|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 17, 2020 15:53:05 GMT
I'm watching Dark Fate and Terminators just show up and then everyone is just like this is not a big deal and easy to swallow. They ask "what is going on?" and then she says "I'm from the future" and everybody's just like "Oh, okay." Just a bunch of action with no build up, drama or suspense.
In The Terminator (1984) there is a whole scene dedicated to Sarah Connor thinking Kyle Reese is nuts. This is how you build drama and tension. Take note.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolf359 on Jan 17, 2020 16:41:22 GMT
"In The Terminator (1984) there is a whole scene dedicated to Sarah Connor thinking Kyle Reese is nuts. This is how you build drama and tension." -------------------------------------
Yeah, I agree with you completely on that.
James Cameron did a Good Job writing all of that in the script and then filming it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Jan 17, 2020 17:52:59 GMT
The simplicity of the story also makes it effective. A cyborg assassin goes back in time to hunt down the mother of the future savior of humanity.
A problem with the later sequels is they got bogged down in mythology visual effects, trying to outdo the previous films and terminator models, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 17, 2020 18:02:51 GMT
The simplicity of the story also makes it effective. A cyborg assassin goes back in time to hunt down the mother of the future savior of humanity. A problem with the later sequels is they got bogged down in mythology visual effects, trying to outdo the previous films and terminator models, etc. The other movies have simple stories too though, except for Genisys. The problem with the sequels is that they are poorly written, poorly made and are extremely redundant.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jan 17, 2020 21:24:27 GMT
Well, that's kinda most sequels. The first one has a sense of awe or wonderment that the sequels skip past because the audience already knows the score. The characters might not have have seen a time traveling cyborg assassin before, but we have.
I think what the sequels lack after 2 is a moving character story and relationship. 1 turns into a love story. 2 is about the bond between John and the Terminator. Then in 3, there's zero connection between John and the Terminator, and I dont think him and his future wife even make it to kissing. There's likewise zero connection between John and Jake Endoskully in 4. Everything in 5 is treated as a glib joke.
And then in this one, Grace is what to Reyes? Friend? Fangirl? I think the relationship between Sarah and the Terminator that killed her son had potential to reach emotional heights, but - not to sound like John Spartan - it's introduced too late into the film because of the movie's girl power agenda.
|
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Jan 17, 2020 22:51:34 GMT
It's definitely a combination of the chemistry between the characters but also the simplicity of the plot. Sarah's and Kyle's romance is definitely one of the better romances in film, but it doesn't over complicate the time travel lore. It's a simple closed loop film. You can question whether Kyle was truly meant to go back and father John or if the Terminator arm was meant to get left behind and help develop Skynet, but it doesn't detract the quality of the film.
Terminator 2 is a great sequel but it's also a stretch too in terms of the time travel and does break the closed loop of the first film, but Cameron makes it work. Though when you do compare the films, the first one is clearly superior.
Besides Salvation, which was just another take on the future war (the wrong way that is), the others are just rehash with the same premise of the first two without offering anything new and executed badly. Three was the closest to going somewhere interesting, but then regressed to a rehash of 2, but ended the most boldly with the nuclear war happening and Judgement Day being inevitable. Genysis was...well, I don't know what it was trying to do, and Dark Fate again was just a retread of 1 and 2, with just more girl power to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Jan 17, 2020 23:29:10 GMT
I really appreciate the freshness & conciseness of original tales, like The Terminator, Alien, Star Wars, etc...
Sure, I devoured sequels as a kid because more = good, right?
Less is more when done so hilariously amazingly.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jan 18, 2020 0:50:12 GMT
I really appreciate the freshness & conciseness of original tales, like The Terminator, Alien, Star Wars, etc... Sure, I devoured sequels as a kid because more = good, right? Less is more when done so hilariously amazingly. Well it helps when someone behind the camera knows how to let the visuals tell the story (or at least make exposition interesting to listen to).
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 18, 2020 1:57:03 GMT
Well, that's kinda most sequels. The first one has a sense of awe or wonderment that the sequels skip past because the audience already knows the score. The characters might not have have seen a time traveling cyborg assassin before, but we have. I think what the sequels lack after 2 is a moving character story and relationship. 1 turns into a love story. 2 is about the bond between John and the Terminator. Then in 3, there's zero connection between John and the Terminator, and I dont think him and his future wife even make it to kissing. There's likewise zero connection between John and Jake Endoskully in 4. Everything in 5 is treated as a glib joke. And then in this one, Grace is what to Reyes? Friend? Fangirl? I think the relationship between Sarah and the Terminator that killed her son had potential to reach emotional heights, but - not to sound like John Spartan - it's introduced too late into the film because of the movie's girl power agenda. I watched it trying to be as fair as possible. Mckenzie Davis is solid, Linda Hamilton is good, Arnold is there and some of the story elements are good, though none of them are written well. The Arnold stuff could have worked if in an entirely different movie. My main issue is that everything is done in such a boring way. Every action scene with the exception of the highway chase scene is terrible and action takes up a large portion of the film. It doesn't even set characters up before getting to the action scenes and that removes any tension or reason to care. Then when you finally do learn more about the target, she is so bland. To my surprise I didn't even mind that they killed off John Connor since he is of no importance to the future anymore. That a new version of Skynet would happen is believable, but it is just retreading the first 2 movies with nothing new to offer. Even the T-800 gaining a conscience and emotions is already touched on in T2, though I did like the stuff with his feeling of guilt in Dark Fate. They should have made him a loner and kept the family out of it though.
|
|
senan90
Junior Member
@senan90
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 546
|
Post by senan90 on Jan 18, 2020 15:17:57 GMT
I'm watching Dark Fate and Terminators just show up and then everyone is just like this is not a big deal and easy to swallow. They ask "what is going on?" and then she says "I'm from the future" and everybody's just like "Oh, okay." Just a bunch of action with no build up, drama or suspense. In The Terminator (1984) there is a whole scene dedicated to Sarah Connor thinking Kyle Reese is nuts. This is how you build drama and tension. Take note. Well the real reason why the original Terminator is effective is because it’s a low budget independent film. It works because action isn’t the force of the film. |
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on Jan 18, 2020 15:25:55 GMT
James Cameron took everything he learnt from Roger Corman and made a tense and blistering action movie. He also brought editor Mark Goldblatt with him, one of Corman's best cutters, and the film was produced by Gale Anne Hurd, Corman's production assistant of many years who'd become an invaluable jill-of-all-trades. Smart decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 18, 2020 15:40:47 GMT
Schwarzennegar really is the perfect choice for the title role. I'm trying to think of someone else that could have fit the role (Lou Ferrigno?)
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Jan 18, 2020 15:48:25 GMT
Something that amazed me at my most recent viewing of the original was how the backstory was told by images. We know just by the visuals (and some very brief intro titles) that there are future and current time levels. That there is devastation on Earth in the future and a war with machines. It is 40 minutes in before dialog explains any plot points. Pretty impressive.
I believe that today's action films do not, for the most part, provide an emotional connection between the audience and what's happening on screen, a gap that technology tries to bridge and mostly fails. "The Terminator" (1984) provides that connection.
|
|
