Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)

edited February 10 in General Movies & TV Posts: 2,782
Arnie has signed up and it has been revealed there will be three new stand alone movies based on the premise that the series will be a reboot!

What's wrong with the studios, don't they like original screenplays anymore? Don't they like being creative? Or is it the lure of a cgi money making strategy.

It really does upset me. Soon we will be watching reboots of reboots...batman, spiderman anyone?

Sick of it really, the original Terminator should not be touched. I even enjoyed Bale's movie, it was great, I don't why it got the slagging off it did? It set up a premise of the war that I would have liked to have seen some more of.

Oh well let's see how they destroy the legacy.




Skydance Productions, Annapurna Pictures and Paramount Pictures have jointly announced they will partner on a rebooted Terminator movie, to be released by Paramount Pictures on June 26, 2015.

The first in a stand-alone trilogy, Terminator will be produced by Megan Ellison of Annapurna and David Ellison of Skydance. Dana Goldberg and Paul Schwake of Skydance will serve as executive producers. Laeta Kalorgridis (Avatar, Shutter Island) and Patrick Lussier (Drive Angry) are attached to write the screenplay.

Launched in 1984 with star Arnold Schwarzenegger as the title character, Terminator spanned 3 subsequent films, which have earned over $1 billion at the worldwide box office.

David Ellison most recently executive produced, along with his partners at Paramount, World War Z, Star Trek Into Darkness, G.I. Joe: Retaliation and Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol. A 5th installment of in the "Mission: Impossible" franchise is in active development, along with a 3rd film in the "G.I. Joe" franchise, among other films.

Megan Ellison most recently produced the Academy Award®-nominated Zero Dark Thirty, The Master and executive produced Spring Breakers via her Annapurna Pictures banner and has David O. Russell's American Hustle, Spike Jonze's Her, and Bennett Miller's Foxcatcher set for release later this year.



«13456742

Comments

  • Posts: 4,778
    Yeah great, another trilogy with four parts.

    Why can´t they just make a decent film that stands for itself?
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 395
    What's wrong with the studios, don't they like original screenplays anymore? Don't they like being creative? Or is it the lure of a cgi money making strategy.

    Original screenplays have always been more challenging, commercially, than films based on pre-existing IP.

    Filmmaking is a very unusual business - unlike selling cars or cutlery or combine harvesters or computers, studios are producing and selling a one-off product every time. And they're expensive to make. And there's no way of knowing whether a film will be a success and make a lot of money or be a failure and lose a lot of money. Heaven's Gate is an example of what happens when things go very wrong.

    As William Goldman wrote in Adventures in the Screen Trade, "nobody knows anything" i.e. you can't predict if a film will be successful before it hits cinemas. This is a problem hardwired into the film business. The best way to mitigate it is to make films that already have a pre-existing consumer base. That means films based on popular books or plays; or sequels or remakes; and usually with established stars.

    It's not new: out of the 10 Best Picture winners from the 1940s, "the Golden Age of Hollywood," only 1 was an original screenplay. 8 were based on existing books or plays and a ninth, Casablanca, was based on an unproduced play. Almost every film Hitchcock ever made was based on pre-existing material and he even remade his own film, The Man Who Knew Too Much. The popular version of The Wizard of Oz starring Judy Garland was the sixth(!) time the story had been made into a film.

    Without adaptations, remakes, sequels and prequels, the film industry as we know it wouldn't exist.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 2,928
    No problem with a new Terminator film but I think a reboot is a bad idea. 4 was decent enough considering who directed it, so they really should continue onwards on what has already been established.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    edited June 2013 Posts: 28,232
    Yeah, I just heard about this. I guess the money machines Hollywood use to preserve their existence are getting a bit empty.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 395
    No problem with a new Terminator film but I think a reboot is a bad idea. 4 was decent enough considering who directed it, so they really should continue onwards on what has already been established.
    It performed very badly at the box office though.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,473
    4 was kind of a reboot anyway, why not just make a sequel?
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 395
    4 was kind of a reboot anyway, why not just make a sequel?
    Because why would one make a sequel to a film which lost money?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 2,928
    It made twice it's budget, which would actually mean it broke even - just about. But you're right, it definitely underperformed.

    That aside, it definitely deserved a sequel. And now that Arnold is dedicated to coming back, whether or not the previous film made money is less of an issue as fans will come to see him back as the character regardless, no?
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited June 2013 Posts: 3,033
    District 9 is a better movie then Terminator 4. Also Transformers 2 who special effect are made by the people who did Terminator 3 is a better movie.

    I whas happy to hear to Paramount going to make T5 because Paramount is connect with the T1 and T2 directer work for Paramount (and Fox) with Titanic/Avatar and Paramount have connections with Universal (T2 is re-released by them on BD and dvd, and a lot of Paramount movies (Animated) be released by Universal or the other way around who soon going to be released by Fox who going to take over Dreamworks.). Afterall Terminator franchise is a MGM/Fox/Sony/Universal/Paramount thing and Terminator 4 is more a Warner/Sony thing. So Warner runed the franchise, Christian Bale be in Terminator 4 i see symbol of Warner and there making the prequel tv series and my feeling be Terminator 4 feels a bit like that.

    Mabey there get scary after Die Hard 5, but the good thing be is that it be easier to get a directer for T5 and 100 minutes movie is les of problem. The directer of Terminator 4 is not the problem. Note i haven't seen Die Hard 5 but i heard it is QOS of Die Hard franchise, it have left over from Die Hard 4 i whas afraid wil not happen and like Mi4 i like the idea it be a story with russians.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 395
    It made twice it's budget, which would actually mean it broke even - just about. But you're right, it definitely underperformed.
    No, both Warner Bros and Sony lost money and Halycon, the production company, was unable to fully repay the equity investment in the film.

    As a rule of thumb, a film generally needs to make back about 3 times its production budget to break even (cinemas take approx 50% of Box office and the distributor's P&A costs are usually at least 50% of the production budget.)
    That aside, it definitely deserved a sequel. And now that Arnold is dedicated to coming back, whether or not the previous film made money is less of an issue as fans will come to see him back as the character regardless, no?
    The Last Stand, his first starring role in 10 years, flopped badly.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 2,928
    That aside, it definitely deserved a sequel. And now that Arnold is dedicated to coming back, whether or not the previous film made money is less of an issue as fans will come to see him back as the character regardless, no?
    The Last Stand, his first starring role in 10 years, flopped badly.[/quote]

    The Last Stand was a stand alone feature though, the difference here would be Arnold returning to his most iconic role. Surely that would make a difference. Probably one of the reasons Salvation underperformed was because he wasn't in it?
  • Arnie was in it...and Arnie is only in it as a bit part apparently. I want the rock to take up the baton...awesome.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 2,928
    Arnie was in it...

    Everyone knew it wasn't really him.

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,473
    4 was kind of a reboot anyway, why not just make a sequel?
    Because why would one make a sequel to a film which lost money?

    Lost money or not, it was better than T3, and that got a sequel.
  • Arnie was in it...

    Everyone knew it wasn't really him.

    I know but retro cgi Arnie just being pure evil had be hiding behing the sofa. T3 was awful like having ones testicals coated with honey and putting them in a bee hive.

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,194
    Hopefully Cameron keeps the rights in 2019 meaning we won't have to endure three more of these films. One should be enough.
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Terminator could also have picked up where Sarah Connor Chronicles left off. That would have been real interesting. Maybe someone might continue the TV series.

    If I have my Termintor chronology correct, Sarah Connor Chronicles was a tangent which branched from T2, in which she didn't get killed, while T3 and T4 were a different tangent extending from T2 in which Sarah is killed and Judgement Day happens.

    I am happy at least that more Terminator is being served up. A re-boot makes for 3 different Terminator continuities, I guess.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Schloss Drache ~ Defender of the Continuation.
    Posts: 12,659
    Well we Bond fans can hardly talk. Rebooting seems to be very much in fashion these days...
  • Posts: 2,341
    All that friggin money in Hollywood and all they can come up with is re hased, rebooted, remakes?
    They should stop force feeding us these CGI expensive films and just save the money and concentrate on more story driven tales.
    Lincoln
    Django
    42
    Crash
    Several of these films did not do too badly at the box office and even won some Oscar Gold. They do not cost as much to make, the studio can earn back it's money that much faster. They would rather spend 200 million and sweat bullets that the film may not recoup its costs rather than spending 10-20 million and earn back the money the first weekend or two.

    "If they keep serving slop, the people will acquire a taste for it."
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,778
    I read about this this morning and I don't see a need for a reboot. T2 and TS are my two favorites of the franchise. But hey at least we have Arnold in the role again, although I'm hoping for "The Legend of Conan" first.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 391
    Gawd, just stop with the series already. T:S wasn't terrible, but they really goofed up a lot of details in it. End the series on a semi-good note and come up with an original idea!
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    edited June 2013 Posts: 1,778
    IMHO I think they should continue after TS; it would be a nice change from the whole time travel thing and I would like to see the humans win the war.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,473
    timmer wrote:
    Terminator could also have picked up where Sarah Connor Chronicles left off. That would have been real interesting. Maybe someone might continue the TV series.

    If I have my Termintor chronology correct, Sarah Connor Chronicles was a tangent which branched from T2, in which she didn't get killed, while T3 and T4 were a different tangent extending from T2 in which Sarah is killed and Judgement Day happens.

    I am happy at least that more Terminator is being served up. A re-boot makes for 3 different Terminator continuities, I guess.

    Much as I loved The Sarah Connon Chronicles, and would love to see a continuation showing the time-misplaced John in a future where nobody knows who the hell he is, the show is sadly dead.

    Then again, there's going to be a Veronica Mars movie. The future is not set.

    Also, McG (what the hell kind of a fake name is that?) stated that his ideas for a fifth movie, set after Salvation, would have revealed that Sarah faked her death in order to survive Judgement Day.
  • Posts: 1,141
    Well I for one am very excited by the prospect of this. I love the Terminator franchise and think the opportunity is there to do something special. Reboots are not necessarily something to fear. Bond's done very well for himself since his reboot and the recent Batman reboot is another example of what a great idea it can turn out to be. Superman has gone and done it also, although I've not seen Man of Steel yet so can't really comment on that one.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 31,801
    Shame they never continued on from 'Terminator: Salvation.' Heard about this news earlier and thought of how cool it will be to get a new trilogy, but I had no idea it was going to reboot. Somewhat lowers my interest. I don't see these new films being better than 'Terminator' or 'Terminator 2.'

    Besides, as great as Schwarzenegger is, is he really going to return as a Terminator? He's too old. I thought the models for the machines were supposed to be near perfection?
  • Posts: 10,826
    That is just pathetic! It does not need a reboot? The last movie whether you enjoyed it or not? Has set up the apocalyptic wartime of all these entries so far! So lets see some more all out full on battles! That's what we all want!!!
  • Posts: 1,141
    RogueAgent wrote:
    That is just pathetic! It does not need a reboot? The last movie whether you enjoyed it or not? Has set up the apocalyptic wartime of all these entries so far! So lets see some more all out full on battles! That's what we all want!!!

    Whilst I would be happy to explore more of the post apocalyptic point in the franchise, I am more happy that they have chosen to revisit the origins of the franchise whereby a mean killing machine is sent from the future to be unleashed on an unsuspecting public. The first movie The Terminator remains my favourite because it is sci-fi but first and foremost is a frightening horror of cat and mouse. Human fighting against all odds against an unstoppable machine that will never never give up until you are dead or somehow can destroy it first.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 16,246
    I'm a sucker for anything Terminator, I must admit. Growing up on Cameron's originals, I sustained a solid appreciation for the franchise even after ROTM and Salvation. I will acknowledge, however, that the quality of the franchise has been in steep decline after T-2; in fact I will admit that I would just as well have been happy to leave things alone after T-2. That said, I'm an easy lay for more Terminator product and I think there's tons of material that can be extracted from the fascinating world of Terminator.

    When it comes to hope that any future film in the series, reboot or not, will ever match or even top the quality of the first two, I have none. I rather think of the Terminator franchise as ranging, on average, from good to great, with the first two films being exceptionally great almost by accident. They benefit from Cameron's direct involvement, a luxury the other two never had. So, if the new film ends up between good and great, I'll be happy. To put a different spin on it, it doesn't have to be exceptionally great, like T-2, to get me excited for it.

    I'm always interested to see what a new Terminator film brings. Because ultimately, the war against the machines offers fertile ground for truly impressive sci-fi stories. Yes, I can dig yet another Terminator film and I'm not ashamed to admit it. ;-)
  • edited June 2013 Posts: 2,782
    Yes, rumour has it Dwayne The Rock Johnson is in talks....
  • 4 was kind of a reboot anyway, why not just make a sequel?
    Because why would one make a sequel to a film which lost money?

    Lost money or not, it was better than T3, and that got a sequel.

    That got a sequel because it made money. That's how it works. Sadly, it has little or nothing to do with the perceived quality of the film.
Sign In or Register to comment.