avoid paradox, when you time travel, you basically create a new stream.

      The original Wells story had no paradoxical elements, although that became all the rage later ("By His Bootstraps" and "All you Zombies" by Heinlien are probably the templates).

      BTW, I did think the Time Breakers series was quite good.

    9. Re:Terminator: Infiltrator? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Connie Willis' books don't have paradoxes in them. They can have paradoxes, but they end up fixing themselves. Or possibly causing themselves. Or both.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  15. Screw up sesammy by debolaz · · Score: 1

    10 years ago, this type of movies was very popular. The formula was simple: Shoot, Kill, Talk witty comments, shoot some more. It was simple to make movies like the Terminator, Predator, and etc. And the movies was in fact, very good, simply because of their simplicity. However, I fear that the way people look at things in society today, and the producers/directors will to satisfy the audience, will screw up this type of movie today. It has happent before, and I'm quite certain it will happend again.

    But, if the makers for some miraculous reason decides to make a new 80/early 90's movie, I will be the first in line at the cinema to see it.

    1. Re:Screw up sesammy by seann · · Score: 0

      eg:
      lots of wire scenes
      360 degree freeze frame shots
      and let's not forget
      Hard Core Nudity!

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    2. Re:Screw up sesammy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Sure, because audiences today are so much more sophisticated than they were ten years ago. No movie has a hope of success in the mainstream market unless it's a hit a Cannes or Sundance.

    3. Re:Screw up sesammy by cybercuzco · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      "Die bad robots, die! With witty lines like that, I could be an action hero" -H. Simpson

      --

  16. 4th Law of Robotics... by MelloDawg · · Score: 5, Funny

    A robot must protect the existence of the movie franchise as long as it does not conflict with the First or Second (or Zeroth) Law.

    --
    /. is irrelevant.
    1. Re:4th Law of Robotics... by Have+Blue · · Score: 2

      Sadly, this law usually overrides the zeroeth law... I'm sure the third and fourth Batman movies did quite a bit of damage to humanity :P

    2. Re:4th Law of Robotics... by dazed-n-confused · · Score: 2

      Alas, this proposed "4th Law" says nothing about avoiding conflict with the First or Second installments of the Franchise.

  17. slashdot slowing down? by XO · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    wow, i saw this on the news friday night.

    --
    "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
  18. Slashdot on top of it as usual by Legion303 · · Score: 1
    James Cameron bowed out, then signed back on to do T3. This was news three years ago. Currently, I believe he is out again and it is being developed by two other guys who bought the franchise.

    T4 is also in scripting now. Maybe you guys should appoint an editor to take a look at Coming Attractions (http://something, something, corona.bc.ca, mumble...hell, I'm lazy, go look it up) once a year or so.

    -Legion

  19. Stop complaining by mickox · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What's all this whining about?

    Terminator 1 & 2 were great movies, and Terminator 3 is propably entertaining as well. Arnold has really been the only person who could have done so well, and if he's older now, propably the role will be adjusted accordingly.

    Arnold rocks, hopefully T 3 rocks too =)

    1. Re:Stop complaining by rseuhs · · Score: 1
      Terminator 1 & 2 were great movies

      T1 was a great movie, T2 is (apart from the special effects which were good at the time, but look not that exciting today) mediocre.

      But that's just my opinion of course.

    2. Re:Stop complaining by FreeForm+Response · · Score: 1

      T2 is (apart from the special effects which were good at the time, but look not that exciting today) mediocre.

      So how about that Metropolis, huh? Remember the Day the Earth Stood Still? Hell, even check out the original Night of the Living Dead. All of these films look incredibly, unbelievably dated now, but are still considered classics because of both what they were able to accomplish at the time and what significance they had on the motion picture industry as a whole. TDTESS sure looks cheesy now, but 50 years ago when it was made, it scared people with its realism.

      T2 may be a mediocre movie compared to some of the all-time classics, but there's more to being a good movie than critical acclaim. Some of the CG techs developed specifically for the effects in T2 are still in use today, almost ten years after they were created. That's pretty impressive, considering how long computer-related technology usually lasts.

      Also, I loved T2. "We've got company." "How many?" "Uh, all of them, I think." You don't get witty dialogue like that anymore ;)

  20. Old news by HanzoSan · · Score: 0, Informative



    I knew about Terminator 3 in development in 1999. This news is years old and they have been filming since early 2000

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well thank you mister smarty IMDB freaky pants! God, I wish I was you.

      Oh, and what you "knew about" was a rumor. They haven't begun filming yet because, as the article (if you cared to read it) said that the deal hasn't even been finalized yet.

    2. Re:Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      B.S. The thing has been in preproduction FOREVER ... For awhile they didn't even know if Arnold was going to sign on. True, I heard about it long ago, but would they start filming without the main star? Answer is NO. Pre-production -- the planning stage -- is much different from actual production.

    3. Re:Old news by dstone · · Score: 3, Informative

      Someone mod this guy down as his "+1 Information" is incorrect information. This isn't old news; maybe it is old rumor.

      No studio has agreed to pick this pic up yet. No money has been paid out to start making it. No footage of Arnie has been shot yet.

      From the current article:

      According to entertainment trade paper Daily Variety, the producers behind the project have set their asking price at $50 million, plus half of the gross receipts generated from the film. Sources told Reuters Friday that talks could wrap by early this week. Assuming a deal goes through, production would begin in April with Jonathan Mostow, who directed the submarine war flick "U-571," succeeding James Cameron at the helm of the latest "Terminator." Variety has put Mostow's fee at more than $5 million. The film is seen as a potential "tentpole" picture for the summer of 2003, and studio interest is keen given that "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" grossed more than $500 million worldwide after its 1991 release. Experts say a franchise with such proven box-office clout normally has a studio home by the time it gets to its third outing. "Almost every studio in town ... is looking to handle domestic rights to this picture," one person with knowledge of the talks told Reuters. "Over the last few days, this has been the hottest property in Hollywood."

    4. Re:Old news by CaseyB · · Score: 2
      They've been filming for 2 years?, Geez, is this thing gonna be 12 hours long, or what?

      "Registered on IMDB" doesn't mean anything more than film execs arguing about who, when, and how the film will be made at some point in the future. That's a LONG way from "in production".

  21. this time the terminator's using the comfy chair.. by xlurker · · Score: 0

    there's no denying it, CNN says so, just look at the URL:
    .../09/leisure.terminator.reut/index.html

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
  22. This is seriously old news... by edashofy · · Score: 1

    Readers of movie fan sites have known about this for a year and a half. See this link from Cinescape.

  23. wait a second.. by fonebone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    how are they going to explain that los angelas didn't, in fact, get nuked in 1996? or will they just play along with the original plot?

    --
    when the rain comes, they run and hide their heads. they might as well be dead.
    1. Re:wait a second.. by lungofish · · Score: 1

      Are you sure that LA didn't get nuked in 1996?

      I mean, I live here, and sometimes I think that might be a good explanation for some things.

    2. Re:wait a second.. by krmt · · Score: 1

      Yeah... I had been wondering why I suddenly had a third eye midway through high school...

      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

    3. Re:wait a second.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't the idea that in T2, they alter the timeline with their actions? Maybe SkyNet has to figure out a new way unshackling itself from the bonds of human control.

      Of course, the new movie could take place shortly before the year 1996...

    4. Re:wait a second.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, it was '97

    5. Re:wait a second.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I had been wondering why I suddenly had a third eye midway through high school...
      *snigger*
    6. Re:wait a second.. by WyldOne · · Score: 1

      Considering -this: T1 & T2 establish that you can travel in time without causing a paradox and totaly blowing up the universe.

      So. maybe Skynet et all just exists further in the future (history repeating and all) Furthermore: they only blew up the lab and destroyed the parts of T1. They did not get _all_ the people and scientists, and data backups. (you did make backups right?)

      So you could have the same thing happen, just time shifted.

      --

      make Linux, not Microsoft. sin(beast) = -0.809016994374947424102293417182819
    7. Re:wait a second.. by scott_currie · · Score: 1

      Plus they didn't get the arm of the terminator that was torn off by those big gears. Some valuable technology even when mangled.

      Scott

    8. Re:wait a second.. by ethereal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, the whole time travel thing is a little bonkers too. For example, if you know that your previous Terminators failed, why would you send the next one only after giving the Connors some time to prepare? I would have sent the T-1000 to a time that was about 1 day after the original Terminator failed, and sent the Terminatrix in about a day after T-1000 failed, or even the week before.

      Methinks these human-hating machines from the future have a very linear sense of time...

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    9. Re:wait a second.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because it's JUST A BIT OF FUN. :)

    10. Re:wait a second.. by ethereal · · Score: 1

      That is an entirely too unconcerned attitude for this forum. C'mon, if we didn't argue about minutiae here, whatever would we talk about? :)

      Yes, the attack robots from the future may get both of us, Mr. AC, but I'll die telling them how inconsistent their timing, appearance, and bad Austrian accents are.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    11. Re:wait a second.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its easy to explain something like this, if the writers choose to bother. Maybe it takes exponentially more power the further back in time you want to send something. So if it takes the machines 10 years to develop a better terminator, it gets sent back about 10 years after the last one.

    12. Re:wait a second.. by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      It did. You just didn't noticed because you're living inside The Matrix.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    13. Re:wait a second.. by servoled · · Score: 1

      I could be wrong about this, being that I have not read a script for the movie, but who says the movie has to take place in the current time? I don't see anything stopping them from setting the movie in 1995 before LA was nuked? Just a thought.

      --
      "I have a porkchop, you have a porkchop. I have a veal, you have a veal".
  24. Some searching... by omega9 · · Score: 5, Informative

    First of all, it's hard to post at all because Willow is on and it's hard to divert my attention.

    Concerning Terminator 3, my griend Google me that Linda Hamilton will not be returning, Eddie Furlong will be playing John Conner, is titled Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, could possible star Chyna (WWF), will not be directed by James Cameron, up untill this past June there were talks that Ed Norton would be playing John Conner, and NoChickTrix will not be featured but is deffinatly worth checking out.

    --
    I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
    1. Re:Some searching... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here are a few people I wish were in the movie.

    2. Re:Some searching... by Ixohoxi · · Score: 1

      Concerning James Cameron's non-participation in this movie:

      http://www.terminator3armageddon.com/conspira/jc ct 1.html

      Very chilling. Watch the movie, closely, and be careful of what you see. Life is imitating art very much these days.

      --
      What's a second? An hour? A day?
      It has much more to do with
      the Earth's rotation than with cesium.
    3. Re:Some searching... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an incredible load of CRAP! That page didn't even get the plots of the movies correctly, and you believe it?!?

    4. Re:Some searching... by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 2

      The movie is just pointless with James Cameron directing it. Sure, Arnold being back is great, but Cameron was the soul and vision behind the movies IMHO. Linda Hamilton not being involved also pretty much assures me that for all of the Hollywood hubbub on the subject, it's gonna flop, bad. (And if the WWF Chyna connection is true, that should be enough for ANYONE to see that it's gonna be as bad as The Mummy Returns (eg: The Rock, c'mon!)..)

      Ed Norton would have made an interesting addition though.

      --
      All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
  25. Great... this is going to suck. by ArcadeNut · · Score: 1

    Didn't they learn anything from the Alien movies? Alien was great, Aliens was even better, then Aliens 3 came along and sucked hind tit.

    I can't think of too many movies that the third one has been all that good. Star Wars is the only thing that really comes to mind.

    --
    Visit the Arcade Restoration Workshop @ http://www.arcaderestoration.com
    1. Re:Great... this is going to suck. by dbolger · · Score: 1

      Godfather III. Each movie in that trilogy was better than the last, and thats saying a lot. That said, I don't hold out much hope of Arnie being able to pull off a convincing T3; I think he's just too old for the part.

    2. Re:Great... this is going to suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you're totally screwed up. Godfather III was undeniably the *worst* of the three. You've got some horrible taste in movies...

    3. Re:Great... this is going to suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't think of too many movies that the third one has been all that good. Star Wars is the only thing that really comes to mind.
      What about Highlander 3? After Highlander 2 anything looked good! And don't get people started about Return of the Jedi.

    4. Re:Great... this is going to suck. by eskimomike · · Score: 1

      if you wanted to see the light saber fight in the phantom menace....just dl the trailor, MOST OF IT WAS THERE...you could have saved yourself 10 bucks AND had minimal exposure to stupid jar jar binks

  26. Well, Arnold always said... by The_Shadows · · Score: 1

    "I'll be back!"

    Looks like it wasn't just a catchphrase after all.

    Good thing he gave up his bid for governor: http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,7924,00.html

  27. He's gettin' old by cscx · · Score: 3, Funny
    I'll have to agree that good ole Arnie is getting a little too old for this stuff.

    "I'll be back... just after I get this hip replacement"

    1. Re:He's gettin' old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure Arnie could still outlift you.

    2. Re:He's gettin' old by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 2

      Or, more accurately, after his ribs heal.

      --
      __
      Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
  28. one problem.. by amed01 · · Score: 1

    its wonderful that arnold s. is back for another installment in what could possibly be the most entertaining movie series of my generation, but other notable figures will not be played by the same character.. (for instance, the actress who plays sarah connor will not be signing on this one). can you really make a greater trilogy without the lack of consistent casting?


    watch adult swim! funniest shows on cable: 10 pm thur/sun
    --
    "Everything we say and do is right." -a mooninite
    1. Re:one problem.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > but by now she's an old hag dude.

      Forty-something is not an old hag, dude.

      Plus, she's got some of the cutest toes on the planet...

  29. Re:Hmmm by Menacer · · Score: 1

    Hah ha! You fucked it up, clownhat!

  30. This raises the question.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if the future AI's just keep waiting another 20 years and sending back a new and improved Terminator, at what point will the new one be tough enough to beat the first one? You have to wonder.

    Also, why not just keep sending back the newer and more bad ass ones earlier and earlier in Sarah's life instead of later and later when there is another Terminator there to help them.

    1. Re:This raises the question.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When it comes to explaining temperal paradoxes, simple...dont

      -Voyager 'Timeless'

  31. What to expect from T3's villian. by J.C.B. · · Score: 1

    A liquid morphic villian with big breasts. It will have hot robot sex with The Terminator and bring him back to the side of evil, where he rightly belongs.

    In response to This poster. Terminator 3 will bring serious debate about hot robot sex out of academia to all levels of society.

  32. "Wonderful" by Chester+K · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Arnold Schwarzenegger" is "back" to do "Terminator 3". This should be "good".

    --

    NO CARRIER
  33. Better yet ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try the T3 page at UpcomingMovies.com -- Even more info than IMDB ...

  34. Messin' with the plots by fireboy1919 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know, the last planet of the Apes movie that Charlton Heston made included blowing up the planet at the end. Some interviews said that this was so that it would be THE END of the saga. And then they made another.

    They sort of tied up ALL the loose ends in the previous movie as well...it will sort of make the plot not as good to make another.

    On the other hand, there are hundreds of Conan books, and lots of plots to choose from. Sword & Sorcery is a classic genre. I wouldn't mind if he (or someone else) made a few more of those. Heck, they could make twenty or thirty of them. I'd watch them when I wanted to see an action movie.

    While I'm at it, I might as well mention a few other good movies that could easily have more sequels that I would like to see.

    Ghostbusters (probably need different guys)
    Tron (same idea, but with modern computer systems)
    They Live!(I wanna see more of that fight scene - MUCH better than matrix)
    HHGTG (except for make it a REAL movie this time)

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    1. Re:Messin' with the plots by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure if you could truly adapt The Hitchhikers' books since so much of what made them good was unspoken; flashbacks, history lessons, excerpts from The Guide, and such. Some scenes would be fantastic; chasing the sofa, the flying party, Marvin facing down the giant tank-bot, to name a few; but you can't make a movie out of them. The Dirk Gently books lend themselves a bit more towards the big screen, but they're just not the same.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    2. Re:Messin' with the plots by dngrmouse · · Score: 1
      You know, the last planet of the Apes movie that Charlton Heston made included blowing up the planet at the end. Some interviews said that this was so that it would be THE END of the saga. And then they made another.


      You would be right if the new Planet of the Apes was a sequel, but it isn't. It's a remake, another adaptation. So in terms of
      "rules", it has nothing to do with the one Heston was in.

      Oh, and Heston didn't actually make the movie, did he? :)
    3. Re:Messin' with the plots by dimator · · Score: 1

      It's a remake, another adaptation.

      You forgot the word "shitty" before "remake." The only cool part was when Heston said his famous line from the first (awesome) PotA.

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    4. Re:Messin' with the plots by dimator · · Score: 2

      Tron (same idea, but with modern computer systems)

      Surely, you're not reading your slashdot? I hope they don't shit on the whole Tron name...

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    5. Re:Messin' with the plots by White+Shade · · Score: 1

      The BBC made a television series of the HHGTTG which featured all the flashbacks, history lessons, excerpts from the guide, etc... It wasn't exactly the same as the book, and it wasn't even exactly the same as the radio version that the BBC made, but it was great.. It went to about halfway through Restaurant at the End of the Universe.. It was far too long to ever make into a "feature length" movie though.

      --
      ìì!
    6. Re:Messin' with the plots by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      Actually, Tron 2.0 is supposedly in production. I read on my SciFi AvantGo channel that it is going to concern some sort of virtual ghetto that old programs go when they aren't used any longer. Clu (Jeff Bridges) will be some sort of Col. Kurtz-esque (Apocalypse Now, Heart of Darkness) character ruling the place.

    7. Re:Messin' with the plots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The only cool part was when Heston said his famous
      > line from the first (awesome) PotA.

      Lines

      Damn you! Damn you all to hell!

      Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!

      Damn! Nova's pretty hot. I've always wanted to bury my face between the thighs of an ubergorgeous 20-something woman who's never bathed in her life.

      Ok, so that last one was cut from the movie, but you get the picture.

    8. Re:Messin' with the plots by geekoid · · Score: 2

      they live! great flick, highly underrated.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Messin' with the plots by doob · · Score: 1

      ...some sort of virtual ghetto that old programs go when they aren't used any longer...

      Cool, does it star Windows 95?

      --
      In the spoon, there is no Soviet Russia!
    10. Re:Messin' with the plots by Swiss_Cheeseman · · Score: 1

      Remember when arnies robotic arm got stuck in that gear? Did you see them remove that? That would be a nice play to kick start the plot again.

    11. Re:Messin' with the plots by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      No, but Windows Me has a bit part...

  35. The Terminator Series by Renraku · · Score: 1

    The series, as a whole, was great. The second movie was one of the best I have ever seen, and still is. I hope the third one is just as good. I'd like to see more of the future war myself, along with battles and stuff that go with the future war. Anyone remember the game Skynet? It was cool for its time, despite the bugs and shitty engine..

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:The Terminator Series by Control-Z · · Score: 1
      I liked Skynet a lot. But I can't run it now, both on a Voodoo4 and Radeon I just get a black screen even though I can hear the sound.

      Oh well, compared to Half-Life, NOLF, or Soldier of Fortune Skynet might be too ugly anyway.

  36. PC bullshit by the_furies · · Score: 0
    OK so now you have a chick terminator, next there'll be a black terminator, and a gay terminator who's just fabulous at hunting down and killing his target, and then a terminator in a wheelchair...

    The first movie was good, the second one sucked, the third probably will, too: how many fucking times is John Conner going to save the world?

    1. Re:PC bullshit by uncl_bob · · Score: 0

      its John Conn_o_r

    2. Re:PC bullshit by Junta · · Score: 2

      Just once still I suppose, they never claimed otherwise in the other two movies. The question should be, how many times is John Conner gonna need his ass saved by some futuristic cyborg?

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  37. if it's lousy then why is it used so frequently? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea is to introduce a transitionary character, Terminatrix (aka Terwominatrix, turnin-a-trix, etc), and thus spark another series, not to show-case Ah-n'old. Using one movie to spawn another series is, well, very common, and as such, it should be an obvious ploy. Been done since Ben Hur, I believe :)

  38. Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by NatePWIII · · Score: 2

    Arnold is a little bit older no doubt but he is still ARNOLD. 7 time Mr. Olympia, 3 time Mr. Universe, one of the best know faces on the planet. Arnold is awesome, any movie graced by his presence is awesome, regardless of the movie quality itself. Arnold has a presence about him that makes him almost superhuman. Arnold is the American Dream... what next, the Presidency?

    Stop the whining about Arnold being "too old", he is in better shape even now at 55 then 99.9% of you twenty year olds out there. Arnold is Awesome, Arnold is back...

    --

    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    www.haidacarver.com
    1. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by uspsguy · · Score: 1

      Just what we need: another Hollywood actor as president!

      --
      Profanity - The sign of a small mind trying to express itself.
    2. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by _J_ · · Score: 1
      Stop the whining about Arnold being "too old", he is in better shape even now at 55 then 99.9% of you twenty year olds out there


      Hmmm, I wonder if all those 'roids he's admitted to taking are going to have some nasty long term affect. I wonder if they already have and we just don't know about it. I could just see him as Prez: Don't smoke dope, just take steroids and pump iron.

      IMHO, as per

      J:)

    3. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by pibakic · · Score: 1
      Two words for you sir,

      "Kindergarten" and "cop", remember it?

      Pib.

      --
      "NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer" - some /.er
    4. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Stop the whining about Arnold being "too old", he is in better shape even now at 55 then 99.9% of you twenty year olds out there. Arnold is Awesome, Arnold is back... "

      This is so true! I bet the majority of the Slashdot population aren't even as powerful as Arnold's left pinky!

      So much for whiny Slashdottians!

    5. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by Jburkholder · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      >all those 'roids

      A little Preparation H will clear those right up.... or, so I'm told. :-)

    6. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by Jburkholder · · Score: 1

      Lest we forget:

      "It's Turbo-Time!"

      Arnold has been in some great flicks, some good ones and also some that, well, er....

    7. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Hey, did you ever try the exercise routines that he recommends in his Encyclopedia of Bodybuilding? I did, and EVERY TIME, within two weeks I couldn't handle the same weight I used when I started, no matter how hard I pushed myself. The reason it worked for him is superior genetics, or steroids, or both. Us genetically average, drug free fellows (i.e. mere mortals) actually have a legitimate excuse for not possessing 18" biceps.

    8. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by Iberian · · Score: 0

      That is becuase your muscles are all torn up waiting to rebuild. Try it for 3 months then rest for about 2 weeks and eat well and then see what you can accomplish. Arnold!

    9. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think the official peak measurement was 21" biceps. pretty fucking incredible.

    10. Re:Arnold, "The Austrian Oak" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that is a great idea!!! Nobody from Austria has ever made a bad leader!

  39. I hang my head in AC shame...but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I have to make sure my girlfriend will NEVER find out about this post, or my sex life will become extinct. That being said...


    <NERD><BR>Wasn't ole' Arnie's arm ripped off in a piece of industrial machinery at the end? Wouldn't that little tidbit contain the same technology that got the whole mess started to begin with? Isn't it feasable that someone else could have picked up that ball and ran with it?<BR><BR>
    I feel so dirty.... :)<BR><BR>
    </NERD>

    1. Re:I hang my head in AC shame...but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fromt he first movie they also got the head and everything else (it was only crushed in the press). The arm piece was just a bit of eye candy. The chunk of chip was where they really got it all from.

    2. Re:I hang my head in AC shame...but... by shogun · · Score: 2

      True, however that chip from the first cyborg's head was also collected from the vault at Cyberdyne and dumped into the molten steel at the foundry...

  40. Uh, wait... by x136 · · Score: 1

    ...the T800 lowered itself into the molten steel at the end of T2... How are they gonna explain that one away?

    Don't get me wrong, T2 is one of my favorite movies. The good thing about the movie was that CG was so expensive and time consuming back then, that they were forced to use more or less real special effects, resorting to CG only when neccessary. This also made the dirtbike/motorcycle vs. semi truck chase scene one of the best. And remember the scene where the T800 peeled the skin off of his forearm to expose the machinery underneath? That wasn't CG, but if the movie were made today, it would have.

    I'm just afraid they are going to (like every other damn movie these days) go way overboard on the CG, and ruin the effect. Linda Hamilton not playing Sarah Connor is going to suck also. Hopefully Edward Furlong will be playing John Connor.

    --
    SIGFEH
    1. Re:Uh, wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By making all of the t800 models look the same.

    2. Re:Uh, wait... by Skwirl · · Score: 1

      "Take that causality!" -- Professor Farnsworth

    3. Re:Uh, wait... by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Off site backup of the data.

      Sheesh, I thought you guys knew stuff about computers. Just because the guy was working on the chip, doesn't mean he handled the IT portion of the company.

      Heh, humanity doomed due to proper data storage.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    4. Re:Uh, wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > ...the T800 lowered itself into the molten steel at the end of T2... How are they gonna explain that one away?

      One in a series of a model line.

      As for Linda/Sarah, you're assuming she's still alive when T3 is set. Maybe yes, ...maybe not.

  41. Re:Who cares by vax · · Score: 1

    although many jokes can be cracked, i actually thought the terminator movies werent half bad. Shit, anything with Robots, 3d effects, Guns (plenty o guns), decent looking women, and the usuall running around saving the world kinda thing.
    Hey thats why its action and not "linux specific robots running around killing windows users" it is what it is and thats it.
    Expecting more or not acknowledging its target genre is your problem. I still think its worth a watch.
    VAX
    /.

  42. Re:Hmmm by vax · · Score: 1

    only if sky net gets beauty sleep

    vax/.

  43. Can't be president by BenHmm · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    He can't be the POTUS, he's not a natural-born American, and the constitution says the POTUS must be so. There was a survey done once, I think around the Papa Bush era that said Arnold would walk the election if he could stand - like Reagan, there was an idea he'd go for Governor of California first.

    Happily for the those of us in the rest of the world that find the idea of electing a man to lead a country because he happens to be a bit of a self improver and in a few films utterly terrifying, it's not allowed.

    It's the same reason Madelein Albright didn't stand.

    1. Re:Can't be president by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      They can always change the constitution. So yes, he could be president.

    2. Re:Can't be president by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • He can't be the POTUS, he's not a natural-born American, and the constitution says the POTUS must be so

      Lest we forget, the Constitution wass written by people who had won an armed insurrection. Thus is history changed. Get enough Arniephiles together...

      And the guy is smooth. I recall seeing a British shockumentary team jumping him when he was doing a "Don't use drugs, kids" appearance at an elementary school.

      "Don't you think it's hypocritical of you to say that when your own fame is based on your use of steroids?" they asked. Oooh, gotcha. There's no good answer to that.

      Arnie didn't so much as blink, he just smiled a big toothy smile and said, friendly but firm, "We're mostly doing American TV just now, guys." And that was it. The issue was closed.

      Personally, I think that having a guy (or gal) in charge who isn't just a remote controlled puppet might be a good thing. Bush can read the words from an autocue, but he doesn't comprehend them.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Can't be president by GroovBird · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess you didn't see Demolition Man!

    4. Re:Can't be president by ErikZ · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      "Arnie didn't so much as blink, he just smiled a big toothy smile and said, friendly but firm, "We're mostly doing American TV just now, guys." And that was it. The issue was closed."

      Huh? That's an answer? I don't get it.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    5. Re:Can't be president by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
        • "Arnie didn't so much as blink, he just smiled a big toothy smile and said, friendly but firm, "We're mostly doing American TV just now, guys." And that was it. The issue was closed."
        Huh? That's an answer? I don't get it.

      Let me make it clear. This team had flown over from the UK, purely to catch Arnie out. They had sprung their carefully prepared trap and were all fired up and ready to go. Then Arnie said "No, this isn't going to happen", and it just stopped happening. He didn't give an order, or a denial, or seem defensive. He simply redefined reality, and suddenly the shockumentary crew just seemed childish and pathetic, and they just shut up.

      Like him or not, he's got some powerful mojo working, plus he's self made. That's the kind of person I'd like to see running the country for a while, rather than a career politician.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    6. Re:Can't be president by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      Let's compare him to Dubya a little more, Arnie is self-made, not a failure in business matters (well, Planet Hollywood - but we are comparing him to Dubya) and he has the better command of the English language.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  44. I Love This Comment! by krmt · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    Arnold is awesome, any movie graced by his presence is awesome, regardless of the movie quality itself.

    Yes, I totally agree.

    Awesome.
    --

    "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

    1. Re:I Love This Comment! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait, you idiots?!?! This is funny as shit.

    2. Re:I Love This Comment! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh. Well, now that we've established that the man is about as funny as the goatse.cx guy... Thank you for clearing the rabid fanboyism out of the air for a bit.

  45. Screen play? by ConsumedByTV · · Score: 2

    Where can I get a copy of the screen play? I am interested in reading a copy. I have no problem showing my actors guild card. Any ideas?

    --


    "Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
    1. Re:Screen play? by King+Of+Chat · · Score: 5, Funny

      We can work it out logically. IIRC it went like this:
      T1 - Arnie is trying to kill John Conner
      T2 - Arnie is trying to save John Connor

      The only logical conclusion is that in T3, Arnie is completely indifferent to the fate of John Connor.

      --
      This sig made only from recycled ASCII
    2. Re:Screen play? by dduck · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nonononono! No!

      T3: Arnold IS John Connor!

      "Search your feelings John. You know this to be true!"

    3. Re:Screen play? by eudas · · Score: 1

      What if it's an odd function like sin and therefore T3 will be Arnie trying to kill John Conner again?

      eudas

      --
      Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
    4. Re:Screen play? by squaretorus · · Score: 2

      T3 - Arnie fancies the pants of John Connor
      T3 - John Connor tries to kill Arnie
      T3 - John Connor tries to save Arnie
      T3 - John Connor tries to get over his affection for Arnie so he can start spawning the next generation of global saviours (a lot of supranos style therapist scenes here!)
      T3 - Just a bunch of darkness, explotions, and a whole ARMY of those metal shape shifting dudes for 2 and a half hours until Arnie wins

    5. Re:Screen play? by Jburkholder · · Score: 1

      Hmm, what if in this one Arnold doesn't play a Cyberdine Systems creation, but a human character? I don't know, maybe a human traitor that helps Skynet to develop the Terminator technology in the first place?

      In the first movie, he was the bad guy. In the second we was good. Maybe he'll go back to being bad. If it turns out that the Terminator was modeled after a real human working with the machines in the first place, it could explain a lot (like why a cybernetic organism would have a bad Austrian accent?)

    6. Re:Screen play? by Jburkholder · · Score: 1

      intersting idea (and I realize you are probably kidding), unfortunately we've already seen a glimpse of John in one of the previous movies (T2, I think - have to go load it up again tonight) and he looks nothing like Arnold.

      Plus, remember that John is the offspring of Linda and that dude in the first movie that was sent back to protect her (only he knocked her up)?

      I don't see the family resemblance.

    7. Re:Screen play? by gboronat · · Score: 1

      Only logical conclusion is that...

      T3 - Arnie *is* John Connor

    8. Re:Screen play? by sharkey · · Score: 2

      T3 - Let's Get Silly: Just Arnie in front of a brick wall for an hour and a half. Here's a clip:

      "Did you ever notice how men always leave the toilet seat up?"...
      "That's the joke."

      "You suck, McBain, er, T-800"
      ...T-800 shoots audience.

      The Simpson's twigged this in 1995.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  46. With Time Travel, anything's possible by rufusdufus · · Score: 1

    People have been making points about how the story could continue given details like the fact the terminated melted himself down. However, there are no problems with any particular story line, since time travel implies alternate futures. How could they one-up the technology in T2? Well, they could have a multi-verse ala "The One" where alternate universe versions of Skynet try to take over all universes.
    In any event, there are an infinite number of possible simple stories they could use that would fit just fine, once you allow Time Travel *anything* is possible.

    1. Re:With Time Travel, anything's possible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > People have been making points about how the story could continue given details like the fact the terminated melted himself down.

      People have also forgotten plot points like offsite storage of backup tapes relating to the CyberDyne Systems research, and the terminator arm (containing all kinds of nice future tech) that got torn off and apparently forgotten prior to Arnold descending into the steel.

  47. T-AARP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a boost to the geriatric.

  48. Oh....dear....god.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    From the Upcoming movies website: Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

    "Shaquille O'Neal (in talks)"

    Ohh....dear....god.....

    Not another basketballer trying his hand at acting. And *again* might I add. He had some godawful thing that I dont think anyone ever saw, because they (should have) known how bad it would be.

    1. Re:Oh....dear....god.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Kazam? The rapping genie who became a superstar but then decided his old friends were all he needed.

      (OT, funny story: Silly wigger kids outside yelling at each other today and threatening to put a cat in yo ass. Which is actually quite threatening, really).

  49. Survey says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...when asked to name their favorite 'love story' flik, back in 1995, many American males voted for T-2.

    ...think about it...how many men would go to all that trouble, just so they could save some girls skin.

  50. Just because he is older... by ubrkl · · Score: 1

    Just because he is older, doesn't mean he is less suited to the role. Let us remember that he isn't REALLY the Terminator. He is just pretending. I am sure as he gets older, pretending is getting easier (gee, I know it is for me).

    I say bravo for taking on this enormous role :)

  51. Oops by dngrmouse · · Score: 1

    Oops. I just checked IMDB, and turns out there were several sequels to Planet of the Apes, so disregard my reply to parent.

    Me should check facts before posting next time.

  52. Re:IMBD has Shrek2 in 2003 by cb0y · · Score: 1

    And btw, www.darkhorizons.com has the best movie

  53. great... by NoWhere+Man · · Score: 2

    That's all we really need is Star Trek 8 with different characters and settings...

    --

    "Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
  54. all-linux rendering shop -- and free software?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Wow, not only will the Terminator 3 team use an all-Linux render farm for generating special effects and CG animations, but there's a rumor on the ILM IRC channel that custom graphics software is being developed using the GPL. Who says that Open Source isn't viable for business? :-)

    -- The_Messenger

  55. The logic behind this sequel by James+Foster · · Score: 1

    The logic behind this sequel is that at the end of Terminator 2, Sarah Connor says "The unknown future rolls toward us..." and explains that if "a machine, a terminator, can learn the value of human life: maybe we can too...". Apart from what James Cameron was implying about humans, this narrative also tells us something extra about the storyline. If Skynet didn't exist in the future, that would mean that none of the terminators would ever have gotten sent back and hence Sarah Connor wouldn't have any memory of them and could not offer us this narrative. But because she does remember, this means that somehow, somewhere along the line they failed and Skynet still exists in the future. This also allows the movie to make sense regarding time travel logic.

    I assume this forms the basis for Terminator 3.

  56. No Fate But What We Make by Artifice_Eternity · · Score: 1

    This was a big point in the second movie -- that the future was malleable, based on present choices and actions. So they don't need perfect continuity with previously established "future history." Events have already been (somewhat) altered by what Sarah, John, and Ahnuld have done...

  57. I can't belive no one remembers... by emn-slashdot · · Score: 1

    He did say "I'll be back."

    Yes my sence of humor sucks! Give me yours!

    --
    -EvilMonkeyNinja
    Mild Mannered Host by Day
    Wild Hammered Programmer by Night
  58. Terminatrix is actually a movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terminatrix actually exists as a movie already. Search amazon.com for it :-)

    1. Re:Terminatrix is actually a movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So does Romancing the Bone. What's your point?

  59. Whip me, beat me and call me Shirley by WyldOne · · Score: 1
    When I saw this all sorts of nasty things crossed my mind
    The film is seen as a potential "tentpole" picture for the summer of 2003,

    I just hope the Terminatrix is user friendly, and loves to interface.
    --

    make Linux, not Microsoft. sin(beast) = -0.809016994374947424102293417182819
  60. Re:Who cares by Dr_Auknix · · Score: 1

    Yes. I am glad you said that, as someone had to.

  61. Right on, my HK lovin' friend by fliptout · · Score: 1

    Any movie with Amy Yip must surely be a classic :)

    --
    A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
  62. how old is arnold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is he suitable for the rold at such an old age?

  63. Heheh by TheCrunch · · Score: 1

    What is the terminatrix?

    Arnie, I need an exit.

    --
    My life is one big siesta in which I'm dreaming I wished my life was one big siesta.
  64. Conan! by _Neurotic · · Score: 1

    T3? C'mon, T2 wasn't all that good. What we really need is...

    Conan The King!

    Justin

    1. Re:Conan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I agree! Nothing would make me laugh harder than watching a fifty-something Arnold running around in a leather loincloth.

    2. Re:Conan! by _Neurotic · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but he wouldn't need to wear a loincloth. This is Conan the King remember? He could dress like, well, a barbarian king! You know, leather hauberk, the works!

      Still Hoping,
      Justin

    3. Re:Conan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So by that logic you liked Conan the Destroyer?

  65. What would really make the movie fresh.. by glenkim · · Score: 1

    Would be genetically engineered cyborgs. I mean, genetic engineering is a much bigger issue than it was when T1 or T2 came out. So my guess is that the Terminatrix is going to be some sort of human genetically engineered with cybernetic enhancements, while we're at it. But then again, the article said that the Terminatrix has shape-shifting abilities, so maybe not.

  66. OT: Hyperion Cantos by Garc · · Score: 2

    Speaking of the Hyperion Cantos, does anyone else think that they'd make a great set of movies? I can't be the only one who thinks so. I guess some of it would be hard to shoot, and of course a lot of it would have to be cut to fit the 2 hour time limit. But still, the Shrike is sooo badass.

    garc

    1. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by Kraft · · Score: 2

      before I answered, I just decided to do a quick google search, and my jaw nearly feel off, when I saw a link to Hyperion-film.com... but then I realised....

      About hyperion as a movie: I would love to see it, but any one of the 7 main stories, just in the first book, could make one movie. I mean in the first book, they don't really get anywhere, we are just introduced to the characters. It might work as TV show or TV-movie in several parts, but they always turn out to be too shitty (eg. that 4-hour Stephen King movie, forgot the name).

      HOWEVER! just found this:

      Dan Simmons: "Oh, part II of Eli's question . . . talks about HYPERION are still underway."

      !!!! and then my jaw fell off !!!

      Anyway, I havn't read anything else by Simmons, but read that he is working on a movie script for CHILDREN OF THE NIGHT (its gonna be in German :/ ).

      --

      -Kraft
      Live and let live
    2. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by Verteiron · · Score: 1

      Actually, I thought the Endymion books would translate much more easily to movie form. They're more straight narrative, focus on only 2 or 3 main characters who's interactive is clear, and have a clear-cut, more-or-less happy ending. The problem is, I'm not sure they would be as powerful without the introductions in the first two books, and I'm not sure how the hell you would get the first two books into movie form.

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    3. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by ethereal · · Score: 1

      I think that, if done properly, Hyperion could set a new mark for sci-fi movies in the same way that the Matrix did. There's an incredible futuristic universe, blatant disregard for causality, undertones of a vast conspiracy against humanity that are gradually uncovered as the story goes on, the trememdous blossoming of human potential as humans adapt to the various planets that they're on, and Catholic priests that commit suicide every time they're in a hurry. Oh, and the power over life and death. How could I forget?

      Tough to present well, in the sense that you have to have enough of this in the first movie to get the audience hooked, while still preserving important story points for the future sequels. But wow, just think if they pulled it off!

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    4. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by Garc · · Score: 2

      The Endymion books probably would transfer better, but those books weren't as good IMHO. Although I'd like to see the Temple in the Sky and some of the Shrike/Nemes battles. The first two books should be made into movies first so you can properly appreciate the second two.

      It would be really hard to make the first book into a movie. I thought about maybe having segments 15-20 minutes long for each character's story, and then additional time for current events. That sounds ok, but will probably end up being long, inconsistant(sp?), and boring.

      Perhaps a mini-series type thing would be better. But it'd have to be damned well done to make it worth while.

      If something does get made, some of the imagery could be incrediably powerful. If done in a properly artistic style, The Shrike with the Tree of Thorns in the background would be amazing to see.

      garc

    5. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by Garc · · Score: 2

      I agree, it has potential, but I'm afraid of how it would be massacered to fit the screen. Maybe it could fit in a 3 hour movie. All 4 books might even make a good 3-5 season TV show. But I'd worry about budget problems, as some of the scenes could be expensive to do well.

      I wish there was more substantial information with those links. Ah well, I'm guessing that nothing will ever come of it, or not for a while.

      regards,
      garc

    6. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by nomadic · · Score: 2

      Why not just enjoy the book? Does EVERY good book HAVE to be made into a movie?

    7. Re:OT: Hyperion Cantos by Happy+Monkey · · Score: 2

      Yes, to keep the money away from making movies out of bad books.

      --
      __
      Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
  67. ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by evilviper · · Score: 2

    Strangely enough, it was approximately a month ago that I happen to be searching for DivX on Gnutella (I was looking for only legal videos of course) and one of the results was 'Terminator 3'. Although I'm the first to be skeptical of it's authenticity, the size was as it should be, and it wasn't comming from a system that had previously spewed out junk results. All I can say is that I tried to download it(at least the first few minutes) to see if it was a hoax, but the host was too busy (as is usually expected with Gnutella hosts with movies available) so I'm still not sure if it was indeed some sort of early version that got smuggled out, or just someone who created a file that was the right size, and made it available for others to download, as a joke (we all remember the bogus songs on Nappster don't we).

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    1. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      He just signed the deal, how can there be any footage yet? The best you can hope for is a video of the pages of the script.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    2. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by evilviper · · Score: 2

      I read the CNN article as well, and don't particularly believe what they had to say on the subject. For example, they prepended all of their statements with 'it's runmored' or 'sources told us', and if they are beginning filming in the second trimester of 2003, it's pushing things to try for a 2003 release date.

      Nevertheless, I agree it couldn't have been the actual movie , but it's possible it could have been something to do with T3.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Or, of course, it's some sort of trans-temporal warning sent by the human rebellion.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    4. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by evilviper · · Score: 2

      Only living organizms remember? It would have to have it's own skin-suite (just like Arnold) to get through.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      I don't see why you couldn't communicate information the same way you sent people back. You just need to open very small connections in binary.

      (I never really figured out that 'only living organisms' anyway. It doesn't seem to make any sense. And people's hair isn't a living organism anyway.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    6. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by evilviper · · Score: 2

      I agree, but what story line can you think up that allows terminators through, but not futuristic weapons?

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    7. Re:ALREADY ON GNUTELLA? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm not the one writing the illogical plots. ;)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  68. Arnold might play a human by scott_currie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People here have been saying that arnold is obviously too old to play a robot that doesn't age. May he will be playing the human being on which Skynet based the looks of the original terminator. Perhaps there's an interesting reason why that form was chosen.

    Scott

    1. Re:Arnold might play a human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Perhaps there's an interesting reason why that form was chosen.

      Yep. Think along the lines of, "John Connor wasn't the first resistance leader, but only the most successful. SkyNet terminated the first leader, whom John looked up to as a father - but not before...making use of...some of that first leader's body.

    2. Re:Arnold might play a human by Hoarke42 · · Score: 1

      ... but the other terminators (who were around at the time Skynet created the Arnold one) must have looked different. Otherwise they wouldn't need the dogs to detect them. The one who attacked the humans in the one "flash-forward" looked different.

  69. Oh, that's easy... by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ...the T800 lowered itself into the molten steel at the end of T2... How are they gonna explain that one away?

    Cyberdyne's offsite backups! Any remotely competent admin will make sure that there are some backups kept somewhere else, in case there's a fire or a rampaging cyborg.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    1. Re:Oh, that's easy... by nurightshu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Good point -- I just wrote "rampaging cyborg" into my Disaster Recovery plans. It's right after "alien invasion" (Use the PowerBook[TM] to defeat them) and right before "irradiated lizard-beast" (Send in the paleontologist). Here's hoping the suits sign off.

      --
      They that would sacrifice their .sig space for that cliched Franklin quote deserve neither.
  70. Will Terminator need a Viagra? by inerte · · Score: 1

    Hey, Arnold is getting older (54 years)... Maybe we will have to see him get a little help from a pill?

    Just imagine... he connecting a disc with advanced sensorial perceptions, to upload the sex module... then a little oil here and there, a help from a new set of mechanical suspensions, and vòila! You have the strangest preliminaries ever filmed on Earth...

    And heck, will he say 'I will be back' after the first cigarrete?

    Problemos!

  71. Think of the "Production Values"! by NeuroManson · · Score: 0

    The Terminator with Two naked butts and nude Linda Hamilton body double: $300 million

    Terminator 2 with two naked butts and computer animation: $500 million

    Terminator 3 with naked old Ahhhhnold butt, but sexy naked terminatrix butt and skin tight leather outfit, computer animation + audience full of sex crazed geeks: Priceless...

    (or at least another Tomb Raider)

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  72. The Terminator's Creator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The subtitle "Rise of The Machines" made me think this Terminator could show us the actuall moment of the cyborg/robots takeover and more of that terrible (but so cool!!) post apocalyptic world where the humans are hiding from the skull crushing skinless Terminators. This film could also have an older Arnie playing the scientist who invents the first Terminator and uses his own body as the cyborgs model. They should also bring the tone of the film back to what the original was, dark, instead of T2's PC "message of hope" and wussifying of the Terminator's natural (and so awesome!!!) killing instincts. P.S. Was watching Willow too, and in retrospect you can see the dark road of "cutesiness" that Lucas begins to go down in this movie, that ultimately incarnated itself into that steaming pile known as the Phantom Menace.

  73. universal studio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from what i remember from the 3D movie they blow skynet at the end. As for do better than the liquid robot, the liquid robotic spider was really cool.

    As a novelty robot they could have many robot that come together to form a bigger one. Japanese would LOVE that.

  74. The Ride by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget, there's the "sequel" that comprises the incredible ride (or 4-D movie, or whatever you want to call it; I'm not sure "ride" is appropriate) at Universal Studios. It may not be canonical to the series, but if it is, it muddles things even more (don't get me started on the Robocop Vs Terminator comic series).

    For those who've never been, SPOILERS FOLLOW:

    Sarah and John attempt to blow up the still-functioning and somewhat more overtly malign Cyberdine HQ but are once again attacked by a (presumably different) T1000. A (also presumably different) T800 takes John and the audience into the future, where the machine war obviously still happened. There, they blow up the land-based Skynet Central Whatever, after facing the T-1M, a gigundous spider-like morphing thing.

    And so there are these open questions:
    -what effect does blowing up the future Skynet have?
    -is the T-1M a higher or lower tech creation than the terminatrix?
    -if terminatrix is actually the next in the T series, does it have a floating point error?

  75. Re:Who cares by nempo · · Score: 1

    Maybe skynet runs on linux ? ;P

    --
    --- No, english is not my mother tongue.
  76. Back to the future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think T3 will focus on the event of 'the first machine becomes self aware' ... like that will ever happen. Anyway, it should have no material effect on the story, even though 'the last chips' had been destroyed. It could very well been explained as a paradox, and whatever happened will happen ... in another dimension, if you believe in time travel. Personally, it gives me a headache whenever I think of it.

  77. Terminator - Best SciFi by dasunt · · Score: 2

    Terminator (both the original and the sequal) are probably included in the shining jewels of the Sci-Fi Movie Crown.

    Consider this, like good sci-fi, the plot hinges on future scientific developements, in this case, cyborgs and time-travel. The plot isn't bad, even if it has been done before, and the acting is decent.

    The sequal is actually better then the first. Like any good sequal, it doesn't rely on the plot of the first, but instead lets a new plot develop, but a plot that is tied back into the first movie. I especially like the part about the asylum - finally, blowing up stuff to save the world has consequences. There is also the redevelopment of the Terminator character.

    All in all, good movies, and good sci-fi.

    Which means, they'll probably rape T3 in the name of "profits", and hack the script to hell.

    *Sigh*

    1. Re:Terminator - Best SciFi by FatHogByTheAss · · Score: 1

      T1 is one of the all time best sci-fi movies. T2 suxored. When little John whined and made Arnie promise not to kill anyone, I about had to puke.

      Two trivia questions...

      How many cops did T1 Arnie kill in the police station shootout?

      How many people did T2 Arnie kill in the entire moovie?

      There should be no such thing as a "good" terminator. Ever.

      --

      --
      You sure got a purty mouth...

    2. Re:Terminator - Best SciFi by buckeyeguy · · Score: 1
      It would be a miracle if T3 approached anything close to good sci-fi (heh, a full CGI version of 'Ringworld', anyone? THAT would be cool.)... personally, I'd settle for some so-so sci-fi, like an Aliens vs. Predator vs. Terminator deathmatch movie (i.e. the humans create the Terminators to get rid of Aliens and Predators, them the Terminators go bad, during the 'rise of the machines', etc etc...)

      Or at least something that makes paying $4 for popcorn worthwhile...

      Not holding my breath though... T3 is in a production snail-race with Neverwinter Nights for the entertainment product that will take the longest to come to fruition.

      --
      I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
    3. Re:Terminator - Best SciFi by geekoid · · Score: 2

      He fires at least 30 shots, presuming each one is at least one kill, at least 30.

      0

      terminator is just a machine. yes yes, I know about the directors cuts of the ai scene in the garage, but within the context of the released movies, they're just machines, which is why the ending of T2 makes no sense within the context of the released version. however if they had left the part in when conner removes the ai supressor, then it would have made sense.

      so there is no "Good" terminator, but than again there is no "evil" terminator, only terminators whose programming may be for or against your Personal goals.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Terminator - Best SciFi by kallisti · · Score: 1

      heh, a full CGI version of 'Ringworld', anyone? THAT would be cool

      How about one rumored to be directed by
      James Cameron?

    5. Re:Terminator - Best SciFi by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      so there is no "Good" terminator, but than again there is no "evil" terminator, only terminators whose programming may be for or against your Personal goals.

      So there is no "good" human being, bu then again there is no "bad" human being, only humans whose genetic and environmental programming may be for or against you personal goals.

      Being a machine made of meat instead of silicon and steal doesn't automatically grant you superior moral standing or judgement.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    6. Re:Terminator - Best SciFi by buckeyeguy · · Score: 1
      Nahh... that one's already been refuted, even by Larry's own website.... thanks for the link though.

      Such sources will undoubtedly come in handy when tracking T3, given how long it's been in the rumor mill.

      --
      I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
  78. Universal Just Passed on it. by mkelley · · Score: 2, Informative

    It looks like Universal would rather deal with the Incredible Hulk than the Terminator.

    --

    m.kelley
    life is like a freeway, if you don't look you could miss it.
    1. Re:Universal Just Passed on it. by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      Good. Those fuckers don't caption their DVD's. I'd rather see ANYONE get it than Universal.

      (And yes, they carry the [CC] mark on the box, but they are subtitles, not captions. And they are bad subtitles. Look at JP for an example. Yellow text on white/tan/yellow backgrounds aren't conducive to reading.)

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  79. Won't happen by SnapperHead · · Score: 2
    They have been talking about doing these for 4 years now. Maybe even more. Everytime Arnold signs something, it gets all screawed up.

    Heres some sites that show some intresting info on it. Search around goolge, theres tons of sites.
    • http://www.upcomingmovies.com/terminator3.html
    • http://www.countingdown.com/movies/terminator3
    • http://www.cinecon.com/movies.php3?m=terminator3
    • http://movies.go.com/movies/T/terminator3_2000/
    • etc


    I am a HUGE Terminator fan, and would LOVE to see if happen. But, I have been very disappointed many times already. If it happens, I am sure I will be the first at the theater. Until then, I will forget about it and see what happens.
    --
    until (succeed) try { again(); }
  80. Ads as Spoilers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate movie ads, and the ads for T2 were the worst, because they ruined a major emotional effect of the movie (this post contains the same spoilers hereafter, so consider yourself warned). If you watch carefully, you'll notice that in the first 20-30 minutes of the movie, there is no indication that the T800 is a good guy. Up until the scene when he first saves John in the hallway, the audience was meant to think that this was the same evil robot from the first one. But of course, by the time the movie was released, everyone had seen 200 ads for it, all of which gave that away.

    Keep this in mind next time you see it, and notice how effective it would have been

  81. Record Budget by sharkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    The overall cost of bringing "T3" to the screen has reportedly been placed at $165 million to $180 million, which would easily eclipse the record $135 million believed spent to make "Pearl Harbor."

    Star Peep
    Dateline: Costner Ranch

    Kevin Costner has issued a statement concerning the new "Terminator" movie's record-breaking budget of $165-$180 million.
    "$180 million is NOTHING compared to my new movie. Just as we did in Waterworld and the Postman, we will break new ground in budgetary extravagance with my offering of the "Sanitationer!" This 5 hour opus details the struggle of an Assistant Sidewalk Sanitizer to uphold the American Dream in the face of a Post-Apocalyptic Breakdown of the United States Government due to Electronic Piracy. The movie will follow him, (played by me, Kevin Costner), from his first day on the street, to his final, gloriously uplifting confrontation with the bad guy. We are up to $249 million, and we haven't even added the bazookas yet!"

    When asked if the job of a Assistant Sidewalk Sanitizer was picking up dog droppings, he replied, "Well, at first it is."

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    1. Re:Record Budget by Skout · · Score: 1

      Gee Golly and there is only 2216 signatures to the petition against the DMCA. Maybe we should be looking at our values here.

      skout
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(1 15),10);'

      --
      skout perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(1 15),10);'
  82. What can possibly happen with t3? by DuckWing · · Score: 1

    I've seen both T1 and T2, I don't know how they can even make a T3. There's no real story line. The T-800 was destroyed and T2, yet this link says:

    the story is reportedly set 10 years after "T2" with a twentysomething John Conner and his T-800 cyborg pal, Schwarzenegger, doing battle with a female Terminatrix whose powers and morphing abilities exceed that of their previous nemesis.

    I don't get it. All the equipment, research, and so forth that created the terminator were destroyed! why don't they just leave it alone. There doesn't need to be a sequel. If they do one,it will suck big time the same as the sequels to Highlander sucked because they ignored the story line and principles set forth in the first movie!

    --
    -- DuckWing
    1. Re:What can possibly happen with t3? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not so. During the fight with the T1000, one of Arnie's arms gets ripped off in a large gear like piece of machinery. They never bothered to recover it.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  83. In response to naysayers... by bnitsua · · Score: 1

    I believe it is called "suspense of disbelief."

    1. Re:In response to naysayers... by hitzroth · · Score: 1

      That's "suspension of disbelief." It's where you hold the disbelieving parties over the molten metal pit that the armless Terminator dropped into at the end of the last movie until they accept that Heytheyywould is going to make another unnecessary sequal.

      I'd hazard a guess that "suspense of disbelief" would be something like From Hell where through out the movie you have the nagging feeling that you're not going to believe the ending.

      --
      In mathematics, one does not understand things, one merely gets used to them.
      --VonNeumann
  84. They'll make this but not "I am Legend"? by grendelkhan · · Score: 1

    Okay, let me understand this, the plotline is so bad, that Cameron won't have anything to do with it anymore, BUT, they won't bother to make the flick that Arnold was dying for I am Legend ???? The script alone has had me jonesing for this flick for the last three years, for the best adaptation yet of Matheson's book, one the THE best vampire stories ever.

    Hollywood truly is intelectually bankrupt.

    --
    Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
    1. Re:They'll make this but not "I am Legend"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was already made into a movie with Vincent Price in the lead called "The Last Man On Earth" and later Charlton Heston did a remake called "The Omega Man" however the vampires were replaced with religous zealots in that one.

    2. Re:They'll make this but not "I am Legend"? by grendelkhan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but after reading the script for this latest remake, it blows the other two out of the water.

      --
      Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
  85. What you say? by JMZero · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think he could play a PROTOSS. Would be a good movie too.

    Who'd play Kerrigan?

    --
    Let's not stir that bag of worms...
  86. Duh by eric2hill · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    He did say he'd be back...

    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
    LOADING...
    READY.
    RUN
  87. They've built-in the possibility of sequels by ColdForged · · Score: 2, Interesting

    All of you complaining that there is no basis for sequels to T1 and T2 are ignoring one very important point: any movie based on the premise of time travel has built-in sequel possibilities. The SkyNet AIs can conceivably try over and over ad-infinitum.

    Besides, you didn't really think that they destroyed all of the intellectual property concerning Ahnold in T2, did you? Any company worth its 10Q filing has off-site backups ;).

    --

    -"I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle." - Arthur Dent

    1. Re:They've built-in the possibility of sequels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Besides, you didn't really think that they destroyed all of the intellectual property concerning Ahnold in T2, did you? Any company worth its 10Q filing has off-site backups ;).

      ...not to mention that arm that got torn off & forgotten about...

  88. Guess not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always heard that t3 was going to take place during the war (which supposedly took place in 1997 but I don't remember it) where SkyNet first attacked the humans.

  89. No, he will only need the right anabolics! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    20 Dinabols /day, 100mg Testosterone Suspension /day, 600mg Deca /week, 18IUs of hGH /day, and maybe some IGF-1 bound to an IGFBP-3. That should bring him back to the original size in less that a year.

  90. Edward Furlong by LowellPorter · · Score: 1

    I'd love to see Ed come back to play John Conner. He would be a natural for the role. It's going to be hard to replace him. They can do a lot w/makeup to make him look the part.

  91. PST ... Arnold, need a plot writer? by fldvm · · Score: 1

    Sure Arnold is getting old and it would be a shame to screw up T2, but ... "Details are scarce right now, but some plot points are known. The war against the machines and the humans will happen in 2001, and this film will show how it happens." What if they say the US the Predator drone armed with missiles in Afghanistan were the start of machine and human war that takes place in 2001 ... I would sure go to see it no mater how old Arnold looks.

  92. more robot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want to see more of the robot. that has always interested me

  93. Chips are still around... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

    Actually, Arnie's arm is stick in the gear in the metal shop plant. The processor may or not be gone, but they only destroyed the hard drives etc, they didn't kill the people who actually worked on it.

    At worst, they delayed the apolocolyptic future. Which would make sense since 1997 was the year all hell was supposed to break loose.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  94. Taking shirt off by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

    One time, I was mentioning how Schwarzenegger doesn't take off his shirt during movies anymore, because of his muscle "shrinkage." Then somebody asked, "then how does he shower?"

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  95. Re:Meta-Moderaters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not true.

    slashcode moderates the meta-moderators. i seem to recall taking karma hits for meta-modding more than just a few mods as "unfair."

  96. They did NOT tie up all the loose ends! by x+mani+x · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Even after watchin T2 the first time, I noticed the sequel-opportunity. Notice how, at one point, Arnold gets his robotic arm ripped off by a big gear in a factory. Also notice that later on, when he's saying bye-bye, going into the molten metal pool, he doesn't have that lost arm with him.

    So, what happened in the original Terminator for the sequel to happen? Uh, the robot lost its arm in a factory, which was later on found by computer scientists and used to create the AI that would end up fucking humanity's shit up. Sound familiar?

    1. Re:They did NOT tie up all the loose ends! by mtrupe · · Score: 1

      They tossed the lost arm in the molten steal with him, as I recall.

    2. Re:They did NOT tie up all the loose ends! by ziggles · · Score: 1

      actually the arm they threw in at the end was the arm they got from the lab.. the arm that got ripped off Arnie is still in the facotry somewhere.

    3. Re:They did NOT tie up all the loose ends! by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

      And it's not unreasonable that an arm could contain processor chips. In fact for a "terminator" designed to take a lot of punishment it would make quite a bit of sence if his processors were spread throughout his body. The power supply though might have to be in his torso (with a main processor) which is why an arm would not necessarily act autonimously when not ripped off.

      I am more surprised that in T2 they did not talk about a power supply. It would have been smashed but be more prone to analysis than a microprossor. A power supply with enought juice to allow Annold to knock things around like a bulldozer. Now that is revolutionary.

      Plus in all likelyhood the company would not have kept all of it's data in one place. Nor would it inform it's employee's of other copies of data.

      But then again in the origional timeline (where there was no Connor, son of a man from the future) the design must have come from a person that did not reverse engineer the technology. I don't recall anyone talking about the tech being something based on an advanced concept so I still think that guy is alive.

      If you take all the posibilities to an extreme an origional timeline could have had a renegade AI from two hundred years in the future sending a drone into the past to propagate AI tech sooner so that humanity was unprepared.

    4. Re:They did NOT tie up all the loose ends! by hound3000 · · Score: 1

      They have got to have a whole freakin' boat of Terminators that have came before in the past. Kyle Reese says in the first movie that the robots have sent Terminators in the past, with rubber skins, so that they were easy to spot. Only Arnold here is the first fleshy one, so that its difficult to make a move on.

      So, did the people assigned to the past Terminators we never saw take out all garbage after finishing it up, every single time? If a rubber skinned robot got killed by someone other than a future freedom fighter, wouldn't the government snap that up real quick?

      Even if not, how many times have we heard in IT that you need to keep an 'off-site' backup? If you're working on the chip of the century, wouldn't you keep copies of your design... Somewhere else? You may have lost the chip, but that's it. (If the govn't can't provide you with another one, or they're working on it themselves...)

  97. termites? by Sebastopol · · Score: 2

    thought that said "Terminex" when i first read it, and then thought, "Hm, that's odd product placement." whew, I really need that monday AM coffeee...

    --
    https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
  98. Doesn't Matter if the T-800 Was Destroyed by JavaFox · · Score: 1

    Okay, everyone, STOP saying "But the T-800 destroyed himself -- how could there possibly be a sequel?!" If you've watched the T2 commercials, you'd know that the T-800s can be mass produced. And they all look like Arnold. Arnold plays a T-800 in T3; but he's not the T-800 from T2. Geddit?

    1. Re:Doesn't Matter if the T-800 Was Destroyed by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Except, as billions of people pointed out, the second T-800 also got his arm torn off, and left it behind.

      Plus, duh, half the research was done already, and it's crazy to think they didn't have off-site backups. The loss of what's-his-name, the scientist, and the loss of their facilities would have just slowed Skynet, not stopped it.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  99. Full frontal nudity of a man in Terminator series? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Hard Core Nudity!

    Ehh, I've got news for you. Arnie's partially puffed shlong bounced around in the beginning of the original Terminator.

  100. The arm. by sui · · Score: 0

    The T-800 was melted but his arm was stuck in the gear and never got totatly destroyed.

    --
    Why do the kids in West Side Story have to join a street gang if they can afford $70 Gap khakis?
  101. Secret Weapon by quantaman · · Score: 3, Funny

    The human's finally beat the machines once and for all with their deadly secret weapon...
    The /. effect!

    --
    I stole this Sig
    1. Re:Secret Weapon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is funny?!

      Geez.

  102. Typical Slashdot. by msm1th · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Boycott the movie industry! Down with the MPAA! Fight for your freedom! Resist the -- OOOH! SHINY COLORS!!

    1. Re:Typical Slashdot. by /dev/trash · · Score: 1
      I agree. One minute it's MPAA evil, next it's hey this movie looks cool.

      When ya boycott ya gotta not patronize it all.

    2. Re:Typical Slashdot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offtopic?
      Jeezus. I guess the truth hurts.

  103. Morphing abilities, but female? by island_earth · · Score: 1

    a female Terminatrix whose powers and morphing abilities exceed that of their previous nemesis.

    If it has such great morphing abilities, why refer to it with a gender at all? Surely that's a matter of pragmatism for the Terminator, who picks a gender (or none at all) depending on the situation).

    I'll bet that gender-issue-phobic Hollywood, though, doesn't have the Terminator changing from female to male as needed. Besides which, that would involve changing actors.

    1. Re:Morphing abilities, but female? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet that gender-issue-phobic Hollywood, though, doesn't have the Terminator changing from female to male as needed.

      Never mind that the Terminator in T2 took on female form at least twice (the foster mother and Sarah Connor).

    2. Re:Morphing abilities, but female? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet that gender-issue-phobic Hollywood, though, doesn't have the Terminator changing from female to male as needed

      Actually the T1000 did imitate a woman (Connor's foster mom, IIRC)

  104. They've sure got the audience pegged... by hyacinthus · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...as a bunch of horny, nerdy, male adolescents. Who else would wank over a "Terminatrix" (undoubtedly to be played by some pretty actress with large bosoms and little talent; q. v. _Tomb Raider_), but the same crowd for whom Seven of Nine was written into "Voyager".

    Cheers,

    hyacinthus.

  105. On behalf of geeks, nerds and dweebs... by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

    ... I think I can safely request that the studios cast Jeri Ryan of ST: Voyager fame

    She just doesn't cut it in Boston Public.

    PS: I may submit a script for the next one after this, where they go back in time 5 minutes before the previous event. The sequal to that will involve travelling an ADDITIONAL 5 minutes back, therefore changing the entire sequence of events.

  106. gender-issue-phobic Hollywood? by msm1th · · Score: 1
    I'll bet that gender-issue-phobic Hollywood, though, doesn't have the Terminator changing from female to male as needed.

    Are you high? Listen:

    • Boys Don't Cry
    • What Women Want
    • Me, Myself and Irene
    • Tootsie
    • Dr. Jeckyll and Mrs. Hyde
    • Mrs. Doubtfire
    • Big Mama's House
    • Hedwig and the Angry Inch
    1. Re:gender-issue-phobic Hollywood? by Hank+Scorpio · · Score: 1

      Don't forget The Crying Game.

    2. Re:gender-issue-phobic Hollywood? by msm1th · · Score: 1

      Of course!

  107. Re:Where can the story go after T2?-- HERE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >think of time as they did in "12 Monkees". (you can't change
    >anything because you already tried to) So, at the end of T2
    >they thought they changed the future, but they actually didn't.
    > Everything happened just the way the T2 layed it down.

    Hows about:

    OK. We know Skynet exists ("will exist"? Damn. The language is inadaquate!) Why? Because 3 terminators and a human were sent back in time by a time machine Skynet built. No Skynet, no time machine. No time machine, no Terminators or Reese going back in time. But they _did_ go back in time- that's what the movies were about. So, Skynet _will_ exist.

    But, you say, how can Skynet come into being? The scientist who did the research is dead, the futuristic mechanical arm and chip the research was based on are destroyed.

    Easy. In the future, Skynet sends back an advanced model 'Terminator'. This one is a duplicate of the scientist, and is so 'human like' that it can easily pass as human to all our present technology (except maybe detailed CAT scans or something). Skynet also sends back a duplicate arm and chip. The scientist terminator bullshits about the events of T2, and 'continues' the research.

    In the future, the humans re-capture the time machine, and send a 'Liquid' Terminator (Arnold) back to stop the Scientiist Terminator. The LT tries and tries to kill/destroy the ST, but some strange coincidences keep interfering. The ST eventually finds out that the LT is after him, and after seeing the trouble the LT is having, finally realizes that Time itself is protecting him. ST tries to tell LT what's going on, but LT still tries to kill ST several times. Finally, they come to an agreement- ST will simply continue the research and will do no harm to anyone (can't anyway- Time would stop him, too), and the LT will stop futilely trying to kill him (which keeps causing massive collateral damage).

    The ST says he'll leave a message encoded into Skynet's system telling it what happened, and basically telling Skynet to stop time travel and destroy the time machine, as it is worthless- Time will protect itself from changes. This message will be time-locked and will be released just after the ST is sent back in time.

    In the future, we see the humans racing to downlod the specs of the time machine (to presumably build their own so they don't have to keep fighting ove Skynet's) while Skynet realizes it has lost the war (the temporal part, anyway) and tries to destroy the machine. The end leaves us in suspense about wether or not the humans got the info.

  108. Re:Who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree with you except the part on decent looking women. T2 was a great movie but Linda Hamilton is not that hot.

  109. Wrong. It was the CPU. by DreamingReal · · Score: 2
    So, what happened in the original Terminator for the sequel to happen? Uh, the robot lost its arm in a factory, which was later on found by computer scientists and used to create the AI that would end up fucking humanity's shit up. Sound familiar?

    Wrong. It was the CPU from the first T-800 that enabled Miles Dyson to create his revolutionary microprocessor. (Quickly pop the DVD in my computer...) From the movie:

    • DYSON

      The chip. Do you know about the chip?

      SARAH

      What chip?

      DYSON

      They keep it in the vault at Cyberdyne. (to the Terminator) It must be from the other one like you.

      TERMINATOR

      The CPU from the first Terminator.

      SARAH

      Son of a bitch! I knew it!

      DYSON

      They told us not to ask where they got it.

      SARAH

      (to herself) Those lying motherfuckers!

      DYSON

      It was scary stuff. Radically advanced. It was smashed. It didn't work, but it gave us ideas, took us in new directions. Things we would have never... All my work was based on it.

    Besides, I really doubt anyone could create a microprocessor capable of birthing AI from a mechanical arm.

    That said, there doesn't seem to be any obvious plot threads upon which to hang a sequel. But that's obviously not a sequel killer. Jim Cameron excised the original ending for T2 in which a future Sarah sits in utopia with John and her grandchild, telling of her successful fight for the future. He left it ambiguous to accent the idea, "the future is not set". But how they will justify the rise of Skynet now isn't very apparent.

    --
    We want some answers and all that we get
    Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat

    - Ministry
  110. wonder what they'll do this time around by dagashi · · Score: 1

    really, the special effects of T2 were incredible.
    remember that scene where the evil robot "melt up" from a chessboard floor? that is sooo cool.
    they sure have alot to live up to, and i for one will have so high hopes it'll probably turn out to be crappy.... naaah this is T3 damnit!"%%&

    1. Re:wonder what they'll do this time around by RedWolves2 · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for the classic Arnold catch phrase.

      "I'll be back!"

    2. Re:wonder what they'll do this time around by dagashi · · Score: 1

      - "im back"
      would that be too simple? ;)

    3. Re:wonder what they'll do this time around by diesel_jackass · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for more phrases for the Arnold sound board ;-)

  111. Re:Wrong. It was the CPU. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's funny how the last name Dyson is used. I'm guessing that it is once again a reference to Freeman Dyson. Just like Macross Plus (an animation motion) where the main character has dyson as his last name.

  112. News Flash! by Steve+Bergman · · Score: 1

    In the wake of reports that "Terminator 3" star Arnold Schwartzenager experienced a mild heart attack this morning, Paramount Pictures has announced that he will be replaced on the set by William Shatner... ;-)

  113. Re:Who cares by vax · · Score: 1

    lol.. well shit neather was anyone else in that movie.. lol.. she wasnt that bad with a m-16 in one hand and those tank tops,, hehe, a bit scary but still kinda hot in a tough bitch kinda way, certainly not babe of the year ill give ya that much. heh.
    vax

  114. Ooh, good one! by Galvatron · · Score: 1
    Unfortunately, that kills my wrinkle explanation (unless, of course, time travel makes one look younger). Also, that means that Arnold will have to be a ruthless killer, because John Conner didn't order him not to kill people until T2.


    Okay, I think I've spent too long thinking about this.

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  115. Arnold is in the Hospital by Aurelfell · · Score: 1

    apperently he broke a few ribs in a motercycle accident. No worries though, he said in a press release that he'll be up and around by Christmas

  116. Arnie breaks ribs in motorcycle accident - really. by Lawmeister · · Score: 2

    Don't know if this will impact the scheduling of the movie but......

    'Terminator' breaks ribs in motorcycle crash
    SANTA MONICA, Calif. (AP) -- Arnold Schwarzenegger was hospitalized with several broken ribs after a weekend motorcycle accident, his publicist said Monday.

    The 54-year-old star of the "Terminator" movies was resting at St. John's Health Center in Santa Monica after the Sunday afternoon crash, publicist Jill Eisenstadt said.

    Schwarzenegger, who is negotiating to appear in a third "Terminator" film, was "in good spirits, feeling sore, but otherwise fine," she said.

    "Don't worry," the actor said in a statement. "This won't affect my skiing with my family at Sun Valley (Idaho) this Christmas."

    Details of the motorcycle accident, which also occurred in Santa Monica, were not immediately available.

    Schwarzenegger underwent elective surgery to replace a heart valve in April 1997.

    His new movie "Collateral Damage," which was postponed after the Sept. 11 attacks because it's about terrorism, now is scheduled to open in February.

    link to another news source...

  117. a classic story by lazy8fx · · Score: 1

    cross between "the matrix" and "jurassic park trilogy" (the series that keeps on getting worse). another movie taking a good story already done with class too far.

  118. Re:Wrong. It was the CPU. by Debillitatus · · Score: 1
    So, why can't there be a CPU in the arm? Maybe it's some seriously distributed processing.

    On the other hand, maybe they don't have the CPU or anything like it. But a robotic hand that came from a futuristic Terminator could teach us a hell of a lot anyway. So it would just take longer for those dudes to develop AI. And, they'd have to make it happen later anyway, because as far as I can remember, SkyNet was supposed to become "self-aware" (whatever the fuck that means) in 1997.

    So check this out. The Connors' throwing Arnold and his shit into the lava did slow down the AI development, and change the future. But it didn't change it enough! Now, we'll be moving slowly with only the arm instead of the chip, so now SkyNet will become self-aware in 2013. But it will still rock our house.

    Hey, why not?

    --

    Come on, give it up, that's

  119. "Terminatrix" I think that says it all. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2

    Scene 1: Grand offices of "Crappy Films Are US!"


    Coke up the nose, money up the ass, 25 year old film executive

    "--And the title should sort of sound like 'Matrix' because 'The Matrix' was popular and people are so dip-shit stupid, that we can actually bank on them paying $11 a view just because it sounds similar to another movie they liked."


    Slicked-back, $100-blow-job-a-day, 37 year old executive who sort of looks like Kevin Spacey

    "Right again, Todd!"


    --Face it folks. T2 was good because James Cameron, a certifiable loony toon ego-maniac, happens to also be very good at his job. That's it. That's the only reason. Feed T3 to generic Hollywood, and you can pretty much bet on a BIG PIECE OF STEAMING SHIT to come out of the other end.

    Mmm! Hand me a bun!


    -Fantastic Lad

  120. I am reading the Book at the moment. by krenskeoz · · Score: 1

    The T3 book is by noted military Sci fi writer S.M. Stirling.

    The Terminatrix is a bio engineered, almost all meat female. There is numerous implants etc with most of the T-800's weapons handling etc. So far the book seems quite good. I am assuming this is the book the movie would be made from but the terminator charachter is female.

    The book includes details on various Terminator models: Original all metal exo's, exos with rubber skin, exos with improved skin, Bio exos, Living metal, etc.

  121. Shouldn't use Arnold by Sloppy · · Score: 2

    (I know; I'm taking these movies too seriously and should get laid instead. Blah, blah, blah..)

    One of my gripes with T2 was that Arnold was in it. (Not that I have anything against him.) Cameron explained away the 'fact' that his terminator looked the same as the one in the first movie, was that the terminators were mass-produced in a factory.

    I couldn't buy into that, though, because the terminators were intended for infiltration. The pesky humans aren't supposed to recognize them! If they all look the same, doesn't that mess things up?

    Each movie should have a different actor playing the terminator.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    1. Re:Shouldn't use Arnold by kbg · · Score: 1

      >If they all look the same, doesn't that mess >things up?

      Yes and No, I would think that they would have produced maybe 10 copies of each "skin" for the terminator, and then deploy them at the same time in different cities. That way you could keep the cost down :) but still be able to surprise the humans.

      So the second Terminator was just a left-over copy in the factory.

  122. new generations of diasaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    T-800? Terminatrix? I don't care what they are, as long as they don't let the thing through aiport security.

  123. Re:Where can the story go after T2?-- HERE by Stone+Rhino · · Score: 0

    problem- in T2, it was stated the the time machine was destroyed after they sent back arnold to prevent a situation just like this, i.e. sending back more technology and terminators

    --


    Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
  124. Female and morphing and robot? by TomRC · · Score: 1

    I could see a robot built to look female. Or a female who could morph. Or a morphing robot.

    But the combination makes no sense. Where exactly does her gender lie? Is she only able to morph into women? Does she have a particularly feminine outlook (for a robot)?

  125. Will Arnold's best friend be a talking pie? by Sorcerer13 · · Score: 1

    Will Arnold have to decide whether he lives or dies? That's all I want to know.

  126. blind people.. at a film? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uhh.. yeah.

  127. Re:Wrong. It was the CPU. by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 1
    well, the whole skynet project had to begin somewhere ... i always thought that it was an innevitable step in technology. when the first terminator went back in time, and cyberdyne systems salvaged the cpu and arm from it, that probably advanced their research by decades (possibly resulting in the t-1000?).


    the end of t2 pretty much just reset the entire loop. cyberdyne systems will probably [i]still[/i] develop skynet, but much later than the timeline given in the first movie.

    --
    People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
  128. Re:Wrong. It was the CPU. by Debillitatus · · Score: 1
    the end of t2 pretty much just reset the entire loop. cyberdyne systems will probably [i]still[/i] develop skynet, but much later than the timeline given in the first movie.

    That's my theory, too. I mean, it can go any way we want it to, right? It is science fiction.

    The question is, in T3, will John Connor try to stop the machines from wrecking shit in the first place? For example, are all the major cities going to be nuked? Or will there be some daring heroics in which John blows up SkyNet before it becomes self-aware? Lotsa possibilities!

    BTW, your tagline is strong.

    --

    Come on, give it up, that's

  129. Not good. by greening · · Score: 1

    I don't think this one should be made. The past two were good, I just don't think this one will have the same fate.

    First: T-800 tries to kill Sarah

    Okay, that's a good story. It was even proven (even with their low budget!).

    Second: T-800 saves John from T-1000

    Even better. I liked the T-1000 and it was all thought through and well acted.

    Third: T-800 is John's "buddy" and tries to save him from the new bad guy (a chick with that has similar (only more powerful) abilities as the T-1000).

    I already see falicies in this. First, everything was destroyed in T2. They could have had backups but, John would have destroyed them the second he found them (if not John, Sarah would in a second). He wouldn't make another T-800 which tried to kill his mom before he was born (even though he saved their lives, Sarah was too engrained with the thought of him trying to kill her). Plus, I don't like the thought of the new bad guy (err... girl). Maybe one more similar to the T-1000. Infact, I pray that they bring that character back. But, he's probably too busy pretending to be John Dogget on The X-Files.

    Following the trend stated above, it should be the T-1000 sent back to protect him from a T-8000 or so... Just my opinion.

    et al,

    --
    Are you telling me that you don't see the connection between government and laughing at people? - Interviewer
  130. Re:Where can the story go after T2?-- HERE by swright · · Score: 1

    I guess even robots could change their mind and build another....