Page 2 of 2


PostPosted: Mon Jul 06, 2015 2:34 pm
by so sorry


PostPosted: Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:13 pm
by TheButcher
caruso_stalker217 wrote:So has anybody here actually seen this turd yet?

I did.
I liked it.
Old Man Arnold is great in this movie.

I like how each Terminator movie is basically a reboot.

I like big movies that don't really work.
Then I get to use my imagination to play What If?.
What if The Terminator was sent back to 1987 and to fight the Predator and Dutch's Expendables.

The section of the movie that takes place in 1984 is really cool.
The T-800 fight was cool.
Nu-Kyle and Sarah are ok.
I don't really like Planet of the Apes John Connor.

Time travel is a very tricky plot device to get right.
The movie really screws with the timelines.
Maybe the writers are setting up a multiverse.

It would be nice to see a Terminator go back in time and Terminate somebody.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:58 pm
by TheBaxter
TheButcher wrote:It would be nice to see a Terminator go back in time and Terminate somebody.

you had ONE JOB!


PostPosted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:50 pm
by Spandau Belly
TheButcher wrote:What if The Terminator was sent back to 1987 and to fight the Predator and Dutch's Expendables.

How about a PREDATOR movie set in the world after Skynet has won the war and there are no living people left, just robots?

Just shove a Predator in this...


PostPosted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:38 am
by TheBaxter
Spandau Belly wrote:
TheButcher wrote:What if The Terminator was sent back to 1987 and to fight the Predator and Dutch's Expendables.

How about a PREDATOR movie set in the world after Skynet has won the war and there are no living people left, just robots?

Just shove a Predator in this...

can we get some Aliens in there too. and maybe some Avatars as well? and then have them send a T-800 back to retrieve Leonardo Dicaprio's frozen body from the bottom of the Atlantic and send him thousands of years into the future where apes have taken over the planet?


PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2016 9:56 am
by TheButcher
Everything GREAT About Terminator Genisys!


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:57 am
by TheButcher
A Major ‘Terminator’ Franchise Announcement Is Coming in 2017, Says Skydance’s David Ellison
Ellison spoke briefly about the "bright future" of the 'Terminator' franchise.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:06 pm
by Ribbons


PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:45 pm
by Wolfpack
Exactly. Fuck has the best sake around. It's delicious.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:53 am
by TheButcher
TheButcher wrote:COLLIDER MARCH 21, 2017:
A Major ‘Terminator’ Franchise Announcement Is Coming in 2017, Says Skydance’s David Ellison
Ellison spoke briefly about the "bright future" of the 'Terminator' franchise.

THR MARCH 30, 2017:
The Terminator Comes to Hollywood to Destroy Old Copyright Grants
From a mockumentary classic to an Oscar winning best picture, studios are fighting to hold onto properties from hungry authors.
Eriq Gardner wrote:In James Cameron's sci fi classic, The Terminator, a cyborg is sent back in time to assassinate. Something similar is playing out in Hollywood at the moment thanks to a mid-1970s change to copyright law that allows authors or their heirs to terminate a copyright grant. And like the film, there's resistance.

When Congress decided to extend the copyright term in 1976, it chose to recognize those who had created works at the early stage of their careers but handed their rights over without much bargaining power. By allowing authors to serve notices of termination to publishers or studios, those authors were allowed to enjoy the benefits of the latter stages of a copyright term. Authors just had to wait at least 35 years for another bite at the apple. As Arnold Schwarzenegger would say, "I'll be back."

The time is now for many authors, and what first created hassles in the music industry has slowly crept into the purview of filmmaking just as major studios are in the midst of reboot mania. Even The Terminator itself appears be the subject of a termination battle judging by an only partly-informed Deadline story reporting a "copyright reversion" 35 years after the release of the 1984 film. Sources close to Cameron refuse to discuss what's happening, citing ongoing negotiations.

Studios will, of course, fight back.

Deadline January 20, 2017:
He’s Back! James Cameron To Godfather ‘Terminator’ With ‘Deadpool’ Helmer Tim Miller
Mike Fleming Jr wrote:EXCLUSIVE: He’ll be back! James Cameron, who regains certain rights to his prized creation The Terminator in 2019, is godfathering a new iteration of the film that might finally get it right in drawing a close in the battle between humans and Skynet. Sources said that Cameron, whose copyright reversion happens 35 years after the release of the 1984 classic, is in early talks with Deadpool director and VFX wiz Tim Miller to direct a reboot and conclusion of one of cinema’s great science fiction tales.

David Ellison, whose Skydance co-financed Terminator Genisys, is bankrolling an exploratory effort that includes engaging some top-flight science fiction authors to find the movie creatively. Ellison still holds many Terminator rights, after his 2013 acquisition from sister and Annapurna principal Megan Ellison. She bought them in 2011 at Cannes for $20 million.

This is the latest development in an ongoing saga. Indeed, The Terminator might have endured the craziest road of any billion-dollar movie franchise, going back to when Cameron — who only had Piranha 2 under his belt as director — sold rights to his scripted project for $1 to producer Gale Anne Hurd, with the stipulation he could not be fired as director. The result was a 1984 sci-fi classic that launched his star and that of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Cameron came back and topped himself to write and direct he blockbuster Terminator 2: Judgment Day, but he washed his hands of the property after that. He mentioned to producers Mario Kassar and Andy Vajna his plans to buy the rights back from Carolco bankruptcy. They beat him to the punch, figuring he would still participate, but Cameron responded by walking away. He didn’t participate in the three films that followed, or the TV show The Sarah Connor Chronicles. The rights ended up with Pacificor, which paid $29.5 million, and Megan Ellison bought them after that company floundered.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 2:01 pm
by Peven
is there any way to salvage this franchise aside from putting it on the shelf for a couple decades before rebooting it? they really made a mess of it with the last two movies, screwing canon all to hell and watering down the identity of what made the first movie so visceral and engaging. just like Pitch Black, sometimes the best science fiction movies are the ones that are "small" and intimate, they draw the viewer in more because it is about the people in the story, not the technology, the tech stuff is just the back-drop.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 3:07 pm
by Cpt Kirks 2pay
Enough with these repetitive films already. It's like some gentleman painting over a Picasso with his own puke trying to replicate the original.

It's DONE. Move on. You movie makers are aware of a thing called a brain and it's creative capability of coming up with something new but just as good as the first Terminator films?


PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 4:24 pm
by TheBaxter
Peven wrote:is there any way to salvage this franchise aside from putting it on the shelf for a couple decades before rebooting it? they really made a mess of it with the last two movies, screwing canon all to hell and watering down the identity of what made the first movie so visceral and engaging. just like Pitch Black, sometimes the best science fiction movies are the ones that are "small" and intimate, they draw the viewer in more because it is about the people in the story, not the technology, the tech stuff is just the back-drop.

Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:Enough with these repetitive films already. It's like some gentleman painting over a Picasso with his own puke trying to replicate the original.

It's DONE. Move on. You movie makers are aware of a thing called a brain and it's creative capability of coming up with something new but just as good as the first Terminator films?



PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 5:31 pm
by Ribbons
Peven wrote:is there any way to salvage this franchise aside from putting it on the shelf for a couple decades before rebooting it? they really made a mess of it with the last two movies, screwing canon all to hell and watering down the identity of what made the first movie so visceral and engaging. just like Pitch Black, sometimes the best science fiction movies are the ones that are "small" and intimate, they draw the viewer in more because it is about the people in the story, not the technology, the tech stuff is just the back-drop.

In my opinion they should just stop with the Terminator sequels altogether. This is one of what people sometimes refer to as a "franchise mirage." There were two popular action movies featuring a huge star in the '80s and early '90s, so now we have to keep remaking it endlessly, because that's just what you do, right?. But the story was finished, the loop was closed; it's time to move on. It's especially galling with The Terminator because they have to keep fixing the timeline and then fucking it up all over again. So yeah: Hollywood, no more of these movies plz.*

*of course I never would have imagined that a new series of Planet of the Apes movies could have come out of nowhere and kicked ass in the 2010s, so who the fuck knows. At the very least they should sit on it for awhile until they find a fresh perspective.


PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 7:23 am
by TheButcher
Arnold Schwarzenegger Will Reteam With James Cameron for the Next Terminator Movie
Via Screen Daily:

Speaking to Screen in Cannes, [...] Schwarzenegger confirmed that he will star in a new Terminator film produced by James Cameron.

“It is back,” commented Schwarzenegger, who revealed that he had met Cameron recently and discussed the project. “It is moving forward. He [Cameron] has some good ideas of how to continue with the franchise,” the actor added, “I will be in the movie.”


PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 5:37 pm
by TheButcher
Fox, Paramount Accused of Using Stolen Computer Graphic Technology for Hit Films
A VFX firm demands an injunction on "Deadpool" and three other blockbusters plus one huge video game.
Eriq Gardner wrote:Rearden LLC is now in full-on attack mode against Hollywood studios.

A week after the company filed a lawsuit demanding an injunction on three Disney films, Rearden has now submitted three more lawsuits over motion capture technology that it contends was stolen. One lawsuit demands that Fox be enjoined from distributing Deadpool, Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb and Fantastic Four. A second lawsuit aims at Paramount Pictures' Terminator: Genisys. And a third goes after Crystal Dynamics for an Xbox game called Rise of the Tomb Raider.

The plaintiff, a firm incubated by Silicon Valley entrepreneur Steve Perlman, claims to have perfected a technology called MOVA, which captures facial expressions to create photorealistic computer graphic effects. Rearden has battled with Digital Domain 3.0, and last year after an FBI investigation into economic espionage, scored an injunction against two Chinese firms that purchased the technology being licensed. Digital Domain is challenging the injunction before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Now, Rearden is looking to do something about technology it says was used to make Arnold Schwarzenegger look much younger in the most recent Terminator film and to make Colossus appear as the character did in X-Men comics.

Rearden says it had contracts with the studios for prior films. The plaintiff says it licensed its technology to Fox for Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief and to Paramount for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which won an Academy Award for its reverse aging of Brad Pitt's face.

The complaints (here's one) further accuse the studios of having "secretly contracted with the thieves," and notwithstanding the "widely-reported litigation," to having flaunted use of the allegedly stolen tech.

Somewhat unusually, the latest lawsuits bring no patent infringement claims.

Instead, Rearden is asserting copyright infringement connected with the "output" of its software program — including skin texture, makeup pattern, captured surface and something called tracking mesh. Rearden is also claiming trademark infringement from the way that the studios have been advertising and promoting the VFX in their films.

The claims could provoke Dastar-type arguments from the defendants over the intellectual property mash-up ambiguities and be scrutinized on whether expression is really being misappropriated, but for now, Rearden and its attorneys at Hagens Berman are clearly attempting to send a message a year after some observers were sounding alarms about the legally controversial technology being widely used in Hollywood.

Re: Terminator ReGenisys

PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:16 pm
by TheButcher
James Cameron Considering a New ‘Terminator’ Trilogy
“The question is — has the franchise run its course or can it be freshened up? 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.”


PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:31 pm
by caruso_stalker217
But how will it tie into the AVATAR sequels?


PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:17 pm
by TheBaxter
the problem with the Terminator "franchise" is that it's so tied into the concept of time travel, that each new film in the series feels the need to use time travel as a device to keep sending terminators back into the past, which ends up with increasingly convoluted timelines that make less and less sense with each iteration.

what they need to do, if they want to restart the series fresh, is:
- forget schwarzenegger, no one wants to see his wrinkly ass pretending to be a cyborg in his 70s
- forget john connor and sarah connor and kyle reese and the whole conner clan
- set this thing in the future, in a post-skynet world. you can have an occasional reference back to john connor and how he saved humanity from skynet, but set it far off enough in the future that none of the old characters are still around. and please resist the temptation to make your hero somehow related to john connor, like his long-lost great-grandson or something... it's so obvious
- avoid time travel. maybe you can have some new AI villain who is trying to rebuild the time travel device to go back and prevent skynet from being defeated, but that plan is thwarted without any actual time travel occurring. a time-travel-free terminator film could be a refreshing change. if you eventually resort to time travel later in the trilogy, make sure it's a one-time thing with real ramifications, not some cheap device to reset the history of the world one more time.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:08 am
by Ribbons
Wasn't that basically Terminator: Salvation though? I deleted entire sections of that movie from my brain, but I don't think there was any time travel.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:58 am
by TheBaxter
i saw T:S but i don't remember much about it. it still has Connor and Kyle Reese as primary characters, and even if time travel itself isn't a factor in the film, the leftover remnants of all the previous time travel plot points (like Connor knowing Reese is going to go back in time to become his daddy) are still in place. and i think Arnie had a cameo, or at least his digitally superimposed face did.

so yeah, T:S kinda had the right idea, but didn't go far enough with it. they probably were afraid to abandon the characters people have come to know from previous films, meaning they didn't have enough confidence in the underlying world and story concepts themselves to interest people. but john connor isn't even hardly a character in #1, and was played by multiple people in later films, whereas kyle reese was gone from the franchise after the 1st film. so basically, they need to do something similar to T:S but take it a bit further, throw away the safety wheel characters from previous films.... oh yeah, and hiring someone other than McG to direct might help.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:58 pm
by TheButcher
Linda Hamilton Set to Return to 'Terminator' Franchise (Exclusive)
Borys Kit wrote:With James Cameron and Arnold Schwarzenegger involved, it's a reunion more than 25 years in the making.

After waving hasta la vista, baby, more than 25 years ago, Linda Hamilton is returning to the world of Terminator, reuniting with James Cameron, the creator of the sci-fi franchise, for the new installment being made by Skydance and Paramount.

Cameron made the announcement at a private event celebrating the storied franchise, saying, "As meaningful as she was to gender and action stars everywhere back then, it’s going to make a huge statement to have that seasoned warrior that she’s become return."

With Hamilton’s return, Cameron hopes to once again make a statement on gender roles in action movies.

"There are 50-year-old, 60-year-old guys out there killing bad guys,” he said, referring to aging male actors still anchoring movies, “but there isn’t an example of that for women.”

Tim Miller, the filmmaker who made his breakout feature debut with Deadpool, is directing the sequel, which is returning to its roots by having the involvement of Cameron for the first time since 1991’s Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

Cameron is producing along with Skydance. And the new film, which will be distributed by Paramount with Fox handling it internationally, is based on a story crafted by Cameron. Cameron and Miller created a writers room to hammer out what is planned to be a trilogy that can stand as single movies or form an overarching story. David Goyer, whose credits include the Blade and Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies, Charles Eglee, who created Dark Angel with Cameron, and Josh Friedman, who created the Terminator TV spinoff, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, were part of that room.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has starred as both a bad guy and good guy portraying the cool killer robot sent from the future, is already set to return and with Cameron and now Hamilton on board, the new Terminator film will once again have its original creative team.

Hamilton starred in the first film, The Terminator, released in 1984 as a low-budget genre play, playing one of the silver screen's strongest female heroines, Sarah Connor. Conner was a waitress who is being hunted down by an unstoppable killing machine, played by Schwarzenegger, sent from the future. Connor learned that in the future, machines have taken over and that she is the mother of the human resistance leader.

The actress returned to the character in Cameron’s 1991 sequel, which was a summer blockbuster that pushed the visual effects envelope and set box office records for that time. This time Connor, buffed and in prime fighting form, was a hard-edged, take-no-prisoners warrior who fought like a bear to protect her son.

Both Hamilton and Cameron, who were married to each other in the later 1990s, sat out the installments that followed in 2003, 2009, and 2015.

Story details are, of course, being kept on a secure hard drive at Cyberdyne Systems, but Cameron and Miller are treating the new movie as a direct sequel to Cameron's Judgment Day. And the themes of the potential evils of technology will once again be at the fore.

But the new movie will also be seen as a passing of the baton to a new generation of characters.

"We’re starting a search for an 18-something woman to be the new centerpiece of the new story," Cameron said. "We still fold time. We will have characters from the future and the present. There will be mostly new characters but we'll have Arnold and Linda’s characters to anchor it."

Re: Terminator 2: Part 2?

PostPosted: Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:26 pm
by TheButcher
How Will Another 'Terminator' Reboot Attempt to Address the Plot?
Graeme McMillan wrote:History and two earlier failed reboots are against Arnold Schwarzenegger's robot making a successful return.

The most fondly remembered line from the original Terminator — a movie that, let's be honest, few people think of as having particularly memorable dialogue, a couple of future catchphrases aside — is "I'll be back." Even reading it now, chances are it provokes a smile because you're thinking of the flat delivery, and the fact that it's a setup to an especially fun, destructive punchline.

Nevertheless, it's a phrase that has come to personify the Terminator franchise. Arnold Schwarzenegger's unstoppable robot — or a variation that just so happens to look like a younger, cheaper actor — has been back on a number of occasions, to increasingly diminishing returns, since that first 1984 movie. Sure, 1991's Terminator 2: Judgment Day was the highpoint of the series — both critically and in terms of box office — but since then, things have been on a downward spiral. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) appeared to bring the series to a close, but it didn't stick; the franchise has been rebooted no less than twice in the past 14 years with little success, and now apparently has its third reboot en route. Can this fourth go-round work where the others have failed?

It's true that the newest attempt to revive the franchise has forces going for it that the others haven't; the newly revealed involvement of Linda Hamilton, in addition to James Cameron — who is acting as, essentially, a showrunner for a projected new trilogy of features, working with a writers room and producing the series — offers both a heavy dose of happy nostalgia to long-term fans as well as the potential for a return to the indefinable qualities that made the earlier movies "work" in a way the latter installments apparently didn't.

Despite whatever goodwill might come with the involvement of the series principals of old, any new series of Terminator movies will have to contend with the simple fact that, according to the series' own mythology, The Terminator is a story that has essentially ended by now. Judgment Day — the tipping point where machines achieved sentience and took over the world — happened in 1997, according to 1991's T2, with that date postponed until 2004 in 2003's T3.

Telling a story about preventing an apocalypse is one thing when it's a future event; even taking into account the high concept of changing the past that the series is hooked around, the story dynamics are different when your audience has to consider the fateful moment as something more than a decade earlier.

And speaking of having to undo past events: T3 stated that Sarah Connor was already dead, leaving it an open question just who Hamilton will be playing in the new movie; of course, time is malleable in this series, so anything and everything is up for grabs. And that, in many ways, is the problem.

If Cameron and crew choose to follow the route of The Force Awakens — and with the movie reportedly focusing on a new cast with Hamilton and Schwarzenegger as anchors, that seems to be the case — then it should be borne in mind that the Star Wars reboot made a point of paying respect to everything that came before, an approach that was applauded by fandom at large. Terminator will have problems doing that, though; even beyond the "Sarah should be dead" aspect, it's a series that's actually predicated on the idea of rewriting the past and actively disrespecting continuity.

(With two separate reboots to deal with, there's also the question of, which continuity would the new movie respect, anyway?)

With this kind of baggage to contend with, any new Terminator project feels as doomed to failure as standing up against robotic overlords in a machine-led dystopia. But even if the new trilogy fails, history has taught us one thing: Someone else will ensure that the franchise will return, sooner or later. No matter what, the Terminator will always, always be back.

Scified 2017-09-23:
New Terminator movie is a direct sequel to Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Gavin wrote:Speaking recently at 'An Experience with Arnold Schwarzenegger' in Birmingham, UK the action movie legend revealed a wealth of information about the forthcoming movie which will see creator James Cameron return as the screenwriter, creative consultant, and executive producer to the next Terminator movie, which is to be directed by Deadpool director Tim Miller.

While revealing that his former co-star Linda Hamilton is currently in training for her return to the iconic role of Sarah Connor, Arnold Schwarzenegger also revealed that the movie, which was believed to be reboot of the troubled franchise will instead be a direct sequel to the last movie of which Cameron was directly involved with; 1991's Terminator 2: Judgment Day. Arnold reiterated the movie's place in the chronology saying that it would not be called Terminator 6 and would ignore that Terminator: Genisys ever happened. Arnold also mentioned that Robert Patrick, who has expressed interest in returning to the franchise, will not be returning. Finally, Arnold stated that the movie will begin filming in March and that creator Cameron is expected to complete the movie's script in as soon as a fortnight's time.

Hamiltons return would suggest that in addition to Genisys this new movie will also be ignoring Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines and Terminator Salvation, as in the former Hamilton's character had been killed off, and in the latter, Jurassic World's Bryce Dallas Howard starred as the grown-up Kate Brewster, played by Claire Danes (Homeland) in Terminator 3. This bold move will doubtlessly be praised by the majority of fans and general audiences but as I have stated repeatedly Terminator 3, while being a poorly executed movie did maintain the timeline of events, thus fixing the discrepancies in the timeline created by the first two movies.

Hamilton's return also suggests that her scenes will be set during the Future War of which fans have been eager to see realized on the big screen beyond a brief five-minute montage. And while we are starting to get an idea of who will and won't be returning we have yet to see who Cameron and Miller will cast in the movies most important role of John Connor, as it is unlikely that Edward Furlong will reprise his role.

With development well underway on the new Terminator movie, we are hopeful that Cameron has paid attention to the timelines of his movies and realized that his next movie will have to answer two questions...

The first being the true date of Judgment Day which I have already answered in a previous article, which is between 2000 and 2005. The second question, however, is more intriguing - In the original timeline, Sarah Connor would not have given birth to 'the' John Connor that Skynet viewed as a threat, as that John Connor had foreknowledge of the Terminators and had Kyle Reese as his father. So in the original timeline why did Skynet view Sarah Connor as a target?

Arnold Schwarzenegger Will Film Triplets After Terminator 6

Re: Terminator 2: Part 2?

PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 6:24 pm
by caruso_stalker217

I've always thought this idea sounded like a gag from LAST ACTION HERO or something. An idea so fucking terrible that I must see it realized on screen. Except instead of DeVito playing his character from TWINS he should just play Frank from It's Always Sunny In etc.

Re: Terminator 2: Judgment Day 2 - 07/26/19

PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 1:24 am
by TheButcher
caruso_stalker217 wrote:

I've always thought this idea sounded like a gag from LAST ACTION HERO or something. An idea so fucking terrible that I must see it realized on screen. Except instead of DeVito playing his character from TWINS he should just play Frank from It's Always Sunny In etc.


James Cameron Sounds the Alarm on Artificial Intelligence and Unveils a 'Terminator' for the 21st Century
Matthew Belloni & Borys Kit wrote:Cameron and Deadpool director Tim Miller sit down with THR to talk for the first time about how they will reboot a storied but troubled franchise for the new era of Amazon drones and AI anxiety: "People ask me, 'Will the machines ever win against humanity?' I say, 'Look at people on their phones. The machines have already won.'"

By all objective measures, The Terminator represents the most feared cautionary tale of modern Hollywood: a broken franchise. Thirty-three years after Arnold Schwarzenegger became an international star playing a killer robot sent from the future to kill the mother of the leader of a postapocalyptic rebellion, there have been four sequels (and one TV series), and the three films without the involvement of creator James Cameron have turned off fans and led the property to bounce from studio to studio and reboot to reboot. Terminator: Genisys, a 2015 installment made by financier David Ellison's Skydance Media (Ellison bought rights from his sister, Megan Ellison, who acquired them in a 2011 auction for $20 million), seemingly, uh, terminated the prospect of future films.
But this is Hollywood 2017, and no major franchise is truly dead. Ellison, along with distributor Paramount (Fox has international rights), has persuaded Cameron, who on Sept. 25 began filming four Avatar sequels, to shepherd a new Terminator for the era of Amazon drones, Facebook news bots and artificial intelligence-fueled anxiety. Calling it "a return to form that I believe fans of the franchise have been wanting since Terminator 2: Judgment Day," Ellison, 34, has for the past year worked secretly with Cameron and Deadpool's Tim Miller, who will direct the untitled sequel for a July 26, 2019, release. They assembled a writers room with scribes David Goyer, Charles Eglee, Josh Friedman and Justin Rhodes as well as Ellison, a lifelong Terminator fan (Cameron himself shows up once a week), and have crafted what they want to be a trilogy with Schwarzenegger, 70, and original star Linda Hamilton, 62, passing the torch to a young female lead.

The team hopes it's launching the equivalent of the new Star Wars trilogy — but with the most successful filmmaker of all time pulling the strings. To unveil their plans and explain why the Terminator franchise is still relevant amid 21st century fears, Cameron, 63, and Miller, 47, joined The Hollywood Reporter's editorial director Matthew Belloni for a discussion Sept. 19 on the Paramount lot in Hollywood. An edited transcript follows, and a separate Q&A with Cameron on Avatar, Trump and his recent Wonder Woman critiques is here.

Jim, why do you want to do this? You can do anything. These are movies you made a long time ago.

TIM MILLER I've got some pictures on him that he doesn't want published. (Laughs.)

JAMES CAMERON There's a pride of authorship in anything that you do, and when David and I started talking about this, it made sense for me to see if there was a way to bring it into this century and to relevance. I look at what's happening now with the emergence of artificial general intelligence equal to or greater than humans', and you've got Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking and others saying that this could be really bad for the survival of the human race. What was science fiction in the '80s is now imminent. It's coming over the horizon at us. And there's been a resurgence of fear and concern about nuclear weapons and so on. So all of these apocalyptic elements are out there. The first two Terminator films that I did dealt with the angst around that and how we reconcile it for ourselves in a fantasy context. So I got excited about the idea of finding a story that made sense for now.

So what does a James Cameron-produced Terminator movie look like in 2017?
CAMERON This is a continuation of the story from Terminator 1 and Terminator 2. And we're pretending the other films were a bad dream. Or an alternate timeline, which is permissible in our multi-verse. This was really driven more by [Tim] than anybody, surprisingly, because I came in pretty agnostic about where we took it. The only thing I insisted on was that we somehow revamp it and reinvent it for the 21st century.

MILLER The [first] films are more relevant today than they were when he made them. A lot of it seems like prognostication because it's coming to be — the world we live in right now.

The conflict between technology and humanity is a theme in a lot of Jim's movies. Does technology scare you?

CAMERON Technology has always scared me, and it's always seduced me. People ask me: "Will the machines ever win against humanity?" I say: "Look around in any airport or restaurant and see how many people are on their phones. The machines have already won." It's just [that] they've won in a different way. We are co-evolving with our technology. We're merging. The technology is becoming a mirror to us as we start to build humanoid robots and as we start to seriously build AGI — general intelligence — that's our equal. Some of the top scientists in artificial intelligence say that's 10 to 30 years from now. We need to get the damn movies done before that actually happens! And when you talk to these guys, they remind me a lot of that excited optimism that nuclear scientists had in the '30s and '40s when they were thinking about how they could power the world. And taking zero responsibility for the idea that it would instantly be weaponized. The first manifestation of nuclear power on our planet was the destruction of two cities and hundreds of thousands of people. So the idea that it can't happen now is not the case. It can happen, and it may even happen.

MILLER Jim is a more positive guy [than I am] in the present and more cynical about the future. I know Hawking and Musk think we can put some roadblocks in there. I'm not so sure we can. I can't imagine what a truly artificial intelligence will make of us. Jim's brought some experts in to talk to us, and it's really interesting to hear their perspective. Generally, they're scared as shit, which makes me scared.

CAMERON One of the scientists we just met with recently, she said: "I used to be really, really optimistic, but now I'm just scared." Her position on it is probably that we can't control this. It has more to do with human nature. Putin recently said that the nation that perfects AI will dominate or conquer the world. So that pretty much sets the stage for "We wouldn't have done it, but now those guys are doing it, so now we have to do it and beat them to the punch." So now everybody's got the justification to essentially weaponize AI. I think you can draw your own conclusions from that.

MILLER When it happens, I don't think AI's agenda will be to kill us. That seems like a goal that's beneath whatever enlightened being that they're going to become because they can evolve in a day what we've done in millions of years. And I don't think that they have the built-in deficits that we have, because we're still dealing with the same kind of urges that made us climb down from the trees and kill everybody else. I choose to believe that they'll be better than us.

CAMERON At the very least, they will reflect our best and worst nature because we make them and we program them. But it's going to take a lot of money. So who's got the money to do it and the will to do it? It could be business, so the Googles and the other big tech companies. And if you're doing it for business, you're doing it to improve your market share or whatever your business goals are. So you're essentially taking a machine smarter than a human and teaching it greed. Or it's for defense, in which case you're taking a machine smarter than a human and teaching it to kill. Neither one of those has a good outcome in my mind.

Will there be a day, as in Terminator, where people will look back and say, "This is the day that machines became aware"?
CAMERON It probably won't be that dramatic and will probably happen off-camera to us, and we'll suddenly be living in a world where that has happened.

MILLER I'm a little more worried about programs gone wrong. For instance, if you invented a program where the goal was to search out and destroy cancer — if you're not careful, humans are a source of cancer, so [programs could] wipe humanity out. That's not an AI gone wrong. That's a program gone wrong.

Jim, has your opinion on this subject changed since you had the original idea for the Terminator story 35 years ago?

CAMERON I'll be honest. At the time, I was just trying to get a plot mechanism where somebody could be an enemy from the future so that I could shoot in the streets of L.A.

Arnold and Linda Hamilton are coming back. What was your conversation like with them?

CAMERON Well, Arnold just expected to come back. So that was easy. I approached Linda to see if she'd even be interested. And …

MILLER Jim was fucking terrified.

CAMERON I was. It took me a week just to get up the nerve. No, that's not true. Linda and I have a great relationship. We've stayed friends through the thick and thin of it all. And she is the mother of my eldest daughter. [They were married from 1997 to 1999.] So I called her up, and I said: "Look, we could rest on our laurels. It's ours to lose, in a sense. We created this thing several decades ago. But, here's what can be really cool. You can come back and show everybody how it's done." Because in my mind, it hasn't been done a whole lot since the way she did it back in '91.

MILLER As strong a character as she was, as meaningful as she was to gender and to action stars everywhere, I think it's going to make a huge fucking statement to have her be the really seasoned warrior that she's become.

CAMERON There are certainly plenty of 50-, 60-, 70-something guys out there that just keep cranking along doing action movies and killing bad guys left and right. But there isn't an example of that for women, and I think there should be.

MILLER Which is why we're bringing Liam Neeson in as the bad guy. And she is going to kick his ass. (Laughs.)

CAMERON She fucks him up.

He retired recently. He said he's done with action movies.
MILLER Did he? That's 'cause he was afraid Sarah Connor was going to kick his ass.

Tim, you had a lot of heat coming off of Deadpool, and instead of doing something that is not based on pre-existing material, you decided to do this. Why this?

MILLER: To some degree, all the stories that I love are based on pre-existing materials as either a book I love or a movie I love. And I don’t make a whole lot of distinction between those two things. Story is story. I mean, I wanted to make Deadpool 2. I was going to do that, until I wasn’t. So, there was that, which took up about seven months of my time. But even then, David and I were talking, like afterDeadpool 2, it was going to be this [Terminator].

So, we can thank Ryan Reynolds for you doing this?

CAMERON: Thank you, Ryan.

MILLER: Yeah, if you want. I felt like there was more stories to tell there, but I’m happy that somebody else is telling them. And I’ve got to tell you, there was a sense of relief in that I get to do something new versus Deadpool 2. I think it would’ve been a great movie, but it was also going to be a continuation of what we had done. This really is gave me a chance to do something new.

Are you planning to introduce new stars for future movies, like the Star Wars model?

CAMERON Absolutely, yeah. A lot of this is handing off the baton to a new generation of characters. We're starting a search for an 18-something young woman to essentially be the new centerpiece of these stories. And then a number of other characters around her and characters from the future. We still fold time in the story in intriguing ways. But we have Arnold's character and Linda's character to anchor it. Somewhere across there, and I won't say where, the baton gets passed, so to speak.

This summer was not a good one for the box office. Why do you think people aren't going to theaters? What's the solution?
CAMERON Look, I don't know what the answer is for the industry at large. I don't think the industry at large is hurting that much. A lot of the good writing is now in television, and I think that feature films could benefit from better writing and better character work in general and a little less spectacle. Not that I don't like spectacle, but I like it at the right moment. You just have to make good movies. Pretty simple.

MILLER There weren't a whole lot of movies that I wanted to go see this year. The Big Sick was, I think, one of the best movies I saw this summer, and it's not my kind of movie even.

Tim, you've made one movie. Do you feel intimidated working with Jim?

MILLER Every minute of the day. But I also feel honored. If Jim didn't think I could do it, I wouldn't be there. And that gives me confidence. He could fire me later and decide: "Why did I believe in this guy? He's a tool."

They do that these days. If it was a Star Wars movie, it could happen.

CAMERON Yeah, no kidding.

MILLER Touche, touche.

CAMERON Don't let that revolving door hit you on the back of the head.

MILLER And you know what? It's a similar situation there. Somebody does a good film, then they think: "Well, he must be a great director." So, it could totally be true in my case. But I don't think that's the case.

Now an uncomfortable question. Arnold is going to be 71 years old when this shoots. How do you get around that fact?

CAMERON: You don’t have to get around it. The beauty of it is: He’s a cyborg. And so, the org part is on the outside, meaning organism. And Reese says it in the first film: “They sweat. They have bad breath.” Because they were supposed to be infiltration units, so there’s this idea that flesh sort of sheaths over a metal endo-skeleton. So that would age normally. So, obviously he’s one that’s been in action and operation for a long time. And that’s all I want to say about the actual story part of it.

MILLER: I haven’t talked to Arnold about this so I could get in trouble. But because he’s been in all the other movies — unlike Linda — I do think there needs to be a reason to be different here. I like my sci-fi grounded. I like my characters grounded. And what Jim said about the exterior aging while the interior remains the same — well, not the interior, as in the brain, as emotionally and intellectually he will have evolved. They’re learning machines. But that’s a way to make it different than it was. Even in Genisys, he looked — I should stop — he was a slightly gussied-up version of the old Terminator. I think we should embrace his age. And that’s what’s going to make it interesting and fresh for the fans.

Jim, you're handing over the keys to your baby to someone who doesn't have much experience.

CAMERON Look, we're both taking a risk. That's the nature of the director-producer relationship. But I feel really confident. We're already about seven or eight months into the creative process, and we haven't killed each other yet. There's been some fur flying, but it's always been for the right reason. I feel Tim's commitment. I feel David's commitment. They feel my commitment. That's it. We're brothers-in-arms at this point.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 01, 2018 1:10 pm
by so sorry
First official image of Sarah Conners in new Terminator movie

Jeebus this Photoshopped image is cringe-worth.

And Linda Hamilton looks like Hillary Clinton.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 12:14 am
by Fievel
I'm always hopeful for a decent Terminator film. I think it's a cool image and Hamilton looks badass.
Clinton wishes she looked a fraction of Hamilton's badassedness.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:08 pm
by so sorry
Fievel wrote:I'm always hopeful for a decent Terminator film.

Just like I always hope for a decent Aliens film... :P


PostPosted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:29 pm
by Fievel
If Blomkamp's version would have been filmed, my hopes would have been beyond measure. But with Cameron producing this next Terminator, I'm at least hopeful.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:16 am
by TheBaxter
Fievel wrote:I'm always hopeful for a decent Terminator film. I think it's a cool image and Hamilton looks badass.
Clinton wishes she looked a fraction of Hamilton's badassedness.

if Hillary showed up at the debates dressed like that, instead of wearing those pantsuits, we'd all be living in a much better world right now.