Evil Avatar

Evil Avatar (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Items (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Pure Evil - Youíre Terminated F**ker! (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=263692)

Evil Avatar 11-03-2019 06:46 AM

Pure Evil - Youíre Terminated F**ker!
 
As is our Saturday thing, we went to see the new Terminator: Dark Fate, the first movie in a while to bring back Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) and the first film to ignore all the sequels since Terminator 2.

Itís an enjoyable Saturday afternoon popcorn flick with non-stop action, so we did enjoy it quite a bit and there was a lot of fun there to be had.

Is it the next Terminator 2? Not a chance.

The big problem with the new films is that you donít feel anything for any of the characters. In the beginning, they show a sequence from Terminator 2 where Sarah is in the hospital freaking out over the knowledge that Judgement Day happens and no one can prevent it. That kind of raw emotion is totally absent from the new film. We do get to see some of the back story of new characters Grace and Whatís-her-Name (I literally canít remember the characterís name), but it obviously doesnít stick with you at all. Itís just another quick scene in a movie that moves with robotic precision directly from one stock action piece to the next stock action piece.

There really isnít even much here that is new for action fans. We have seen fighting in an airplane in Tom Cruiseís The Mummy and in several other films and we have seen the big freeway chase scene done a hundred times in Fast & Furious films. There was one crash & action underwater fighting scene with a Humvee that seemed pretty new and creative, but thatís about it.

Without spectacular set pieces or characters we care about, all they have left is our nostalgia for the first two films and thatís not enough to save Dark Fate which is tanking at the box office and will be one of this yearís biggest flops for the studio.

James Cameron claimed he came out of Avatar world to produce the new film, he should have totally stepped in and written and directed it if he wanted it to be a success.

Three Evil Eyes.

BeardedSonOfNel 11-03-2019 07:00 AM

Nice write up. This one is a hard pass for me. I'll just pretend that the first two movies were the only two made (just like their is only one Matrix movie, and Star Wars only had one trilogy), and be fine with that.

Evil Avatar 11-03-2019 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeardedSonOfNel (Post 2547515)
Nice write up. This one is a hard pass for me. I'll just pretend that the first two movies were the only two made (just like their is only one Matrix movie, and Star Wars only had one trilogy), and be fine with that.

Itís a good film to catch later on Netflix when you just want some mindless eye candy. But, itís about as forgettable of an action film as they come these days.

I donít see the hate some people have for it because itís all ďWokeĒ, but one thing I did walk away from the film thinking is that it really did need a leading male character.

Michael Bein was that character in the first film and Arnold himself was that character in the second film. The minute they move Arnold into the background and replace the ďLeading MaleĒ with ďLeading FemaleĒ a lot of what makes you want to go see these movies is lost.

As much as you donít want to be that guy, there is a difference between a movie with a Male lead and a Female lead. I canít really explain it, but as a guy who likes action movies, I get more out of John Wick than I do Charlene Theron.

ElektroDragon 11-03-2019 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Avatar (Post 2547516)
It’s a good film to catch later on Netflix when you just want some mindless eye candy. But, it’s about as forgettable of an action film as they come these days.

I don’t see the hate some people have for it because it’s all “Woke”, but one thing I did walk away from the film thinking is that it really did need a leading male character.

Michael Bein was that character in the first film and Arnold himself was that character in the second film. The minute they move Arnold into the background and replace the “Leading Male” with “Leading Female” a lot of what makes you want to go see these movies is lost.

As much as you don’t want to be that guy, there is a difference between a movie with a Male lead and a Female lead. I can’t really explain it, but as a guy who likes action movies, I get more out of John Wick than I do Charlene Theron.

I saw Dark Fate after rewatching T1 and T2 for the first time in years. DF was contrived plot-wise, a bit of a rehash, AND was basically a Hispanic SJW feminist Terminator movie. Don't kid yourself, it was, especially with T1 and T2 fresh in your mind.

It had good action and some great humor from Arnold. That's it. It's not even as good as I remember T3, Salvation, or Genisys being IMHO.

Protip, on Apple TV/Itunes you can buy ALL Terminator movies this weekend for only $5 each, including Salvation Director's Cut, and the 4K HDR remaster of T2. So I could not resist. Now I that I saw DF I will rewatch the other "sequels" and decide for myself which is the best.

So far of the 3 I saw yesterday (YES, I saw T1, T2, DF BACK TO BACK in one day), my favorite is T1 because nothing beats Evil Arnold Terminator or the original "I'll be back" delivery.

And by the way, it is CHARLIZE Theron. :)

vivafletcher 11-03-2019 06:01 PM

The Terminator franchise should never have been a franchise. It should have been one movie and that's it.

But Hollywood is Hollywood, so they should have made one crappy sequel and let it go. Problem is, they accidentally made a fantastic sequel. And they've been chasing that accidental high ever since.

The same could be said for the Alien franchise. Some of the sequels aren't bad (though some are). They're just not necessary, add nothing and don't come close to what we loved about the first two.

BalekFekete 11-04-2019 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vivafletcher (Post 2547530)
The Terminator franchise should never have been a franchise. It should have been one movie and that's it.

The same could be said for the Alien franchise.

Now now...lets not get crazy. The sequel to each are some of the few examples where the second movie really does outshine the first (IMO at least...).

Chief Smash 11-04-2019 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BalekFekete (Post 2547544)
Now now...lets not get crazy. The sequel to each are some of the few examples where the second movie really does outshine the first (IMO at least...).

You're saying that Terminator 2 is better than Terminator 1?

thatlukeguy 11-04-2019 07:51 AM

Damn that sucks. Thanks for the review Evil, I'm gonna skip this one and catch it on Bluray.

Evil Avatar 11-04-2019 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Smash (Post 2547546)
You're saying that Terminator 2 is better than Terminator 1?

The older I get the less I can stand Terminator 2. The FX didn't hold up over time and the kid is just annoying beyond the ability for words to describe it. Not to mention that the film breaks the very first rule of time travel (as has every film since then), that you can't send anything metal through time.

Chief Smash 11-04-2019 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Avatar (Post 2547549)
The older I get the less I can stand Terminator 2. The FX didn't hold up over time and the kid is just annoying beyond the ability for words to describe it. Not to mention that the film breaks the very first rule of time travel (as has every film since then), that you can't send anything metal through time.

I can understand the nostalgia and T2 was a big summer blockbuster but I don't think it has aged well. I thought Sarah and John were annoying characters and the way they changed Arnold through the movie seemed ridiculous to me even back then. I liked it for the borderline kaiju action scenes between the terminators but I felt like everything else fell apart over the years. On the other hand, T1 still stands up today for the most part. Sure the whole Reese being John's father thing is pretty stupid but other than that, it's really a solid movie.

vallor 11-04-2019 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Avatar (Post 2547549)
Not to mention that the film breaks the very first rule of time travel (as has every film since then), that you can't send anything metal through time.

Never heard of any such rule! Even the T100 was a shit-ton of metal despite having a fleshy sheath (that sounds like a sex toy).

Chief Smash 11-04-2019 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vallor (Post 2547561)
Never heard of any such rule! Even the T100 was a shit-ton of metal despite having a fleshy sheath (that sounds like a sex toy).

They say right in the movie that it was only successful with the T100 because the metal was encased in living tissue. And yeah that is a weak rule.

Evil Avatar 11-04-2019 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Smash (Post 2547564)
They say right in the movie that it was only successful with the T100 because the metal was encased in living tissue. And yeah that is a weak rule.

Yea, they use it as the reason Reese doesnít bring any future tech back with him, then Cameron just ignores it for the sequel.

Inkabodcrane 11-04-2019 11:46 PM

Just watched it tonight. It was pretty much as expected. Arnold "Carl" was funny although the entire excuse for him being there was ridiculous, the villain Terminator was very cool and had funny moments himself, but the rest of the characters were just cypher roles filled by actors. Even Linda Hamilton just seemed weird. Her role, her attitude, everything was strange with her.

Like Evil said the action was fun, but there was just enough "meh" to the film that the positives didn't drastically outweigh them. 3/5 sounds about right. Maybe even 2.5/5.

As for my 2 cents on the franchise, T1 is by far my favorite, Arnold as the evil Terminator is a perfect casting, because a Terminator is supposed to be a metal Jason Vorhees. No matter what you do to it, it just keeps coming. T2's whining John and some of the SFX look bad now. T3, I watch it sort of frequently, because I always forget why I don't like it a lot. So I watch it again and again, and still forget what I think of it. Even now after watching it a month ago, I liked Arnold in it, I liked that Terminator girl, but I don't recall much else.

Salvation was very interesting, and I liked Christian Bale as John Connor, and the other half man half machine guy played by Worthington was cool too. The problem I initially had with it was that it was rated PG-13, but they eventually released an unrated or rated R version. Its a fine movie overall, just doesn't have Arnold in it (really).

Genysis sucked ass, and I have mostly wiped it from memory. I remember the reason I really ended up not liking it was the actor who played John Connor is one that I am not a fan of in any movie, the stupid heel turn he took, and how became a nanobot guy. The actor who played Reese, what's his name, is not a good actor. I remember (as usual) Arnold was the best part of that film. I actually want to rewatch it to see if there is more that I forgot about that I may like.

Chief Smash 11-05-2019 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inkabodcrane (Post 2547616)
T3, I watch it sort of frequently, because I always forget why I don't like it a lot. So I watch it again and again, and still forget what I think of it. Even now after watching it a month ago, I liked Arnold in it, I liked that Terminator girl, but I don't recall much else.

I don't hate T3 but I think the major problem with it is that John Conner is about as far from a war hero as you can get. They needed someone that was already close to being the legendary John Conner and not the whiny junky we got in that movie. However, for good or ill, it did give us this deleted scene:


Fun fact, Sergent Candy is voiced by Samuel Jackson.

Inkabodcrane 11-06-2019 04:45 AM

That is hilarious! That was supposed to be in T3? Holy hell, it would have been iconic for how weird it was. Thanks for sharing dude!

Chief Smash 11-06-2019 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inkabodcrane (Post 2547679)
That is hilarious! That was supposed to be in T3? Holy hell, it would have been iconic for how weird it was. Thanks for sharing dude!

I'm glad you enjoyed it. I don't know if they were ever serious about it being in the movie. Some people claim that it was recorded for the T3 game tie in instead. But either way, I'm glad it's out there.

Evil Avatar 11-08-2019 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inkabodcrane (Post 2547679)
That is hilarious! That was supposed to be in T3? Holy hell, it would have been iconic for how weird it was. Thanks for sharing dude!

"We can fix it." LOL! I'm glad that wasn't in the movie, but it is still hilarious.

Sensei-X 11-08-2019 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Smash (Post 2547627)
I don't hate T3 but I think the major problem with it is that John Conner is about as far from a war hero as you can get. They needed someone that was already close to being the legendary John Conner and not the whiny junky we got in that movie. However, for good or ill, it did give us this deleted scene:


Fun fact, Sergent Candy is voiced by Samuel Jackson.

That's like something that would totally have fit in perfectly into the Robocop universe lol. :D

vivafletcher 11-11-2019 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Smash (Post 2547627)
I don't hate T3 but I think the major problem with it is that John Conner is about as far from a war hero as you can get. They needed someone that was already close to being the legendary John Conner and not the whiny junky we got in that movie. However, for good or ill, it did give us this deleted scene:


Fun fact, Sergent Candy is voiced by Samuel Jackson.

This deleted scene is the only part of T3 I've ever seen (and I've seen it a few times). Even though it didn't make the final cut, I feel like I've seen the best part of the film.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:02 AM.