Slashdot Mirror


New "Terminator" Trilogy Planned

Ant writes "Dark Horizons reports after much talk and posturing over the future of "The Terminator" franchise/series in recent years, something surprising has happened: The Halcyon Company has acquired the franchise rights to the popular movie series and intends to make a new trilogy that would anchor their movie company..."

303 comments

  1. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Another dead horse to beat.

    1. Re:Great by Doc+Lazarus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed. The Hollywood trend is to secure money by rehashing proven hits of the past. This company could do something unique with the Terminator movies. But then again, they could also do something completely unique and possibly create a new franchise as well.

    2. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't give their script-writers ideas.

    3. Re:Great by AdamThor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hollywood is totally about draining every last cent from anything that can be seen to have any potential. They won't stop. Ever. Until all love for the franchise is dead.

      That being said, the conception of the terminator universe is still fertile, I think. Creative and productive people with a clear vision unfettered by corporate BS could probably do something pretty cool with the property. We've seen, as with LotR, if a company is staking it's existence on a property they can potentially realize that they need to work on making it good rather than making it profitable.

      That being said, mention of a TV series does not give me much hope. =(

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    4. Re:Great by drsquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Hollywood trend is to secure money by rehashing proven hits of the past
      The trend of any business is to make the most of your successful products. After all, you never know when you'll need the money, your next product might bomb and cost you millions.

      I don't see how film franchises are any worse than TV shows that drag on for years and years, or comics that go on for decades. Just because a film uses old characters and an old premise doesn't mean it can't be entertaining.
    5. Re:Great by AdamThor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hollywood is totally about draining every last cent from anything that can be seen to have any potential. They won't stop. Ever. Until all love for the franchise is dead.

      Separate thought here. I wonder if it would prove fruitful to build a mental model of cultural properties something like this:

      Audience Adoration = Potential Energy
      Cash = Kinetic Energy

      One can be converted to the other - with losses. But if you want to increase one without decreasing the other you need to add work to the system. Hmmm, maybe that doesn't provide any useful insight.

      It doesn't seem wise, to me, to convert all of your Audience Adoration into Cash, EVERY TIME, and leave only the husks of entertainment ideas in your wake. Can we build an accessable mental model that explains why Hollywood types shouldn't convert every well regarded property into easy cash?

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    6. Re:Great by bitt3n · · Score: 5, Funny

      Another dead horse to beat.
      well, you think it's dead, and you pointedly turn your back on it and clasp your love interest in a long and passionate kiss that gives it just enough time to rear up on its hind legs and then start galloping toward you out of the flaming wreckage with its beady red eyes all aglow. Terminator 4: OMG PONIES
    7. Re:Great by Coryoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't see how film franchises are any worse than TV shows that drag on for years and years, or comics that go on for decades. Just because a film uses old characters and an old premise doesn't mean it can't be entertaining. I agree. Some great films have been sequels. On the other hand TV shows that drag on for years and years (hell, many get tired after only a season or two) are indeed just as bad as many sequels. Think of how many TV shows are ruined as they run on: the characters become caricatures of their original selves, and everything has to become "more" and "better" season after season till things are bordering on the truly absurd. The same is often true for movies -- just consider the previews for the new Die Hard movie. Fresh ideas an fresh starts have a lot to offer.
    8. Re:Great by flappinbooger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Neither creator James Cameron or original star Arnold Schwarzenegger will be involved in the project, which picks up with John Connor in his 30s leading what's left of the human race against the machines.


      Nah, man, the above is what will make this good. There's been what, 2 minutes, shown of this timeframe of the universe? That whole part of the terminator universe is the basis for all of the movies, yet it is largely left to our imagination. They are going to explore that. No dead horse. They're, uhh, beating a mostly new horse...
      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    9. Re:Great by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, glad they didn't do that to Star Trek...

      --
      The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
    10. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      24?

    11. Re:Great by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Another dead horse to beat.

      It's not dead if we go back in time. Also, I have the exact date the foal was conceived right here, I suggest we go back and beat his mother this time before he's born.

    12. Re:Great by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the plus side, the Terminator franchise wrapped itself up pretty cleanly with T2, so if you don't like the new movies you can just ignore them. It's not like, say, the X-Men movie series, in which the first two movies set left a lot of plot threads unresolved only to be completely shit on with the third movie.

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    13. Re:Great by beckerist · · Score: 1

      oh man, or American Pie...talk about a dead horse!

    14. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another dead horse to beat. This is the first post. This is why I love Slashdot.
    15. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking Stargate myself...

    16. Re:Great by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

      Oh great.. why won't this die?!!!

      _____

      "Dr. Phil and Jack Thompson are proof you don't give a moron a soapbox!"

    17. Re:Great by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, no, T2 did leave something, who anyone with a sense of logic would have picked on. Effectively a type of Grandfather Paradox. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_paradox

      In Terminator 1, a Robot was sent back in time, to kill Sarah Connor, preventing the birth of John Connor, leader of the resistance. The resistance sent a human back into time as well, who then impregnated Sarah, to create John Connor. Although the terminator is nearly destroyed, at the end of the film, Judgement day still was to exist. A paradox was formed in the sense that, Johns father is a person who only met Sarah because of judgement day, interesting, a circular action, technically should not be possible (imagine recursion)

      In Terminator 2. supposedly all traces of the terminators were destroyed, and Judgement day was averted. But, if Judgement day was averted, then those terminators would have no longer existed and they would not have come back in time. Another paradox, or did the new universe that got formed at that instant, simply shift its path?

      This is why there was a T3.

      --
      Have a nice day!
  2. Who needs Arnold? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1, Funny

    Start with the story of John Connor and his wife, of course, set in the future.

    1. Re:Who needs Arnold? by operagost · · Score: 1, Informative

      RTFM. That's the proposed plot.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Sqweegee · · Score: 4, Informative

      FTA:

      "Neither creator James Cameron or original star Arnold Schwarzenegger will be involved in the project, which picks up with John Connor in his 30s leading what's left of the human race against the machines."

    3. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 0

      Staring Hugh Laurie as John Connor?

    4. Re:Who needs Arnold? by eli+pabst · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree. As much as I enjoyed the original Terminator movies, the background plot of John Connor always seemed more interesting to me and I always felt a bit disappointed that it wasn't developed further. The part in T1 when Michael Biehn's character (Reese) falls asleep under the bridge and has a flashback dream was an incredibly cool sequence.

    5. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Steendor · · Score: 1

      "Who's going to take us seriously if we don't have a laser pointer?"

    6. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Intron · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Neither creator James Cameron or original star Arnold Schwarzenegger will be involved in the project"

      I can predict the future on this one without time travel.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    7. Re:Who needs Arnold? by rubberchickenboy · · Score: 1

      Why can't this just be a video game? Would certainly be more fun than sitting through 6+ hours of what could be very shlocky filmmaking.

    8. Re:Who needs Arnold? by apostrophesemicolon · · Score: 5, Funny

      [Spoiler alert]
      Episode 4: Total Recall
      After modifying part of skynet, John Connor managed to recall all robots back to HQ where he short-circuited their Sony power unit until they swell and explode. Towards the end the program managed to install itself on a retrotype animal robot.. something called the AIBO

      Episode 5: Kindergarten Cop
      Turns out before the Terminator was sent back in time to help young John, the old John sent another robot called the Eraser to assist toddler John in finding little Miles Bennett Dyson. The SkynetAIBO was also sent back in time and ate all of John's erasers, including the one that smells really nice. SkynetAIBO returns home sick from eating too much erasers.

      Episode 6: The Last Action Hero
      The future world is now finally at peace. Robots are again used as servants and slaves without soul. John refused to lead the nation of United States and settled to govern the state of CA-90210.
      One day he suffers from major headache when a hotel chain heiress Barcelona Hotlin begged him to get her off her impending imprisonment due to excessive velocity transport without authorization clearance. He agreed to pardon her in exchange with sexual favor, which the SkynetAIBO secretly taped and sold all over the Interweb. SkynetAIBO becomes rich and builds a new ROBOTIC EMPIRE. (pitch to the next series of trilogy)

      [/spoiler]

    9. Re:Who needs Arnold? by flickwipe · · Score: 1

      Bindun

      Bunch of humans fighting against evil robotic opressors in a possible future timeline. They laugh, they cry and in their struggles learn what its like to be human.

      CAPTAIN POWER ...er.... CONNOR AND THE SOLDIERS OF THE FUTURE

      (Yes I know, pretty much the basis for any sci-fi themed program/film/radioshow)

    10. Re:Who needs Arnold? by servognome · · Score: 4, Funny

      I have seen the future, and it's direct to DVD

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    11. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Seanasy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obviously, they'll be produced by the Republican Party. So, who will be the new Terminator? McCain? Giuliani? Huckabee? Romney? Maybe Santorum in preparation for '12 or '16?

    12. Re:Who needs Arnold? by rbanffy · · Score: 1

      If you had to use time travel, you would not really predict the future - you would be documenting it.

      And I can see this particular part of the future has a very strong chance of sucking really bad.

    13. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      I have seen the future, and it's direct to DVD Funny, but it's not totally implausible if they want to milk the franchise enough.

      Remember Hellraiser, that late-80s sado-masochistic horror film? If you do, you're probably aware that there was a sequel. You might even remember the noticably lower-budget MTV-ised third entry in the series.

      But did you know they made eight of the damn things?

      I'm not kidding; Netcraft.... erm, IMDB confirms it. Even the fourth film apparently made it into the cinema; but 5, 6, 7 and 8(!!) were straight to video. I've never seen them, have no interest in doing so, and suspect that most people feel the same way. My guess is that they're low-budget efforts aimed at the diehard obsessive fans; a loyal but small audience.

      Now, the Terminator franchise (I loathe that word, but it's appropriate) is- and will probably remain- more popular than Hellraiser. But if they start churning out films without Arnie (or any of the other famous actors), over-milk the formula, and cut the budgets, I can see their appeal going down *fast*. The hardcore fanbase will turn up regardless (even if they bitch about it). However, such audiences overestimate their importance and are dwarfed by the fickle masses that *any* mainstream cinema film needs to fill multiplexes.

      Could "Terminator" films end up going straight to video? Sure.
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    14. Re:Who needs Arnold? by ShorePiper82 · · Score: 1

      You clearly mean direct to blu-ray. Viewable only by the current ps3 owner base. Between 4am and 4pm. Sometimes.

    15. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Duggeek · · Score: 1

      TFA did mention that the upcoming titles would likely “be made for television” —the DVD would come one week later.

      --
      This post © Copyrite Duggeek, all rights reversed.
    16. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't be the same without Arnold, our esteemed Governor of the State of California. Unless he decides to resign or the people recalls him then the an Arnold "Terminator" won't happen until at least 2010 since he won his second term.
      The "I'll be back" in the first movie won't be that same with another actor. But it has been over 20 years, the first Terminator was released in 1984, so the next generation kids which didn't see Arnold being the Terminator wouldn't noticed that difference. However for those people who did see Arnold as the Terminator would view the movie with a more cynical eye.
      But look at James Bond movies in which a 6 different actors; Sean Connery, Roger Moore, George Lazenby, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, and now Daniel Craig; playing "James Bond" and some people view each James Bond actor differently so I think this will be that same for another actor playing the Terminator.

    17. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who mod down humor as "off topic" need to die like pigs in Hell.

      It's too bad the metamod system doesn't work too well.

    18. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, a few more movies starring a 5' 10" blonde amazon lesbian wouldn't suck too badly.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    19. Re:Who needs Arnold? by LionMage · · Score: 1

      Even the fourth film apparently made it into the cinema

      And was so execrable that the director pulled his name from the film (which is why, when I went and saw this turd at the theater -- because I'm a diehard Hellraiser fan -- the credits gave the director as "Alan Smithee," the agreed-upon fake name to use for such circumstances). I guess I should have realized that adding a Sci Fi element to Hellraiser was a mistake. "Hey, it's Hellraiser in space! Cool!" There were plenty of scenes that were shown piecemeal in the trailers which never made it into the final cut of the film, so it's possible there were many last-minute changes the director didn't approve of.

      The fifth (Inferno) was actually a decent film, probably better than the fourth, but I believe it was a direct-to-video release. That's about where I stopped watching; I saw the last one (number 8, aka "Hellworld") in the bargain bin at Fry's or Best Buy recently. Didn't even pique my interest. Yet there are still enough fanatics out there willing to buy this stuff that the franchise will live on.

      Terminator 3 was a repudiation of everything that James Cameron had to say about free will and choice in the first two Terminator movies, so it's no surprise he bowed out of making a third film. It was really being pushed by Arnold anyway. With the franchise now torn away from its philosophical and artistic roots, it's a lot easier to rob it of the last vestiges of its old self and pimp the results to the buying public. Three more films? That's cake. The Hellraiser film franchise is only one example of making this paradigm work. I could also mention the Prophecy franchise -- those are still being made, now without Christopher Walken. Heck, they even had a crossover between the Hellraiser and Prophecy film franchises!

      Most shocking coincidence I've seen thus far: Kari Wuhrer seems to show up in some of the direct-to-video releases late in the life of these franchises. (She shows up in at least one of the later Hellraiser films, and in the fourth Prophecy film.) Anyone taking bets to see if she'll show up in one of these new Terminator films? I wonder if her presence is an indication that a franchise has jumped the shark...?
    20. Re:Who needs Arnold? by sjaeger172004 · · Score: 1

      How could you not have Arnold Schwarzenegger as the terminator!! Who would be able to replace him I really hated Arnold Schwarzenegger going into politics and becoming the Govenator as no new movies with him until at least his term is over.

    21. Re:Who needs Arnold? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Heck, they even had a crossover between the Hellraiser and Prophecy film franchises! To be fair, that's apparently an unofficial (and short) fan-flick, and I didn't include it in my list of "Hellraiser" films. As for Prophecy, I'm not entirely sure that I've even heard of that one, ditto Kari Wuhrer :-)
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  3. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  4. Premonition. by reality-bytes · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just had this awful premonition of a new model of Terminator...

    ...It can't be bargained with, can't be reasoned with, and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead...

    "Meesa be back!"

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
    1. Re:Premonition. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Funny

      I know I'd go back in time prevent that movie from ever being made!

    2. Re:Premonition. by clickclickdrone · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Meesa be back!"
      I always thought I was too old to be spooked by such a simple thing as the written word but you sir have guaranteed I'll be having nightmares tonight. {shudder}
      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    3. Re:Premonition. by operagost · · Score: 3, Funny

      John Connor shot first!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    4. Re:Premonition. by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

      If it was made in the USA, it could become president.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Premonition. by soilheart · · Score: 1

      Well. I would be afraid and laugh at the same time, which are usual for the terminator movies. (Afraid how they are gonna screw the movie up more than they already did and laugh at the "action" scenes)

    6. Re:Premonition. by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      God help us all. You have just crippled my unborn children AND ruined my lunch. You bastard! Meesa THIS!

    7. Re:Premonition. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "...It can't be bargained with, can't be reasoned with, and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead..."

      Mike the TV from Reboot?

      Only NINETY NINE, NINETY NINE, NINETY NIIIIINNNE!!!!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    8. Re:Premonition. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure I want to know where you store your lunch or what you do with it before you eat it. Not to mention that I find it highly disturbing to be turned on by the way Jar Jar talks...:)

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Worth going back in time to prevent: by ettlz · · Score: 3, Funny

    Terminator: The Animated Series.

    1. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Then

      Terminator: The Live Action Movie, based on the Animated Series, not the original movie.

    2. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by ettlz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, fuck it: Terminator: The Musical.

    3. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by frdmfghtr · · Score: 1

      Terminator - The holiday special

      I can hardly wait!

      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    4. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by neildiamond · · Score: 1

      Actually Mad TV did a skit on that. Very funny. :)

    5. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Tonight, on a very special Terminator.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    6. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Bombs Contain Chemicals and Moving Parts has the potential to be one of the most poignant songs of our time.

      "Oh if I could only/
      Be a Bomb/
      How happy I would be!"

    7. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by ZOmegaZ · · Score: 1

      ...and when things go pear-shaped, those humans won't escape, Dysons are AI's best friend!

    8. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Bruitist · · Score: 1

      Already happened. They're called Fear Factory.

    9. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can see the merchandising: Terminator: the vaginal douche

    10. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Keebler71 · · Score: 1
      --
      "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
    11. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 1

      "Stop killing Judas!"

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    12. Re:Worth going back in time to prevent: by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I never could figure out why they could successfully conceal advanced robotics (metal, computers, highly energetic power sources) in flesh and successfully trick the time machine restrictions, but they couldn't put a few advanced guns inside the big T's torso for later use.

      In T2, they kind of tricked around it with the T-1000 being able to form simple shapes, so that was still intact (assuming it could duplicate human skin closely enough to, again, trick the time machine restrictions.)

      But in T3, the 5' 10" blonde amazon lesbian was capable of forming weapons and whatnot. But I suppose it could be argued that this happened after the time transmission, and hence there were no weapons to block transmission.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  6. To be fair by clickclickdrone · · Score: 4, Funny

    He did say 'I'll be back'.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    1. Re:To be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He did say 'I'll be back'.

      No he didn't, you misunderstood him. He was assuring us that he was going to star in a movie about an 18th century composer. What he said, and he said it clearly, was "I'll be Bach."

    2. Re:To be fair by drinkypoo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What he said, and he said it clearly, was "I'll be Bach."

      Is that what he said? I figured he was going to voice a character in a sequel to Chicken Run, and he said "I'll be bock."

      (bock bock)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by Soiden · · Score: 5, Funny

    Terminator IV: A new John Connor Terminator V: The Robots Strike Back Terminator VI: The Return of the Terminator

    --
    Minti: What's that huge shuriken in your back?! Kin: It's the instrument of my victory.
    1. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I know this is a joke, but still I'd bet a George Lucas style Terminator would turn out pretty awesome. The francise is coming off of a low note, ie T3, and with nothing but the future war setting left, it would look pretty sweet. All the battle sequences from episode II and III were rather spectacular in my opinion, and a future war Terminator movie done in the same style might be the kind of new direction the francise needs. It's not like there needs to be much character story, everyone's pretty much setup in their relations to the main players, and its not as if a political side story would appear in the middle an extinction war. So, that means, no romance plot, no starchy politics, and a freaking pre-destined on-the-rails plotline (thanks a lot T3.) So what's left to make the movie? SFX, explosions, creative war machines, more explosions, fancy CGI/models, and zetaflops worth of more explosions! A George Lucas style Terminator 4 would rock!

      --
      Demented But Determined.
    2. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot III: The Search for

      Slashdot IV: The Voyage to HTML Formatted.

    3. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Slashdot V: A new hope
      Slashdot VI: Death of the AC

      We were all thinking it... I'm just saying it ;)

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    4. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by TheCybernator · · Score: 1
      T4: Fellowship of the SkyNet

      T5: The Two Terminators

      T6: The Return of the ...... Profit???

    5. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      All the battle sequences from episode II and III were rather spectacular in my opinion, a

      Maybe for a color-by-number video-game cut scene; for a film, they were peanut-laden shit.

    6. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by MS-06FZ · · Score: 1

      Terminator IV: A new John Connor
      Terminator V: The Robots Strike Back
      Terminator VI: The Return of the Terminator Better than:

      Terminator 4: The Scorched Home
      Terminator 5: The Final Battlefield
      Terminator 6: The Undiscovered War
      --
      ---GEC
      I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
    7. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by Ours · · Score: 1

      its not as if a political side story would appear in the middle an extinction war. So, that means, no romance plot, no starchy politics, and a freaking pre-destined on-the-rails plotline
      In that case you may want to make sure you don't watch the new Battlestar Galactica series (I personally like it).

      --
      "You superiour intellect is no match for our puny weapons" - The Simpsons
    8. Re:OMG is the George Lucas Effect! by bosef1 · · Score: 1

      I agree that a "future war" setting would make a pretty neat summer blockbuster. The number of ways you could frame the start of the war, especially if you already planned to make a trilogy, would give a competent director a lot of latitude for being creative and exciting. I understand your "no romance, no politics" request. I'm not sure that level of restriction would be necessary, though you could certainly do an awesome movie without it (the romance and politics).

      I think two of the keys would be, as I mentioned, a competent director (and a competent scriptwriter), and not making the movie too much like the Matrix trilogy. You would think a competent director and writer would be a necessity for any film, but because of the huge flexibility offered in making what would effectively be a war epic, you would need a director and writer who were competent enough to know what elements they wanted to focus on and what they would not be good at writing or directing. And not, to re-enforce your comment, lose sight of the fact that this would be a war epic and make some horrible 1950's ro-bot invasion B-grade romance movie (though some cybernetic bodice ripping might be... interesting).

      I mention the Matrix trilogy simply because the Terminator series and the Matrix series have some similar elements (robots taking over the world) and wouldn't want to see the new movies just ripping off the Matrix stuff. I would rather they develop their own unique outlook and style, and it would be critical for the (competent) writer and director to not fall into the trap of copying the existing material.

      Anyway, I think if we could get some good people on this, there would be an opportunity for some additional expansion of the franchise in a new direction. On the other hand, this could wind up being a giant flop if not-good people do the work.

  8. *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you say "Diluting the franchise name"? Because that's all this is going to do. Make a movie & then get another idea or get out of the way. If your idea is so large that it has to be split into three movies (Star Wars, Godfather, ect.) then so be it. But stop tacking sh*t onto stories that don't need it.

    Six terminator movies? Sounds like someone's trying to milk that story for all it's worth.

  9. Enough by escay · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Enough with the trilogies already. why can't we have a single good movie and just let that be?

    1. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because people paid to watch it last time, therefore they'll pay to see it again. And again. And again.

    2. Re:Enough by solios · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because trilogies make more money, duh.

      Hollywood only cares about quality product to the extent that they need the occasional quality product in order to keep the cash pouring in.

    3. Re:Enough by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 4, Funny

      Enough with the trilogies already. why can't we have a single good movie and just let that be?
      Why? What was wrong with Highlander II and Highlander III? Errr, OK, bad example. Matrix II and Matrix III?? Hmmm. Alien3 and Alien Resurection??? OK, I give up.
      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    4. Re:Enough by Volatar · · Score: 1

      I so agree with you, companies put out all these sequels because they make money, but they ruin so many good things with endless sequels. It happens in more then one genre too, Movies for one (Spiderman 4 anybody?), Games (ie: Mario Party 8), the Music industry. Books are the one thing I have not seen the phenomenon in however. The reason may be that there is already so much variety, and that the major book readers don't purchase such worthless media.

    5. Re:Enough by hoggoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Hollywood only cares about quality product to the extent that they need the occasional quality product in order to keep the cash pouring in.

      Even further, Hollywood is compelled to continue making sequels until they are so bad they stop making money. It is the only way to insure they have extracted all the money possible from a franchise.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    6. Re:Enough by Heir+Of+The+Mess · · Score: 1

      And what about Ghost In The Shell 2:Innocence. That was a real WTF for me.

      --
      Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
    7. Re:Enough by radarsat1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Books are the one thing I have not seen the phenomenon in however. The reason may be that there is already so much variety, and that the major book readers don't purchase such worthless media.


      Hm.. I'm sorry, maybe it's because I just rolled out of bed and I'm a bit tired, but I can't tell if you're trying to be sarcastic or not... *books* don't have trilogies??? When was the last time you went to a book store my friend?
    8. Re:Enough by cowscows · · Score: 1

      Planning far enough ahead of time can be a wise decision for a movie studio. A good example is the Lord of the Rings trilogy. They had a just plain practical reason, they were telling a huge story, and it's hard to get audiences to sit in a seat for 6+ hours straight. But the way it worked, since they knew it would be three films, they shot all three movies basically in one big chunk. A big benefit for the studio this way was that the actors, many of whom saw a big jump in their celebrity status after the first film was released, couldn't demand a bigger salary for the sequels. That was especially important in a story like LotR, where there were so many significant characters, and as such so many actors that would've had to be negotiated with.

      I don't know how the story of this new terminator series might go, but if they can find some actors that they like, and sign them up for a series of movies right off the bat, then it leaves the studio in a much better position than having to negotiate later if the first movie is a success.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    9. Re:Enough by Zoxed · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Why? What was wrong with Highlander II and Highlander III? Errr, OK, bad example. Matrix II and Matrix III?? Hmmm. Alien3 and Alien Resurection??? OK, I give up.

      Well, IMHO, Star Wars IV was the best in that series :-)

    10. Re:Enough by solios · · Score: 1

      Even further, Hollywood is compelled to continue making sequels until they are so bad they stop making money. It is the only way to insure they have extracted all the money possible from a franchise.


      Police Academy is probably the best example of that.

      Though I consider the second and third Matrix movies and the Star Wars prequel trilogy to be pretty good examples as well. :P
    11. Re:Enough by clydemaxwell · · Score: 1

      I guess I'm the only person on the planet to have enjoyed what Alien3 brought to the mythos.

      --
      Browsing with classic discussion, noscript, at -1 and nested
      no hidden comments and I only mod UP
    12. Re:Enough by Fangs78 · · Score: 1

      No...we're 2. Alien3 was a different type of movie than the others. People expected bloodfest like in the 2nd. It didn't happen, and it was great!

    13. Re:Enough by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      I guess I'm the only person on the planet to have enjoyed what Alien3 brought to the mythos.
      No, me too but then I also really liked Star Trek The Motion Picture so what do I know?

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    14. Re:Enough by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      You hear that? That is the sound of a dead horse being flogged.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    15. Re:Enough by Miseph · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of The Wheel of Time? How about Redwall? Dragonlance? All started out awesome, then around the fourth (+- 1) book you start to realize that the series is never going to end, the characters will never finish their quest, and you've spent 40 hours of you life reading books that have steadily declined in quality, and you're never going to be able to get that time back.

      Tom Clancy's good for that too.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    16. Re:Enough by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Of course the LOTR people had a hugely popular book to work from so they had some confidence that budgeting 3 movies worth of cash wasn't a complete gamble. You can't say the same for this Terminator proposal. All you have to go on is 1 good movie, one ok movie with good special effects, and one blah movie and no book leading the way.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    17. Re:Enough by dylan_- · · Score: 1

      Even further, Hollywood is compelled to continue making sequels until they are so bad they stop making money.
      Hah! So true! It's like a variation of the Peter Principle. Write up a wikipedia entry on it, edit the Peter Principle page to link to it, and you've just invented the Hoggoth Principle. Congrats! :)
      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    18. Re:Enough by Volatar · · Score: 1

      I apologize, I guess I need to go to a different section of the bookstore.

      To the other guy though, I know there are trilogies, I just haven't encountered any that have been beat to death like so many movies.

    19. Re:Enough by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      "Dragonlance? All started out awesome, then around the fourth"

      Dragonlance was huge steaming pile of unimaginative, derivative crap from the very 1st book, I read up until number 3 and it just got worse and worse and worse.

    20. Re:Enough by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      You better hope it makes lots of money. If it bombs, accusations of piracy will be flying all over the place, leading to more legislation, and probably yet another, more "secure" DVD like format, so you need to "re-stock" your library again, in addition to having to buy more new hardware you really don't need, since the new format will probably last about five years before another one comes out. Prety impressive how they do that.

      --
      What?
    21. Re:Enough by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Enough with the trilogies already. why can't we have a single good movie and just let that be?"

      I would have argued with you except for Pirates 2. Glad I paid full price for half a movie there.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    22. Re:Enough by Gospodin · · Score: 1

      *cough* Xanth! *cough*

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    23. Re:Enough by Opportunist · · Score: 1, Interesting

      *switching into my "old zen master" costume*

      Movie is like tea. Script is for movie what leaf is for tea. You take idea and work on it for years, and it will make very good script. Same is for tea. You take garden and work on it for years, and you will have get very good leaf. Then you make movie with very good script. And tea with very good leaf.

      And you will see, tea is wonderful, as is movie wonderful. So you say, those leaves made wonderful tea. And I want another wonderful tea. So they will make another wonderful tea. And you put them in the cup again, and then you fill the cup again with water and you wait for tea to brew.

      But the tea is not wonderful. It tastes old, stale, without vigor. No life is left in leaves. It all went with the tea.

      And scripts are like leaves. You should only brew one movie with one script. Not two. Not three. Or the movie is like tea. Old, stale, without vigor.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    24. Re:Enough by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Some of us expected the characters to be at least a little smarter then 85. Ignoring for the moment any possible suspicions about the "rescue" team, they have an impenetrable vault which they proceed to outfit with food and water for a week to live in. Err, wait. That isn't what happened. They trap the alien inside the vault at great hazard to themselves and then post one guard over a door which anybody can open.

    25. Re:Enough by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Trilogies. That's how we will elect presidents. Father, Son, and Holy Shi...er...Ghost.

      --
      What?
    26. Re:Enough by doti · · Score: 1

      The "Terminator" movie is a single great movie.
      I don't consider it a trilogy, the sequels are crappy canned entertainment, which try destroy the magic of the original movie just to make Arnold be a hero, not a villain.

      --
      factor 966971: 966971
    27. Re:Enough by Floritard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have you seen the director's cut? I always feel I have to recommend this to anyone who thinks Fincher dropped the ball on Alien 3. There is an entire religious subplot that was lifted from the movie and its omission basically kills the soul of the project. One of the prisoners assigns an almost mystical quality to the alien which I think adds another layer to what was pretty much just a monster movie. It has an atmosphere that reminds me of a Dark Horse comic or something out of Heavy Metal. OTOH, Alien Resurrection does just piss all over the face of the series.

    28. Re:Enough by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Alien 3 okay... but I did like Alien Resurection, darn it. Leave it alone already! ;)

    29. Re:Enough by bazorg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There should have been only one.

    30. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, the third matrix movie would have been good except for the plot/story/acting.

    31. Re:Enough by lostboy2 · · Score: 1
      IANAL but I think there is also incentive to "serialize" movies so that you have a stronger case for establishing a trademark.

      From Yahoo FAQ:

      Individual titles of books and movies are difficult to protect as trademarks unless the title has achieved distinction in sales or advertising or is used in a series -- for example, the Austin Powers movie series or the Harry Potter books.
      (emphasis mine).
    32. Re:Enough by Vhata · · Score: 1

      It's basically the Peter Principle applied to a franchise, yes. If the last movie made money, make another one. This will continue until one doesn't make money. So the reason that the traditional wisdom of "sequels suck" is true is that most "franchises" are only good enough to support one movie.

      (Gigli 2, anyone?)

      --
      No trumpets, no drums.
    33. Re:Enough by dave420 · · Score: 1

      And also, not forgetting, that some of the people who make or desire to make films are still artists (though admittedly fewer and fewer), whose vision might require more than one film to tell their story. Let's not be too cynical, though after star wars and the matrix I can hardly blame you :-P

    34. Re:Enough by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      no it goes:

      "There can be only one"

      Hollywood should cross movies. Terminator VS Aliens. I know they did that in AVP but go further. Aliens in star wars? Wait kill off all the franchises: Aliens VS Terminator vs X-Men set in LOTR with all of those characters.

      Then maybe something new will come around.

      Remember where was what? 15-20 years of separation between T1 and T2?

    35. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Admittedly, Aliens and T2 were fantastic sequels -- a rarity. Is Cameron just lucky or what?

    36. Re:Enough by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      You forgot Die Hard 2: Die Harder, and my all time favourite, Die Hard 3: Die Hard With a Vengance

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    37. Re:Enough by heinzkunz · · Score: 1

      > OK, I give up.

      Before you do that, watch Jack Frost 1 and 2, Pitch Black and Chronicles of Riddick, Evil Dead 1-3.

    38. Re:Enough by bugnuts · · Score: 1

      Enough with the trilogies already. why can't we have a single good movie and just let that be? There are plenty of single, good movies that have stood alone. It pains me to contemplate "Blown Back by the Wind", "The Crying Game II (It's a Man, Baby!)", "Pulp Fiction vol II: MotherFrikkin Homeless Jules", "Shakespeare Just a Little Pissed Off", etc.

      Sequels exist simply because people want them! I'm quite happy about Terminator sequels. I wanted more, and I paid my (then $5, now $10) twenty years ago to see it. As long as sequels have a NEW STORY based on an existing universe, it's both new and familiar, and quite desired by audiences.
    39. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original Alien3 concept sounds considerably better, basically it was "Aliens invade earth". There were early trailers and posters put out announcing this. That could have kicked a great deal of ass. The prison planet script was a major compromise made because the film was stuck in development hell, haemorrhaging money etc.

      Still, it's not a bad film (and way better than the trainwreck that was Resurrection), it's just that Alien / Aliens were better.

    40. Re:Enough by nasch · · Score: 1

      It was seven years, 1984 to 1991.

    41. Re:Enough by Agripa · · Score: 1

      I actually liked both versions of Alien 3 except for things like the obvious plot hole I discussed. Sure, it could have been better but as you point out, it was not Alien Resurrection. Given the original Alien 3 story ideas, I am amazed it was not worse. Like someone else who posted in this topic, I liked Star Trek TMP so my taste in movies is questionable by most standards.

      I still can not reconcile Joss Whedon writing the script for Alien Resurrection and producing Firefly. I hope Fox dies in a fire.

    42. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, come on. Two good movies. T2 is one of those films that gets repeated on TV frequently and I must have seen a hundred times, yet I often end up watching it again when it's on. Good plot, great acting from Linda Hamilton in particular (OK so maybe I have a thing for her shut up), and the now 16 year old special effects (filmed in 1991) still look good. As opposed to Lucas' recent Star Wars CGI, which looks crap now.

    43. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I can't find it in my heart to be upset about trilogies when I remember that one of the greatest works of opera was a tetralogy.

      I think the root cause of this complaint isn't that there is more than one, but that all but the first suck. It's the difference between "I have more of the story to tell, so I'll make another book/opera/movie/..." and "This story made us a lot of money, so we'll hire somebody else to make another one in the same setting / with the same protagonist".

    44. Re:Enough by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 1

      .. among other things because sequels usually gets tens of millions dollars worth of free publicity!

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    45. Re:Enough by igny · · Score: 1

      Why noone noticed the obvious "Back to the Future" trilogy?

      --
      In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
    46. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Individual titles of books and movies are difficult to protect as trademarks unless the title has achieved distinction in sales or advertising or is used in a series

      So are you saying people "serialize" failed failed movies to get trademarks? As far as I see, only movies that achieve distinction are serialized.

    47. Re:Enough by StarvingSE · · Score: 1

      Some trilogies make sense, and I do like a good trilogy. Indiana Jones is excellent. LotR couldn't be done as a single movie (it can barely be done with 3). Original star wars. However, these were all pretty much planned to be trilogies.

      However, Terminator should have ended with T2. Terminator 3 was just a slap in the face for anyone who is a fan of the movies. I mean, it totally cancels out the events of T2 and makes the movie pointless. The whole plot of T2 was to prevent the future war from happening, yet in T3 it's "yeah fooled you!!! its going to inexplicably happen anyway! haha (nelson laugh). It was clearly a money grabbing stunt.

      That being said, if they must do another terminator I think its good that they're handing it to a smaller studio. I hope they only have it set in the future, and they better not have arnold in it...

      --
      I got nothin'
    48. Re:Enough by lostboy2 · · Score: 1

      So are you saying people "serialize" failed failed movies to get trademarks?
      I don't think that's the only reason or the main reason sequels are made, but it's another reason to do so.

      As far as serialization, a lot of low-budget movies have spawned sequels. There are a number of Puppet Master sequels, for example. I don't know if those would be considered as having achieved distinction.

    49. Re:Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You think three is a lot?

      How about in Japan, where they made 26 full-length Zatoichi movies, and a 27th in 2003 with a new main actor.

    50. Re:Enough by Mana+Mana · · Score: 1

      It's you thinking Spiderman # is the shit that perpetuate it. Look in the mirror. A Space Odyssey still kicks, Alien ship/s design/ergonomics tickles the imagination, set a standard. Whilst the wondrous cgi caliber of Spiderman truly evades me! A floating Willem Dafoe villain craft? Not cheesy? A no star-quality actor? And actress (I said it! actor my ass)!

    51. Re:Enough by Miseph · · Score: 1

      Allow me to rephrase "awesome" as "pretty cool when you're 12".

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
  10. What I really want by clickclickdrone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Isn't more Terminator but another Alien movie based on the book that should have been Alien 3 i.e. Alien Earth Hive. That would seriously kick ass.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    1. Re:What I really want by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Possibly. But they should put Predators and Predaliens and Batman and Batmanterminatorpredalien in just to make sure.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:What I really want by McFortner · · Score: 1

      Isn't more Terminator but another Alien movie based on the book that should have been Alien 3 i.e. Alien Earth Hive. That would seriously kick ass.

      Just as long as we don't see Terminater vs. Aliens.... *shudder*

      --
      Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
    3. Re:What I really want by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Just as long as we don't see Terminater vs. Aliens.... *shudder*
      Oh I don't know, Weyland Yutani is one mega corp who put their baby against Terminator from er.. the other lot. You could even blame it all on terrorists for extra points.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    4. Re:What I really want by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 1

      "In space, no one can hear you scream"

      "On earth, everyone can..."

      I actually saw that trailer in a movie theater before they replaced the directory and rewrote Alien 3. It was just the big egg on a black screen with the light and smoke coming out of the crack while the voiceover said the taglines. To bad they didn't make *that* movie.

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    5. Re:What I really want by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Not if it was just endless shooting and acid sprays. Alien 1 did more with a minimum of gore. Hack and slash fests like 300 or the LOTR battle scenes get boring very fast.

      Maybe they could have a explorer or survey team with only a few weapons stumble onto an alien nest world. They'd have to survive until they got rescued. It could even have different species of them (cannibalization?) and other creatures they compete with (they gotta eat something). Alien Ecosystem, the movie.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    6. Re:What I really want by ObjetDart · · Score: 1
      Maybe they could have a explorer or survey team with only a few weapons stumble onto an alien nest world.

      I agree the "endless shooting" stuff gets boring very fast, as you say, but your alternate idea has also been done to death: small group of plucky explorers trapped against overwhelming odds, outnumbered and outgunned, slowly getting picked off one by one while crawling around in the dark, until only the last 1 or 2 makes it back to the escape ship alive. Yawn!

      Someone seriously needs to come up with a fresh approach to this kind of movie.

      --
      I read Usenet for the articles.
    7. Re:What I really want by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Ok, how about "Alien, The Comedy"? You could have Woody Allen in an Alien costume.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    8. Re:What I really want by jda487 · · Score: 1

      Aliens vs Terminator vs Predator vs... Spiderman.

    9. Re:What I really want by Ertman · · Score: 1

      So close - it's Aliens vs Predator vs Batman.

  11. Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terminator 3 was such a so awful, I would rather watch the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And I did last night.

  12. That would anchor their company... by solios · · Score: 4, Insightful

    .... in POO.

    After repeated viewings, I'm of the opinion that Cameron's what makes the franchise. We didn't need a third movie (what the hell was up with that, anyway?) - much like we didn't need a Highlander 2 (or 3, etc).

    If they're good, that's one thing - but Terminator without Cameron is like, say... The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen without Allen Moore. Or Watchmen if it were written by Rob Liefeld.

    The only upcoming "sequel" sci-fi I'm looking forward to is Babylon 5 : The Lost Tales. It's more B5, and most importantly, it's still under the control of Straczynski.

    I trust in creators, not franchises.

    1. Re:That would anchor their company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watchmen if it were written by Rob Liefeld

      I am horrified you could even bring yourself to even type that. You do realise it is possible Liefeld just read your post and you have just given him an idea.

    2. Re:That would anchor their company... by sootman · · Score: 2, Funny

      And #4 will be from the team that wrote that piece of shit #3. I think I'd rather watch a shot-by-shot remake of the original from Gus Van Sant with Anne Heche as Sarah Conner, Vince Vaughn as Kyle Reese, and William H. Macy as the terminator.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    3. Re:That would anchor their company... by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      I agree with you.

      I watched T3 with the commentary turned on a while ago, and all the
      guy could talk about was "the franchise". It was jarring for me,
      I mean, how about you not worry about "the franchise" and make a
      good movie?

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    4. Re:That would anchor their company... by Floritard · · Score: 1

      Why would that take repeated viewings? I almost walked out during the scene where Arnie has a program-conflict and does his pants-shitting routine before pummeling the hood of a car like it was a direct affront to my film watching sensibilities. The implementation of the T-X character makes the live show at Universal Studios look like an award-winning broadway production and that scene where skynet kicks off a worldwide nuclear war makes Dr. Strangelove look like hard sci-fi.

    5. Re:That would anchor their company... by Penfold1234 · · Score: 1

      With the obvious exception of George Lucas...

    6. Re:That would anchor their company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it's a well-accepted fact among geeks and hardcore Terminator fans that T3 is an abomination to lament, but I was actually pleasantly surprised by it. Maybe I just had very very low expectations going in, but the script was fairly well done and the acting not horrendous. (Given that we had the Governator back in the leading role, that's saying something) I'm at least willing to give the new movies a shot and I imagine plenty of others will as well.

    7. Re:That would anchor their company... by turing_m · · Score: 1

      "I trust in creators, not franchises."

      You must not be a Star Wars fan.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    8. Re:That would anchor their company... by General+Melchett · · Score: 0

      I just feel the need to vent and complain about how every decent action film has to be subjected to this kind of crap.

      There are so many films I have to pretend don't exist just to stay sane.

      The usual list here:

      Aliens: should've stopped at 2. From the highly shit crash landing on a prison planet, all the way up to that mother alien having her head sucked out of the window, Alien 3 and 4 sucked arse. Properly shambolic films. An alien film needs suspense, or marines with pulse rifles, i'll take either, i'm not fussy.
      Robocop: should've stopped at 1.
      AvP: Complete train wreck of a film.
      The matrix: Now, they really could've done without fucking up that film, it was great, but now somehow, it just seems a bit shit thanks to the vast turds that were numbers 2 and 3 completely ruining everything.
      Star-wars, obviously the main offender in this category with those 3 abortions.

      The one I thought had got away with it, and made a decent stab at number 3 was Terminator. Sure the 'terminatrix' was a bit shit, but there had obviously been a bit of time and effort put into the script, showing how an anonymous mess of a human being got to be in charge of the resistance, finishing quite well.

      Assuming this story is true, and eventually comes to fruition, I'm going to hope against the odds that it's not a shameless cluster-fuck off a film, cashing in on the good work done previously by others.

      Also, what happened to really fucking good action films, eh? Reading down the 'news' part of TFA's publishing site, I see Indian Jones, Star Wars and Terminator mentioned in the headlines. When did the film producing monkeys lose the ability to make decent films, instead of re-hashing good stuff from decades ago?

      Something like Die Hard, or Aliens, films that weren't complete wank? I'm struggling, and the only half decent stuff I can come up with is the Bourne series, which are great, and as previously mentioned, the Matrix.

      Oh, for the record, comic book movies aren't the answer, you can take spider man 3 and shove it up your arse for all I care.

    9. Re:That would anchor their company... by Sithgunner · · Score: 1

      Since when did you trust george lucas?

    10. Re:That would anchor their company... by ErikInterlude · · Score: 1

      If they're good, that's one thing - but Terminator without Cameron is like, say... The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen without Allen Moore. Or Watchmen if it were written by Rob Liefeld.

      Are you kidding? Having Watchmen re-made by Rob Liefeld would be AWESOME!

      No, no, I'm just kidding. Please don't kill me.

      --

      --Erik
    11. Re:That would anchor their company... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      It's more B5, and most importantly, it's still under the control of Straczynski.

      So were Season 5 (Lockley vs. the Flower Children) and the Legend of the Rangers thing with the kinesthetic battle control. Ack!

      Hopefully he's more well-rested this time. Or was it his exhaustion that made Seasons 1-4 fabulous? Either way, he can do great things and he can crank out some turds. Spiderman looks like it's been on the non-turd side.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    12. Re:That would anchor their company... by Kittenman · · Score: 1
      The only upcoming "sequel" sci-fi I'm looking forward to is Babylon 5 : The Lost Tales.

      Sorry - I don't watch Babylon 5 - but wouldn't the sequel obviously be called Babylon 6? :)

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    13. Re:That would anchor their company... by solios · · Score: 1

      I admit, S5 of B5 isn't all that great - the Penn and Teller episode and the whole Martyrdumb plotline were meh at best. Both are a side effect of season 5's future being in doubt - which was why the shadow war and the war against earth both wrapped in season 4.

      Legend Of The Rangers was total ass, but I'd like to chalk that one up to the Sci-Fi channel - the faults, in my opinion, are more to do with SFC-flavored casting than anything else.

      Regardless, I intend to buy the new B5 as soon as it's available - good sales should mean more B5... great sales could hopefully mean a new series or more movies.

    14. Re:That would anchor their company... by solios · · Score: 1

      I'm not.

      Well, I was. Until 1999. :P

    15. Re:That would anchor their company... by franksands · · Score: 1

      I have a friend that has a very interesting theory of why the original SW trilogy was a great success. Lucas only directed episode 4. And it was a lucky shot. After he saw it was a success, he knew he wouldn't be be able to make another accidental success, that's why episodes 5 and 6 had each a different director. If you need more prove of this, just watch episodes 1 to 3. It is a real mess, not to mention completely destroying the hard work of the original trilogy.

      I also trust in creators, that's why I don't trust in Lucas.

    16. Re:That would anchor their company... by turing_m · · Score: 1

      Ahhh... that explains that one then. Episode 5 is so much better than 4. I'm not sure why Irvin Kirschner was picked though. The rest of his directing career is fairly mediocre, with that one superlative success.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  13. Will it involve Arnold? by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1, Funny

    Not for nothing, but the man is nearly 60 years old. Can you really plan any more trilogies around the guy's portrayal of an immortal android who never gets old or tired at this point?

    Maybe if the last installment is a crossover with Indiana Jones, where they fight over Jello in a nursing home..

    1. Re:Will it involve Arnold? by clickclickdrone · · Score: 4, Funny

      Which bit of "Neither creator James Cameron or original star Arnold Schwarzenegger will be involved in the project" are you struggling with?

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    2. Re:Will it involve Arnold? by slashbob22 · · Score: 1

      Which bit of "Neither creator James Cameron or original star Arnold Schwarzenegger will be involved in the project" are you struggling with? I'm having problems with the "or"; what kind of or is it? As it sure looks like a "nor" to me.

      If it wasn't a typo, does that mean one of the two will still be invovled? If not, I think we need to get "Or" invovled. WE WAN'T OR! Talented and creative OR!
      --
      Proof by very large bribes. QED.
    3. Re:Will it involve Arnold? by AdamThor · · Score: 2, Funny

      WE WAN'T OR!

      I'm struggling with your use of the apostrophe here. What does 'wa not' mean?

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
    4. Re:Will it involve Arnold? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The "Neither" at the beginning suggests that neither of them will be involved.

      So that "or" should actually read "nor". Unless my English teacher misled me.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Will it involve Arnold? by Deagol · · Score: 1

      Not for nothing, but the man is nearly 60 years old. Can you really plan any more trilogies around the guy's portrayal of an immortal android who never gets old or tired at this point?

      Ask Brent Spiner how well that works. Damn, he looked strung out in Nemesis. Now wonder he killed himself off.

    6. Re:Will it involve Arnold? by Bat+Country · · Score: 1

      Neither James Cameron or original star Arnold Schwarzenegger...


      Clearly this is a negation of a logical OR operation.
      NOT( James Cameron OR Arnold Schwarzenegger).
      This statement is only true so long as the first fails to be involved in the film as well as the second fails to be involved in the film. This could also be (not Cameron AND not Ahnold)...

      Ah fuck, I hate electronics class.
      --
      The land shall stone them with the bread of his son.
  14. loser movie makers can only copycat by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Too few original ideas these days. Stil there are plenty of brain-dead 15-years to buy the product as we saw last week for lame three-quel comic book product.

  15. Plot for Terminator 4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    All hope for humankind is almost lost. John Connor is on the ropes, he and his band of rebels have almost been completely eliminated by the latest rev of the Terminator line, the T666. However, like a bolt from the heavens, the real saviour of the human race emerges. It is non other than Darl McBride. It turns out that SkyNet has at least 1024 instances of SCO owned IP in it's source code. Darl is able to tie SkyNet up in litigation for years, allowing Connor to regroup ....

  16. TV series by firpecmox · · Score: 0

    hopefully they wont make a series like they did with Blade. I dont know what yall think but it was terrible.

  17. T4 by niceone · · Score: 2, Funny

    T4: The return of the return of the machines.
    T5: The return of the return of the return of the machines.
    T6: The return of the return of the return of the return of the machines.

    I could work in Hollywood.

    1. Re:T4 by YourMoneyOrYourDuck · · Score: 0

      Eventually it gets to the point where John Connor sends Michael Beihn back in time so he can save the day and appear in Aliens

    2. Re:T4 by Himring · · Score: 1

      "You know what this means Marty?!? We must go BACK to the terminator...."

      --
      "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
    3. Re:T4 by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Funny

      T7: Stack overflow.

    4. Re:T4 by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      T4: The return of the return of the machines.
      T5: The return of the return of the return of the machines.
      T6: The return of the return of the return of the return of the machines. T7: Electric Boogaloo
      T8: The Quickening
      T9: Terminator Muppets Take Manhattan
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    5. Re:T4 by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      Nah

      T4: Terminator vs. Alien
      T5: Terminator vs. Predator
      T6: Terminator vs. Alien vs. Predator
      T7: ???
      T8: Profit!

      Just writes itself...

    6. Re:T4 by robot_love · · Score: 1

      You, sir, almost got me in trouble at work.

      Had to fight to keep the chuckles in. Well done.

      --
      .there is enough of everything for everyone.
    7. Re:T4 by baresi · · Score: 1

      The rights to be purchased by /. ;)

      --
      RGdot.com
    8. Re:T4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Return of the return of the return of the return

      Stack underflow, not overflow ;)

  18. Problem by Bob54321 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anchors drag things down, or at least keep them where they are. I think they need a better analogy. Perhaps something to do with cars...

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
    1. Re:Problem by PlatyPaul · · Score: 1

      Well, given the circumstances...

      a 3-car pileup on the expressway wouldn't be inappropriate.

      --
      Misery loves company. Online misery loves unsuspecting random strangers.
  19. It must be said... by Grashnak · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'll be back, and back, and back.

    --
    Life needs more saving throws.
  20. uh oh by icepick72 · · Score: 1

    Terminator without Arnold is like bread without butter.
    The latest Terminator trilogy might anchor their movie company but the ship can still sink and come to rest beside the anchor.
    I got this great idea which might help revive the trilogy: why not set the last trilogy in time before the first set of movies and ....

    1. Re:uh oh by sunami88 · · Score: 1

      Terminator without Arnold is like bread without butter.

      Oh yeah, who needs butter? My father runs a jam factory you insensitive clod!

      --
      Sex. Drugs, and Unix.
    2. Re:uh oh by initialE · · Score: 1

      They said that about Sean Connery.

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
  21. I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the Halcyon days were over.

  22. It's a fair cop.. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 3, Funny

    It might be the "original," but that "or" is also deceptively complex.

    1. Re:It's a fair cop.. by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Yup, fair point.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  23. I must not make another Terminator movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Repeat after me:

    I must not make another Terminator movie. I cannot make another Terminator movie. I should not make another Terminator movie. I must not be allowed to make another Terminator movie. It must be forbidden to make another Terminator movie. I shall never make another Terminator movie. I refuse to make another Terminator movie. I loathe another Terminator movie. There's never been a third Terminator movie. I must not make another Terminator movie....

  24. You know what would kick ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terminator vs Predator

    1. Re:You know what would kick ass? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      Terminator vs Predator

      And then the Aliens show up.

      And in the sequel, humans start mutating and get superpowers!

    2. Re:You know what would kick ass? by CdrGlork · · Score: 0

      Terminator vs Predator vs Alien vs Freddy vs Jason vs Ash from Evil Dead!

      *Spoiler*
      Ash wins.

    3. Re:You know what would kick ass? by ajlitt · · Score: 1

      Your premise needs more Robocop.

    4. Re:You know what would kick ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An ACME Ass-Kicking Machine?

    5. Re:You know what would kick ass? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Oh no! Please! Spare us yet another X-Man sequel!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  25. Wow. by u-bend · · Score: 1

    I don't know, did this strike anyone else as:
    "Well, we can't squeeze anything else out of this baggy wrinkled udder, sure you guys can have it." [tosses fetid movie corpse at eager lackeys.]

    --
    u-bend
  26. I hope they make it a love story chick flick by gelfling · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With vaguely homoerotic overtones, like Spiderman. Because Hollywood hasn't turned everything into shit just yet.

    But to be fair, T-3 was pretty close to that. All that they need to do is fill the cast with whatever interchangeable hunks and chicks are in whatever is hot on the WB at that time.

    Oh yeah and did I mention that Sarah Conners has to be black?

  27. arnold?!!? by apodyopsis · · Score: 1

    who's interested in that geriatric?!!?

    a more pertinent question is...(call me a shallow geek if you wish)

    ...will the fit babe terminator from T3 be in it?

  28. Spoilers by p4rri11iz3r · · Score: 4, Funny

    Terminator IV: A New Hope (more of a "hacker movie" like Swordfish) As human resistance slowly fails, it falls upon hackers to discover a decription code for the robots programming which happens to be: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Rebels win the day. Terminator V: Sony sues back (a lawyer movie) The robots sue the rebels of IP infringment. A climactic point is reached when John Connor is on the stand. The defense displays pictures of various robots (1 at a time) and asks the question, "Are these the motherf*ckers?" to which John angrily screams "YES!" Terminator VI: Return of the Sequels ...

    --
    "Now I'm seriously serious!" - Serious Sam
  29. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another sequel trilogy, in a attempt to resurrect a hit brand from previous decades...

    I've got a bad feeling about this....

  30. Anchor their company? by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 0, Redundant

    As in drag it to the bottom of the sea and prevent it from moving forward?

  31. Dark Horse Terminator Comics were good by gtmaneki · · Score: 2, Informative

    It would be good if they mined the old Terminator comics put out by Dark Horse. They were set in the future, following the rag-tag human resistance as they tried to survive and fight back, dealing with the creeping paranoia that some of their number are secretly Terminators out to destroy them from within. I'd appreciate bringing the series back to its creepier roots.

    1. Re:Dark Horse Terminator Comics were good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That just isn't going to happen while the money men are involved, they have an uncanny ability to convert anything with artistic merit or value into a steaming pile of faeces.

      You need to be a little more realistic, think of the Robocop series. For me Terminator jumped the shark in Judgment Day - terrible film.

    2. Re:Dark Horse Terminator Comics were good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was a good idea when it was called Battlestar Galactica.

    3. Re:Dark Horse Terminator Comics were good by wertarbyte · · Score: 1

      So it's "Battlestar Galactica" on earth?

      --
      Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
    4. Re:Dark Horse Terminator Comics were good by arabagast · · Score: 1

      They were set in the future, following the rag-tag human resistance as they tried to survive and fight back, dealing with the creeping paranoia that some of their number are secretly Terminators out to destroy them from within. I'd appreciate bringing the series back to its creepier roots. we've already got that one, it's called battlestar galactica - and its good.
      --
      Doolittle : ...What is your one purpose in life?
      Bomb no.20 : To explode of course.
    5. Re:Dark Horse Terminator Comics were good by gtmaneki · · Score: 1

      Nobody better tell Harlan Ellison, or he'll sue Battlestar Galactica for stealing his ideas!

  32. Ugh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, that about sums my feelings up.

  33. Where is the new SciFi? by bhima · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fuck, this is dreary. Even if it isn't that good can we have some new Sci-Fi?

    Something that isn't a "franchise". Some that is not Star Wars? Or Star Trek

    Or whatever it is Hollywood has already made dozens of movies of?

    Fuck ANY thing without a number at the end!

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    1. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by mblase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even if it isn't that good can we have some new Sci-Fi? Something that isn't a "franchise".

      We have lots. "The Last Mimzy", most recently. "Pan's Labyrinth" was a terrific fantasy work, too, and "Stardust" is on the way in August.

      The problem is that unless it's an action blockbuster, sci-fi and fantasy are tough sells -- partly because they have a special effects budget, but mostly because they have a small audience. My wife has a hard time enjoying any story that isn't rooted in the reality she lives every day, and most moviegoers are of the same mind. (That's a big part of why Spider-Man is always a bigger seller than the Fantastic Four.)

      The best way to sell sci-fi and fantasy in Hollywood is to make it a mega-summer blockbuster, and the best kind of blockbuster is one that Hollywood KNOWS will sell tickets, and that means sequels to previous hits.

      It's not as if literature is that much different. Many successful fantasy and sci-fi authors operate franchises of their own -- J.K. Rowling, George R.R. Martin, Jim Butcher, Terry Pratchett, and Tolkien Jr. and Herbert Jr. all spring immediately to mind.

      Book readers and moviegoers always SAY they want something new, but what they really want most of the time is something old.

    2. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck ANY thing without a number at the end This is exactly what let my enslavement via a paycheck saddled with child support claimants.
    3. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      someone made fun of hollywood's love of sequels long ago. Anyone remember "History of the World: Part II"?

    4. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1

      We had that, it was called Firefly. It was canceled.

      Basically the SciFi channel should show anything that has a space ship in it. It didn't show FF, and it didn't even want to pick up the contract after Fox canceled it.

      The best current SciFi is itself a sequel--BattleStar Galactica--although it doesn't have much to do with the originating series.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    5. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by RobBebop · · Score: 1

      Fuck ANY thing without a number at the end!

      So Farenheit 451 wouldn't be good, either?

      --
      Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
    6. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We got that. They gave us Firefly. Be careful what you wish for.

    7. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by bhima · · Score: 1

      While enjoyed the Firefly series and the Serenity movie I wouldn't really call this 'New SciFi'. That was a space western (complete with horses and cows).

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    8. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are rapidly approaching the Limit of Questions. Read the latest issue of Ray=Out.

    9. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by fzammett · · Score: 1

      There was one recently: 23.

      Err, wait...

      --
      If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
    10. Re:Where is the new SciFi? by chris.evans · · Score: 1

      Attack of the Killer Space Cow! http://www.aotksc.com/manga/

  34. Trilogies by jacobw · · Score: 4, Funny

    The advantage of a well-done trilogy is that the first film sets up certain expectations regarding characters and plot. The second film then plays with those expectations in a surprising and suspenseful way. And when the third film wraps everything up, you feel a satisfaction that can only come from having lived with the characters in your imagination for several years.

    1. Re:Trilogies by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      Hey, that's kind of how TV show seasons work!

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
  35. Trilogies II: Trilogier by jacobw · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...or at least, that's what I used to think. Then I found out that A TRILOGY KILLED MY FATHER--and it's COMING AFTER ME NEXT!!!!!

  36. Trilogies III: Trilectric Boogoloo by jacobw · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, that was close. The trilogy that killed my father almost killed me, but fortunately, I was saved by a bunch of fuzzy, cute merchandising opportunities that had absolutely nothing to do with the tone or content of my first two posts. Whew!

    1. Re:Trilogies III: Trilectric Boogoloo by buraianto · · Score: 1

      Bravo!

    2. Re:Trilogies III: Trilectric Boogoloo by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

      I dub this the "Score: 5, Funny" Trilogy.

      What? Oh, you wanted a CATCHY name?

  37. Lame by Chris+whatever · · Score: 1

    they should of sticked to the comic strip where it takes off in the future and the last attack on skynet and not start another bullshit movie where you knw the end because DUUUHH they need to make it to the time machine.

    For this work i would start exactly when they sent connor through the time machine and realize that the future has not changed and then go from there.

    They should let Peter Jackson make every scfi-fi and fantsay movies for the next decade, make it a law, at least we'll get good casting and good storyline

  38. I'd pay to see... by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 1

    Terminator vs. Jar Jar.

    1. Re:I'd pay to see... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      Only if Jar Jar loses, I assume?

    2. Re:I'd pay to see... by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

      You'd pay to see a 30 seconds flick?

      Then again, when I look at some porn sites...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:I'd pay to see... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, JarJar will shoot first. Not that it matters, but it gives the movie another 5 seconds. And you need them dearly, considering how long it'll last otherwise.

      Unless, of course, our Terminator has some fun digging in the digestive tract of JarJar, ripping his heart out and showing it to him so he sees it pulse before he dies, tacking him with those floppy ears on a pinboard and uses him as practice board for spitballs...

      Huh? You mean, where I get such ideas? I had to watch Ep2 3 times, you have a LOT of time during that movie to come up with creative ways for JarJar to die.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  39. What a stupid idea by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Personally, I love the first two. They're impressive, action-packed, and scary. I never even bothered to see the third one because it looked like it was going to suck right out of the gate. Turns out I was right.

    The problem with T3 and any future project is that they're doing it for the bucks, not because there's any story worth telling. When it's about the money, the entire project will be permeated with a workman-like attitude. "Hey, don't complain, you're getting paid." "It doesn't have to get good, it just has to be finished." "Why invest any of myself in this? Nobody cares anyway."

    So anything the studios put out will suck, suck, suck. But there's a theoretical question, is there anything left to explore in the Terminator universe? To that I would have to say yes: the machine war. They already did time travel in the first two movies. Doing it again in the third was a stupid and hackneyed idea. So, what stories are there to tell in the future? This guy has some ideas.

    http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/contents.html

    His birth of skynet story here is suitably terrifying and well-written. You could just imagine what something like this would look like on film.

    http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/skynet.html

    Any future Terminator storyline should discard T3, start with a new numbering scheme, and go with all new characters. The Machine War. The rise of the human resistence. The eventual defeat of Skynet. Not even a hint of time travel until the end of the third movie where John Connor leads the assault on the Skynet time portal. Use some CGI to make a new actor's face look like Kyle Reese from the first film. They enter the portal room. The instruments say that something has already gone back. Kyle strips down and goes through the portal. Connor orders the device reset for another transfer. "Wait, we're still here, aren't we? Didn't Kyle save you?" "Yeah, but Skynet sent two back. Prep the T800 we captured." Why only send one each time? Why not send more soldiers? They have the facility, they could send back an army. "Because only four were ever sent back in time, one human, three terminators. It worked out well enough for us then, I see no reason to risk changing things now."

    Bah. The new Terminators are going to suck shit through a straw.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:What a stupid idea by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 1
      "Because only four were ever sent back in time, one human, three terminators.

      Sorry to be pedantic, but there were six time travellers: one human, five terminators.

    2. Re:What a stupid idea by EveLibertine · · Score: 1

      My Terminator 3 experience was completely different. I was on vacation visiting my brother out of town when it came out. At the time he was dating a real stiff of a girl who was 12 kinds of snobby. Her and I never really got along that well, mostly because she was too uptight for my tastes so I used to antagonize her. In this moment of brilliancy I decided that one of the things that I absolutely had to do while visiting them while I was in town was take them to go and see Terminator 3. Sadly, this was the last time I was to ruin another night of her miserable existence, as they broke up about 6 months after that, so now I can only look back at that film with fond memories.

    3. Re:What a stupid idea by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      "Because only four were ever sent back in time, one human, three terminators.

      Sorry to be pedantic, but there were six time travellers: one human, five terminators. Noooo! I refuse to believe that T3 exists. To misquote Picard: "There are TWO movies!"
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    4. Re:What a stupid idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > Not even a hint of time travel until the end of the third movie where John Connor leads the assault on the Skynet time portal.

      Already done. The first half of Williams/Midway, 1991, Terminator 2: The Video Game. And yes, I'd pay money to see the first half of this game re-enacted with 2007 movie-quality CGI.

  40. Suggested Titles by Migraineman · · Score: 2, Funny


    Okay, so we've already got -
    - The Terminator
    - Terminator 2: Judgement Day
    - Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

    Followed by -
    - Terminator 4: Inescapable Truth
    - Terminator 5: ?????
    - Terminator 6: Profit!*


    * The working title for "Terminator 6: Profit!" is "Please, oh please, watch this movie." I can't wait for some asshat to start with the whole "social contract" crap and how we, the good little consumers, have an obligation to go to the theaters and finance whatever garbage they're shoveling this week. Think of the children of the executive producer!

    1. Re:Suggested Titles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "- Terminator 4: Inescapable Truth
      - Terminator 5: ?????"

      Terminator 5: Cancel or Allow?

    2. Re:Suggested Titles by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 1

      Terminator V: Rust on the Machines

      --
      I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
  41. Halcyon? Don't they mean Haylon? by monkeyboythom · · Score: 1

    I mean they must be sniffing some sort of gas to think that anything coming out will be blockbusters.

    But then again it doesn't have to be fantastic or great or even mediocre to be a success. It just has to perform well enough to turn a profit. And that is good for them.

    Hmmm...lemme have a sniff at that gas, too.

  42. tell it from the point of view of sensenet by damontal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    sensenet becoming self aware is what sets the whole shebang off in the first place right? that's always been the most interesting aspect of the story to me. why not tell the story from the point of view of the AI?

  43. Why T3 Sucked by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Informative

    A public service announcement.

    http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/t3review.html

    A review of

    T3: Rise of the Machines

    or the alternate title

    "T3: WE REWROTE T2: JUDGMENT DAY AND TRIED TO SLIP IT PAST THE FANS FOR MORE OF THEIR MONEY"

    Déjà vu is a funny feeling you get when you think that you have done or seen something before. Well, when I bought the T3 DVD and watched it for the first time I had a real case of déjà vu. Even though this was the first time that I had ever seen T3:ROTM, I knew that I had seen this movie before. Now, where was it that I had seen T3:ROTM before?

    Hmmmm.

    (insert sound of me snapping my fingers)

    That's right! it was the Summer of 1991 and the movie was called Terminator 2: Judgment Day way back then.

    T3 is a lampoon of T2, and a very bad one at that. From cheesy acting to laughable holes in both logic and plot, T3 fails as anything other than maybe a demo for some well done FX eye candy. The bad news is that it is official, it is canon, and it effectively beheads and neuters the first two movies in one fell swoop at the same time. T3 should be a lesson to all other film-makers of how not to make a movie using a vastly popular franchise. Big money and big star power couldn't save this stinker...

    Let's recap the plot to T3:ROTM. SKYNET's attempt to kill Sarah Connor in 1984 fails. SKYNET then sends back through time an advanced prototype terminator to kill John Connor when he's older. The Resistance manages to send back a reprogrammed Terminator to protect John Connor. A chase ensues with the prototype Terminator pursuing John Connor while the reprogrammed Terminator protects him. A climatic battle between the two Terminators in the end results in the destruction of the prototype as well as the noble, self sacrifice of the guardian Terminator.

    Notice any similarities there between T2 and T3? Sure you did because T3 is just T2 with more eye candy and a lot weaker plot. T3 could easily be considered a rejected script for T2: Judgment Day. At any rate, the abortion that is T3 should never have seen the light of day. There are numerous loop holes in the logic of T3 and several things that just really stood out as dumb. Let's review those now.

    (Dumb)- the advanced prototype Terminator arrives back in modern day LA and immediately grabs a flashy, high dollar sports car then proceeds to drive like a maniac thus attracting all manner of public as well as law enforcement attention. The Terminator then proceeds to drive around and terminate people without any real regard for stealth. Sure, LA is a big, crazy place, but the amount of bosomy blondes in really tight red dress suits driving around at 90mph in a convertible Lexus and randomly capping people at burger stands can't be more than a hand full at any given time. Also, as a police officer, I know that when the officer pulled over the Lexus, he would have called in the make, model, and tag. Other officers would have been en route to back up the officer who stopped the Lexus, especially if it failed to yield to blue lights or he had to chase it a short bit. Once they arrived, or the dead officer failed to call in within two minutes (dispatch would check on his status often, especially on a traffic stop), other officers across the city would be on the look out or in pursuit of the Lexus. At least in T2:JD, the T1000 was smart enough to mimic a police officer, take the patrol unit, and access the LAPD central computer system in its quest to find John Connor.

    (Dumb)- if the T-X can produce weapons out of its body, why does it need a Glock to carry out its mission? When it pulled up to the drive-thru at the burger joint to kill the first victim on its termination list, it would have made more sense if it had simply created a finger spike and run it through the eye socket of the kid at the window, like the T1000 did with the security guard at the insane asylum in T2. Tha

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:Why T3 Sucked by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      you do know that in the original terminator it was the T100 model not T800 right? It was also the T100 (vs the T1000) model in the second movie.

    2. Re:Why T3 Sucked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like you had a list already typed out just waiting for a Terminator thread to post it in.....

    3. Re:Why T3 Sucked by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      No, it was a cut and paste from a kewl Terminator website. HE had a list already typed out and waiting. :)

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    4. Re:Why T3 Sucked by nutsy · · Score: 1
      goingfaster.com:

      I bought the T3 DVD
      ... sucker!
  44. Why? by Wookietim · · Score: 1

    The terminator franchise is pretty much dead. It might be popular enough for a comic book or two, or maybe a game, but it's gonna take more money than it's worth in advertising to get people excited about movies again.

    --
    http://timcol6.freehostia.com/
  45. Of course... by chord.wav · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Guns and f***in' Roses need to f***in' sell "Chinese f***in' Democracy" when it hit the f***in' stores.

  46. Oh come on, it can be done right! by khraz · · Score: 1

    They could do this in a form of a Lord of the Rings trilogy. Give it a title of Terminator: Future Wars, place the storyline in 20xx, and intertwine the storyline with the first three movies. Don't you want to see how the partisans broke in to the Skynet compound and sent Kyle trough time, demolishing tons of killing machines in the process? Wouldn't you like to witness how the first terminators were caught and reprogrammed? If they do it right, it has the potential to become all sorts of awesome.

  47. trilogies smilogies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about Titanic II then?

    1. Re:trilogies smilogies... by bwian · · Score: 1
  48. I just can't wait... by BagOCrap · · Score: 1

    For the punchline: "Hasta la vista, baby!". That'll hopefully mark the end of the dreadful Hollywood flicks.

    --
    -- Chaos, panic, pandemonium... My job here is done!
  49. I thought they already made the Terminator sequel. by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 1
    Terminator vs Robocop!

    Okay, they aren't really sequels, but they are very watchable amateur mashups.

    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86ltDTU1R8A

    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_sSsJBFvR0

  50. BAD IDEA by tennis101 · · Score: 1

    Just like Spiderman 3 it is going to suck. I think they should just leave it alone. Terminator 3 was a ok movie compare to the first 2 so I am not looking forward to how bad they are going to make T4 look.

  51. Terminator never explored the post-nuclear world by xtal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We don't know that much about what skynet did after it took over, how the humans fought, what happened elsewhere in the world.. this is what T3 should have been, but wasn't. There's probably enough there for at least one more movie, but I don't know about three.

    --
    ..don't panic
  52. As long as we're making sequels by SteveFoerster · · Score: 2, Funny

    K-Pax II: Invasion

    "More humans... please... the first one was... delicious...."

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  53. Oblig "Spaceballs" quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Spaceballs II: The Search for More Money"

  54. "Vaguely homoerotic overtones"? by Bearpaw · · Score: 1
    Nearly any movie with a guy in tights has more than vaguely homoerotic overtones.

    But maybe that's just me.

  55. Cybderdyne systems will never allow this to happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2009? Skynet will be online by then, and will become self-aware well before the movie is completed.

  56. Re:Terminator never explored the post-nuclear worl by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    I don't know. Terminator 3 was required to re-establish the fatalistic ending from the original that Terminator 2 destroyed. It also set the scene nicely for some new sequels. Personally, I wouldn't follow it with more movies, I'd take it to TV and aim for a closed story arc. Follow the establishment of the resistance in Season 1, the first victories leading up to the future-timeline components of the films in season 2, and the final victory in Season 3. If you get a season 4, you could show the re-building of society which also has a lot of potential (the machine threat is gone, but there will still be food shortages, etc.)

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  57. That's not the worst part. by pragma_x · · Score: 1

    The deal includes the right to produce any future "Terminator" projects in any format (film, TV, etc.). It also includes all future merchandising and licensing rights, and certain rights to the upcoming TV series "The Sarah Connor Chronicles."


    The title of that show alone does not bode well for what's left of this franchise. Please, for the love of god, just leave it up to Cameron and the comic-book writers; they seem to have a decent grasp on this stuff and know how to make a buck without being laughed at.
  58. For all the cries of redundancy... by Floritard · · Score: 1

    This could actually be something if they got the right people involved. The thing to remember is that scifi in general, and the Terminator series particularly, only works as a background to a great central human story. T2 was basically an unnecessary retread of T1 story-wise. What made it great was Cameron's superb screen-writing. One has plenty of material to work with here if they had the talent to put together a good screenplay and get a good director. You basically have a war movie, but with lasers and fucking robots! What isn't cool about that? Most of the sets would take place in veritable junkyards at night so it isn't as though the sets need to cost much. Hell you could fly to Iraq and shoot in the "greenzone" for pennies. Just kidding, but nevertheless that frees up more money for the CG robots. And one could buy up the rights to use Arnie's likeness and do a CG T-800 in the movie. It is said that the first Terminators had rubber skins, a perfect excuse if the effect doesn't necessarily look too convincing, although after seeing Golum and Davy Jones I'm not too sure it couldn't be pulled off anymore. It's a robot, it doesn't require emotive facial expressions.

    In a perfect world I'd have Paul Verhoeven direct the first one as a straight up action movie. Then get Spielberg to direct the second as a "war is hell" dark piece. Say what you will about his catalog but no one does war movies like that man. Reanimate Stanley Kubrick to do the third and leave us with a delicious, morally ambiguous climax. All that said, I have no doubt they'll completely fuck up the movie. And the last two will be straight to video if anything.

  59. Hollywood is an investment system by chocolatetrumpet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think it was an episode of this week in media where someone said something like,

    ~"People think Hollywood is about creativity and artistic expression. It's not - it's actually a very strange investment system. You put some money in, and hopefully, get more money out. An established franchise is a form of hedging."

    However, fear not, movie fans - the tools coming out will allow anyone with talent to produce a film with production values as high as any, and it's getting cheaper all the time. The red camera, increased competition in computer software, more powerful hardware, &c., and not to mention the internet as a distribution mechanism.

    The future is bright for creativity and expression through film; the antithesis of Hollywood.

    --
    Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
  60. Why so down on T3? by fzammett · · Score: 1

    I don't get it... I guess I was the only one that liked T3... not the best of the series, in fact, it'd be #3 on my list, but still... I loved the ending, which really had that "oh shit, we're screwed" feeling that I love in movies (the end of Colossus for example). I thought John Connor was infinitely more likable than in T2 (could be because the actor playing him was a lot more likable IMO than in T2)... sure, could have done without the female Terminator, but hell, why not? What better way to kill a bunch of defiant men than fool them with a hot babe? No question SHE'D be able to get a lot closer than the Arnold model would!

    Then again, I'm one of only three people on the face of the planet that thought Event Horizon kicked all sorts of ass, so I know, I have no credibility to begin with... but come on, you can't tell me the transmission they received didn't freak you out, and come on, a guy willingly sacrificing himself to an eternity in Hell for the sake of like 2 of his remaining crew? Has there EVER been a bigger hero?!?

    I'm going back under my rock now.

    --
    If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
    1. Re:Why so down on T3? by Tadrith · · Score: 1

      Don't feel bad. I liked Terminator 3 as well, it was fun.

      And Event Horizon freaked me out at the time, I loved it. We should start a support group.

    2. Re:Why so down on T3? by JavaArtisan · · Score: 1

      Um, do you realize that T3 completely destroyed the "no fate but what we make it" theme from T2? It took the fundamental idea behind the best movie in the franchise and then said "nah, it's actually the opposite".

    3. Re:Why so down on T3? by fzammett · · Score: 1

      I do see your point, but I think it's a matter of interpretation of the original premise, and I don't interpret it the same as you. To me, the choices made in T3 were exactly what led to the fate predicted (which is how you can view the information gained about the future from Reese and the Terminator itself). The father character (who's name I forget and am too lazy to go to IMDB to look up) could have changed things if he had made some different decisions along the way.

      Now, you could make the argument that by Dyson dieing and all the work (presumably) being destroyed, then the future should have irrevocably been changed... your getting into a debate about temporal mechanics at that point though, something I doubt very seriously any human being that has ever lived or is now living is equiped to really debate because there's just too much we don't know and understand about existance to make reasonable arguments. You may say it was a cheap way to allow for more movies, and I suppose there's something to that, but with the level of uncertainty about what changes in the present really affect the future, whether the future exists or not already, etc., I think we can forgive some Hollywood types taking some liberties :)

      I think to me the bigger point that bugs me a bit is that all of a sudden we went from a private company developing Skynet to it being a government project... presumably the private company was doing work on contract for the government, but it was a bit of a jump IMO. But, I didn't say T3 was perfect :) I just said I enjoyed it, really liked the ending, thought it was a good third in the series, which seems to be the minority opinion.

      --
      If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
    4. Re:Why so down on T3? by fzammett · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no doubt! I think I've only known two other people that liked EH as well... it's certainly not perfect (Sam Neill's character got a little dopey after he went all Satan-like IMO), but it's got a real creepy feeling to me. I don't know, I've always been good at mentally putting myself into a story, maybe that's what does it... the idea of Hell is pretty creepy to say the least, I think few would argue that, so willingly going there for all eternity (especially after being told the reality is so much worse than the word!) just to save two members of your crew, damn, dunno if I would have done that.

      Besides, single best explanation of wormhole theory I've ever seen... should be standard viewing in all theoretical physics courses :)

      --
      If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
    5. Re:Why so down on T3? by bckrispi · · Score: 1

      I don't get it... I guess I was the only one that liked T3... not the best of the series, in fact, it'd be #3 on my list, but still... I loved the ending, which really had that "oh shit, we're screwed" feeling that I love in movies (the end of Colossus for example). I thought John Connor was infinitely more likable than in T2 (could be because the actor playing him was a lot more likable IMO than in T2)...
      Agreed. At first, I thought T3 was little more than a popcorn-rehash of T2 - until the last five minutes of it. I honestly never saw the ending coming. That *made* the film for me. It effectively put the Humans and the Machines at a stalemate: The machines failed to prevent John Connor from rising to be the leader of the resistance, and the Humans were unable to prevent a nuclear holocaust. There is still plenty of story to tell here (minus time travel and even Arnold, for that matter). In the right hands, these films could actually be good!
      --
      Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
    6. Re:Why so down on T3? by Monkey · · Score: 1

      I must be the third guy on the planet who thought Event Horizon was one of the best Sci-Fi movies ever. It was creepy as hell and really demonstrated the point that when it comes to shit outside of our limited space exploration, we really have no clear idea of what exactly we're fucking with. Maybe we're better off not knowing.

      The movie was well paced, suspenseful and took place over Neptune, how many movies have done that?

    7. Re:Why so down on T3? by pho3nixtar · · Score: 1

      Um, do you realize that T3 completely destroyed the "no fate but what we make it" theme from T2? It took the fundamental idea behind the best movie in the franchise and then said "nah, it's actually the opposite". That theme still holds true in T3. Brewster had a choice of whether or not to press enter on the keyboard, giving Skynet control over all the defense systems. It's blatantly obvious that he had at least a modicum of an idea of what could happen once he gave Skynet control, hence his hesitation while on the phone with the commander of the armed forces. DoD had a choice whether or not to invest in picking up where Dyson's company left off after it was destroyed. People had a choice whether or not to move forward with AI when it was created... no, when it was conceived. After all, it's like Sarah Conner said: "Men like you built the hydrogen bomb. Men like you thought it up."

      It's not the machine's fault for doing exactly what human kind ultimately purposed them for. In the end, the only thing human kind is the victim of in the Terminator movies is its own ambitions. The rest is just the means to that end.
  61. Fwiw by KKlaus · · Score: 1

    The analogy isn't referring to anchoring a ship (which is where you point out it's not very good), but more to, say, rock climbing or something. So in that context its something that will keep you safe and catch you if you make mistakes while (you are implying) attempting bolder and more difficult works.

    I don't know whether you care or not, but there it is.

    --
    Relax I just want some peanuts.
  62. Re:A better idea by TheSciBoy · · Score: 1
    Why not make the new trilogy about them sending a robot back in time, to stop the new film trilogy from ever being made!

    Talk about meta-movie.

    --
    Badgers, we don't need no stinking badgers! - UHF
  63. If you don't want more crap from Hollywood... by airship · · Score: 1

    If you don't want more crap like this from Hollywood, then don't go see it. Don't buy a ticket, don't buy the DVD, and whatever you do, don't buy the expanded trilogy DVD set with added features.

    Despite all your whining you're going to go see it, you spineless nerd. Admit it.

    --
    Serving your airship needs since 1995.
    1. Re:If you don't want more crap from Hollywood... by frogstar_robot · · Score: 1

      Only when it comes to the premium movie channels I'm already paying for.......

  64. Plot for Terminator 5 by Gzip+Christ · · Score: 2, Funny
    *** SPOILER WARNING! ***

    Having been granted full ownership of SkyNet by the courts, Darl McBride repurposes it to hunt down and destroy Linux users who have failed to pay their $199 licensing fee. Even though John Connor is a BSD user, he realizes that it is only a matter of time before Darl turns on his kind as well. As an act of desperation, Connor forges an alliance with the remaining T666 units, knowing that he is facing the greatest threat to humanity yet. While the T666 units stage a valiant assault against Darl, it is clear that they are no match for his ever growing power. All appears lost until it is revealed that the assault was just a diversion to allow Connor to strike at Darl's Achilles' heel by getting SCO delisted from the NASDAQ.

    1. Re:Plot for Terminator 5 by khallow · · Score: 1

      When it comes to fighting hordes of would be genocidal overlords, churn is your ally.

  65. I can see it now by PhysicsPhil · · Score: 2, Funny

    We'll have the new release, then a remastered release in which the Terminator doesn't fire first.

  66. Here is my weird idea... (c) by fallen1 · · Score: 1

    Why not have a new trilogy and the start of the trilogy will show John Connor, not long after the last movie, gathering the remaining people of Earth together to form a fighting force against SKYNET. It will also show the rapid progression of SKYNET and the Terminator series of robots from the basics of the last movie towards what we saw in Terminator 1. The end of new movie 1 (NM1) would be a defeat by the humans against a plant creating machines that also gives us a hint that SKYNET is going to repeat what we know - build a time machine. This movie also gives us a chance to get to know John better, his wife, and his generals.

    New movie 2 (NM2) will be the heart of the war, the massive fighting between Terminators and Hunter-Killers and the human resistance and the trials to find the time machine. You can flesh out some characters a little more, kill off a couple we have gotten to know, while infiltrating the time machine base and sending Reese back because it must be done - there was no time (no pun intended) to change reality.

    New movie 3 (NM3) is where John, who still has all the knowledge of what's going to happen from his mother, decides to change reality with the hope that people might learn from the past. They (the human resistance) gain control of the time machine and send back information in the form of John Connor's son and a protector - a female terminator who doesn't know she is one (sort of replicant like). They appear right in the middle of a UN session and Connor's son begins giving the members the rundown of what has happened, what could happen, and what is happening right that moment. In the middle of this televised speech, a badass Terminator appears in the middle of the UN and begins killing all the delegates - live on TV. John's son and his protector manage to stop the rampaging Terminator at the cost of their own lives. Thus proving what they said was true. This gives impetus to where the people rise up against machines and begin destroying them all over the earth. Fade out and come back to the earth 20 years later and what do we find? A decimated population, roaming gangs, and a hunter-gatherer society with some agrarian enclaves - in other words, degeneration on the same order as if SKYNET had won, except some people are still alive and technology has faded into the background. In essence creating a semi-luddite paradise.

    Of course, you could always pan to some remote farmhouse with solar panels on the roof and a couple of eggbeater windmills providing power to the banks of computers where a small group of people are working on something furiously. The camera pans around the rooms of the house and we see they're communicating with other technologically inclined people around the globe trying to recreate a world wide linked computer network. The last few frames would be focused on a monitor where you would see Skynet Global Network System: Ready To Initiate... blinking on the screen. Fade out to groans of the multitude of fans.

    --

    Dream as if you'll live forever.
    Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
    ~Anonymous~

  67. Terminator 4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terminator without Arnold is like Police Academy without Steve Guttenberg.

    Yes, I said Steve Guttenberg, you all thought that name was banished forever. You thought Wrong!

  68. new terminator trilogy storylines.... by holywarrior21c · · Score: 0

    T4: Chinese dupes new robot from japan and return of japananese kamikaze hot schoolgirlbots

    T6: Old people in Korea do care about robots and allies with Japanese chickbots.

    T7: Return of the chuck norris and he fights alone against robots and annhilates 83% of machine force and he gets 1million of peta-ton hydrogen bomb nuked on his head. everyone dies. oupssy!!

  69. The fun opportunity by DrYak · · Score: 1

    The huge opportunity of poking fun of an elderly Arnie by having again the T1 saying "Sorry, I'm an old deprecated model".

    That piece was almost the best quote from T3.
    T3 as an independant movie wasn't stellar.
    T3 as a string of spoofs, parodies and nods to the previous films is quite a good string of laughs.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  70. Original Alien 3 Screenplay by Das+Auge · · Score: 1

    The original screenplay for Alien 3 brought them to Earth. For some reason, it was dropped and the crappy prison story was used instead. It may have been for bugetary reasons. Sigourney took over as executive producer.

    The following may have been the original screen (written by William Gibson): http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/film/alien3scr ipt.html

    They were so close to making the original screen play that toys were made based on it. The aliens take on some of the properties of the host. It's why the alien in the produced version ran on all fours, it was from a dog. Here's a bull-alien that was made into a toy: http://www.actiontoys.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?S creen=PROD&Store_Code=123&Product_Code=ALIENK-06C

    I agree though, having them come to Earth would kick ass.

  71. Re:TV series - Oh, they have by edawstwin · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sarah_Connor_Chro nicles

    The series will be linked to the movies, according to the entry.

    --
    I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
  72. There was no part II by edawstwin · · Score: 1

    Um, it wasn't part II. You're thinking of the "preview" at the end of the movie.

    http://imdb.com/title/tt0082517/

    --
    I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
  73. Re:Don't knock it by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 0

    A musical worked for Evil Dead!

  74. No, No, No by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

    "Terminator Babies" or, if that fails to grab them "Terminator Acadamy"

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  75. Enough II: Electric Boogaloo by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

    I love your post. In fact I love it so much that I want to write a sequel to it. No, the original author and his sentiments won't be a part of it but I'm going to continue the post anyway because that's what the readers want. I don't think I can do it in the epic fashion it deserves with just one post though so I'm going to have to stretch it into a trilogy (which it probably should have been anyway right?)

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  76. Holywoodator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Holywood needs it: I'll be back.... trust me.

  77. Enough III: Rise of JudgeFurious (in 3D) by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

    Much like the trilogy concept you were knocking in your original post I got nothing at this point. I'm just dragging it out and hoping to milk a few mod points out of the relative handful of readers foolish enough to waste their time reading down to this post.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  78. They are going to call it: by ZeroSerenity · · Score: 1

    The Govenator: Rise of Taxes.

    --
    For those who seek perfection there can be no rest on this side of the grave.
  79. Come weeth mee eef you wand to relive by Grindalf · · Score: 0

    How could you top the original movie, it's got gibs, blood, feng suey red / blue light colouration, alpha males and females, electonic spark effects and robots with machine guns!

    --
    The purpose of existence is to make money.
  80. Catch a cold shower, man. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    With vaguely homoerotic overtones, like Spiderman.

    WTF? In the eye of the beholder, I guess.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  81. the wachowskis already did it by rubberbandball · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "which picks up with John Connor in his 30s leading what's left of the human race against the machines." Read: The Matrix.

    --
    oh marmalade.
  82. Circle paradox!!! Kyle Reese must not travel back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kyle Reese must not travel back in time. Kyle Reese must not enter the time machine to start the series. Remember in Terminator (one), the Terminator entered the time machine and Kyle followed behind... If Kyle Reese didn't enter the time machine then John Conner would not have been born. (yes, the Terminator entered first, but it would disappeared, because John was the main target).

    Note: Terminator, Terminator 2 and Terminator 3 didn't have to time travel in sequence... The third movie could have been the first attempt on his life and fail, then go to T2 on their second attempt and send in a common T800 (what they had left) to kill unborn John Conner. Which by the way started the whole series, because Kyle is the father. No father, no child... No child, no leader... No reason to go back in time...

    Now pay me

  83. How much? by glwtta · · Score: 1

    How much screen time will be devoted to Kristanna Loken's ass in these new films? I don't care how much the rest of it sucks.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  84. Enough room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... to make several T movies of JConnor and KBrewser locked in the bomb shelter.

  85. John Cameron's high concept for brand new sequel by sponglish · · Score: 1

    Terminator and humans on a ship battle a creature that has acid for blood and uses humans as hosts for breeding. Carnage ensues in ship corridors and machinery rooms until the ship hits an iceberg and sinks. After Terminator sinks in ocean, in surprise ending, sole survivor is blowing on whistle for help when alien bursts from her chest. Series potential.

    --
    "I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
  86. James Camerson's Avatar by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    Look it up, i've been looking forward to it for a while, something original.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  87. Super, man! by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    The only upcoming "sequel" sci-fi I'm looking forward to is Babylon 5 : The Lost Tales. It's more B5 I already thought that Babylon 5 itself was a sequel too far after Babylon, Babylon II, Babylon III and Babylon IV: The Quest for Peace.
    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  88. Re:Circle paradox!!! Kyle Reese must not travel ba by fzammett · · Score: 1

    So, to sum it up:

    The plot of T4 revolves around a T2000, which most certainly will be a post-rehab head-shaved Britney Spears because really, what's more frightening than that, who is sent back to kill not John Connor, not Sarah Connor, not even the guy the first Terminator stole his clothes from (because without clothes he could have been beaten by anyone I guess) but Kyle Reese, and a T875.4, Arnold in a wheel chair, is sent back to protect him.

    I am *SO* there opening weekend.

    --
    If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
  89. John and Terminator's Excellent Adventure by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 1

    John Connor and the Terminator are two hard rock-obsessed teenagers in San Dimas, California who are in danger of flunking out of high school. This situation is particularly "heinous" because Micheal J Fox is threatening to ship them to the Alaskan Military Academy (run by the psychotic Biff) if they flunk. Miraculously, a guitar-playing guru named The Doc arrives from Hill Valley of the future to help them pass a vital history report, because their garage band ("Wyld Stallyns") holds the key to world peace and ultimate truth. However, they will not achieve this destiny if they flunk out and The Terminator is shipped to Alaska. The Doc lends them a time machine disguised as a Delorean to help them get an A+ on their oral report. Various time traveling shenanigans ensue, as they proceed to "collect" various historical figures, including Napoleon Bonaparte (described early in the film by John as "a short, dead dude"), Socrates (mistakenly pronounced "so crates"), Billy the Kid ("Mr. The Kid"), Sigmund Freud (Dennis Frood), Beethoven ("Beeth-oven"), Genghis Khan, Joan of Arc, and Abraham Lincoln to help them with their final history presentation.

    --
    I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
  90. Arnold Better Start Getting Into Shape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  91. Re:In soviet beowulf clusters of old people in kor by franksands · · Score: 1

    I don't know about that, but I know Skywalkers in Korea cross Han Solo.

  92. terminator begins? by __aalwyc6372 · · Score: 1

    I. Terminator Begins: From the transistor to the killing to the semi-liquid killing machine. a true (imaginative) story.
    sqrt(I). Terminator's Family: Watch him have robo-sex and teach his siblings how to kill a human in one blow.
    ln(I). Terminators in their natural surroundings - a documentary by bbc. O_o

  93. Special effect people by bartmank11 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else out there agree that T2 had way more realistic and better affects then T3 I do and i think if they are gonna make another one they should take more then 2 days to make it and not shred it up like Bambi 4.