Cool News
See Bits Of The New TERMINATOR SALVATION Trailer Before They Get Disappeared!!
Merrick here...
There's a new TERMINATOR SALVATION trailer hitting next week (with THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD still remake I think). Last night, ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT pimped the trailer - which they'll be debuting next Tuesday. Their tease revealed brief snippets of new footage, which you can see via the embed below.
-
+ Expand All
-
Cool.
Oh, and FIRST! -
DHUERRRR!
-
I have to say I am impressed.
-
Didn't he do that same flare thing in Reign of Fire? I'm not complaining...just sayin'
-
All I see is a white box.
-
...hope it doesn't McSuck.
-
that last bit did have a bit of a Transformers vibe...again, not complaining.
-
Instead of ignoring it like Beltrami did for his uninspiring T3 score.
-
Dec 04, 2008 10:12:54 AM CST
not that you can really tell from about 3 seconds footage...
by righteousbrother
but it looked kinda cool.
-
From Chris Nolan to McG. Looks like Bale's career just took a wrong turn.
-
Fuck this.
-
But, let's face the facts. The man's name is McG. Just ponder on that for a bit.
-
....but doesn't look like a Terminator movie. They should have called it Judgment Day: Aftermath.
-
Daaaaammmmnnnn!!! Bay meets McG? McBay??! Oh God the end is near!!
-
anything better than T3 will suffice... McG is ok in my book, but I hate Charlie's Angels
-
Don't fuck with Bale, motherfuckers... HIS CAREER IS BETTER THAN ANY OTHER ACTORS ON THE PLANET RIGHT NOW, SO FUCK OFF
-
They might as well have given this project to the egomaniacal, arrogant and narratively incompetent Michael Bay. And its too bad Universal isn't basing their new park attraction on this instead Bay's lame, over-amped toy commercial.
-
I just hope they keep it dark because lets face it, a future with robots in charge sounds quite bleak to me. I hope it aint soft like PG 13 soft. I shouldnt have to be hoping shit by the way because were talking about the Terminator here but this director is making people unsure. I hope delivers.
-
The hybrid of the future.
-
proof reading is the way forward.....ahem!
-
Boy takes himself too seriously. He said he wants to do a comedy but never gets offers.
-
If I can sit through the horrible Sarah Conner Chronicles, I can sit through this. I don't like McG's work up till now (fucking HATED the Charlie's Angels movies), but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
-
...is a total twat...
-
NEXT ON ET!!!!!!!!!I'm sorry these infotainment shows make me nauseous.
-
Truth.
-
There's already a McBay. His name is Joseph Kahn, the director of TORQUE.
-
Thats actually a really good title man.
-
Not that fond of the ground covered with skulls (didn't make sense in the original flashbacks either). Other than that, i see nothing not to dig. Also: still not get what was wrong with Charlie's Angels. Why is MCG mentioned next to Bay? Bay is a terrible, terrible director. McG is pretty competent, even though aintitcool crowd is not exactly the target audience of his previous movies. (Unless you have some beef with "Charlie's angels is going against the source material" I don't know about.)
-
I don't care what any of you say, or that it's McG. Any person is capable of delivering something awesome if they dedicate themselves, and I think he has.
-
I'd really like to be pumped up for this but nothing I see really looks like James Cameron's universe, and it was his vision that made me a Terminator fan. I can't even watch the "Sarah Conner Chronicles." "Terminator 3" turned out better than I expected without Cameron's involvement, but isn't particularly memorable. I think the whole Terminator mythos is getting dilluted. I hope I'm wrong.
-
Once his scenes hit the trailers closer to release...fans will go wild and the box-office will RISE!
-
Dec 04, 2008 10:43:34 AM CST
I swear, this looks like it could be the best of the series...
by dannyglovers_dickblood
No bullshit.
-
think this looks good. Gonna give it the benefit of the doubt because there's really nothing to attack this movie over so far other than a predisposition against McG. All the shots so far look badass. And you liked Charlie's Angels 1 when it came out... don't try to deny it.
-
Really reminds me of all those "giant spider robot" fiasco's, which went from Superman draft to Wild-Wild-West shooting script.
Hollywood retards. -
McG + McLovin + McRib = McWTF
-
How friggin' original. I guess if giant pink teddy bears sell tickets next year, the next Terminator will feature those too.
-
Still looks cool, except for the Deceptinators that is.
-
To quote the cab driver in Old School... stop being such a faggot.
-
Dec 04, 2008 10:47:27 AM CST
I wish someone would alter the present... so no more of these du
by spiral115
-
Dec 04, 2008 10:48:45 AM CST
Oh, or even better... Terminator with dressed up chihauhaus
by spiral115
-
Dec 04, 2008 10:48:47 AM CST
Oh, or even better... Terminator with dressed up chihauhaus
by spiral115
-
Sweet Jebus! The fucking thing doesn't even have a head!
-
and TSSC is a good continuation of those two films. Terminator Salvation will be only good for the SFX.
-
Singer should have stuck on with X3, and McG should have directed Superman. Fact.
-
Thanks, but in all fairness I think I read that was a working title waaaay back before Bale's involvement was even mentioned in the film.
-
And having the terminator music in your movie doesn't make it a terminator movie. No Cameron, No Arnold, No Linda Hamliton = POS
-
I'll say it again... Y A W N !
-
can't wait to see it in glorious quicktime
-
Mr. Terminator, will you be my daddy?
-
What is your opinion on an Alien film without Ripley? I think the character was played out.
-
The father / son relationship was heart-rendering. HAVE YOU NO HEART TO RENDER?!
-
is freaking John Connor!! Don't you guys forget that!
-
take it from me, i hate everything, especially when they fuck up my favorite movie monsters...but this looks enjoyable. the dumbest things i have seen are the water, shrip looking terminators and the cycles...but i bet there will be like one surprise scene with the 'aquanator', and as for the cyclenators, it's not a bad idea, per se. how would skynet produce something that could cover the long distances between cities quickly over fairly empty roads where bipedal robots are less effective and flying robots are busy patrolling the cities like hawks? strap wheels on it and make it compact and manueverable.aka motorcycle....add guns, viola....my only beef is the design. not very impressive original or intimidating.
-
And one reason it looks good is simply because it doesn't look like a sequel. It looks like a film I'd like to see in its own right. That's the real trick in a case like this, because the last memory entry in the franchise was, what, fifteen years ago? After T3 I wouldn't care about T4, but I would like to see a new film set in the same universe. Color me interested.
-
I also liked Speed Racer too so maybe I'm just a film slut, this looks exciting and I will go see it.
-
That music always gets my hyped up. I need to buy the T2 BluRay and pretend like no sequels exist since then.
-
The Terminator universe has always been full of giant fucking robots!
-
...being in the title is that when set in the post appolyptic world it is not really a Terminator movie anymore. The uniqueness of the original that the conflict was persuit. An advanced killing machine from the future travels back to modern days and is an unstoppable force; all the human characters could do was run away from it. That was a pretty scary concept! In TII they upped the ante a bit by pitting two Terminators against each another, but still set in the modern world, and still a predator vs. prey theme. (part III we'll ignore). But setting Salvation in the future world just evens the playing fields a bit, at least technology wise, and now the humans are actively fighting rather than running away. So it's just a future war movie, kind of like Starship Troopers or something. Not that it's a bad concept, just not, in my opinion, a true Terminator movie.
-
...who of course will actually be first in line to see the movie than the rest of us. Funny.
-
Consider my ticket bought.
-
...there hasn't been a bad Terminator movie yet - and plugging ol' Bats in as the lead is only gonna help. So chill - wait for the movie - and quit whining.
-
the real motivation or drive behind the terminators. i mean, skynet has to be more than just 'pissed' at humans or simply wiping them out. what do the robots want to do after humans are extinct? what are their goals? they fucking invent (or at least harness) time travel...why not space travel? leave the earth they freaking burnt clean.a machine would have all the time in the world for space travel. no food or real sleep. an atomic power cell or whatever too. i hope this movie deals with the fact that the machines NEED humans, at least for a while, as slave labor, until their own reproduction plants are up and running. deal with issues like the irony of machines trying to eliminate what created them, yet emulating them and otherwise existing as human based designs. in reality, the culture and designs machines would create if they had free reign would be things we would not even recognize.
-
get a FUCKING EDIT button on these GODDAMNED talkbacks.
-
Well, I suppose we can't define the series as Hunter vs. Prey anymore, sure, but I like that a series can adapt and become something else too. The Predator series needs to move forward into the future and deal with some Space Marines already.
-
It scoops up crowds of folks, and we've seen the camps they are thrown into. The theory of worker camps may happen.
-
...sorry, even that TerminIronGiant thing ain't gonna put my arse on a seat for this one...
-
Terminator 1? You know its coming soon.
-
better than terminator 3 at least.
-
I'm liking the SCC, and if this over-the-top action flick fucks with the story they're telling, I'm just going to ignore it, like SCC ignores T3.
Really, why did Terminator movies turn into action flicks? The first one, like Alien, was a HORROR MOVIE, not an action flick.
Oh, wait. Same problem with both franchises: Cameron got his hands on them, and turned them from "unstoppable monster stalks and kills people one by one" movies into "balls to the wall explosions everywhere monster fight" movies.
Aliens and Terminator were both perfect horror movies. James Cameron came along and crapped on the original premise, turning them into action franchises. While his stuff was good, it was also a perversion of the original concepts.
So now we only get Slam-Bang action in these movie franchises. That's why they haven't made a decent AvP film, and that's why this movie has McG directing it instead of someone who knows how to do SUBTLETY.
Nope, we're getting the "Wild, Wild West" version of Terminator here, folks. After this one, you'll all be saying, "You know, T3 was actually pretty decent. At least it didn't have giant CG transformers and skin-suit John Connor Terminators" -
Let's ask J Cameron!!!
-
Where it appears the Scottish redhead is a T-1000 or better, and has discovered religion and ethics. She seems determined to put an end to the carnage caused by SkyNet. A borrow from the new Galatica, to be sure, but interesting nevertheless.
Ultimately a synthetic AI would come to see organic life the way we view houseplants. If they not infected with anything dangerous, just feed them and leave them otherwise alone. Same idea in 'The Sandworms of Dune'. -
For seeing out of context bits and pieces.
-
Dec 04, 2008 11:32:40 AM CST
Great Scope to the Terminator Saga, but doubts remain
by adrian marcato
Anyone that goes by the name McG earns an immediate douchebag award, but such lack of respect commands that he nail this one between the eyes or face becoming a pariah. My fear is that if this is successful, that shelved Superman project just might be re-upped. But, Terminator needs a big scope, and the war of the future is something fan geeks have been salivating for, and what T:3 truly should have been. So, we'll take what we can get, and our lowered expectations might be a good starting ground for pleasant surprise. This is a great test though, will Bale become an action giant? Or will he be relegated to a hand or hire? His skills as an actor suggest the first, but McG is that wonderful wild card that makes us all want to hang ourselves to avoid finding out, due to the fear of the inevitable sad truth.
-
The biggest brown nosing on the face of the planet.
I wonder if there will be an update on baby Dannielynn? -
TSCC sucks balls this season.
Who the fuck cares about John and Sarah in therapy and gay John banging a Lost Claire lookalike. -
You do know that Cameron created Terminator, right? He directed the first movie, right? Just checking is all. And I really don't know what could make me speak well of T3. I actually left the theater angry, which has never happened before or since.
-
Dec 04, 2008 11:40:20 AM CST
ZeroCorpse, Jim Cameron directed the first Terminator!
by adrian marcato
And you are damn right, Alien was a horror movie. It's sequel, an action movie, but both are relative giants in the history of their respective genres. And Jim Cameron used to be a geek god, what happened? Titanic? Yes Terminator was framed as a slasher style film, in the guise of action sci-fi film, but eclecticism in a franchise ensures rejuvination. Look at the Pirates franchise in terms of repetition, and you'll see what a dull idea it is to remake the same movie over and over. Plus that terminator show blows donkey balls, and is a drag on the brand in my opinion, cheapening it.
-
James Cameron who is universally praised is responsible for that. Note T1 vs T2 and Alien vs Aliens.
-
"I'll be back." *In Batvoice/growl*
-
Also, I think Bale is saying, "Those hands have been busy." Not exactly sure what it means, but you did ask, right?
-
I look forward to it, looks like a fun movie.
I like Bale, he hasn't let me down yet. He makes smart choices, so I imagine the script must have been good.
-
Seriously? Until I registered on Aint It Cool, and thought it was a chemical impossibility for someone to not like Terminaor 2....its an absolute classic, almost everything about it is perfect. It managed to take a muscle bound lug who couldnt really act (but who is a shrewd business man, Ill give him that)and gave him a role that let him make a killer robot a sympathetic and likeable character...Hamilton was on top form, Patrick was sinister as fuck and the FX look top notch even today. The story was a great extension of a brilliant original concept, was inventive and imaginative, with great socio/political relevance and was expertly scripted. In terms of action cinema it sits side by side with Die Hard...FACT. And the ending is bloody brilliant! If you dont like terminator 2...I duno...check your pulse or something
-
Devil's hands have been busy...
and this movie looks awesome. BALE + Jonathan Nolan + Paul Haggis = WIN
please don't fuck it up McG -
SCC? Seriously? I could understand the love for season one but season two has been utter shit. Do you really want Terminators spouting religion? And how many people and Terminators have been sent back now? 50?
-
it will keep popping up. The first thing I ever do when I see a flash video is use my toolbar software to download it as a "hard copy".
-
James Cameron TOTALLY wrecked the first Terminator. It was like he had no idea what he was doing when he actually CREATED the idea, concept, background, characters, tone and imagery for it.
And while we're at it, Wes Craven's a jerk for wrecking the first Elm Street movie by not foreseeing Freddy as a wise-cracking, rapping, cartoon-like character. I mean, what was HE thinking by actually making Freddy scary? -
Good to see you. There were some who feared you may have suffered the Ban Hammer. As for this new TERMINATOR film, I remain a strange mix of indifferent and curious. Bale is a big plus though.
-
Name the last time a GOOD alien film was made with or without Ripley..oh yeah JAMES CAMERON - Aliens
-
We simply need to the clone the man, and have him direct all our dream projects. What's this? All of the clones have holed up for twelve years, working on their own dream projects?! CURSES!
-
No, James Cameron made great sequels to Alien and Terminator precisely because he expanded the concepts of the original instead of doing mere rehashes, and took the two series in different and fresh directions that were consistent with, and didn't shit over, their predecessors. and he created, wrote and directed terminator 1 you muppet! (which was an action/thriller with some horror aspects, not a fucking full blown horror movie. big difference). you think he doesn't know his own creation?
-
I was up in the air last season but absolutely love this season.
-
because Arnie isn't in this.
-
And that was a piss poor excuse made because of a failing career. Arnie is not the series. Hate to break it to you, but it's true.
-
James Cameron is a fucking genius. We're all lucky as fuck to be alive while he's around making movies. The man shits gold. Wash off your hate.
-
Hope it delivers too.
-
And I know crap when I see it. This smells and looks like crap.
-
Could be great. Could be terrible. I don't know....I DON'T KNOW!!!!
-
But I WANT to like it.
-
So what if he talked without actually thinking first, or knowing about movies, or not checking IMDB at least...oh hell I can't say anymore without cracking up. BWAH HA HA!.....Seriously it looks alright BUT if the rumor is true about the nature of John Connor, I don't know if this rumor has been dispelled or not, then I will not like this movie no matter how much shit they blow up...that being said I will be there day one with my ticket
-
Is that a comment on McG perhaps?
-
I know your opinion of one's opinion of a movie. It's your opinion so who gives a fuck what someone else thinks, and you don't care to defend it one way or another. I think that makes some sense.But as you read on this thread, a majority of science fiction and/or action movie fans think pretty highly of T2. Granted the longer "directors cut" featuring more of the Connor/Terminator bonding, and the humanizing of the Terminator, does show that in this case less is more, and Cameron does need a strong editor. But RockLobster did a good job of listing the pros..Danny, what are your cons?
-
Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, T2, True Lies, Titanic... even his documentaries are classics. You can say shit about Cameron, but it just makes you an asshole. And for the record... I love 007, but Harry Tasker kicks his ass in every way.
-
You're a twat. Way to judge a book by its cover.
-
all over the future, and will she be scantly clad, and glistening with perspiration, breathing heavily? If so, I will be at the midnight opening.If not, it looks like a fun enough time at the movies anyway.
-
...to understand WTF Bale is saying...
-
man i am sick of hearing about avatar...so surprised no one had brought it up in a terminator/cameron thread. i am so sick of hearing about it, and yet i just propagated the avatar blather virus myself. kill me
-
By backing this film, you are saying that T3 was awesome and deserved another film (It wasnt) and you're backing McG as a director..Need I say more?
-
T2 is a great movie, but 1 is so much better. That bleak ending can't be topped, the updated Virgin Mary/Jesus story is clever, and evil Arnold is so much better than good Arnold.
-
We all know that hollywood is after the milkmoney of some poor parentless nerds only, so what is the fuzz? sooner or later EVERY franchise gets fucked. Or is.
-
...to your other impotent obsession: your hatred of Whedon and "Whedonites"Don't worry that it is useless and not relevant to this TB--that has never stopped you before!
-
Dose look transformerish although. Hope it's brutal and not die hard PG13 ish.
-
They aired this on ET, national broadcast television.Looks good.
-
Cameron struck the common nightmare fear of the unstoppable pursurer. As stated in both films, it can't be reasoned with or bargained with, its an unrelenting boogeyman hunting you till you're dead. So whether viewed as action or horror, the central idea remains the same.
-
Some people have been confused about how the future war was originally supposed to go down. Well, here, let me remind. This is how things happened as of Terminator 2 ignoring all future material. Kyle Reese from the first movie and an earlier treatment of the second movie written by Cameron and included on the T2 Ultimate edition DVD are the sources for this:
Skynet, an advanced military computer, goes online in 1997. a couple of days thereafter, Skynet demonstrates self awareness. The humans panic and try to pull the plug. Skynet perceives this action as an attack by humanity and responds by initiating Judgement day. the remaining humans are rounded up and put into camps. some of them help build Skynet's infrastructure, others are killed in death camps. This is humanities fate for years and human numbers are reduced so low that people nearly go extinct. But John Connor appears and has a effective strategy to combat skynet, he rallies the survivors and begins the future war. Under Connor's leadership, Skynet's forces are destroyed and beaten back relentlessly. Heres the part many don't know the full details on, but it was revealed on the DVD. There came a where Connor was able to lead a platoon of top soldiers, (including Kyle Reese) and Skynet central command. They broke in, overwhelmed the defenses, and found there way to the skynet central server itself, and destroyed it. The humans WON. Connor unequivocally WON THE WAR. But in it's last moments before destruction, skynet conceived of one final desperate plan, utilizing prototype technologies. It had cracked time travel, and intended to kill connor. But Skynet's knowledge of Connor's history was very sketchy, and there were only 2 points where it could conceivably know his whereabouts and attack him. One was to attack Sarah Connor before his birth in Los Angeles, and it also located Connor as an adolescent in Los Angeles again. Two Terminators were simultaneously sent back through time to each point. a regular T 800 to attack Sarah and the more advanced T1000 prototype to attack John, because it viewed John, even as a teenager, as more dangerous. The terminators went back just as Skynet was destroyed. John Connor and the soldiers found the time chamber, and learned of this plan. John sent Kyle Reese back to protect his mother and made him memorize a message. After Kyle lept through time, John commandeered the now defunct Terminator factory equipment, and ordered it to create one more T800, but he was able to use the same equipment to reprogram it to protect himself. The terminator then went back. -
Dec 04, 2008 2:03:49 PM CST
Ofcourse, T3 and Connor Chronicles fucked with that mightily
by greenstyle92
and missed the point: Time travel was a one time only thing.
-
this looks good, and hopefully it will be rated-R. they've got my money. btw, it's fucking difficult to make one of these movies. i'd like to see some of you whiny people make something yourselves, you bunch of negative cubicle jockeys.
-
Ever since T2 Rickey's been dying to see this movie get made. About damned time we get to see the machines rise up and go apeshit.
-
Damn You Michael Bay
-
I mean, if it didn't have Christian Bale, would anybody care? You guys can barely keep a Terminator seris on TV, what hope does this movie have? No Arnold, No Winston, No Cameron = No Sale
-
Josh Nolan wrote the script for this movie. You may know him from his writing talents on a little heard of movie called "The Dark Knight." Feel free to whine about McG as much as you damned well please, but Bale + the writer from TDK = good times.
-
Now I'm back on the "wait and see" line
-
Not really a surprise though is it? Slow motion kills an action scene stone dead, somebody should point this out to the hacks masquerading as action directors these days.
-
Congratulations on winning today's Stupid Post Award.
-
Dec 04, 2008 2:53:04 PM CST
I thought he was saying "The machines have been busy"
by thehumanbeingandfish
I thought he was saying "The machines have been busy". Will go see this. Then again I liked T3, even though it was too goofy at times. Then again so was T2.
-
PROS:future war
john connor as resistance leader...not another angsty brat
said leader played by bale
classic terminators, with a few surprises
wasted cities...what we have always wanted
a seemingly good balance of actual props and sets with CG work
it's not T3
classic music (so far)
well shot actionTHE CONS AND WILD CARDS
McG a little untested or out of element
some silly new bots (some good)
possible shit ending with connorskin worn on a terminatori admit, though there are less cons, they are each strong enough to equal 2 or three pros each...so it's still a draw for me, and i shall wait and see -
it's "Those hands have been busy. Sorry.
-
Because this movie does (at least in basic concept) what has needed to be done since T2, mainly, show us the freaking war! Now if the director only has part of last name for his whole name, or the script leaks reveal absolute retardation, or the trailer looks a little terminator-ish. The fact still remains. This is not a time-traveling chase movie and the lead does not look like a sixteen year old. I remain hopeful.
-
This has me more excited than anything else about the movie. But just because the script and lead actor is good doesn't mean it will be great (true romance?).
-
and whether or not it's rated R is probably the most important unknown right now.
-
go watch T1 again and tell me- do you really want to see that future war? with the cheesy 'pew pew' lazer-tag bullshit, and resistance people in tightrolled pants with shades on and shit, shooting horrible lazer guns? If they keep that, i'd like to see how they are going to explain the sudden leap in lazer weapon tech in connor's future. i guess it's stolen from skynet and other terminators...but still go watch that cheese and then rewatch these trailers and tell me what you prefer...today
-
Those robotic teddy-bears from Thundercats were more menacing than that cheesy 'Transformers without the paint' rip-off. The first two Terminator movies were great because they pushed boundaries and gave us something that exceeded our expectations. I hope that this project has been done as a true continuation of the original ethos and not because, well, it's time for another sequel before people lose all faith. Please McG, the SFX should come second to the story. 2008 has set a high standard in storytelling, and it's shown that that's exactly what people want.
-
To the movie that is. I think Christian Bale is just amazing and this actually looks decent from the footage. Now I just have to see if I'm willing to suffer through EW to see the cool preview of things to come.
-
I hope it doesn't seem like they're using the original theme to try and convince us that we're watching a Terminator movie.
-
skinning the connor
-
Hasn't he?
-
and fuck WALMART with a Terminator dick.
-
Fuck them for that. They need to double their prices, and pay their employees $100,000 a piece no matter what job they do so they go out of business. Cuz it would be awesome if they went out of business and all those people lost their jobs and all the stockholders and their 401k's got screwed cuz I hate Walmart cuz they're like a corporation and like evil and stuff.
-
Dec 04, 2008 4:11:49 PM CST
ZeroCorpse also thinks Coppola should make a GODFATHER 2
by george newman
being the big cinephile ZeroCorpse is, i bet he's just aching for Francis Ford Coppola to further explore the Corleone family with a Part 2. http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/why_dont_they_make_a_second
-
An obviously shitty film that morons will love when it first comes out until about 6 months after release and everyone gets over the special effects and realizes how terrible it is. I can't wait to fight this fight yet again with these people only to have them come around so I can say I told you so. And btw, in regards to Indy 4 and Transformers, I TOLD YOU SO.
-
Fuck you, McG
-
I mean, should we paying to see that? Pretty X-Rated, ya know?
-
Agree with you about Indy 4. But Transformers is the SHIZNIT!
-
...Uh, Cameron didn't "come along" and crap on Terminator. He made Terminator. Aliens, well, true perhaps, although I prefer Aliens to Alien. And even if he did turn them into balls to the wall action, he still made the best entries in the series, while other lesser talents fucked them up. And kwisatzhaderach yeah, your right, slow motion kills action scenes. Just like all those awful action movie masterpieces by Woo or Peckinpah. Tard.
-
I'm not going to bother with an argument, as I do see your point about Walmart, but without pushing it on you I hope you check out the documentary "WalMart: The Highcost of a Low Price." In full disclosure Walmart put out its own response documentary called "Why Walmart is as Successful and Why That Makes Some People Angry" to tell their side of the story. The most ballanced program may be Frontline's "Is WalMart Good for America." Of course the best of all is Playboy's "Girls of Walmart."
-
that looked pretty cool. looking forward to the trailer. as I am to the new Friday 13th trailer, released today. There is a new one sheet featuring a full shot of Jason over at bloody disgusting. very nice!
-
Uwe Boll would like to stop you right there. ^_^
-
...in London, right after the Dark Knight opened? I think he got drunk, or high, and just unloaded on them when they wouldn't shut their mouths. No charges were filed, because he is a famous actor, and that lets him do whatever he wants.
-
Dec 04, 2008 5:31:36 PM CST
they should have just sent one of those giant terminators back
by burgerking
John Conner would be annihilated in .98 seconds.
-
The footage so far looks good. I think this could be a pretty cool film.
My only complaint, and it's a gigantic one, is the fact McG's studio is neutering the franchise by making it PG-13. This sucks, in my opinion. I want Terminator films consistent with the harsh language, unpredictably intense drama, and explosive gore that defined the franchise. PG-13 sucks. "Screw you" replaces "Fuck you, asshole." See what I mean? That's how it'll be. It insults and bitchslaps everything that's come before.
If they ramp up "Salvation"s rating to an "R," I'll stop complaining and embrace it. -
I've listened 4 times and can't figure it out. Looks cool by the way.
-
somethign has been busy? Even still, looks fucking sick.
-
At the start of the trailer, Bale says, "The devil's hands have been busy."
-
I am saying it is stupid for people to criticize them for smart business practices and even stupider for people to criticize AICN for having a mainstream corporate advertiser. I'm sure Harry being a good liberal would like to be sponsored exclusively by Barack Obama and Whole Foods, but we live in the real world not fantasyland, and AICN is a business. You don't like Walmart? Don't shop there (I don't), tell your friends not to shop there, make sure you have none of their stock in your mutual funds etc. Oh and Saluki? I guess you don't shop at malls, best buy, circuit city, target, gas up at chevron, shell, eat at subway, mcdonalds, chipotle, get medicine at walgreens? Or do you shop at some of those places and then go home and cry as you think about how you suck corporate cock yourself?
-
Looks different but good, then again trailers be decievin!
-
I hope they ignore the cannon created by that show. It is ok to accept that half the human and Terminator population from the future are time travelers to help keep a TV series going, but it is stupidity to tie it into the movie. The whole idea that future John has a Terminator as his only confidant is stupid too even on the show.
-
Still really not feeling it. I don't know if Christian Bale is enough to save this movie. Samuel L. Jackson is one of the coolest actors on the planet and he cannot save most of the shit projects he takes for the cash. I don't know if Bale can either if this is a more like McG's other shitfests.
-
Terminator 3 got rated an R in the U.S. , in the U.K. it was given a 12a
with no cuts which is confusing considering i thought it was violent for a 12a, it only has the word fuck 3 times and alot of the violence is off screen. I think T4 will get a pg13, it's obvious the studios want that rating as it makes more profit and is easier to market then.It's all about money nowadays and unfortunately i think that will be T4s undoing, i hope i'm wrong -
Look at the first one w/ Arnold cutting out his eye and gunning down housewives, then watch the others...
-
"T2 is a great movie, but 1 is so much better."
Yes indeed. -
"I hope they ignore the cannon created by that show."
I hope they ignore EVERYTHING apart from the original story. None of the sequels make any sense; the whole point of The Terminator is that it's set in a SINGLE TIME LINE universe with a loop; this means it's IMPOSSIBLE to change the future. How do we know this? The photograph - its inclusion in the film is specifically to signal that we are NOT in an alternate time line, and that, contrary to John Connor's pep talk message, the future IS set. T2 and T3 are narrative non-seqiturs. (T3 is somewhat more forgiveable, and I actually like that much-maligned movie more than T2.) -
"The first one, like Alien, was a HORROR MOVIE, not an action flick."
I don't agree...I'd say it's an intense thriller combined with a love story, all with a great background concept. Its primary emotions are: (1) fear, yes, but also (2) sadness. Even the main theme is primarily a lament, although peppered with a threatening, recurring motif. But the main melody carries the emotion of sadness...it's a story all about loss: the loss of our prelapsarian world, the loss of Sarah's safety and innocence, the loss of Reese.
I can see that there are some horror-like elements in The Terminator. It's somewhat Halloween-ish at times (relentless, unemotional killer, tracking down and killing women).
I also thought when watching No Country for Old Men recently that it had some elements reminiscent of The Terminator. -
Haha he does say it like that.
-
wrong. T2 is not a 'narrative non-sequitur'. what makes you think just because events unfolded according to fate, and that there was the emphasis on the photograph, that T1 was set in a single time-lime, and that the future was in fact, pre-determined? none of the characters in that movie even attempted to change the future (there were germs of this in some of the deleted scenes)' there simply wasn't time, they were constantly on the run from the terminator. thus, events unfolded according to pre-determination. the whole theme that cameron wanted to explore in T2 was precisely that - could the future be changed; specifically a character burdened by the knowledge of impending doom and could she change things? the old, if I assassinated hitler would i prevent world war 2 idea. it is entirely compatible with the themes inherent in terminator 1 and a logical extension of it. wisely, he decided not to use the original ending (which, though not as good, actually isn't a logical fallacy either - grandfather paradox), in favour of a more ambiguous and satisfying ending. there is nothing at the end of T2 that states that they actually managed to change the future - just a sense of hope that they did. the themes of both terminator movies ARE that the future isn't set, that people are in control of their own destiny, and have free will to take action. as reese says in the original 'one possible future (ie. the future that plays out in t1 if they don't do anything to try and alter it)- i don't know tech stuff'. there CAN be multiple time lines. do you really think cameron is that stupid that he would create such a gaping flaw in his sequel, that he doesn't even know the themes of the story he created? t1 - a pre-determined time line that plays out in the absence of action against it. t2 - a film revolving around the ability to (possibly) alter the future. an excellent thematic duology. t3 doesn't offer anything new in terms of thematics - amongst its many other flaws.
-
or Jonah Nolan.
-
I mean, McGinty said it was only an idea thrown around during script stage but not the one they chose. But then I read that they changed it late in the game because of the backlash. Either way, he said that the rumour isn't true.
-
"Wrong", eh?
Allow me to explain to you the metaphysics of The Terminator.
:)
"what makes you think just because events unfolded according to fate, and that there was the emphasis on the photograph, that T1 was set in a single time-lime, and that the future was in fact, pre-determined? none of the characters in that movie even attempted to change the future (there were germs of this in some of the deleted scenes)' there simply wasn't time,"
Irrelevant. Completely irrelevant. Heard of Butterfly Effects? If we were in a different timeline, the TINIEST change would have made a huge difference. The mere fact of The Terminator and Reese's presence in LA in 1984 would have ever-snowballing effects on the future, even if all they did was sit in deckchairs playing cards with each other. People who would have walked past in the original timeline might have stopped to glance at them or talk to them. They would have then arrived slightly later at their destinations, slowing down traffic slightly, altering patterns of movement. Certain car accidents that took place in timeline 1 would not have happened in timeline 2, and vice versa. They would have brought viruses with them. They would alter the movements of air currents, birds...a week later in timeline 2, patterns of activity in LA would be substantially different. You think that after seven months, in timeline 1 and timeline 2, Sarah Connor BY PURE CHANCE ends up at the exact same gas station, with the same exact haircut, the same dog, the sun at the same point in the sky etc? I mean, what the fuck was she doing at this gas station in timeline 1 anyway? Was she just on vacation? (Shakes head.) No, I'm afraid you've misunderstood completely. A quite common misunderstanding, so don't feel too bad about it. I am guessing you saw T2 first, and projected its "branching timelines" story back onto The Terminator. The Terminator is NOT a branching timelines story, and this is NOT because "nobody tries to change the future". On the contrary, the CSM-101 is trying THROUGHOUT to change the future. You might think (as many people do, mistakenly), that we're in a new timeline, but one in which "all the important stuff is still the same thanks to Reese", i.e. Sarah is still alive. But aside from the photo, this interpretation is patently absurd: Reese is Connor's father, so MUST have been there in "timeline 1". How is this possible? Because THERE IS ONLY ONE TIMELINE. You can gnash your teeth all you like, but you're simply mistaken. You have misinterpreted the film. It is like La Jetee and Twelve Monkeys: a time loop story. Sorry! -
"the themes of both terminator movies ARE that the future isn't set"
No. By the end of The Terminator, you realise that the overriding theme is of being in a deterministic loop. That's what the photo is for. THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF ITS INCLUSION IN THE FILM. Think it's there just for decoration? :) If you read the novelization of the screenplay, this expands on the idea even further. Even the final word of the novel is "destiny". This is what Sarah's thinking about as she drives into the desert, i.e. the fact that there really IS such a thing as a destiny.
There's another aspect of the novel/screenplay that would have cemented the idea yet further, although I'm guessing that with the photo as evidence of the time loop, this was unneccesary: when the terminator kills the first two Sarah Connors (the "wrong Sarahs"), he slices open their legs to check for the presence of a metal pin. This is one of the elements in Skynet's sketchy records about her, and it will serve as a confirmation marker that the terminator has killed "the right Sarah". At the end of the story, after the fight in the factory in which Sarah's leg is badly injured by debris, she gets a metal pin put in it. Geddit? IT'S THE SAME TIMELINE. It's a loop in the same timeline. There was always a terminator in 1984, there was always Reese in 1984, there was always a metal pin in Sarah's leg as a result of the fight with a killer robot.
Again, sorry that you've misunderstood it for years. It's not really your fault. James Cameron retconned his own story in T2. -
"do you really think cameron is that stupid that he would create such a gaping flaw in his sequel, that he doesn't even know the themes of the story he created?"
On the contrary, I think that he didn't CARE. Also, most people don't tend to deal with time travel logic very well, so I'm guessing he felt he could get away with it.
The other issue is that The Terminator is actually quite a different story to make a logical sequel to if you want to maintain suspense: how do you make an exciting sequel set in a world that has been revealed as deterministic and running on rails? He could simply have told the story of the future war, but we know how it ends. So if he was DETERMINED to make a sequel that introduced uncertainty, breaking his own rules is a logical (if slightly lame) thing to do. And as I say, most people will just say "Hey, it's just a movie, and it's time travel stuff, so, y'know...anything goes!" This is actually false (anything goes) but the subtlety and brilliance of The Terminator wasn't necessarily what made the film a hit anyway; most people probably just loved the action scenes, and the bad-assness of Arnie.
Talking of directors never being stupid enough to make a sequel that contradicted their own original movie...seen Highlander 2 recently? What about those Star Wars prequels? ;) Directors break their own narrative consistency ALL THE TIME. -
"The Terminator is actually quite a different story to make a logical sequel to"
Sorry, I meant "difficult", not "different". -
"although I'm guessing that with the photo as evidence of the time loop, this was unneccesary"
I should have written "Cameron must have deemed this (the metal pin) as an unneccessary extra in the film" -
Dec 04, 2008 10:40:31 PM CST
Can't wait to see this 3rd installment of the Batman Franchise!
by colloquiallyborn
.. oh wait.. sorry.. wrong sequel(s)... Still looks great... :)
-
Then the hell with it.
-
Listen pal, you can deride me all you like, but they'll be no 'gnashing of teeth' from this end. It's you, in fact, who is the one who is mistaken and have misinterpreted
the film - sorry that I called you on it and it doesn't gel with your 'interpretation' (and it really is only that), but that's just the way it goes. So less of the patronising tone. Don't believe me? Er, Cameron - you know, the guy who created the terminator- has stated that both the films are thematically about fate and free will. straight from the horse's mouth. I believe he even stated such in mid-80's interviews long before T2 came out.the theme of terminator was never that it was impossible to change the future. and no, I saw T1 WAY before T2 came out, so i'm not 'projecting' anything - but thanks for making ridiculous assumptions none the less. The stuff you're talking about has NO relevance whatsoever to the terminator films. we could go on all day about butterfly effects and other sci-fi theories - that's completely outside the scope of even the first movie, and little to do with the main storytelling and thematic thrust. there will always be narrative 'problems' like that with any time travel stories - indeed there are several such logical errors even in the first movie. but that has nothing to do with what the films' central ideas are. the logical minutiae of time travel, of minute interactions affecting things, simply doesn't factor in and the absence of it certainly doesn't support you argument - no such logical deduction that its a single, unchangeable timeline can be made from it (i'm not saying that it isn't interesting, and it presents great scope for sci fi focussed only on that, but its completely outside the scope of the main narrative of even T1 - deductions have to made in a movie. if cameron was making a film that revolved around butterfly effect on time travel, I would concede that it has merit in regards to the underpinning logic of the film, but he isn't). So, we're back to the time line as presented in the first movie - and nothing you've said invalidates what i've stated. of course she ends up at the same gas station - this version of events is indeed pre-determined(and of course the t-101 tries to change the future. i think you knew damn well i was referring to reese and sarah connor.) . In conclusion, even if all that you said was correct, how does that present T2 as a narrative non-sequitur? As I pointed out, there is nothing in T2 that states the future HAS been changed. So, no cigar. I presume you're more interested in nitpicking sci fi nerd 'theories', whereas I am more interested in storytelling execution and the main thrust of an idea and themes. some minor logical inconsistencies in a story (unavoidable with time travel tales, which obviously no one has ever done in reality, so i'm afraid its all 'theory')do not negate a compelling narrative (and I concede none of your stated ones for the resons given above). I will say you could also do to learn some manners and stop being a first class, condescending prick as well. -
they can never replicate the utterly utterly bleak atmosphere of the future war scenes in T1, i think it's because each time there's a new future war imagining it's being done with CGI and the highest budgets, while in 1983 cameron is using the Roger Corman effects trickery and melding different physical/optical effects into a seamless blend which results in such rawness, nothing like it afterward.
-
In the words of Chris Morris, "You're wrong, and you're a grotesquely ugly freak".
Ah, yes, this old chestnut:
"Er, Cameron - you know, the guy who created the terminator- has stated that both the films are thematically about fate and free will. straight from the horse's mouth."
Here's a classic maxim to which you should cleave:
"Trust the tale, not the teller."
Seriously, don't worry. By misunderstanding The Terminator you're in good company. (Hee hee.)
I'm bringing out a book that covers the metaphysics of T1 and T2 in some depth, late summer of next year. (Title to be decided.) I devote around 80 pages to the topic of a deterministic STL being the only plausible interpretation of The Terminator, and T2 being fundamentally incompatible. The photo is just one of many killer blows against the multiple time line interpretation of T1.
By the way, the butterfly effect is not a "sci fi theory". It's a known phenomenon of the mathematics of complexity. The real world is an enormously complex system, and thus unless your assertion is that the tale is not supposed to be set in a world that is pretty much functionally isomorphic to our world, you have to bring complexity on board regardless of the thematic elements of the movie. -
"stop being a first class, condescending prick as well."
Oh, but I'm SO GOOD at it! Don't deny me my first calling in life!
Okay, okay, truce, lighten up, you started it by making bold, manly statements that dismissed my opinion as fallacious. "WRONG! Stand aside, untermenschen!" Plus, well, you're just MISTAKEN, and wrongness plus misplaced confidence always invite rudeness in my book. :)
"of course she ends up at the same gas station - this version of events is indeed pre-determined"
Okay, so let me try to lock your position down. In The Terminator, are the events we're seeing (a) "the ONLY timeline", (b) "the second timeline" or (c) other? I'm just not quite sure what your position is. Was there ever a version of 1984 with no terminator and no Reese? (Or, at least, in the version of history that Reese comes back from, was there a terminator and Reese in the 1984 of that timeline?)
-
Dec 05, 2008 1:44:55 AM CST
Who cares when AVATAR is fucking our eyeballs in 2009?
by motoko kusanagi
nobody
-
Go onto YouTube and watch the trailers for the original movie, i.e. The Terminator. Find the one where voice-over man says, "In this city, under cover of darkness, someone is stalking Sarah Connor..." It's presented, at first, like a serial killer murder mystery. So remind yourself of the premise of The Terminator. Think about Silberman's questions in the police station. To reproduce them here...why were the other girls murdered? And why this elaborate scheme with the terminator?
The central premise of the movie is that Skynet strikes at Connor's MOTHER because it cannot strike at HIM. The retroactive abortion, based on the sketchiest of details and requiring systematic elimination of ALL Sarah Connors in 1984 LA, is its best shot, and its last, desperate roll of the dice. "Its defense grid was smashed; WE'D WON." So ignoring the time travel logic inconsistency, T2 just makes no fucking sense as a sequel. It hopes that you conveniently forget the very premise of The Terminator and accept that it is able to send back an advanced super-terminator to strike at John Connor himself. What the fuck? Whatever happened to "most of the records were lost in the war. Skynet knew almost nothing about Connor's mother. Her full name, where she lives. They just knew the city. The Terminator was just being systematic."
I repeat: The Terminator is about a wacky, round-the-houses, elaborate hail Mary pass necessitated due to lack of information, and is the last act Skynet is able to carry out before the commandos send Reese and blow the TDE. Whatever happened to, "Nobody goes home; nobody else comes through. It's just him...and me"? Whatever happened to "The FINAL battle will...be fought here. In our present. Tonight"? What, it was really the PENULTIMATE battle? The first of quite a few battles, depending on how many sequels we want to make? T2 doesn't fit in with this at all! It's contrived bullshit! -
"As I pointed out, there is nothing in T2 that states the future HAS been changed."
At a stretch, you can make a case for that, but it's a somewhat perverse interpretation. T2 IS thematically about changing the future. Of course, the script's coda (the deleted final scene) shows a clearly changed future. But you can always counter that the text of the story is what's up on screen, so, hey, fair enough. It's obvious that Cameron was INTENDING to make the "new future" explicit but might have had a change of heart later. But the script is peppered with this theme throughout. E.g.
"But I thought... aren't we changing things? I mean... right now? Changing the way it goes?"
"That's right! There's no way I'm going to finish the new processor now. Forget it."
Now, Dyson and his wife could simply be mistaken, just as John Connor is wrong when he says "The future is not set" in the original. (As you'll know, he doesn't say "there is no fate but what we make for ourselves"; that's not part of the original movie, although it does appear in a deleted scene.) Like Reese, all of these people "don't know tech stuff". But, as I say, it is pretty clear that Cameron wanted T2 to be a story about free will, possibilities, the idea of changing the future. If you want to argue that T2 does NOT involve changing the future, fair enough. But either pursue that course or pursue the course of arguing that both movies feature the legitimate possibility for change. But you can't do both...
-
"if cameron was making a film that revolved around butterfly effect on time travel, I would concede that it has merit in regards to the underpinning logic of the film, but he isn't)"
Actually, he is, but in a non-obvious way. The photo is there to prove that we're in a single time line, as I say, because, as we live in a world that WILL exhibit butterfly effects, and the photo is identical, the ONLY rational interpretation is that the act of time travel has created NO CHANGE, and therefore that we are in A SINGLE TIME LINE.
-
"in 1983 cameron is using the Roger Corman effects trickery and melding different physical/optical effects into a seamless blend" Yeah, there's something really cool about TT's future scenes: the rearscreen projection as opposed to bluescreen compositing somehow gives it a weird, distinctive sheen...not quite real, but real cool.
-
And McG, Mr. Joseph Mac Fucky Gintol, that stupid talentless hack, still at the helm? Then count me out, no matter how many Christian Bale's are in it.
-
T1 is a closed temporal paradox. There really is no room for T2 or the other films.
Skynet is about to lose. It uses the time displacement equipment to send the T-800 after Sarah Connor and only Kyle Reese also gets through. That's it. Ultimately, Kyle goes on to become John's father. John knows this - as far as we know, he's the only one who knows this in the future and possibly Sarah if she's still alive then. In the future, they let/make it happen because they know how it's going to turn out. No variation. It's a closed circle loop. The obvious irony, in trying to save itself, Skynet destroys itself.
If you throw T2 in the mix, then things start to get very messy. Things in the T1 loop get bent out of shape and even broken. Ie, what happened to Miles Dyson and all his research that supposedly became Skynet. How another two terminators get sent to a time 10 years later seems to be a mystery given how time critical Kyle Reese said his journey was before the whole place blew up.
Supposedly now though is the paradox as to how Terminator parts are used to create Skynet in the first place, seemingly showing that Skynet itself came into being out of a closed loop and no-one created it in effect. Corollary - God hates us and made it all happen. -
"Don't go robodaddy! We Wub Woo!"
"I wub woo too, John Connor. Now, put me to sleep like Old Yeller."
"WAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! I'm a whiny bitch ass teenager who thinks guns n roses is cool! WAAAAH!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!" -
Search your OOOOOOZEEEEEE NEIN MILLUHMEETUH you know it to be true.
-
Dec 05, 2008 6:22:56 AM CST
LaserPants - Your opinion is now worth shit.
by i_am_not_the_droid_you_are_looking_for
In 1991 Guns n Roses were cool. That's the worst "criticism" of a movie I've seen in a long time. That's like saying Lethal Weapon is shit because Mel Gibson hates the jews.That coupled with the fact that you like T3 means you're an absolute dickhead.
-
You do realize, of course, that T2 is a separate entity from you? that your entertainment choices are not the same as the self? Yes, even you can overcome your geek-schizophrenia if you just come to these two very important realizations. Let me guess, you saw T2 when you were about 8? Hadn't seen the first one? Thought so.
-
geekdom disagrees on your hate for T2. Any particular reason this didn't do it for you?
-
Thanks for your assumptions, just like your opinions you are way off the mark. I saw T2 when I was 13 and had seen the first one about 20 times on video. T2 is not as good as the first, but for you to call it shit quite simply means that you are an absolute dickhead. Your opinion of T3 is proof enough of that.
-
I agree with you about "T1". The story IS a closed temporal paradox. "T2" and "T3" were wholly unnecessary, as were any other Terminator stories, including the tv show and "Terminator: Salvation." In fact, the true drama of the first film -- the love story between Kyle and Sarah -- is annihilated by everything that's come afterward.
This is why the only DVD I own is "The Terminator." All other stories I consider fan fiction. High-production, mostly entertaining fan fiction, but still fiction. The real story ended with pregnant Sarah sitting on her motorcyle staring down the dark desert highway as the "duh duh duh du-dum" theme pulses in.
Oh, and Laserpants, you're definitely in the tiny minority that hates "T2." I'm a "T1" guy all the way, but "T2," as fan fiction, kicks some serious ass. I liked it a lot. -
He was the Jeffersons' neighbor, and was on Sesame Street.
-
1) Terminator not only becomes a good guy for some retarded reason, but he is also reduced to an ersatz father figure. He goes from ultimate cold badass to symbol of gay emo father-complex. Epic fail.
2) Sarah Connor, totally unconvincing as butch lesbo mom, delivering lines with such ludicrous gravitas it becomes unintentional parody. I didn't take her seriously AT ALL.
3) John Connor - turns out the badass general from the future was a ragingly gay emo whiner kid with a severe father complex who likes guns and roses and cries when a robot dies. Epic gay.
4) Totally contradicts the ending of T1, which is perfect, and spooky, now its inevitable? Why? Oh, I know why, because Cameron's last movie bombed and he couldn't think of any new ideas.
Now, I saw T1 when I was a kid, in the theatres and TOTALLY loved it. I saw it multiple times that summer and was obsessed with it. All I wanted to see after that in a sequel was a badass future war scenario depicting John Connor in all his badass future general glory kickin' ass and not bothering to take names. THATS what T2 should have been -- essentially what T4 looks like its going to be -- and instead I got this cloying, whiny, father-complex bullshit with some admittedly groundbreaking efx (for the time)? I HATED it. Loathed it. I remember going to see it with my girlfriend at the time and both of us just cracking up over how bad it was. It became a running joke for weeks. We busted on it constantly, and lots of people liked it, but couldn't disagree with us either. My theory on the popularity of T2 is the same as that of Burtonman -- people had been blitzed with a nonstop advertorial hype barrage for months previous to release that told them they HAD to like it, and thus, they did.
Oh, and I'd like to go on record so we can all talk about it later when it comes out, that AVATAR is going to bomb, fucked eyeballs or not. How much you want to bet? -
4) Totally contradicts the ending of T1, which is perfect, and spooky. Why? Oh, I know why, because Cameron's last movie bombed and he couldn't think of any new ideas.
-
*sigh*Some guys never learn...T2 = classic. There's nothing to argue about. Only retarded dipshits like that Speed Racer-lovin' talkbacker called LaserPants would try that.And the best future war battle sequence is in the first five minutes of T2. Pretty brilliant pre-title sequence, imho.
-
Was one of the great things about it. It repaired the epic gay ending of T2. Also, it featured really exciting and fun set pieces. Finally, it was really funny and campy / stupid. Now I wouldn't call T3 a good movie by any stretch of the imagination, but it was a whole lot more entertaining than T2 in my opinion. The bathroom fight scene alone trumps anything in T2; it borders on grindhouse exploitation.
-
Wait, why did you name yourself after a female cyborg again? Oh yeah, thats right, its the closest you will ever come to making physical contact with a female human being.
-
WAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! I'm a whiny bitch ass dickhead who wanted a future war movie! WAAAAH!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!
-
T3 made Judement Day inevitable because it was made by talentless fuckheads who wanted to rape the franchise for all the money they could get.T2 repeatedly states there is no fate but what we make for ourselves.It was as far from inevitable as you can get.
-
1) Arnold. He's just fucking cool, no matter how limited his acting skills are. We loved him for being the hero this time, as he was the hero in TOTAL RECALL, PREDATOR, RED HEAT and the other great flicks he made back then.
2) Mind-boggling action. T2 is first and foremost a sci-fi action thriller and from that standpoint alone it's one of the most thrilling ever made.
3) Jaw-dropping AND groundbreaking special effects work. Still looking great, even for todays standarts. Also, Kudos to the stunt team and second unit crew.4) Storytelling. It's not about what T2 is telling, but how the story is presented and how it unfolds. James Cameron is a master in storytelling and T2 is one of the many examples for that.
5) Score. Brilliant. Not only the title tune but especially the scores throughout the movie. A class of its own.6) Camera work. What Adam Greenberg did here is simply stunning be it the lighting, the angles or the images themselves.
I could go on forver but I'm getting tired of defending such an obvious masterpiece like T2 against obvious blockheads like LaserPants. -
"WAAAAAAAAAAH!!! I'm an obese virgin and I think that the movies I like are the same as me due to an acute personality disorder and advanced schizophrenia! WAAAAAAAAAH!!!"
-
Even the ones the market brainwashed you into believing. I bet the lot of you thought Burtonman was great too. Also, that T2 was one of the first movies you ever saw when you were very young and therefore you ascribe a quality to it that doesn't actually exist. A similar phenomenon exists with Star Wars, with the caveat that Star Wars, the original one, was actually very good.
-
I'll give Laserpants this: however you feel abouit his "T2" dissing, he made his arguments pretty well seven posts above. Disagree with him, but don't slam him for being cheesy. He made his case pretty well.
-
Project much?I hope you're still with that "girlfiend" of yours, because there's nothing I like more than two mongoloids finding each other in this crazy mixed up world of ours.
-
...those were pretty stupid remarks. Are you his long lost girlfriend, or why do you defend him like that?
-
Don't forget: AVATAR - Penetrating your looking organs in 2009!!!
-
He doesn't, and that's okay. Unusual for this site, but okay.
-
to read his comments as to why. I logged on, and just started typing before reading all the posts.
-
I've no problem with differences in opinion, but...Don't mistake expressing an opinion for expressing an opinion well.Laserpants expressed his opinion, and he's entitled to it, but he has not provided anything but whiny nonsense about emo-father relationships and guns n roses.I'd really like to hear the opinion of someone who dislikes T2 if they can back it up with reasoning. Not because I want to prove them wrong, but because I'd enjoy debating films with people.
-
Aren't you the boy? when they put teeth in your head they must have ruined a perfectly good ass, eh? There's little more amusing than a pompous pseudo-intellectual who's nowhere near as intelligent as he thinks he is. Et puis, indeed. Unfortunately for you, people are not going to be brow-beaten towards your interpretation of terminator, nor concede that it is the better film, just because you say so. something tells me you're easily irked when challenged, but tough titty, because that's your problem , not mine. and as for half the things you've condescendingly stated that most people misunderstand about terminator, I GET IT (you'd have to be brain dead not to). did you not actually read what I posted? do you really think that most people don't get that the photograph illustrates a closed loop, or that there was always a terminator or reese in 84? there's no dispute about that. I guess ol' Kaitan with his 'intellectual superiority' is the only one who understands , eh? indeed - better than most viewers, and even film makers no less!however, all that doesn't negate the fact that its possible to spin off a story revolving around the fact of whether the future can be changed or not - it does not mean the loop is set in stone, particularly if you subscribe to other time travel theories like grandfather paradox and the whole notion of 'auto-infantacide'. the future can possibly be changed by some decisive action, and some other time line be branched. and if such a situation occurs you seem to have arrived at some facetious position of logic, whereby since you do not see miniscule causal effects in the narrative, therefore the time line must be a fixed loop, and therefore such a notion is not possible. that's a position that requires no proof, and I'm sorry, but the narrative device of a photograph offers no such conclusive evidence just because it served to illustrate a point. the absence of something does not dictate the presence of something else. it seems you've got yourself into a paradoxical straightjacket based on nitpicking irrelevancies. because its a fixed timelime, everything must fit together like a jigsaw; if one tiny detail is out of alignment then events cannot correspond exactly? sorry, but the film glosses over that fact - its a theoretical adjunct to the story and it would require more definitive proof than one photograph, which only illustrates that there was a loop, not that it was a'single time line and therefore 'fixed'. it would be like you trying to tell me that there's a flying teapot orbiting the sun of the 5th dimension, just because I cannot conclusively prove otherwise. a straw man argument. terminator only works on the basic logic it needs to drive the plot- yes, even the first; any sci fi theories (or mathematical theories, but we ARE talking about them in the context of a sci fi movie - a reduced 2 hour genre framework narrative - hardly of the order of complexity of real life) in the context of time travel you can cook up to 'prove' your point are irrelevant. As for your other story point gripes - mere trivia that doesn't have the slightest bearing on story and can be easily explained away. In any event, its all water under the bridge regardlss - as I've pointed out, the fact that T2 doesn't actually state the future has been changed negates all your arguments anyway (the alternate ending was not used, and is therefore uncanonical). so yes, the events of T2 could be argued as running on preconceived rails as well if you want to take that tack. while we're talking non-canonical scenes there is a scene in one of cameron's earlier scripts that describes connor infiltrating the time displacement complex with his team, and then studying the face of the second terminator he's about to reprogramme and send back as if he 'were remebering that face from his past'. so, its clear that cameron had this idea in mind. just because the characters THINK they're changing the future, and have hope for it, doesn't neccessarily make it so. (I'd also point out that the novel of the original you mentioned was, in fact, written in 91, to tie in with the release of T2. so if cameron had 'retconned' his story do you think he'd make weight of this fact? once again, this is only your interpretation - sarah connor was thinking about destiny - ie. is it fixed or not.this is what T2 revolves around) all of this does not obscure the themes of free will, even if it is left up to the viewer to ultimately decide. oh, but cameron was 'clearly wanting to make a movie about free will', was he? as you've rebuked me 'don't trust the teller trust the tale'. if you think movies have no room for interpretation then its no wonder you're so insistent in trying to enforce your opinions on others. I can most certainly have my cake and eat it as T2 can be interpreted doubly.good luck on that book by the way -I might just buy a few copies and use them as toilet paper!
-
Dec 05, 2008 8:53:26 AM CST
My goodness, some ppl really need to use paragraphs...
by motoko kusanagi
My eyes hurt.
-
This will be massive, and please keep watching Sarah Connor , that show gets better every week.
-
Dec 05, 2008 8:59:26 AM CST
I scrolled up to see what this argument was about...
by i_am_not_the_droid_you_are_looking_for
and saw about 8 more posts just like it. Epic argument, but in dire need of paragraphs.
-
Being a nerd completist, I read the Terminator vs RoboCop Dark Horse comic. In it, they paint a picture of a future in which SkyNet has exterminated mankind and embarked on a galaxy-wide crusade to "cleanse" the stars of biological life. They're machines. Their whole purpose is to wipe out life.
-
Above and beyond the unbelievably lame gay whiny emo father-complex angle it jerks you off with. The rest of you just love it because... you love it. No real reasons beyond the fact that you were told you had to by advertising. And thats fine, if you're that dumb, that easily lead, that lame, but its not exactly a logical or reasonable defense of what is, at best, a painfully mediocre and ridiculous movie.
Btw, its also a really shitty action movie. None of the action sequences feel organic or real, they're clunky and loud and dumb -- essentially exactly the same as any disposable Michael Bay movie. For GOOD action seqeuences I direct you to watch SEVEN SAMURAI (the final battle in this film is quite possibly the greatest battle scene ever filmed), THE FRENCH CONNECTION, MAD MAX, MAD MAX 2 (aka THE ROAD WARRIOR), and CHILDREN OF MEN to name a few. All of which make the anemic and stiff "action" sequences in T2 look like exactly what they are -- gigantic explosions of money with slim to no substance or excitement. -
Because that was the LAMEST comeback I've ever read. Don't worry droid, one day you will emerge from the mothers basement of the soul like a shimmering, glimmering (but still really dumb) butterfly. Good luck!
-
Ok I may have been living in a cave whenever this news may have came out and if i'm late on in please forgive me fellow geeks. BUT is this going to be rated pg13? why would they do that to this franchise... Seriously what the fuck! McG got interviewed by this site and tried to appease us by stating he would treat the material faithfully and you make a FUCKING PG13 Terminator movie. Oh PLEASE, PLEASE don't say it is so. Well if it is they just lost my for ticket. I was even gonna give McG a chance but not now making it PG13 just told me alot about him as an artist. Before you fucking apologists tell me it can be good as pg13 rent the original and then tell me that again with a straight face. FUCK! please don't let it be true.
-
Dec 05, 2008 10:33:19 AM CST
Once again, you're way off the mark Laserpants.
by i_am_not_the_droid_you_are_looking_for
Are you trying to outdo my "LAMEST" comeback?If so, you've succeeded.And if Motoko Kusanagi is to be believed and you like the Speed Racer flick, then you are a bigger moron than I thought.
-
if memory serves, and not an appalingly moronic slice of torture porn dreck that wasn't even entertaining.
-
Good Things: Action scenes- that motorbike chase is fucking magnificent. Score, Motoko is right Special Effects Arnold. Bad THings: Robodaddy sucks.End Sucks Rewriting T1 canon sucks. Overall I give it a "quite good". If it wasn't so jaw dropping it would be shite.
-
why is there nothing on his IMDB listing about any involvement with Salvation?
did the WGA fuck him over or something? -
According to McG, Nolan was “the lead writer of the film,” and “I don’t know how the WGA rules work but honest to goodness, we did the heaviest lifting with Jonah.” Currently, Nolan is uncredited on the film’s IMDB page.
-
"Corollary - God hates us and made it all happen."
Aha! You're a smart man. (Or woman.) Yes, you can make a strong case for the argument from design wrt The Terminator. It isn't a logically paradoxical structure, but it does seem to be one that can only exist in toto as a single, static four dimensional entity, and it does smell rather strongly of intelligent design. -
"it does not mean the loop is set in stone"
Yes it does. If it's a deterministic universe, it's a deterministic universe. It can't be a deterministic universe so long as people don't think about changing the future into something else, at which point it becomes non-deterministic. You're dealing in fallacies, because you are subtly holding to a dualist interpretation of the world, i.e. that certain things can be clockwork, but that the mind is made of mind-stuff that is not clockwork, and that free will can make a deterministic universe non-deterministic. That appears to be where your crucial error is being made. That is why you fail.
Must have hit it pretty close to the mark to get you all riled up like that, eh, kid? :) -
"This is why the only DVD I own is "The Terminator." All other stories I consider fan fiction. High-production, mostly entertaining fan fiction, but still fiction."
I think that's a very reasonable attitude to take. -
Dec 05, 2008 1:09:02 PM CST
Did someone say, "That's a Kentucky Harvester!"
by the reluctant austinite
Nice Gremlins/Dick Miller reference. I'm still laughing my ass off. It's not everyday someone's "clever" post cracks me up. Tres Bon!
-
"the absence of something does not dictate the presence of something else."
Actually, it can do. It's called modus tollens reasoning.
If A implies B, and you know that B isn't the case, A must be false.
A small change to a complex system implies a non-identical situation 7 months later.
We see that 7 months later, we do NOT have a non-identical situation. The photo is identical. Therefore, we cannot have had a small change to the system. The absence of change dictates the presence of an identical starting point.
There is no change. Therefore Reese and The Terminator must have been in 1984 in the "previous" timeline. Therefore it is, in fact, the same timeline.
The only realistic option is for you to argue that:
EITHER
The story is not really set in our world, but in one where the laws of complexity do not apply and butterfly effects do not occur, perhaps due to many-to-one mappings which damp down the effects of changes rather than amplify them over time
OR
That due to AMAZING COINCIDENCE, the photo just ends up the same exact way, down to the tiniest detail, because of blind luck.
-
"it would be like you trying to tell me that there's a flying teapot orbiting the sun of the 5th dimension, just because I cannot conclusively prove otherwise. a straw man argument."
Well, "Russell's Teapot" is an argument in favour of taking the sensible default position in the absence of evidence to the contrary. You are thinking that the sensible default in The Terminator is to think that we're seeing an altered version of history that just happens to bend back round to the same end state as before despite taking some exciting deviations. I would suggest that this is not at ALL sensible as an interpretation.
If you are position changes in the "new" timeline, what are they? What's different this time around? And give me a brief precis of how Sarah ended up with that photo being taken of her in the "first timeline", and also why she was "in hiding before the war".
Looking forward to it. -
"If you are position"
Sorry, typo. Meant to say "if you are POSITING changes".
-
" As for your other story point gripes - mere trivia that doesn't have the slightest bearing on story and can be easily explained away."
Go on, then. (Gestures expansively.)
-
"(I'd also point out that the novel of the original you mentioned was, in fact, written in 91, to tie in with the release of T2."
Might have been reissued then, but it was first published in 1985. I bought my copy in '88 or '89. Sorry!
-
"Oh, I know why, because Cameron's last movie bombed and he couldn't think of any new ideas."
Yeah, I've often wondered what a Terminator sequel would have been like had The Abyss done well at the box office. T2 feels like the most hyper-commercial, popcorn, conservative blockbuster he could possibly have done. A teen action movie rehash with lots of visual effects, basically.
-
"There's little more amusing than a pompous pseudo-intellectual who's nowhere near as intelligent as he thinks he is."
I agree that it's healthy to laugh at yourself.
-
i mean, they all have flaws (the biggest being the child-like, innocent "i swear i will not kill anybody" at a stage when John Connor was clearly no longer innocent or child-like), but they are all stonking, great films. just enjoy them all, and hope that this 4th one is just as good.
-
That I think The Terminator is pretty much flawless, but perhaps one always feels that way about one's first love. :)
I agree with LaserPants about T3, btw: it sets out to be a dumb, fun action movie, and it achieves those aims. It has a bold, brave ending, doesn't drag on, and has lots of fun scenes. It's dumb, yes, but the franchise has already been dumbified by T2, so that doesn't bother me unduly. Once you've spray-painted the Mona Lisa pink, who's gonna complain about adding extra polka dots?
-
"All of which make the anemic and stiff "action" sequences in T2 look like exactly what they are -- gigantic explosions of money with slim to no substance or excitement."
Not least because in the second half of the movie, I don't even know what's at stake anymore. If this is a movie about "no fate but what we make for ourselves" and divergent histories, is it even important that John survives? His After the destruction of Cyberdyne, shouldn't the T-1000's mission change? Forget John Connor, it should immediately become a research scientist, or buy up Cyberdyne's corporate identity then produce its own range of neural processors. Connor is now an irrelevance.
Plus the scenes with the police: how should I react emotionally to a large friendly robot fighting against an innocent but misguided police force but not trying to kill them? Should I just be excited by explosions? (Shrugs.) I just don't care about anything that's happening.
-
Moving off the point of whether T2 is a logical impossibility, any one deriding T2's action scenes (or indeed the level of the film as simply a compelling story or drama) really needs to study basic filmmaking. T2's action scenes were like michael bay? nope, they were brilliantly edited, composed and mounted sequences. there's genuine tension and its always clear exactly what's going on. michael bay's action scenes are an incomprehensible jagged jumble of noise, and close ups - you can never tell what's going on or what you're looking at - an explosion, a robot, or somebody's shoe. but i suppose when you don't like something, you'll go to any lengths to deride it.
T1 was a classic, no doubt, and a hell of an achievement on such a small budget, but it is by no means the flawless movie you think it is - many of the supporting performances are fairly poor, the 80's music and fashion has dated more noticeably than some 90's slang and gun's n roses, the composition and camerawork aren't as surefooted as its later sequel. to call t2 a 'teen action movie' is nonsense- i could certainly make a case for the original being just a slasher b-movie dressed up in some pseudo-intellectual time-travel clothing (and indeed fairly common clothing in sci-fi literature and other media - the story is not particularly original, simply good execution, mood, and drama)- indeed most critics dismissed it as such at the time. there's nowt as harrowing as the nuclear blast sequence or sarah's attempted assassination of dyson in front of his family in the original. the terminator has 'smarts' and is a clever film but doesn't neccessarily have great intelligence. T2 has a greater conscience about the nature of responsibility (or at least the possibility of such), something which T1 abdicates if its just a mechanical story about the absence of free will and clockwork events. (and while you could argue that that's poignant, it seems to be simply a default theme dictated by following the logistics of a supposed 'unbreakable' loop - the film isn't a profound meditation on this. its simply something you've inferred as a by-product of the main thrust of the narrative).
as for what cameron's supposed T2 would have been like had the abyss not flopped - i think that's more of a wished-for supposition on your part. it would have likely been exactly the same, since he had been talking about the ideas he used in the sequel since 85. so i don't see how he made the most 'commercial film he could'.(and by the way - you definitely did not purchase that version of the novel in the late 80's. there was indeed an initial terminator novel in 84, but the one you're quoting from was a rewrite from 91 - i have both).
most of your other grievances about T2, aside from the supposed logical incompatibility with the original, are just grasping at straws and rationalising things after the fact because you can't get past this time line issue. I suspect you regard the original a little too preciously. Its good, but it ain't THAT good. T2 does many things far better.
-
There are TWO versions of it. One is the official novel released, I think, to coincide with the T2 release, but the other was written by British horror novelist Shaun Hutson several years earlier. For reasons I don't recall, Hutson's novelization was never sanctioned and the most of the books were withdrawn after a legal dispute of some kind. I own both. I got the Hutson one off eBay a few years ago.
-
aspect. Sorry to inject a little thematic emotion into your sci-fi action. Think about John Connor's young existence. From birth he is shuffled from location to location, always on the run. Bouncing from uncaring foster home to foster home once his mother is incarcerated. A mysterious man who will do anything to protect him, including sacrifice his own life, comes into his life, and John is NOT supposed to project a father figure image toward the Terminator? It echoes the theme between Ripley and Newt in Aliens. Despite the fact that the directors cut includes wisely edited scenes of bonding and "humor", the concept of Termie-Daddy makes dramatic sense.
-
young john connor is interested in his sexuality, so one day he goes up to his robot protector and unzips his pants slowly "VOT ARE YU DOING" "dont worry its what all people do" he slowly unzips his leather chaps while a giant veiny sausage slumps out a tad and quivers as it hangs down in front of slighty-hairy balls. connor gets down and starts working the shaft until the blood rises and it hardens, then he looks to his sides. the terminator remains staring still and blank. connor swallows the cock and bobs back and front sucking it, while simultaenously working the root wit hhis hands. faster and slower, finally he is shaken with animalistic desire so much that he frantically tries to unzip his own jeans and drops down his metallica underwear, he bends over and grabs the huge log and nudges inside his sphincter. at this piont he tells the terminator to fuck him, "VOT DOZ DAT MEAN" "just keep sliding in that thing back and forward a lot, but do it kidn of slowly since my anus is smaller than your massive cack" and so connor started feeling ecstacy urges, somehow his anus had nerves that caused him to have anal orgasms. the terminator started feeling strange urges as well, "JAWN I'M FEELING STRANGE DODWN THEEERE" "keep going sweety" at that point the terminator kind of exhaled and inhaled, as if the urges connected with his metallic wirey brain and he went a little faster until an explosin of cum filled connor's anus like fresh sewage fills a sewer after a summer rain. "turn around now" the veiny slimey cock slipped out and cum ran down connor's glistening anus. "turn around" and so he slid his tiny cock inside the terminator's firm buttox and his eyes roleld up as he pouned away...
-
Listen, you can throw scientific theorems at me all day, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to argue them all. You have worked yourself into an inescapable prism of logic with your pedantic and rigid interpretation of events and semantic juggling. You seem to think that, by a process of deduction, because events correlate exactly, as evidenced by the photograph, that this somehow dictates that we are in an unbreakable loop. because the film makes no play of showing any infractions at an insignificant level it must, by default, be an singular, unbreakable loop? no, the film is a boiled down narrative - plot dictates that there be things like the photograph, but why would the writer muddy the story by including every possibility engendered by time travel? The Terminator is set in the 'real world', yes- but it is a narrative fiction, boiled down to its essence, not the actual real world, not a real time simulacrum, its devices serve the plot, and anything that doesn't would be discarded. would you show a character going for a piss if that had nothing to do with the story? (even though he theoretically might have gone 'between scenes'?)therefore, the photograph only serves as a narrative point to indicates that we are in a loop, until some character takes decisive action to the contrary at some point - ie. burning the terminator parts-but you seem to think that a story can only create one of two possible time limes or universes, an unchangeable theory of time travel or a strand that can be changed, and that never the twain shall meet. that any event, even attempts to change the future, can be explained away by the fact that it was all 'pre-determined' anyway (and indeed that is a possibility for T2), and thus you can not escape from the over-arching paradox you've set up. you can not make deductions based on the simplified nature of story telling and story structure as opposed to reality (or the theoretical implications derived from time travel in reality, in all of its potential complexity) if the terminator had made it clear from the start that it was set in a timeline that could be changed would you have issues with it then? of couse the possibility of corresponding events being down to chance or coincidence would be absurd. but no that just illustrates we're on a self-consistent loop, not that the timeline can not be branched or spiked at some point and thus that string of time internally 'corrects itself' and remains consistent, leaving a future that will never come but only lives on in the memories of those that travelled back. its also worth noting that the somewhat personal events of terminator 1, of snuffing out a single life, are of a different order than the global events of T2 (of preventing the war full stop). one is inconsistent with the principle of self-adjusted cyclical closed timelike curves, the other is not.
I will say again that this scarcely matters since my MAIN point, and my preferred reading of the film, was always that T2 does not decisively state that the future has been changed, and thus may not have been. Sarah Connor says 'The UNKNOWN future rolls towards us. I face it for the first time with a sense of hope (ie. she tried)' The ending is a road leading off into the future, just like T1, with uncertain characters and possibly larger hands of fate at work. I have always been of the opinion that this is a possibility for the ending of T2 - that the film is simply a framework for exploring the idea of how someone, burdened by terrible knowledge of things to come, could attempt to alter events and what lengths they would go to, as well as the moral imperative of john connor learning responsibility on his way to becoming a great leader, and the dialectic of a 'good' terminator, illustrating that machines are simply technology, neither good nor evil, but mankind has to take responsibility for its creations (including the rebuild of humanity after the defeat of skynet). the film's ending is ambiguous and could easily point to the same conclusion as T1;it is left up to the viewer to interpret accordingly. It is entirely compatible with T1 in mood and spirit. In any event, the ideas of T2 present the intriguing flip sides of those in T1; each film explores the opposite of the other in good/bad machine; absence of fate versus the possibility of free will. if you think writers have to be hemmed in by rigid internal logic (and for the reasons discussed I don't believe there actually are any - the open ending makes sure of that even if you subscribe to unbreakable time line logic of your own devising) and thus are prevented from telling a story and exploring the themes that they wish, then that's just pedantic and a stranglehold on storytelling. there are always going to be some sort of infractions, real or imagined, particularly in a story like this -it has nothing to do with drama.
anyhow, I'm done. try not to throw your rattle out the pram in future. its been 'stimulating'. -
why does this damn site do away with the paragraphs I've set when my comments are posted! the huge blocks of text are even making my eyes ache.
-
...in this case, insert a "" (without the spaces) whenever you want a new paragraph.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 142 total posts 131 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 465 total posts 126 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 124 total posts 124 posts
- Wanna smell like the Hulk? What about Cap? Consider yourself a Thunder God or a unisex God of Mischief? -- 69 total posts 68 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 60 total posts 60 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 111 total posts 46 posts
- AICN Legends: Quint talks with Paul Reubens about all things Pee-Wee! Including the 3 (!!!) Pee-Wee movies in development! -- 37 total posts 37 posts
- Rest In Peace Bethesda’s Adam Adamowicz -- 88 total posts 37 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 174 total posts 33 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 83 total posts 32 posts