Whedon certainly has his problems ('character abuse', as they say -- he thinks it's not Art unless the characters suffer periodic agonies, whether the plot requires them or not), but c'mon. His hand would only improve 90% of Hollywood anything. Especially if he brings Ben Edlund along.
Here's an idea Whedon should try out
Forward that memo to Matt Groening and Seth MacFarlane, too. I mean, it should be obvious to everyone and anyone, but apparently some people are optimists.
Fox (as a TV network) was largely built on the backs of three shows: The Simpsons, Married . . . With Children, and COPS. All three were massive successes. And Fox kept trying to kill off The Simpsons and MWC, year after year.
$10,000 sounds about right. Although Whedon could turn the show into a twisty, character-driven series that people actually gave a shiat about, the Terminator idea is pretty played out.
The English Major:Say what you will, but I still like Castle.
/this will be an interesting thread //I can already tell
To be perfectly honest, I skipped over the show because I had a hunch that ABC would kill it off in five, six episodes, tops. It slipped out of my memory after a while.
I might have to give it a try now that it's on DVD.
Gwendolyn:Terminator:Salvation would have been a much better movie with the last 5 minutes lopped off. Of course I say this about most movies I see lately.
Not as bad as "The Matrix" where you have to lop off the last two movies to make it good.
/this will be an interesting thread //I can already tell
To be perfectly honest, I skipped over the show because I had a hunch that ABC would kill it off in five, six episodes, tops. It slipped out of my memory after a while.
I might have to give it a try now that it's on DVD.
I like it. The detractors call it "Murder, He Wrote" but it's more than that. Fillion can definitely act.
Gwendolyn:Terminator:Salvation would have been a much better movie with the last 5 minutes lopped off. Of course I say this about most movies I see lately.
Salvation could have been a better movie if it adressed a few issues, correcting some of the fark-ups from T3.
What we basically have at the moment, is a series where you maybe could send someone back in time to change events sometimes, but not necessarily stop an event from occuring, only delay it, apart from the events that are prevented that is. And of course a few events that have to take place, in order for the past to have happened so the present could still be possible.
Also, John Connor has to find Kyle Reese in order to send him back in time in order for him to become his father, while simultaneously avoid getting killed by a T-850 model 101 that is specifically chosen due to Connor's close memories of a similar unit, except that Connor wont be killed by a T-850 model, because he has been warned by another T-850 model that was sent back from the future to prevent him from being killed by a T-X unit in the past while simultaneously warning him of a successful assassination in the future. (Of course, unless the encounter in "Salvation" was meant to be the event foretold in T3. Which was quite redundant because SkyNet also sent a T-X unit...) Except, when it comes to Kyle Reese, John Connor could pretty much have sat on his ass and waited for Kyle Reese to show up, because the existence of Connor proves that Reese shows up at some point, because Reese is Connor's father, because John sent him back in time to protect his mother and fark her at the same time (which, by the way, should cause a few issues that would have Siegmund Freud say "eeenteeereeesting" in the tone psychiatrists use to indicate that things just got expensive), although there is a distinct possibility that if Connor didn't save Reese in order to send him back in time to fark his mother, he might maybe have faded out of existence and thus ensuring that he never existed in the first place by not existing in the first place by recursion.
Basically, the next terminator movie needs to start with an explanation of how time actually farking works, which has to be only slightly more complex than as if Stephen Hawkins and Terry Pratchett got high together, in order to sort out how the hell this franchise works anyways.
Cornwell:in the tone psychiatrists use to indicate that things just got expensive
ha-ha.
Continuity aside, I liked T3. I thought the ending was a bit... redeeming, actually. I still need to see Salvation. As soon as it's both free and convenient, it's done!
Cornwell:Basically, the next terminator movie needs to start with an explanation of how time actually farking works, which has to be only slightly more complex than as if Stephen Hawkins and Terry Pratchett got high together, in order to sort out how the hell this franchise works anyways.
Actually, we shouldn't call this a franchise because that's the exactly the problem: the first movie had a few good moments and the uncut version was a mindfark that revealed that Connor's interference with the past is what brought about Skynet's existence: by sending Reese, he allows the Terminator sent to be destroyed and its remains to be captured by Cyberdyne who reverse engineers it and creates Skynet.
The second resolves this. There is no need for another movie. The storyline is resolved. Yes, we can go on and on about how the battle continues, but there's nothing more to do. Salvation showed that there isn't much of a story when you're fighting the giant farking robots anyway. T3 was pathetic. And the show just retread the same old thing anyway, trying to turn the first two movies into a show that would have just turned into a Fugitive type chase show.
The premise is dead. You can keep beating the dead horse, but it's been about twenty years since Judgment Day and there's no real reason to revisit a badly-made franchise that ended every production it had its name attached to this year. Put it down, let it die, think of something else. And as for Whedon, the only thing he would do is recreate the TV show and add more psuedo-feminist whining and 'struggle' that anybody with the complete run of X-Men circa 1993 could recreate.
Not everything can be a franchise, especially something not as one-note as a Terminator movie could be.
IgG4
2009-11-02 04:28:09 PM
Shostie
2009-11-02 04:30:07 PM
RandomAxe
2009-11-02 04:41:29 PM
Here's an idea Whedon should try out
Forward that memo to Matt Groening and Seth MacFarlane, too. I mean, it should be obvious to everyone and anyone, but apparently some people are optimists.
Fox (as a TV network) was largely built on the backs of three shows: The Simpsons, Married . . . With Children, and COPS. All three were massive successes. And Fox kept trying to kill off The Simpsons and MWC, year after year.
Kublai Khan
2009-11-02 05:19:13 PM
Terminator vs. Batman!
AdolfOliverPanties
2009-11-02 06:14:58 PM
Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener
2009-11-02 06:19:48 PM
"Hasta la vista... KISS MAH GRITS!"
*KABOOOOOOOOOOM*
Gwendolyn
2009-11-02 06:23:53 PM
Terminator:Salvation would have been a much better movie with the last 5 minutes lopped off. Of course I say this about most movies I see lately.
The English Major
2009-11-02 06:29:14 PM
"Hasta la vista... KISS MAH GRITS!"
*KABOOOOOOOOOOM*
Say what you will, but I still like Castle.
/this will be an interesting thread
//I can already tell
Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener
2009-11-02 06:37:51 PM
/this will be an interesting thread
//I can already tell
To be perfectly honest, I skipped over the show because I had a hunch that ABC would kill it off in five, six episodes, tops. It slipped out of my memory after a while.
I might have to give it a try now that it's on DVD.
Crosshair
2009-11-02 06:38:21 PM
Not as bad as "The Matrix" where you have to lop off the last two movies to make it good.
GraysonAC
2009-11-02 06:38:54 PM
/loves Firefly and Castle, and likes Buffy and Angel to boot
The English Major
2009-11-02 06:40:00 PM
/this will be an interesting thread
//I can already tell
To be perfectly honest, I skipped over the show because I had a hunch that ABC would kill it off in five, six episodes, tops. It slipped out of my memory after a while.
I might have to give it a try now that it's on DVD.
I like it. The detractors call it "Murder, He Wrote" but it's more than that. Fillion can definitely act.
AdolfOliverPanties
2009-11-02 06:41:12 PM
"I aim ta terminate ya. So you'd best make peace with your dear and fluffy lord."
Cornwell
2009-11-02 06:45:35 PM
Salvation could have been a better movie if it adressed a few issues, correcting some of the fark-ups from T3.
What we basically have at the moment, is a series where you maybe could send someone back in time to change events sometimes, but not necessarily stop an event from occuring, only delay it, apart from the events that are prevented that is. And of course a few events that have to take place, in order for the past to have happened so the present could still be possible.
Also, John Connor has to find Kyle Reese in order to send him back in time in order for him to become his father, while simultaneously avoid getting killed by a T-850 model 101 that is specifically chosen due to Connor's close memories of a similar unit, except that Connor wont be killed by a T-850 model, because he has been warned by another T-850 model that was sent back from the future to prevent him from being killed by a T-X unit in the past while simultaneously warning him of a successful assassination in the future. (Of course, unless the encounter in "Salvation" was meant to be the event foretold in T3. Which was quite redundant because SkyNet also sent a T-X unit...) Except, when it comes to Kyle Reese, John Connor could pretty much have sat on his ass and waited for Kyle Reese to show up, because the existence of Connor proves that Reese shows up at some point, because Reese is Connor's father, because John sent him back in time to protect his mother and fark her at the same time (which, by the way, should cause a few issues that would have Siegmund Freud say "eeenteeereeesting" in the tone psychiatrists use to indicate that things just got expensive), although there is a distinct possibility that if Connor didn't save Reese in order to send him back in time to fark his mother, he might maybe have faded out of existence and thus ensuring that he never existed in the first place by not existing in the first place by recursion.
Basically, the next terminator movie needs to start with an explanation of how time actually farking works, which has to be only slightly more complex than as if Stephen Hawkins and Terry Pratchett got high together, in order to sort out how the hell this franchise works anyways.
Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener
2009-11-02 06:45:53 PM
"I aim ta terminate ya. So you'd best make peace with your dear and fluffy lord."
THAT is precisely what I'm talkin' about.
"You want me to self-terminate?"
"YEAH!"
"Well... I can't. :-/"
The English Major: I like it. The detractors call it "Murder, He Wrote" but it's more than that. Fillion can definitely act.
Duly and truly noted and quoted.
Your judgments seem to be on the money, so I'll give it a shot - thanks!
Kyosuke
2009-11-02 06:47:16 PM
"Hasta la vista... KISS MAH GRITS!"
*KABOOOOOOOOOOM*
The Hammer is his penis.
Accolade
2009-11-02 07:16:04 PM
ha-ha.
Continuity aside, I liked T3. I thought the ending was a bit... redeeming, actually. I still need to see Salvation. As soon as it's both free and convenient, it's done!
Loneman1
2009-11-02 07:16:41 PM
Wow......my fingers won't even allow me to continue writing that shiat.
Steve Zodiac
2009-11-02 07:19:15 PM
/Music by Wagner, of course.
FriarReb98
2009-11-02 07:20:41 PM
Wow......my fingers won't even allow me to continue writing that shiat.
Tyler Perry is the modern-day equivalent of blaxploitation. Only very, very dumb, very stereotypical people like Tyler Perry.
Guntram Shatterhand
2009-11-02 07:22:40 PM
Actually, we shouldn't call this a franchise because that's the exactly the problem: the first movie had a few good moments and the uncut version was a mindfark that revealed that Connor's interference with the past is what brought about Skynet's existence: by sending Reese, he allows the Terminator sent to be destroyed and its remains to be captured by Cyberdyne who reverse engineers it and creates Skynet.
The second resolves this. There is no need for another movie. The storyline is resolved. Yes, we can go on and on about how the battle continues, but there's nothing more to do. Salvation showed that there isn't much of a story when you're fighting the giant farking robots anyway. T3 was pathetic. And the show just retread the same old thing anyway, trying to turn the first two movies into a show that would have just turned into a Fugitive type chase show.
The premise is dead. You can keep beating the dead horse, but it's been about twenty years since Judgment Day and there's no real reason to revisit a badly-made franchise that ended every production it had its name attached to this year. Put it down, let it die, think of something else. And as for Whedon, the only thing he would do is recreate the TV show and add more psuedo-feminist whining and 'struggle' that anybody with the complete run of X-Men circa 1993 could recreate.
Not everything can be a franchise, especially something not as one-note as a Terminator movie could be.
Slaves2Darkness
2009-11-02 07:24:09 PM
Fark you! I like Dollhouse. I'm sorry it is too dark, intellectually and morally challenging for you to follow. It does need a better lead though.
quizkid8279
2009-11-02 07:25:24 PM
LD approves.
bberg
2009-11-02 07:25:50 PM
*BLOCK OF TEXT*
Basically everything you wrote can be summed up as: Time travel is awful, especially when left in the hands of Hollywood writers.
There has been exactly one movie that dealt with time travel properly, and that was Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.
Uchiha_Cycliste
2009-11-02 07:26:23 PM
/loves Firefly and Castle, and likes Buffy and Angel to boot
Didn't we just do this headline bait last week, will it really work again?
\She'd never fall for a centuries-old guy with a dark past who may or may not be evil.