Terminator Dark Fate bombs

@MirkoS77:

"Any form of creative medium can hold an agenda influencing aspects that aren't there due to the creative impetus that drives it."

- What does that even mean? Suddenly everything that appears diverse must have an agenda? And seeing people celebrate it should be ashamed? Now *that* is naive because it feeds a level of paranoia and close mindedness. Suddenly you can't even enjoy it because you feel like the work somehow out to go against your beliefs.

It's a movie, first and foremost. You're there to be entertained. Why does it have to be anything else?

It doesn't, but it is.

Why did you ignore the pictures and link I provided in support of my argument? It's not paranoia or closed mindedness, it's calling something for what it is. Again, I welcome diversity with open arms. I'm not "threatened by it", I'm not upset my "privilege" is being treaded upon, I'm not a racist or sexist or any other bullshit Leftist argument they'll shove my way, and frankly I'm sick and tired of people blaming me when I call it out when it's so obviously forced by an outside agenda instead of coming from a creative whim.

@MirkoS77:

Well, at least you recognize creative whims. Though I wouldn't be surprised if you thought there is a shortage of that recently.

@nepu7supastar7: yes, as stated. Seems to be more as of late to me. But there are plenty of movies that’ve come out recently that I love and don’t feel have an agenda behind them, such as Wonder Woman and Black Panther.

Maybe I wouldn’t have felt the way I do about Dark Fate if there weren’t numerous signs. The director coming out with the typical “misogynists will hate this film” (or whatever he said) attack on fans was just the cherry on top that solidified my belief it has an ulterior motivation behind it that transcends its narrative.

Haven’t read this entire ridiculous thread about SJW’s woke etc.

But could the reason for the flop be that’s it’s the 5(?) movie in a franchise that has produced nothing but terrible movies since T2 and its being lead by random unknowns and a old ass actor that haven’t made a good movie in 20 years and even then one could question how many quality movies Schwarzenegger actually have made...

@djoffer: lol you're really blaming it on Schwarzenegger? How about the new lead who everytime she tries to deliver a serious line it becomes cringe inducing.

I'd say Arnolds catalogue of movies are mostly solid compared to many other ageing action stars.

Most of the his worst movies are before he was famous.

Even in his ripe old age, put out some really fun action movies like The Last Stand and even tried some indie shit like Maggie.

For a guy who was told he would never act because of the size of his body and his voice (barely speaking English at the time) he's done tremendous.

Look at Jean Claude Van Damme or Steven Seagal or even Bruce Willis who's been reduced to straight-to-video pap.

Honestly speaking, he's about the only thing that makes these newer Terminator movies worth watching. The man himself is a curio.

I really enjoyed it.

It’s a good action flick with some nostalgia, take it for what it is.

@flippygonemad:

Sadly, its trilogy can't survive in this current political climate. The anti-woke cult has claimed another victim.

@MirkoS77: I like how extensive and detailed your posts were and was happy to read them. However, I don't think your argument is really working out here.

You wrote earlier that:

"Cameron places women in his films because it's part of his creative bias. I highly, highly doubt Dark Fate's female leads came from the same place, but instead one more reflective of a toxic Leftist push for representation and equality at all costs."

What would be an example of a toxic Leftist push for representation and equality at all costs? What are the costs? Why is it toxic? What is being lost? You argued that Terminator 1 and 2 were not an example of this, because Connor had to have been a girl for her to be the mother of the savior of mankind. But Connor could have also been the father. Would this then not be an example of a movie who was given a girl protagonist for some "Leftist" representation "at all costs"? After all, it didn't have to happen.

I believe Terminator 1 and 2 would also be seen as "woke" and "Leftist" if they were released nowadays. Because they are. Yeah, of course it's Cameron's personal bias, because as you argued, there's bias everywhere. Katheleen Kennedy also adding stronger female characters in Star Wars is an example of this. None of this is a bad thing, or "toxic", and it's only "Leftist" if you want to assign a scary word to it. After all, what is the cost? (nothing) Why is it toxic? (it isn't) What is being lost? (I suppose a male actor in that role).

Also, your argument about absurdity in Terminator movies kinda falls flat when you used that scene fro Terminator 2 as an example. That was an absurd scene and was great because of it, and yes, that was a very expensive scene to create and film. They used technology that was the best and realistically achievable that was available at the time, which would be pyrotechnics. In 2019, we have CGI, which is a much cheaper and realistically achievable way to do the same effect. If they had CGI that could do that scene back then, they would have used it.

It was decent for the uninitiated, but otherwise an inferior rehash of Terminator 2.

My take? Watch the first 2 Terminator movies and forget the others exist.

7.5/10 for those who have never seen a Terminator movie

I was reading the plot summary on Wikipedia; I didn't even want to finish reading it :-/

Just had to comment on that. Not a chance in hell they would be considered this. Zero.

I can be pretty anti-sjw but I think people in here are really reaching. I liked the movie.

@Willy105: I like how extensive and detailed your posts were and was happy to read them. However, I don't think your argument is really working out here.

Well thanks for taking the time, I enjoy hearing others' opinions and debating. Apologies for the length.

What would be an example of a toxic Leftist push for representation and equality at all costs?

Dark Fate, Star Wars. A few more I suspect, but lack evidence for.

What are the costs?

The cost is that it harms the cause it purports to help by hamfisted and forced execution that people will naturally push back against when they see it, causing financial failures that will ruin franchises, as well as making people more suspicious overall of ulterior motives driving future movies. I think the corollary (such as the Joker's immense success) can also be used to show how people are making their voice heard against this push.

Why is it toxic?

See above, among other reasons.

What is being lost?

Money's being lost. Beloved franchises are being relegated to guinea pigs for political ends. While I don't discount that the quality of previous Terminator films alongside franchise fatigue are factors in Dark Fate's sales, it's dishonest to not even humor that political agendas are a factor that people are tiring of. Like me. I might've seen DF, but I refuse to support films when I feel they've become vessels for Leftist ideologies and political correctness. I've evidenced in my first post why I believe an agenda is at play here (and in the new Star Wars trilogy).

You argued that Terminator 1 and 2 were not an example of this, because Connor had to have been a girl for her to be the mother of the savior of mankind. But Connor could have also been the father. Would this then not be an example of a movie who was given a girl protagonist for some "Leftist" representation "at all costs"? After all, it didn't have to happen.

Connor couldn't have been a father, as that would've necessitated a woman to come back to protect him, something that betrays traditional gender roles. That's not sexist, it's not transphobic, it's science. As for the plot, the woman would not've been able to carry John to term as she would've sacrificed herself in a span of a few days, which would've nullified the entire point of the film.

Secondly, maternity is a strong thematic underpinning in Terminator 1 & 2. The empowerment of Sarah stemmed largely from the drive to protect her child, and Cameron obviously views and admires the strength found in maternal instinct. This is present in a few of his films and it's (at least partly) how Cameron views female empowerment. Motherhood is strength. Not meaning to say that maternity is a requirement for female empowerment or the only justification for inclusion as there's many films I love that have kick-ass female leads (such as Alien or Run Lola Run) where that's not a theme and I don't feel it to be an agenda. With Dark Fate I do, but the difference stems from the reasons mentioned in my first post.

I believe Terminator 1 and 2 would also be seen as "woke" and "Leftist" if they were released nowadays. Because they are. Yeah, of course it's Cameron's personal bias, because as you argued, there's bias everywhere. Katheleen Kennedy also adding stronger female characters in Star Wars is an example of this. None of this is a bad thing, or "toxic", and it's only "Leftist" if you want to assign a scary word to it. After all, what is the cost? (nothing) Why is it toxic? (it isn't) What is being lost? (I suppose a male actor in that role).

Kennedy's an executive, not a writer and director like Cameron. Rian and J.J. were given creative liberty to write the films, but Kathleen sits on the throne of corporate influence and oversees the broader handling of the franchise, she approves who's in creative control of it, and as such pulls strings to introduce her political leanings and bias from a position removed from direct creative endevour. That fact wouldn't be enough on its own for me to claim an agenda, yet we can clearly see a correlation of Kennedy's statements and pictures ("The Force Is Female", her LGBT rainbow shirt) reflected explicitly in the films. If that's not enough to raise peoples' eyebrows, I don't know what is. It does have a cost, it is toxic, and things are being lost, as I've pointed out.

And sorry, no, Terminator 1 and 2 are in no way woke or Leftist.

Also, your argument about absurdity in Terminator movies kinda falls flat when you used that scene fro Terminator 2 as an example. That was an absurd scene and was great because of it, and yes, that was a very expensive scene to create and film. They used technology that was the best and realistically achievable that was available at the time, which would be pyrotechnics. In 2019, we have CGI, which is a much cheaper and realistically achievable way to do the same effect. If they had CGI that could do that scene back then, they would have used it.

The mini-gun scene wasn't absurd and was great because it wasn't. It existed within a framework that people could imagine actually being in, the same as Sarah attempting to assassinate Dyson. Those scenes are grounded and as a result they are much more impactful and exhilarating than any of the CGI garbage that's come arrived in every subsequent Terminator film. Not solely due to CGI, Cameron is an exceptionally talented action director.

Terminator has been pretty crappy for a while. First 2 were great, the rest have been either mediocre or downright awful.

I enjoyed Salvation. Genisys looked absolutely terrible so I skipped it, this one looks better, but not all that interested in it.