Jump to content

Avatar 2: The Way of Water


Recommended Posts

On 5/12/2022 at 10:51 AM, sifth said:

The first few minutes of Dark Fate, are an insult to all fans of Terminator 2.

I'm aware of that. Truthfully I'm not that bothered by it. It's been 30 years. At least they didn't do it off screen.

-

The views!

https://www.joblo.com/avatar-the-way-of-water-teaser-views-revealed/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I'm aware of that. Truthfully I'm not that bothered by it. It's been 30 years. At least they didn't do it off screen.

 

 

Just saying, if you start your movie off, by giving a middle finger to one of the most popular sci-fi films ever made, you might not be making something that pleases your audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's that upsetting and I'm a huge T2 fan...

Spoiler

Sarah Connor Chronicles - easily the best Terminator-related thing to come out since T2 - would have explored a future without John Connor if it had gotten a third season.

That being said, I haven't seen Dark Fate or Genisys.

ETA:  Ultimately anything that comes out after T2 timeline-wise would "cheapen" it because Sarah's entire purpose in Act 3 was to stop Skynet for good.

Edited by DMC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, sifth said:

I think sequels should never be made on the concept of destroying the story that came before. Alien 3 had this same issue. Sequels should build on what came before, IMO

I mean even T2 fundamentally alters the concept of T1 by saying Skynet was developed through reverse engineering the T-800's endoskeleton remains from T1 that Cyberdyne recovered.  Is that "destroying" T1?  I certainly don't think so, but a purist could sure make that argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

I mean even T2 fundamentally alters the concept of T1 by saying Skynet was developed through reverse engineering the T-800's endoskeleton remains from T1 that Cyberdyne recovered.  Is that "destroying" T1?  I certainly don't think so, but a purist could sure make that argument.

More like retcons so that two Terminators are sent back to kill Jon, not just one. T2 doesn’t begin by murdering Sarah and making everyone/thing she fought for in the first film meaningless.

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sifth said:

More like retcons so that two Terminators are sent back to kill Jon, not just one. T2 doesn’t begin by murdering Sarah and making everyone/thing she fought for in the first film meaningless.

I'm just saying I don't think there should be any strict rules on what sequels should be "allowed" to do, even ideally/hypothetically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

I'm just saying I don't think there should be any strict rules on what sequels should be "allowed" to do, even ideally/hypothetically.

Just saying most sequels I’ve seen that open with the killing of a main character from the previous film, for shock value tend to be horrible. Robocop 3 comes to mind as another sequel that did this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember some pretty visceral reactions to Alien 3 when it came out. I still have a vivid memory of a classmate of mine ranting that, after everything they went through to save Newt in Aliens, the next film kills her off-screen at the beginning of the first act. Yeah, he was pissed. 

It was certainly jarring for me, but I don't see it as a problem depending on what one thinks the alien trilogy is about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DMC said:

I mean even T2 fundamentally alters the concept of T1 by saying Skynet was developed through reverse engineering the T-800's endoskeleton remains from T1 that Cyberdyne recovered.  Is that "destroying" T1?  I certainly don't think so, but a purist could sure make that argument.

There is a deleted scene from T1 that addresses that “plot hole”.  I is made explicit that the T-800 is the orgin point of Skynet in the first film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I turned off Alien 3 straight away and still haven't seen it for that reason. It's not that killing of a main character from a previous film can't be well done and used to good effect, but doing it to open a film when the previous one had been all about saving that character is just cheap shockery and disrespect to the emotional investment the previous film built up in people. Glad I never saw Dark Fate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

There is a deleted scene from T1 that addresses that “plot hole”.  I is made explicit that the T-800 is the orgin point of Skynet in the first film.

I've never heard anyone have a problem with this or that it makes for a plot hole. There's an interesting parallel in that Skynet had to send the Terminator had to go back in time in order to have Sarah Connor destroy it in that place in order for Cyberdyne Systems to get its bits in order for Skynet and eventually Terminators to exist. John Connor has to send Kyle Reese after it in order for John Connor to be born in order to send him after it.  

Fate, blah, blah. No future but what we make, blah, blah. 

ETA: if the Terminator was successful in killing Sarah Connor, would Skynet be erasing itself from the future? Wrap you brain around that. 

Edited by Deadlines? What Deadlines?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alien 3 is a mostly a crummy movie. Mostly. Not so much compared to what came after. The workprint version they released years ago is ok. If Newt and Hicks survived it probably still would have been bad. Their deaths hit hard but they weren't what ruined that movie, despite what people may say. If you want the characters to have a happy ending, you shouldn't make another horror sequel about them!

16 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I still have a vivid memory of a classmate of mine ranting that, after everything they went through to save Newt in Aliens, the next film kills her off-screen at the beginning of the first act. Yeah, he was pissed.

I mean do you think he would have been ok with killing Newt on screen? Cause I'll take the off-screen death thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...