Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on May 24, 2006, 12:48:35 am
-
After getting all three of the Terminator movies on DVD recently, I do wonder: What does the future hold for the franchise?
Personally I thought the third one, compared with the other two, sucked. Sure, it was fun to watch because of all the well-done CGI and fighting scenes, but it lacked the depth the first two had (amoung other things). It just didn't seem "dark" enough. I did find a rather interesting review about it.
http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/t3review.html
I wished that Terminator 3 would have taken place in the future, but instead the writers merely recycled the plot from the second one. Think about it, from 1997-2029, Skynet was trying to destroy humanity. It spent 32 YEARS doing it! With such a long war, surely there must have been many stories to tell about the war. If they started the movie during the war, they could have at least tried to come up with a half-assed explanation for why Judgement Day happened.
So another question, is Hollywood really this creatively bankrupt?
I want T3 re-written and re-made. Show us the darkness that is the future, don't just keep recycling the same thing over and over again.
-
I still haven't seen T3...
But you're bringing this up now? :wtf:
-
My vote goes to Terminator TV-series set to happen during the 32-year war. More terminators, more carnage, more chips and coke and fatter americans. They still haven't sued Coca-Cola so there's that too.
-
Yeah, T3 could've been way better in my opinion. I still like T2 the best.
-
After getting all three of the Terminator movies on DVD recently, I do wonder: What does the future hold for the franchise?
Personally I thought the third one, compared with the other two, sucked. Sure, it was fun to watch because of all the well-done CGI and fighting scenes, but it lacked the depth the first two had (amoung other things). It just didn't seem "dark" enough. I did find a rather interesting review about it.
http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/t3review.html
I wished that Terminator 3 would have taken place in the future, but instead the writers merely recycled the plot from the second one. Think about it, from 1997-2029, Skynet was trying to destroy humanity. It spent 32 YEARS doing it! With such a long war, surely there must have been many stories to tell about the war. If they started the movie during the war, they could have at least tried to come up with a half-assed explanation for why Judgement Day happened.
So another question, is Hollywood really this creatively bankrupt?
I want T3 re-written and re-made. Show us the darkness that is the future, don't just keep recycling the same thing over and over again.
T4 does (http://imdb.com/title/tt0438488/) the whole war thing.
-
Remove "T4" part of the IMDB link and it will work.
-
:nervous:
:yes:
:nervous:
-
i dont know i dont like what hollywood does to everything it touches. i havent been to the movies in over a year. i do watch the independant film chanel alot though. at least they have some good flicks.
-
first one is the best IMHO...
The second one had that liquid metal garbage (but I loved the minigun scene :D) and the third one..well...meh..
-
first one is the best IMHO...
The second one had that liquid metal garbage (but I loved the minigun scene :D) and the third one..well...meh..
But the first one was too damn... eighties. Eugh..
IMO, the second one had the most heart, the best action, and the best writing and directing [the acting wasn't half bad either]. C'mon, who didn't cry a little at the end of it, what with the thumb and the molten.. *makes vague hand gestures*
-
But T4 is still based off of T3. That's the problem I have with it, and I heard it is going to have the same director.
T3 in its current form must be terminated.
But the first one was too damn... eighties. Eugh..
It was made in the mid-eighties, what do you expect?
-
I also liked the second best. I thought the third was total crap though. Quite unlike what I thought of Jurassic Park 3 which I actually enjoyed. (Whereas JP2 is the only film I've ever fallen asleep at in the cinema. I wasn't even tired.)
-
Anyone remember the old Terminator Future Shock games written when Bethesda was a no-name on the developer stage? At the time when the only other FPSs were Duke Nukem, Doom and Quake, there were drivable vehicles, everything was in full 3D and it had a genuine sense of creepiness to some of the levels... like when dormant Terminators suddenly come to life when you enter their weapon range and silent, floating bombs pop out of nowhere to kamikaze you. They proved quite well - and 10 years ago at that - that a game license set during the war was viable. I hope to see another game title some day.
-
I played a demo of that game, at the time I did not realize how advanced the game was.
-
Anyone remember the old Terminator Future Shock games written when Bethesda was a no-name on the developer stage? At the time when the only other FPSs were Duke Nukem, Doom and Quake, there were drivable vehicles, everything was in full 3D and it had a genuine sense of creepiness to some of the levels... like when dormant Terminators suddenly come to life when you enter their weapon range and silent, floating bombs pop out of nowhere to kamikaze you. They proved quite well - and 10 years ago at that - that a game license set during the war was viable. I hope to see another game title some day.
Viable? It's perfect!
-
Anyone remember the old Terminator Future Shock games written when Bethesda was a no-name on the developer stage? At the time when the only other FPSs were Duke Nukem, Doom and Quake, there were drivable vehicles, everything was in full 3D and it had a genuine sense of creepiness to some of the levels... like when dormant Terminators suddenly come to life when you enter their weapon range and silent, floating bombs pop out of nowhere to kamikaze you. They proved quite well - and 10 years ago at that - that a game license set during the war was viable. I hope to see another game title some day.
I think I remember that as one of the very first computer games I ever played, ever. From what I remember, I walked around for about 10 minutes, before walking into a lake, dying, and getting bored with it. Aaaaaah, those were the days.
-
Terminator: Future Shock and Terminator: Skynet were frickin' awesome games, way ahead of their time. Full 3D maps, 3D enemies, drivable/flyable vehicles, mouselook, and the levels were HUGE. You really felt like you were wandering around a desolate, dangerous, postapocalyptic wasteland.
I never could get either game to run in SVGA mode though.
-
I just recently downloaded Terminator: Future Shock (because I had heard so many good things about it), but it won't get past the CD check.
And no, I'm not going to go run out and buy a 10+ year old game that won't even work on my computer without a fraking emulator.
-
The problem I had with T3 wasn't anything specific in the plot - just that it diverge from the spirit of Terminator.
Which was the concept of "No fate but what we make for ourselves" being completely 'wrong'.
See, at first glance, the entire film is about predetermination. The arrival of the Terminator in the first movie results in the conception of John and the beginnings of Sarah's militancy - which are what ultimate save humanity.
Then in the second movie, because of the presence of the Terminator arm and CPU, mankind advanced much faster - resulting in TechCom having their own time machine and SkyNet being vastly more advanced (as evidenced by the T-1000). The destruction of Cyberdyne Systems resets things back to how they were 'supposed' to be for the timeline to continue correctly relative to the first movie.
All of which supports predetermination.
Connor knew that nothing would change when he sent Reese back.
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves." - is basically admitting that you can't change the past no matter how hard you try, but that doesn't mean you can't change the present and forge your own path into the future.
It even takes into account the meddling with time-travel. As they 'made their own fates' when they tried to change the past. Connor's 'fate' was the present - fighting SkyNet - but his future was still his own choice, regardless of any temporal fudgery. Everything's up for grabs till the very moment you try to meddle in the past, at which point all your choices become predestined.
T3 ignores all that are replaces Fate with Destiny. Connor was to lead Tech-Com to victory against SkyNet regardless of anything else. The past, present and future were all up for grabs - as opposed to the 'only future' philosophy of the previous two films.
-
I just recently downloaded Terminator: Future Shock (because I had heard so many good things about it), but it won't get past the CD check.
Apparently you can bypass this by editing the path in install.dat.
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves." - is basically admitting that you can't change the past no matter how hard you try, but that doesn't mean you can't change the present and forge your own path into the future.
Dude... WTF? This is a series that's all about time travel. There is no past, present, or future except from a relative frame of reference. Skynet's present is our past. Our present is Skynet's future. Saying "You can't change the past but you can change the future" is meaningless gibberish in this context.
-
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves." - is basically admitting that you can't change the past no matter how hard you try, but that doesn't mean you can't change the present and forge your own path into the future.
Dude... WTF? This is a series that's all about time travel. There is no past, present, or future except from a relative frame of reference. Skynet's present is our past. Our present is Skynet's future. Saying "You can't change the past but you can change the future" is meaningless gibberish in this context.
Some people actually think this much into a movie or series of movies? :wtf: Interesting.
-
*shrugs* I just didn't like it. The T-X was hot, but so what?
-
Thing is that even though Cyberdyne's research was destroyed, they still would have come up with the "neural net processor" more or less akin to what Skynet uses, but it would have taken them longer to do that. That is really the only thing that would have changed. The military's desire to have something like Skynet would not change (and, IIRC, the US military is working on something Skynet-ish, although at this stage it is less advanced then it was in the movie).
Because the desire is there and the technology will in-evitably come along, judgement day is pretty much cannot be avoided.
And the reason we like to think about this is because it provides a very dark, somewhat realistic (of course not completly, but the concept is certainly realistic), interesting view of the future.
I don't know why I like the idea of the human race getting pw3d and almost wiped out by a super-intelligent defense computer so much, but that is the series' biggest attraction for me.
-
Dude... WTF? This is a series that's all about time travel. There is no past, present, or future except from a relative frame of reference. Skynet's present is our past. Our present is Skynet's future. Saying "You can't change the past but you can change the future" is meaningless gibberish in this context.
It's a movie about how time travel doesn't allow you to change the past, present or future, regardless of your relative perspective.
As soon as you send someone back, it's because you were meant to. They affected the past by sending back Reese and the Terminator, but they never changed it.
Thus, your ultimate end is only ever 'fate' after you've tried to meddle in the past and created a predestination paradox.
They could do as they pleased in the past, present or future (in absolute terms) and their actions would forge their own future. But by sending things back in time, they effectively sealed the sequence of events between the thing arriving and them sending it - as the predestination paradox is impossible to break.
Thus, the only things in the Terminator universe which are predestined to occur are the things that lay between the arrival and the dispatch of the various time-travelling agents.
-
T1 and T2 set up a universe where there is no such thing as predetermination. You can't simply change something in the past and have that affect something in the future. If you change something in the past the entire timeline you were in is gone. Skynet wasn't trying to save itself by killing Sarah Conner. It knew it was ****ed whatever happened. But it could rewrite history so that there would be a timeline where Skynet would win.
It was a last desperate throw of the dice by a machine that knew it had lost.
Making it so that it was all fated to happen was one of the big reasons I hated T3.
-
The Terminator was just supposed to be a cool time-travel movie with robots and sex and explosions. The time-loop thing with the guy who got sent back being John Conner's dad was just the typical "Ah it always happened this way" cliche that time-travel flicks rarely have the strength to resist throwing in.
-
You can't simply change something in the past and have that affect something in the future. If you change something in the past the entire timeline you were in is gone.
Unless it's a predestination paradox - which is what the whole thing was about.
'No fate' was saying that the only fixed events were those that were the result of a predestination paradox - everything else was up for grabs. The temporal fudgery, the creation of the paradoxes and the results of those paradoxes are the fates they 'make for themselves'.
It's to show that future-Connor knows he has to send Reese back and do all that other **** to start the War, so that mankind can defeat SkyNet and survive the holocaust.
He knew he'd won, and he sent Reese and the T-800's back simply to make sure things played out as they had - where he could be assured of victory over SkyNet.
-
Meh...you see...this is why I hate time travel ANYWHERE.. it allways sucks in the end...
-
Meh...you see...this is why I hate time travel ANYWHERE.. it allways sucks in the end...
What about the Back to the Future trilogy?! Nobody hates Back to the Future.
-
You can't simply change something in the past and have that affect something in the future. If you change something in the past the entire timeline you were in is gone.
Unless it's a predestination paradox - which is what the whole thing was about.
'No fate' was saying that the only fixed events were those that were the result of a predestination paradox - everything else was up for grabs. The temporal fudgery, the creation of the paradoxes and the results of those paradoxes are the fates they 'make for themselves'.
It's to show that future-Connor knows he has to send Reese back and do all that other **** to start the War, so that mankind can defeat SkyNet and survive the holocaust.
He knew he'd won, and he sent Reese and the T-800's back simply to make sure things played out as they had - where he could be assured of victory over SkyNet.
Actually that is one of the central motifs for John Conor in the books I read.
Don't bother looking them up, they were written by a Hungarian guy in the 90', and had the best damn portreyal of both Skynet his minions and the war.
Conor knows he's going to win - and that he's going to be alive when the war ends. What he doesn't know is what 'living' will entitle. All the times when the crap hits the fan he wonders what the price will be....
Being burnt, deformed, or plainly cut up like a marionette.....those kinda things go though your mind when your bunker is about to be atomised and you know you'll 'survive'.
(After the initial phase of the war (when Skynet was running death camps that would put the best nazis to shame) the AI decided to nuke any place John turns up. It doesn't use the nukes in a widespread fashion though as even the initial holocaust casued extensive damage to the infrastructure....and unlike humans it needs the power on, the computers running, the factories churning out new units.)
-
You can't simply change something in the past and have that affect something in the future. If you change something in the past the entire timeline you were in is gone.
Unless it's a predestination paradox - which is what the whole thing was about.
'No fate' was saying that the only fixed events were those that were the result of a predestination paradox - everything else was up for grabs. The temporal fudgery, the creation of the paradoxes and the results of those paradoxes are the fates they 'make for themselves'.
It's to show that future-Connor knows he has to send Reese back and do all that other **** to start the War, so that mankind can defeat SkyNet and survive the holocaust.
He knew he'd won, and he sent Reese and the T-800's back simply to make sure things played out as they had - where he could be assured of victory over SkyNet.
Actually that is one of the central motifs for John Conor in the books I read.
Don't bother looking them up, they were written by a Hungarian guy in the 90', and had the best damn portreyal of both Skynet his minions and the war.
Conor knows he's going to win - and that he's going to be alive when the war ends. What he doesn't know is what 'living' will entitle. All the times when the crap hits the fan he wonders what the price will be....
contradicted by the movie now, natch.
-
But Connor is alive when the war ends, it's several years afterwards, when he's settled down with kids, that he's assassinated.
-
But Connor is alive when the war ends, it's several years afterwards, when he's settled down with kids, that he's assassinated.
?
Not from what I remember, because how else would there be that T-X thing to have to destroy if there wasn't a war on?
-
Ach, screw making a long post. The war was over, SkyNet wasn't destroyed yet, last-ditch effort to stave off destruction.
-
Apparently you can bypass this by editing the path in install.dat
It still doesn't work for me. :(
Ach, screw making a long post. The war was over, SkyNet wasn't destroyed yet, last-ditch effort to stave off destruction.
Which pretty much contradicts the first and second movies. It was pretty explicitly stated (at least in the first one) that Skynet was killed off just as the Terminators went through time.
-
Let's just settle that the universe, while shiny, is ridden with plot-holes.
-
Most of these plot holes exist because of T3, which did **** up the series pretty good.
-
Very true, but Kristanna Loken made up for most of the problems. Not all, but most.
-
I've nwever hated a films subtext so much in my life as T3, i rember back in 91/2 whenever it came out watching on VHS, It was great, like robocop 2 but darker. T3 is a good film to watch even if you're a purist as long as you ignore the "cock ups" BTW on the T1 DVD theres an original script which talks about how Kyle was on of 2 people sent back in time except the unit didn't generate a displacement field and poor old bucko number two ended up phasing in occupying the same space with a fence/fire escape. And old Corporal Hicks had to snap his neck, Also He was a ninjaesque hard ass, in the scene where he runs through the department store naked, Before the cops enter, he catches a doberman while its in mid-leap and breaks its neck deftly.
The Terminator 2 disc special edition.
No such joy with the T2 Tin though.
-
Yeah, Sumner was the second guy. I thought he phased into a wall though.
And my take on the whole SkyNet thing was that Tech-Com stormed the Cheyenne Mountain Complex and took out the SkyNet mainframe - crippling it's ability to exert tactical and strategic control. So all the machines would still be out there, but they'd basically be running in dumb mode without the Mainframe giving them proper intelligence - which would make them far easier to pick off and devoid of any unified retaliatory capacity.
The Terminator that killed Connor was probably already on-mission when SkyNet went down. But the way it's put in the film it sounds like time changed, the war lasted longer, Connor never made it to the end and his kids took up the fight when he died.
-
The T3 game starts with connor getting killed IIRC from the demo. it didn't state when it happened.
-
Yeah and the Robocop Vs Terminator game has SkyNet gaining sentience by linking with Robocop. I wouldn't put any stock in what the games say.
-
Yeah, Sumner was the second guy. I thought he phased into a wall though.
And my take on the whole SkyNet thing was that Tech-Com stormed the Cheyenne Mountain Complex and took out the SkyNet mainframe - crippling it's ability to exert tactical and strategic control. So all the machines would still be out there, but they'd basically be running in dumb mode without the Mainframe giving them proper intelligence - which would make them far easier to pick off and devoid of any unified retaliatory capacity.
The Terminator that killed Connor was probably already on-mission when SkyNet went down. But the way it's put in the film it sounds like time changed, the war lasted longer, Connor never made it to the end and his kids took up the fight when he died.
Actually the T3 movie did get a single thing right - Skynet taking over the Internet. It was designed to survive nuclear holocaust, what better way to preserve itself when pretty much unleashing it?
In the books the humans win by countinously hacking the net, and loading up viruses. Victory is achieved when infected most of the systems (as in, outpacing Skynet for a war on its mainframes.) Since J-Day happened in the 1992 they do all of this on pretty low-tech hardware (pre-Pentium era machines and no M$)
Programmers are the most sought after and precious resources in the hands of the resistance - and likewise are the prime targets for terminators.
Inflitration missions are usually a one-way ticket to hell, spent by sacrificing the team members one by one to insert the programmer into a critical facitility.
-
Actually the T3 movie did get a single thing right - Skynet taking over the Internet. It was designed to survive nuclear holocaust, what better way to preserve itself when pretty much unleashing it?
If it was a super-computer buried beneath a major, heavily fortified installation (NORAD), that would be more efficient at preserving it then the distributed computing model.
This was actually kind of stupid, because in a nuclear war more than 90% of the computers in the world would either be destroyed, have no power, or would be severely disrupted by the EM interference.
http://www.goingfaster.com/term2029/skynet.html
While the above article is pretty much fan-fiction (and a bit long), it is so well written it might as well be cannon. It does make a lot more sense then the crap T3 was trying to shovel.
-
leaving only the outlying continents like Australia and the poles unaffected.
Woo! I like this story. :D
Damn, seriously good read. :yes:
-
I always thought that guy should have written the script for T3.
Some quotes from other parts of the website:
Maybe in T4 (if there is a T4) we can allow common sense to overcome star power, just once, in the quest for a logical, better story. Probably not
Notice any similarities there between T2 and T3? Sure you did because T3 is just T2 with more eye candy and a lot weaker plot. T3 could easily be considered a rejected script for T2: Judgment Day. At any rate, the abortion that is T3 should never have seen the light of day.
T3 is a lampoon of T2, and a very bad one at that. From cheesy acting to laughable holes in both logic and plot, T3 fails as anything other than maybe a demo for some well done FX eye candy. The bad news is that it is official, it is canon, and it effectively beheads and neuters the first two movies in one fell swoop. T3 should be a lesson to all other film-makers of how not to make a movie using a popular franchise.
This man is a genius. :D