I agree 110% with El-Kabong.

And this might not be the last of it...I read somewhere [AOL or TVGuide.com] that Claire Danes has signed for more than this one...

Consider it a bonus Terminator film for now, T2 was the last creative thing, T3 for stopping people saying when's T3 out.

It will be T4 where I think it would take place in the future, although was hoping it would be set in the future now. They can't send another terminator back, rather see the future where skynet is. So if its not T3, I hope T3 makes money, because T4 I think will be the groundbreaking finale in the future.

No I have not but I know that Cameron is in a class by himself whe it comes to mixing science fiction, action and story telling

Seeing the T3 trailer was great icing on the cake before TTT last night. Got a nice round of applause from the audience as well. I'll go see it.

-BT

I didn't like T2 except for the action. (which is hard to match, even today) so I doubt I'll like this one much.

T1 was great though.

any mirror sites so I can use getright to grab the trailer?

Yeah, look at Dark angel.


Honestly, given the formula, anyone could have done the second and made it just the same. In that case, anyone can take the already inprinted premise and churn out something decent. When it comes down to it, T3 will be just like T2 a good popcorn flick. You didn't honestly take T2 for anything more then that did you?

I agree and had Cameron been doing this I'd be bitching...but Cameron has no piece of this. He made his choice, he ended the Terminator franchise.

Consider this a follow up made only to make money (which is what it is) just continuing on a great story...like that Gone with the Wind sequal written decades after the original.

at "she'll be back"

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jackskeleton
[B]Yeah, look at Dark angel.


Cameron did NOT direct Dark Angel..He was only an executive producer..

That's like saying well anyone could have made "Goodfellas"

UH..I don't think so!


There are certain films that only some directors can make

Everything we saw in T1 & T2 came from Cameron's vision..You can not replace that with someone else

He was smart to stay away from T3..He realised there's was nothing more he could do with the story!!

There both a differnet stories and have a completely different look

I see the stories more of a continuation then a sequel..Kind of like The Godfather series

Too each is own I guess

[QUOTE]Originally posted by shanester
[B]
Cameron did direct the last episode by the way.

Lets put it this way, Cameron planted the seeds. anyone can do whatever they want with his vision and have it come out just right. Look at what Cameron did with Sam winston. Planted his view of what a "PREDATOR" could look like and you got your predator look.

I'm not saying he isn't good at what he is doing, I'm just saying that the formula once laid out, can be given to anyone and it could turn out something decent. I'm willing to give T3 a chance.

I did Like "Breakdown" so I will give it a chance

As most people were, I was at TTT and saw the T3 trailer. Most people seemed excited when it first started, but when it ended with that ridiculous one-liner, everyone laughed. I know Arnie is a smart guy, buy he is getting like Michael Jackson. He thinks he's still the biggest star in the world and that people want the same thing he's been dishing out for 20 years. Arnold is by far my favorite entertainer, but come on, break some new ground. T3 looks like all action and explosions and no story. This doesn't work anymore! Save some of that $150 mil and write an original script that no one has seen before. I will definitely see this movie opening night (preferably a midnight showing). Just please don't give me T2 part 2. If you do, Arnie is gonna go into politics cause his $30 mil paydays are over.

I like what i see on that trailer. Will definitely see it!!

Some of you guys simply need to get a grip....some really profound statements around here....from only a 2min trailer.....??.....???

After watching that trailer all I can say is:

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

i don't know but the "she'll be back" line got a positive reaction from everyone in the theater.

Generally, it looks bad. I'm definately gonna wait until the reviews from everyone comes in.

If it was sort of a prequel and showed the war between humans and machines (when John Conner is older) in the future that would have been great. Make Arnold a bad guy again and show John Conner wasting him. If Cameron directed that I'm sure it would have been as exciting as Aliens.

But more Terminator fighting on the streets of modern day America? I've had enough of that.

I have to watch this movie because it was filmed right up the street from me. I have to see my "hood."

I'm not sure if I saw the same trailer that some other people here saw...when the "she'll be back" line came up there was about a 50/50 audience reaction. 50% of the audience laughed and the other 50% just groaned. I know I haven't seen the movie yet, but the purpose of a trailer is to make you want to see the movie and the trailer looks bad.

Someone should really tell Arnold that the 80's are over. What passed for an action film then will not work now. If you look at his most successful films, Arnold was working with really talanted genre directors- people like Cameron, Verhoeven, McTiernan, and Milius. It seems that in all of his latest films, he has been working for a paycheck. If you are going to make a ton of money and a really expensive movie go through the trouble to at least have a good script. (T3 = T2 w/hot chick)

More recent films like The Matrix and LotR have really raised movie-goer expectations to what a really good action/adventure film can be--and part of that is free of the 80's cheese.


It's not really that hard:

Working with talanted people = good films

Working with director-for-hire hacks = **** films


I just hope Milius can get King Conan off before Arnold has lost all of his box office draw (what left there is).

Huh? I prefer many of the 80s action flicks over the action flicks today.

I was thinking the same thing

I do too. That was kinda the point.

Almost all the action films from the 80's - early 90's were R-rated and violent.

Most major action films now are PG-13 so they can make more money. There are some exceptions.

Most of Arnolds less successful 80's-90's films still made money. Even if they wern't great movies, they were what people wanted to see at that time--they were "in".

Most of Arnolds more recent films are pretty much the same, just not as bloody to get the PG-13. And lets face it, why watch an action movie with no plot, no script, and no violence? That like watching a porno that doesn't have nudity.

If Arnold wants to keep making these PG action films, he need to find a talanted director and good script to work with. He is severely overestimating his name value and trying to second guess what kind of movie his fans want him make.

Damn straight, give me an 80's action flick any day over today's style of action where it has to be fast cuts and limp bizket for music.

the problem with 90's action flicks, and i'm going to go out on a limb here, was that they were too politically correct. like Demolition Man, for example.

and they had no heart, we're too market-researched, and to tailor fit. they didn't have that gut instinct action feel of the 80's movies.

the 90's action flicks that i liked though were

Bad Boys, The Mummy, Reign of Fire, parts of the Rock, Starship Troopers was okay, but nothing compared to Total Recall, for example.

Equilibrium looks like its going to rock, though i haven't seen it yet.

i liked Die Another Day, more than any Bond flick in a long time.