GTFO of this thread. . . . .
"NAUW!!!"
GTFO of this thread. . . . .
Are you seriously saying that Terminator would be better off without Arnold?Sure he was a terrible actor but perfect for Terminator imo.
yeah i cannot imagine a Terminator movie with arnold. just.....i cantr see it. i dont think bale is a big enough actor to replace arnolds unbeatable star power. arnold will always be THE terminator. i am still debateing whether or not i will be seeing TS. just doesnt look good to me, noone i like in it.
yeah i cannot imagine a Terminator movie with arnold. just.....i cantr see it. i dont think bale is a big enough actor to replace arnolds unbeatable star power. arnold will always be THE terminator. i am still debateing whether or not i will be seeing TS. just doesnt look good to me, noone i like in it.
The only thing that bothered me in T2 was JC was supposed to be 10 years old. I mean come on, hes at least 13 or 14.
i never understood why they made john be 10 years old in T2 especially when they never mentioned a date for judgment day in T1. they could have easily made him 13 or 14 (which he appears to be anyway) and push judgment day back a few years.I think the makers of T3 obviously felt the same - they included a line of dialogue saying ''they tried to kill me before I was born...when I was 13 they tried again''.
I think SCC contradicts it aswell for that matter. If memory serves that show posits that T2 actually took place in 1997 - the year of judgement day. This would make more sense considering T2 was called Terminator 2: Judgement day - but not much more sense because it wasn't set literally on judgement day August 29th. Maybe they took a bit of dramatic license with that title.
T2 itself though seems to say its set in 1995, presuming John connor was born in 1985 - because I'm pretty sure thats what it says on the police computer screen in the squad car when the T-1000 is looking him up. I seem to recall it saying ''john connor - 10yrs old''
except that i don't care about any of that. and the story was just a modern knock-off of a couple Harlan Ellison Outer Limits episodes.you have to see it in its time, and if you look at it that way T2 had the better effects than T3.
T2 won 4 oscars, T3 nothing.
of course T2 was an "older" movie, but comparing to T3 it still looks great. I thought T2 had a more real feel to it than T3.
Of course T4 will have the best looking CGI, cause this is 2009, but if you judge movies by there recent CGI you are overlooking the most important element that makes these movie rule: the story! and T3 was a bad terminator movie compared to the first 2 in story telling.
well, "seriously" is relative here... we ARE talking about an Arnold action flick.Are you seriously saying that Terminator would be better off without Arnold?Sure he was a terrible actor but perfect for Terminator imo.
well, "seriously" is relative here... we ARE talking about an Arnold action flick.
but yes, that's what i'm saying. Arnold is incredibly goofy.
well, "seriously" is relative here... we ARE talking about an Arnold action flick.
but yes, that's what i'm saying. Arnold is incredibly goofy.
is there anyone you could think of who you think could be better ? .
Cameron thought of a least 3 others before Arnold. the best of those was Lance Henriksen. i'd be down for that.is there anyone you could think of who you think could be better ? .
is there anyone you could think of who you think could be better ? .