Jump to content
Jay

Terminator 6: Dark Fate (2019)

Recommended Posts

I personally think there's one of two ways they could go:

 

If they want to stick rigidly to the first two films' stated events, Judgment Day will still happen on August 29, 1997. The movie will focus on the future war.

 

If they want to honour the ideas presented in the first two films - the idea that we are becoming more machine-like and machines are becoming more like us, then the movie might have a completely different "Judgment Day", where the Future War did not happen as we were told it would. In fact, I've seen it suggested plenty of times that the alternate ending could actually be used as the basis: that Skynet has not taken over the world by force so much as we have allowed it in, and that it's there in a subtle way instead of an obvious way like the War scenario would have it. Genisys tried this idea but it would have just wound up as the Nuclear War. Genisys had some good ideas, but went about implementing them in completely the wrong fashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

We didn't know, really. It was left to the viewer's imagination. The characters assumed they did, but there no way to know for sure. If they had succeeded, wouldn't the T-1000 have never been there, anyway? If there's no Skynet in the future, how can it send a T-1000 in the past to prevent the heroes from stopping the creation of Skynet? In fact, even the T-800 would not have been there. If the characters had succeeded in what they were trying to do, none of what they were trying to do in T2 would have happened. My head is starting to hurt...

 

 

Would you prefer Scientist Man explain it to you?

 

maxresdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gistech said:

if it's following on from T2, can it truly be called a reboot? Isn't it just a 'selective sequel'?

 

Yeah like how the Halloween movies went.

 

Which reminds me, I used to have The Terminator and Halloween II on the same tape, so for me, those two franchises will always feel connected somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Luke Skywalker said:

I dont remember well..but didnt T2 moere or less avoid the Judgement day?

 

2 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

 

We didn't know, really. It was left to the viewer's imagination. The characters assumed they did, but there no way to know for sure. If they had succeeded, wouldn't the T-1000 have never been there, anyway? If there's no Skynet in the future, how can it send a T-1000 in the past to prevent the heroes from stopping the creation of Skynet? In fact, even the T-800 would not have been there. If the characters had succeeded in what they were trying to do, none of what they were trying to do in T2 would have happened. My head is starting to hurt...

 

T2's ending also nullified the events of T1. No AI development = no Skynet = no T1 = no T2 = no T3 = no TS = no TG

(where SCA comes into it, I've no idea, as I've not seen a single second of it).

That, however, is the central paradox of all time-travel films: when do events "start", and when do they "stop"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually quite a poor time travel story if you apply ANY level of temporal mechanics to it.

 

If the T-800 destroys the chip, meaning he's never created, how does he travel back in time and eventually destroy the chip?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

It's actually quite a poor time travel story if you apply ANY level of temporal mechanics to it.

 

If the T-800 destroys the chip, meaning he's never created, how does he travel back in time and eventually destroy the chip?

 

Good question. At the start of T1, the events of 1984 have not happened. Only by travelling back in time, does Arnie set these events in motion.

For example: someone from 2017, goes back in time to murder your mum, therefore, no you. But you are alive in 2017, which means that nobody went back to do your mum, until 2017, which means that the events of the future both do, and do not, happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the grandfather paradox. If you go back in time and kill your grandfather, you will never be born so you cant go in time to kill your grandfather.

 

That's why no time traveller can come from the future and kill Hitler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no faith in anything my creator does anymore. He can't hire James Horner, so what can he do? Avatar sequels and reboots of tired overcooked franchises? I'm too busy trying to reduce my carbon footprint to make it to the cinema for the next 6 Avatars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been barren round here. So here's some news.

 

So I am in discussions with David Ellison, who is the current rights holder globally for the Terminator franchise and the rights in the US market revert to me under US copyright law in a year and a half so he and I are talking about what we can do. Right now we are leaning toward doing a three-film arc and reinventing it.

 

SOURCE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2017 at 2:05 PM, Stefancos said:

It's the grandfather paradox. If you go back in time and kill your grandfather, you will never be born so you cant go in time to kill your grandfather.

 

That's why no time traveller can come from the future and kill Hitler.

LOST avoids this pretty successfully by sticking to their definition of "whatever happened, happened." There's only one small paradox that I can think of, but time travel in general is universally nonsensical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linda Hamilton returning to Terminator and ignoring everything since T2, Jamie Lee Curtis returning to Halloween and ignoring everything since Halloween 2, will Sigourney Weaver complete this obvious trilogy after Covenant bombed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, crumbs said:

Linda Hamilton returning to Terminator and ignoring everything since T2, Jamie Lee Curtis returning to Halloween and ignoring everything since Halloween 2, will Sigourney Weaver complete this obvious trilogy after Covenant bombed?

 

Yes brilliant!  It'll act like Alien3/Resurrection never happened!  Bloodboal will be furious, making it all worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ol' Riddles doesn't have much leverage with Fox after Covenant. I don't know if they'll let him finish the David trilogy now. Will they just pull the trigger on Alien 5 and hope for the best?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

 

Terminator 2 is among the greatest action films of all time.

 

Terminator 3 is just alright, nothing special.

 

Salvation is awful.

 

An opinion is not a demonstration!

 

Part 3 had Schwarzenegger carrying a casket with a rocket launcher in it, if I recall correctly (saw it in theaters)!

 

Part 4 had a swamp full of robots or something!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, crumbs said:

Linda Hamilton returning to Terminator and ignoring everything since T2, Jamie Lee Curtis returning to Halloween and ignoring everything since Halloween 2, will Sigourney Weaver complete this obvious trilogy after Covenant bombed?

Well, that was supposed to happen with Neil Blomkamp but it got delayed indefinitely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crumbs said:

Linda Hamilton returning to Terminator and ignoring everything since T2, Jamie Lee Curtis returning to Halloween and ignoring everything since Halloween 2, will Sigourney Weaver complete this obvious trilogy after Covenant bombed?

 

I hope so; Neill Blomkamp's Aliens sequel seemed neat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Koray Savas said:

Well, that was supposed to happen with Neil Blomkamp but it got delayed indefinitely. 

 

If you read between the lines (aka studio politics), Ridley Scott muscled the film out of production so he could keep his Prometheus series going. Fox were going to greenlight Alien 5 until Scott decided to drop everything and make Covenant as his next film (and they couldn't turn him down, because he'd just gifted them a huge success -- The Martian).


Ridley's got an ego. Big studios don't like getting directors like Ridley Scott offside, especially in favour of an up-and-comer like Blompkamp (who just delivered Chappie, an unmitigated disaster financially and critically).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

 

^Post that could have been written 25 years ago

 

And it took them 12 years to make a third film, too, so it may as well have been dead by then anyway. 

 

5 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

And about a lot of franchises!


Studios gotta have their money making franchises apparently, doesn't matter if it they see worse returns each time to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...