Terminator: Dark Fate

[Bartmanhomer]

I'm watching Terminator: Dark Fate right now and I'll tell you my thoughts on the movie later on.

[Ramza00]

Part of me is excited to see it, but at the same time I am so exhausted by the franchise. What movie is this? Movie 6 (does this from memory, now going to look it up via google.)

3 Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)
4 Terminator Salvation (2009)
5 Terminator Genisys (2015)

The 6th one Terminator: Dark Fate (2019.) But yeah the Terminator franchise was kind of hollowed out and I made exhausted by movies 3, 4, and 5. I am a person who loves lore and figuring out how plots go together in non-linear storytelling but the Terminator Franchise is such a mess that it hurts my brain thinking about it. I enjoyed Westworld (HBO), but lost all enjoyment of this franchise

While simultaneously 3, 4, and 5 were not that good of action movies so I can't just turn off my brain and enjoy them for the action spectacle that you can do with other people who ape Cameron's style such as Michael Bay.

-----



I hope the 6th one turns out to be great and it can restore my joy that this Franchise used to instill. I am not sure I will see it in theaters and instead just rent / stream it, but if enough people say it is great and I can hope again maybe I will see it in theaters.

Thus I will watch this thread. 👀

[Bartmanhomer]

Ok, I saw Terminator: Dark Fate today and this is what I think of the movie.

Spoiler: My Thoughts On Terminator: Dark Fate

Show

Terminator Dark: Fate is about new liquified Terminator called Rev-9 was sent from the future to kill an Hispanic woman named Dani. Grace an enhanced human was also sent from the future to protect Dani. At the beginning of the movie in 1998, the original Terminator killed John Connor and succeeded. Anyway the movie has so much action in it. It show the climatic action of an enchanted human to protect the woman from all cost. This movie was great. I enjoy it. And it's Oscar-worthy in my opinion. So I'll give this movie 5 out of 5 stars for a perfect movie.

[Seppl]

I thought it was competently done, but lacking the "epic" feel that the early installments had. I would point to the music score as the one part that I consciously noticed as a letdown, but there may be other factors why this movie just did not click with me.

Spoiler

Show

Good aspects of the story: The way they incorporated the aged cast from the original movies was well done, albeit rather predictable. Especially how they explained the presence of an old Arnold Schwarzenegger. I also liked the fact that they did not fall into the trap off providing an eleventh hour rescue for Grace and/or Karl. They had to die for the plot to work and the audience felt their deaths. In general, I found the main characters all to be well done, believable, and I cared.
(There is also a certain SJW aspect to this as the majority of the cast is badass women but the movie does NOT hit you over the head with this as other movies do. You won't even notice unless it is pointed out. Which I just did 😀)

Bad aspects of the story: Predictability. There was not a single thing you could not see coming from a mile away. Sure, it's an action movie, but this one subverted even my low expectations in that regard. I am not even talking about the big story points (though those were very predictable as well) but also at a scene by scene level. One could always say "Now comes the scene where that will X by using Y" or "Oh, now comes the scene that will reference that similar scene from part 1/2" and you would always be correct. That kind of saps the tension out of an action scene. Or it reminds you of similar, but better, movies. There were just way too many things in this movie that were only done the way they were done because of the famous predecessors, but hurt this movie. On all levels: Plot, scenes, quotes, even gestures.

That probably sounds worse than it is, because I talk so much about the negatives. But that would sell the movie short. Overall, I enjoyed it but it is far from being the masterpiece that it will inevitably be compared to. I would recommend it and I might watch it again given the opportunity, but I will not actively seek it out.

[danzibr]

I'm watching Terminator: Dark Fate right now and I'll tell you my thoughts on the movie later on.

Wait... did you make this post while watching the movie in the theater?

[Bartmanhomer]

Wait... did you make this post while watching the movie in the theater?

Yes I did.

[Sapphire Guard]

Spoiler: major spoiler

Show

I guess the question this leaves us with is, if John Connor was supposed to be important and turned out not to be, why should we believe Dani is so important? Maybe she'll turn out to be unnecessary too.

[Timeras]

Spoiler: major spoiler

Show

I guess the question this leaves us with is, if John Connor was supposed to be important and turned out not to be, why should we believe Dani is so important? Maybe she'll turn out to be unnecessary too.

Spoiler

Show

John was no longer important, because Skynet was not created. The war that he was to be the hero in never happened. Legion started a war 20 years later. And in this war Dani was the hero. Since that war was not prevented, she remains important.

[gooddragon1]

Spoiler: Some dark fate spoilers

Show

I liked almost all of it, except for when the emp devices were inconveniently destroyed by gunfire.

Also, when the rev 9 killed the guy who talked about doughnuts, that guy had a difficult to describe look on his face. Like, "It looks like I'm never getting those doughnuts..."

[Sapphire Guard]

Spoiler

Show

But is there some reason to believe that war is more inevitable than the last one, or might it just be prevented through time travel hijinks too? Makes the stakes trickier.

[Dragonus45]

So while predictable it delivered all the beats I wanted out of Old Woman Sarah Connor and is probably the first good movie in the franchise they have made since 2 but... the box office is looking harsh. I think that says more about the state the franchise is in then it does about the movie itself though. I think it might be time to give this series a rest. A long rest. A very very long rest.


Forever.

[gooddragon1]

So while predictable it delivered all the beats I wanted out of Old Woman Sarah Connor and is probably the first good movie in the franchise they have made since 2 but... the box office is looking harsh. I think that says more about the state the franchise is in then it does about the movie itself though. I think it might be time to give this series a rest. A long rest. A very very long rest.


Forever.

It'll be back.

The terminator franchise is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until it's finances run out.

[Dragonus45]

It'll be back.

The terminator franchise is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until it's finances run out.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeell about those finances...

[weckar]

Yes I did.

But you're supposed to turn off your phone =O

[Bartmanhomer]

But you're supposed to turn off your phone =O

It was the previews. No one didn't notice.

[Hopeless]

Spoiler

Show

Then why did Skynet persist in targeting John given it was effectively didn't exist until 20 years later when John Connor wasn't even relevant?

It sounds like it would have made more sense that the Terminator they came upon at the beach was after someone else and that caused them to restart their quest to discover who it was targeting this time round as it shouldn't have been John!

[The Pilgrim]

It's a direct sequel to Terminator 2. The third, four and five movies are discarded as having happened on alternate timelines. The plot justs follows up after the ending of T2, and is more or less a remake of T1 and T2 mixed together, with women at the lead. (I feared it was going to be a "Terminator Meets Thelma&Louise", but it's not).

If you liked the two original films, you would enjoy this one. It gets James Cameron involved again, it gets some Arnie doing his Arnie thing, and it respects the general mood, pace and style of T1 and T2, albeit without introducing anything new. Thankfully.

Dani plays the role of the helpless assasination target like a combined Sarah Connor from T1+John Connor from T2. Grace plays an emotionally-involved protector similar to the guy nobody remembers from T1. The bad guy is just like the T-1000 from T2. Badass Sarah Connor is Badass Sarah Connor. And Arnie is Arnie. What more do you want from a Terminator film?

Being an action movie, with time travel elements, it inevitably contains a good amount of plot holes, the most prominent of them being that...

Spoiler

Show

Grace could have ended the movie at the first combat scene, since she carried the weapon that can kill the Terminaton inside herself, she knows it, and she is willing to sacrifice herself for the mission, as she does in the end.

But hey, it's an action movie. You aren't paying for plot consistency, you are paying for the action, and I think it does okey in that field. Not okey enought to resurrect the beaten-to-death franchise, though.

I would have prefered that they dealt with John Connor in a way that doesn't makes the whole point of T1 and T2 moot. That prevents me from accepting this film as part of the same "continuity" than T1 and T2. Mr Cameron, you shouldn't have allowed Tim Miller to get his way with that. I mean...

Spoiler

Show

You don't need to be a genius to foresee that fans would loathe to see teenage John Connor killed in a flashback scene set shortly after the events of T2. It destroys the whole significance of the two movies everyone loves.

[Ranxerox]

Spoiler

Show

Then why did Skynet persist in targeting John given it was effectively didn't exist until 20 years later when John Connor wasn't even relevant?

It sounds like it would have made more sense that the Terminator they came upon at the beach was after someone else and that caused them to restart their quest to discover who it was targeting this time round as it shouldn't have been John!

Spoiler: Don't look down, Coyote!

Show

It is one of those time travel things that don't make sense if you think about them for more than a second. Apparently, when it sent the original terminator to kill Sarah Conner back in the first Terminator, Skynet didn't put all its eggs in one basket. It sent other terminators of the same model to other points in John Conner's timeline just to make extra certain that he died. Then Sarah Conner terminated Skynet's future, but since these other terminators had "already" been sent could still pop up now and again.

[Traab]

I wonder if a better way to handle things would have been to work with a multiverse rather than time travel angle from the start. Like, skynet was winning the war to destroy humanity, however, they somehow discovered the multiverse theory wasnt a theory, it was real, and that meant an infinite number of realities they would want to wipe out humanity in. Taking a cue from what caused them the most trouble originally, namely, john conner, they decided the best way to ensure humanity is destroyed is by making sure he is either never born, or dies young. Think Omnicidal Sliders, they hop from reality to reality trying to kill all humans and make sure robots rule all (which is why they dont aim to pop up back in time and shoot anyone who tries to settle in mesopotamia) Now, this being the case, obviously there would be alternate realities that are trying to stop this, hence why we get friendly terminators in various forms, personalities, and permutations, to protect john conner. This eliminates time travel plot holes, gives the series unlimited flexibility in future films to develop new tricks and abilities of the various bots, and makes sense as to why it keeps happening and skynet is still trying to kill john conner despite him having theoretically stopped judgement day by the end of t-2. Because the robopocalypse can still happen, it will just be harder to arrange and conner still has to die as the one most knowledgeable about how to fight against them. All they need to do is setup another scenario from t-1. Leave some robo wreckage behind for the science squads to find around conners dead body and research on, leading to an eventual skynet scenario of one form or another.

[Lemmy]

Considering the last three Terminator movies, I'm in no rush to see this one.

I also heard they killed/erased a classic character to prop up a new one I don't care about, and that kind of thing always annoys me... So it's probably best if I don't spend my money on this one.

Maybe I'll watch it when/if it comes to Netflix or Amazon... And if it doesn't... Oh well. C'est la vie.

Given the box office, I doubt I'll miss out on any conversations.

[HandofShadows]

Spoiler: Don't look down, Coyote!

Show

It is one of those time travel things that don't make sense if you think about them for more than a second. Apparently, when it sent the original terminator to kill Sarah Conner back in the first Terminator, Skynet didn't put all its eggs in one basket. It sent other terminators of the same model to other points in John Conner's timeline just to make extra certain that he died. Then Sarah Conner terminated Skynet's future, but since these other terminators had "already" been sent could still pop up now and again.

Spoiler: Time Travel

Show

Ah, one of thing people often miss in time travel stories at least if the story line follows the theory that there is no such thing as time and everything happens at once. (We just can't see it and yes, this is very much a real theory in physics) If this the case than even when you change something, that alters the future, the original future is still happening because everything happens at once. It's a real hard idea to get your head around. Its a lot like the Grandfather Paradox.

[Seppl]

Spoiler: Time Travel

Show

Ah, one of thing people often miss in time travel stories at least if the story line follows the theory that there is no such thing as time and everything happens at once. (We just can't see it and yes, this is very much a real theory in physics) If this the case than even when you change something, that alters the future, the original future is still happening because everything happens at once. It's a real hard idea to get your head around. Its a lot like the Grandfather Paradox.

Spoiler

Show

I read that scene as if the T-800 was sent to some point before the events of Terminator 2. He then took his sweet time (maybe he was slowed down by another, unknown Resistance agent) and never caught up to John before 1998, long after the future was changed.

[Magic_Hat]

So while predictable it delivered all the beats I wanted...I think that says more about the state the franchise is in then it does about the movie itself though. I think it might be time to give this series a rest. A long rest. A very very long rest.


Forever.

Sorry I blacked out for most of that quote. What series are we talking about? Because you described 99% of the sequels/series that have come out in the past 25 years.

[Seppl]

Sorry I blacked out for most of that quote. What series are we talking about? Because you described 99% of the sequels/series that have come out in the past 25 years.

Which is why so many people are annoyed with the current flood of reboots, remakes, and low efforts sequels? A good sequel is supposed to creatively expand upon the existing material, not just re-hash it.

[Magic_Hat]

Which is why so many people are annoyed with the current flood of reboots, remakes, and low efforts sequels? A good sequel is supposed to creatively expand upon the existing material, not just re-hash it.

What's the highest grossing film of all time again?

[The Pilgrim]

What's the highest grossing film of all time again?

Adjusted to inflation? Gone with the Wind. Endgame is in a far fifth position.

[Magic_Hat]

Adjusted to inflation? Gone with the Wind. Endgame is in a far fifth position.

And yet it's still in the top five - a film so good Marvel had to literally tell its fans to go spend another 445 mil. to beat Avatar. How is the general population tired of trite?

[Dragonus45]

Which is why so many people are annoyed with the current flood of reboots, remakes, and low efforts sequels? A good sequel is supposed to creatively expand upon the existing material, not just re-hash it.

This movie makes a good effort at expanding things.

Spoiler

Show

The idea that they successfully stopped skynet and instead a totally new and different AI took over the world was cool, but they didn't really do anything with Not Skynet. A lot of wasted opportunities in the film.

[The Pilgrim]

And yet it's still in the top five - a film so good Marvel had to literally tell its fans to go spend another 445 mil. to beat Avatar.

And, again adjusted to inflation, they didn't.

How is the general population tired of trite?

I dunno, I'm a different guy than the one that make that point, despite sharing the same avatar.

Anyway, he said "so many people", not "the general population". And he refered to "reboots, remakes, and low efforts sequels", which Endgame is not.

[Ramza00]

Grace plays an emotionally-involved protector similar to the guy nobody remembers from T1.

James Cameron remembered Michael Biehn
(the actor who played Kyle Reese.)

James Cameron has only written and directed 8 movies [I am not counting the 2 documentaries, nor am I counting unreleased movies like the future Avatar sequels.] Michael Biehn was in 3 of those movies.

Sgt. Kyle Reese in The Terminator (1984),
Cpl. Dwayne Hicks in Aliens (1986), and
Lt. Coffey in The Abyss (1989).

Michael Biehn also had a Cameo in Terminator 2 in the Special and Director Editions of that movie.

So yeah someone remembered Michael Biehn

Adjusted to inflation? Gone with the Wind. Endgame is in a far fifth position.

Why adjust for inflation? Why not also adjust for other arbitrary metrics like population of the world in 1939 or some other arbitrary metric.

Movies are success based off the metrics of their time, and once you are talking movies being decade aparts comparisons of success becomes a useless game of arbitrary metrics. Movies from 2019 are different than 1999 for while there was VCRs in 1999 the culture is completely different with streaming, internet, and a culture of entertainment "abundance" and you now have to choose to limit your attention for too much content not enough hours of a day. While 1999 you were limited to 3 to 12 free tv channels and while there was cable and satellite that is money you choose to spend as an opportunity cost that is different than the opportunity cost of going to the movies and so on. Likewise comparing 2019 to 1979 or 1939 is an even more extreme act.