Daenerys Targaryen to face the Terminator


log in or register to remove this ad


Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
Really? I find that ... a surprising opinion.
It did not age well. Like, aged terribadly. Bad FXs, bad photography, bad acting, bad script, horrible dialogues. Cameron can't film or write. Check out Aliens, Titanic or Avatar. T-2 is an accident.

Ok. I need to see Abyss beofre making it a define judgement. I will see it this week. Satisfied?
 

Craddoke

First Post
It did not age well. Like, aged terribadly. Bad FXs, bad photography, bad acting, bad script, horrible dialogues. Cameron can't film or write. Check out Aliens, Titanic or Avatar. T-2 is an accident.

Ok. I need to see Abyss beofre making it a define judgement. I will see it this week. Satisfied?

Hmmm... The only clunker in that list is Avatar. I would also look into some FX history -- particularly who Stan Winston is.
 

Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
Hmmm... The only clunker in that list is Avatar.
Lulz, bait! Nice try, they are all horrible films.

I would also look into some FX history -- particularly who Stan Winston is.
Who did it is less important than how it looks. That naked Terminator "walking" at the end? Fail. Arny's hair after he get's burn? Fail.

And I see you did not challenge script, photo, acting, dialogues, etc. So what is left? The plot? (John, I am your father... From the future and you sent me... Yeah, your mom was hot. /snikers)
 

Craddoke

First Post
I don't hold much hope, but if you want to educate yourself check out the Stan Winston article on Wikipedia.

(BTW I'm focusing on your FX complaint because, while I disagree with your other opinions, there's no accounting for taste. Saying that the FX is bad, though, is objectively wrong)

Please do not hint at other people being uneducated or otherwise less than you. Thanks. - Lwaxy
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
FWIW, Terminator's stop-motion animated sequences were actually fairly state-of-the-art for the time, especially for a low-budget film. CGI was still in its infancy- there was some used in Westworld and Futureworld in the 1970s, but only a little. Even in the 1980s, it was Used sparingly because of its expense. It wasn't until Toy Story in the 1990s that you had an all-CGI film.
 




Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
Saying that the FX is bad, though, is objectively wrong
They did not age well and made me laugh and roll my eyes when I saw the film. Do you think films today should use the same FX?

[video=youtube;BoRY8lKTv3o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoRY8lKTv3o[/video]

FWIW, Terminator's stop-motion animated sequences were actually fairly state-of-the-art for the time, especially for a low-budget film.
Like I said, it did not age well. The film is not very watchable and not just because of the FX.

I saw T-2 first and was curious about the first film. When I saw it I was flabergasted. I did not understand why it was successful or a sequel managed to be made.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
They did not age well and made me laugh and roll my eyes when I saw the film. Do you think films today should use the same FX?

(Edit)

Like I said, it did not age well.

Hm. Different strokes, then.

Personally, I can appreciate Terminator's SFX on its own terms, in its own context without comparing them to the stuff made possible by improvements in computing power that came years later, just like I can appreciate a '67 Mustang even though it isn't a Pagani Zonda.

Side note: I should also point out that sequence used not only stop-action animation for the wide angle shots, but also a full-sized robot puppet activated with hydraulics and pneumatics...the latter of which was used in the sequels.
 
Last edited:



Elf Witch

First Post
Personally I think The Terminator is a nifty small budget film. I recently watched it again and I thought the story held up well. Maybe I am not as judgmental because when I watch an older film I take in consideration the time it was made. I think putting aside the very 80s special effects the story is as compelling today as it was when i saw it the first time in theater back when it first aired.

If they write Sarah as she was in the first movie I think the casting is spot on. She was not a bad ass in that movie she was just a normal young woman thrust into this situation. She basically has to learn how to become a badass. I don't think they should cast Arnold as the The Terminator they should go with a younger actor. If they are doing a reboot then do a complete reboot.
 

Dog Moon

Adventurer
Yeah, Arnold should retire. He's a little too old.

I also think Harrison Ford should retire too. I've liked the actor, but now he just seems too old.

Nicolas Cage should retire too. He's not quite too old but I don't remember the last movie I saw with him in it that I actually thought was a great movie.

Edit: I did like the movie Kick-Ass. But he wasn't the star of that film.
 
Last edited:


Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
Pretty much everyone disagrees with you.
Argumentum ad populum.

Seriously you had problems with Aliens?
Yes. It has been a while, but plot holes and bad filming. I do not understand why it was popular. Watch it again to be disappointed. I could watch it next weekend to refreshm memory. Yes, I am a masochist.

Honestly, I do not understad why Cameron's films are popular. Aside from T-2, which is surprisingly great considering he made it, all (didn't see Abyss though) of his films are terrible.
 

Bagpuss

Legend
Argumentum ad populum.

When you are judging film where much of it's merits are based on opinion and popularity, then "Argumentun ad poplum" is valid to some extent. There are very few subjective judgments that can be made, it isn't like we are talking about the health risks of smoking.

I'm curious are you talking about the original or the directors cut? In my opinion the director's cut is a worse film in my opinion, I felt the pacing of the original is ruined for very little gain. However some people might prefer it as it explains Ripley's attachment to Newt better, and explains the sentry gun business.
 

Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
When you are judging film where much of it's merits are based on opinion and popularity, then "Argumentun ad poplum" is valid to some extent.
Not really. The merites of a film come from its intrinsic qualities and their chemistry together. Is the script good? Dialogues? The actors? Photograhy? Plot? Etc. Popularity doesn't mean these elements or the sum total are good, as Michael Bay as demontrated time and time again.

There are very few subjective judgments that can be made, it isn't like we are talking about the health risks of smoking.
Umm... Do you mean objective? Cause they are, I named a few above. Although I'll grant you that after a certain threshold they become more subjective.

I'm curious are you talking about the original or the directors cut? In my opinion the director's cut is a worse film in my opinion, I felt the pacing of the original is ruined for very little gain. However some people might prefer it as it explains Ripley's attachment to Newt better, and explains the sentry gun business.
I'm not sure, it has a been a while. Guess I'll find out this weekend. /shudders
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top