Rate the last film you watched out of 100 Page 3981

  • JamboWayOh 5 Nov 2019 12:01:26 19,988 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    Genysys moved the franchise solidly into Ďits going to be shití territory. People now firmly expect a new terminator movie to be wank and a mediocre new entry is going to do nothing to change that.

    See also: predator, men in black and every other franchise thatís been run into the ground.

    Id also say this new Matrix movie has the potential to finally bury it.
    Hm, that's actually quite a sound conclusion you've got there, I suppose after T3 the series, for me, kept dipping in quality and as you say come Genisys I frankly couldn't give a fuck about the franchise. How sad.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 12:02:51
    There are still decent actioners being made occasionally. But tellingly they're original properties.

    Upgrade and The Raid spring to mind
  • Pierre2k 5 Nov 2019 13:20:01 1,214 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Terminator Dark Fate

    So, decided to see this last night as, despite the issues the series has faced, it's one that I have always ultimately enjoyed.

    The verdict....honestly, I'm undecided. As a dumb action movie, I actually quite enjoyed it. The set pieces were decent, I was never bored (though it does sag in the middle), and ultimately I had fun. I still enjoy the general premise of futuristic robot having to be dealt with by vastly underpowered by comparison present day comrades.

    However, the film also doesn't really bring anything to the franchise other than to, frankly, take a steaming dump over what the first 2 movies were all about. I won't explicitly say what happens (though it's all over the internet now), but that opening scene, OMFG, what were you thinking! Also, the Terminator series (and many James Cameron movies come to think of it) have always had really strong female leads, without the need for it to feel shoehorned in. Aliens, and the development of Ripley in it, is probably one of, if not my all time favourite action lead. Here, it just came off as one of the most obvious, yet forced, and cynically contrived plot twists ever IMO. I feel it almost ruins the original 2 movies to deliver it.

    Overall, I'm left pondering the Terminator sequels (post-T2) in general, and my preferences.

    Terminator 3 is actually my favourite of these, despite it getting a bad rap. I didn't appreciate the comedy element (star glasses), but the action was good, the female Terminator wasn't out of place and was played well enough, the action was decent, and the target wasn't John Connor, but at the same time, it didn't ruin the legacy of the first 2 movies. Not a masterpiece and it does dump on T2's "the future is what you make it" ending, but overall acceptable.

    Terminator Salvation is exactly where I thought, and still think, the series should have gone. A trilogy of the future war "could" have been brilliant without having to rehash the sent through time to kill/protect story. Unfortunately, this was an awful movie though. Not seen it in years, but absolutely hated it at the time.

    Genysis, I found entertaining enough for a one-time watch, but was the absolute worst fan-fiction plot wise. Doesn't really fit anywhere.

    Then you have a Dark Fate. Love that Sarah is still alive rather than bumped off (as in T3), but the alternative it turns out is far worse.in my view.

    I'm just rambling now....Dark Fate, worth a watch, entertaining enough, but just sullies the story of the first 2 for.me to be satisfied.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 13:29:02
    I actually quite enjoyed T3 at the time. I was young and stoned but I remember the ending being quite novel.
  • Lukus 5 Nov 2019 14:14:10 23,332 posts
    Seen 46 minutes ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    Can the machines' decision to not just send back a killer bee to shoot up someone's ass be explained away by vanity? They love the human aesthetic just a bit too much? Or are all the machines originally designed by man and they're too stupid to come up with a more discreet killing machine? The more I think about it, the less impressed I am by their intelligence.

    Edited by Lukus at 14:14:46 05-11-2019
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 14:44:24
    @Lukus It's explained in the first one that they are infiltration robots, designed to mimic humans and get in their settlements then shoot them all up.

    Doesn't really hold water, but is just about believable enough.
  • prettyvacant 5 Nov 2019 14:49:01 372 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Lukus wrote:
    Can the machines' decision to not just send back a killer bee to shoot up someone's ass be explained away by vanity?

    They tried this but kept losing the bees in bookshop windows or those blue bug zappers they have in chip shops .
  • Derblington 5 Nov 2019 14:50:12 33,414 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Wouldn't be a particularly interesting/tense film otherwise.

    It was a borne from a dream of Cameron's, of a metallic skeleton walking through flames (or something similar). It'd be a more interesting story had he dreamt of a metallic fly burrowing up a dude's ass but I guess he didn't eat enough cheese before bed.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 14:52:10
    James Cameron is full of shit though. He probably made that up.
  • KnuttinAtoll 5 Nov 2019 14:57:21 8,146 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    adamasunder12 wrote:
    I actually quite enjoyed T3 at the time. I was young and stoned but I remember the ending being quite novel.
    To be honest, I can't really remember much of it, other than some firetruck chase sequence, the bad Termy being a blonde, angry looking lady with some interesting moves and afinale on an airbase or some such. I wasn't blown away by it at the time but I don't think I found it anywhere near as offensive as Genisys (even the stupid spelling annoys me).

    The biggest problem for me are the ridiculous set pieces, that, thanks to 100% CGI don't even have to follow the laws of physics anymore. That helicopter chase towards the end - tbh it felt it belonged more to Star Wars and I found it tedious to watch as a result.

    Skynet then smack talking the good guys at the end, instead of just doing what it needs doing. Think of the first two films - the way the evil T800 or T1000 were portrayed was great as they barely said anything - they were ruthless and on a mission, no need for chit chat.

    Then there's the casting; young, clean-shaven, pretty looking people that change from damsel in distress to battle hardened badass within minutes. It's just awful. Arnie isn't exactly a great actor but he runs (sorry, walks) rings around the rest of most of the cast, even though he's calling it in as well (I'm just happy to still see him on screen). Nothing feels believable, any exposition just feels like an excuse to string one set piece to the next. The film doesn't make me care about any of the protagonists at all.

    The problem is, these things seem to be par for the course in most Hollywood blockbusters now. You see one, you see them all, it's as if they follow a standard pattern now. It seems that audiences need to be wowed with ever increasing set pieces, no matter how over the top and dare I say unrealistic they are. I'm sure a younger me would love the CGI fests of now, but to be honest, it just bores me to death now.

    Basically this, in a nutshell.

    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/nov/05/martin-scorsese-superhero-marvel-movies-debate-sadness
  • SuperSoupy 5 Nov 2019 15:25:30 198 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Saw it the other night. Some really nice ideas there. Was never going to match T2 but what does? But all good fun.

    Actors were all great (apart from Linda Hamilton... I actually thought she was a bit weak).

    Grace and the Rev-9 (which after the trailers I thought would suck) are actually the best things about the film. If they are gonna do the same old story, part of me wishes goes into daydream mode that they just cut the budget on half for this thing, cut down on the excessive CGI, lose Arnie and Hamilton cos they're also expensive and it ain't really about them anyway, and just do a tightly-wound Rambo-esque cat-and-mouse movie about a killing machine chasing down a futuristic runaway through a present-day US city.

    She abandoned her post in the future and hopped on one of the last time-bubble things out of there. Rev-9 kills anyone left and takes the only other time-bubble thing left to hunt her down. In the present she constantly has to top up her meds, Crank-style, while avoiding the Rev-9 plus any gangs/cops/military/etc that get in her way The Raid-style. She meets a girl who she saves by chance, who turns out to be the future resistance leader. But is only in it for a bit. Again, this is Grace's story. She eventually learns the value of who she saved earlier, and learns what it means to fight for the future, as the Rev-9 kills everything in it's path and tracks her down to a silicon valley research facility. As Grace is cornered she finally overcomes the Rev-9 but not before suffering a fatal blow herself. As she draws her last breath we learn in a big twist, that the Rev-9 had been leading her here the entire time, because the research into both her and its remains are what leads to the development of the future Legion AI. end daydream mode

    Anyway, fun movie is fun. Too much CGI making heavy robots feel like gravity-defying ballerinas. But otherwise fun.

    Edited by SuperSoupy at 15:31:47 05-11-2019
  • beastmaster 5 Nov 2019 15:35:44 20,912 posts
    Seen 28 minutes ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    But donít people want the same thing? Annual updates of video games are not really that different. More of the same please. Give me a lot of something I already like and a bit of something new.

    Try and do something different and you get The Last Jedi which splits the fanbase.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 15:40:48
    Video games and movies are really not the same thing.

    And you can do something different and not alienate the fan base. See Logan. Again

    Edited by adamasunder12 at 15:41:28 05-11-2019
  • beastmaster 5 Nov 2019 15:49:38 20,912 posts
    Seen 28 minutes ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    adamasunder12 wrote:
    Video games and movies are really not the same thing.

    And you can do something different and not alienate the fan base. See Logan. Again
    Indeed. And Joker.

    Just depends on the filmmaker I suppose. I canít believe they spent north of $150 million on Dark Fate. Iím kind of glad that did but that was just a stupid idea from a business point of view. International market hasnít been at all great either.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 15:56:59
    Yeah, the budget is fucking ridiculous. They really thought Cameron's return was a license to print money. That's the only reason for the confidence surely?

    Avatar 2 is going to be an interesting one. Not a lot of what Cameron's been involved with of late has been very successful and Avatar had a huuuuuuge backlash.
  • You-can-call-me-kal 5 Nov 2019 15:59:35 20,043 posts
    Seen 13 minutes ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    Cameron directed, and Cameron vaguely involved somehow are very different things.
  • SuperSoupy 5 Nov 2019 16:04:02 198 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Avatar backlash? Isn't it like the most successful movie ever made (until Avenger Endgame just this year)???

    I can understand something having an excessive budget but not because Cameron is a producer. Just because it's a reliable brand. However Dark Fate's box office is sure as hell testing that theory.

    It's a good movie. They just could have done a lot more with a lot less.

    Edited by SuperSoupy at 16:04:54 05-11-2019
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 16:11:23
    You-can-call-me-kal wrote:
    Cameron directed, and Cameron vaguely involved somehow are very different things.
    Indeed. Hence being surprised about the confidence.

    Interested to see what happens with Avatar with him directing but I'm not sure disruptive technology is enough these days.

    As for the backlash. Yes it made loads of money but it's been mauled since for being, well a bit shit. Just googling avatar backlash brings up a page of articles about it.

    Edited by adamasunder12 at 16:17:30 05-11-2019
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 16:12:48
    It really isn't a reliable brand. It has been the epitome of diminishing returns since T3.

    Hence having three attempts at making a trilogy fall. At the first hurdle
  • beastmaster 5 Nov 2019 16:26:25 20,912 posts
    Seen 28 minutes ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    A page of articles? The film made over $2 billion. Most people who go to the cinema donít even know there is a ďbacklashĒ.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 16:31:17
    I feel you're still getting hung up on what the film made.

    Which is your thing I guess ;)

    Many people watched it and hated it. Myself and most of my friends, a lot of people here. It had to make the money to get the hate. It certainly wasn't universally liked and the main reason it did so well was because of Cameron's track record and the technology. It certainly wasn't the nonsensical plot, the uncharismatic leading man with confusing motivations or the stupid ending.

    Edited by adamasunder12 at 16:32:55 05-11-2019
  • Lukus 5 Nov 2019 16:41:10 23,332 posts
    Seen 46 minutes ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    Avatar did well because at the time the effects work was a big step up over everything before it, CG-wise at least. Combined with a really big focus on the relaunching of 3D for a new market. To be fair to it, the 3D was really good and the world was impressive. It made it by on sheer spectacle. Any new Avatar film is destined not to be as successful because plenty of other blockbusters have caught up or surpassed it on the FX front, and unless Cameron makes a push for smellovision, there is no other gimmick to push the marketing with.
  • You-can-call-me-kal 5 Nov 2019 16:44:36 20,043 posts
    Seen 13 minutes ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    I think people do Avatar a bit of a disservice suggesting itís success was just because of FX gimmicks. It helped, but Cameron films are bankable, FX or not. And all his films are action masterpieces, even Titanic.

    Also, how do people know Avatar 2 wonít have some highly marketable techno gimmick? We donít know anything about it yet.
  • Your-Mother 5 Nov 2019 16:48:02 4,472 posts
    Seen 27 minutes ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    I thought Avatar 2ís techno gimmick was underwater filming.
  • Derblington 5 Nov 2019 16:48:58 33,414 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Underwater mo-cap is their next push.

    Avatar has positive user scores everywhere you look too. It does have some "hate" but it's the usual vocal minority that hang out online. They aren't representative of the audience at large.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 16:48:58
    Heh, I liked Titanic.

    In fact I like all his films. That's what made Avatar personally so disappointing.
  • beastmaster 5 Nov 2019 16:49:15 20,912 posts
    Seen 28 minutes ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    Heís developed underwater motion capture. Underwater.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 16:50:36
    He does have a thing for water.

    I must Google this new tech. I have no idea what it is or why I would care.

    Edited by adamasunder12 at 16:51:15 05-11-2019
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 16:53:35
    Okay, read an article.

    Scraping the barrel is all that seems to me but I guess I will watch it before casting too much shade.
  • Deleted user 5 November 2019 17:09:34
    Derblington wrote:
    Underwater mo-cap is their next push.

    Avatar has positive user scores everywhere you look too. It does have some "hate" but it's the usual vocal minority that hang out online. They aren't representative of the audience at large.
    Nobody I know likes it and most of them aren't forum scum like me.

    They are all of a similar opinion. "Nice 3D at the time, story dogshit".
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.