You guys need to get a grip - Terminator: Dark Fate (2019) Discussion

[–] B1cKsurN (14762) 4 years ago

Killing John makes the entire story pointless.

It was done to drive an agenda. People see this, and the movie failed. It's not complicated.

Take your lefty woke buzzwords and shove them up your ass.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Totally agree

reply

[–] TimMC (9143) 4 years ago

EGGS zack Lee

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

exactly.....OP is fucking moron. The kind of moron that Glaadly pays money to see turds like this one.
Too low of an IQ too see all the bull this movie contains .

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

and people are not stupid (except for OP)
they can see the political agenda..... the mexican even had a line going: stop being so white....... that is fucking racist, but as long it's against white folks it's okay, right? ..... wrong, you lib hollywood morons.

i am european btw.
no wonder it tanked.

reply

[–] 10200 (656) 4 years ago

Hummm - as much as I think the movie did have a political agenda, I thought that line only meant that Sarah and Grace were standing out from all of the other people and made them more of a target. But, I thought the entire border detention scene was a waste of time. And how in the hell did they know she was Sarah Connor? I can't imagine she gave them her real name and after 20+ years was she still someone they would be actively looking for? Any photos of her would be 25+ years old and I don't think they would be able to identify her through facial recognition alone.

reply

[–] avigalidou (602) 4 years ago

+1.000.000

reply

[–] galahadfairlight (414) 4 years ago

"Killing John makes the entire story pointless."

Wrong. It's basically saying that Sarah and John were successful in Terminator 2, that they did in fact avert Judgement Day. If they averted Judgement Day, it means Skynet never went rogue and John didn't need to lead the resistance, because there was no war.

Therefore John dying now, is irrelevant, because he's just an ordinary Joe like anyone else.

"It was done to drive an agenda. People see this, and the movie failed."

It really wasn't. That the we're talking about a girl instead of a boy shouldn't really make a difference.

"It's not complicated."

And apparently it was, because you couldn't follow the story.... and then advertised it on here.

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (14762) 4 years ago

"couldn't follow the story"

Lmao.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

No it's because it's anybody but john as the future leader nothing to do with racist or sexist,it destroyed the lore of the story

reply

[–] JunoBeach (17) 4 years ago

...and I'm sure everybody was equally upset when they turned him into an enemy cyborg in Genisys. eyeroll.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] B1cKsurN (14762) 4 years ago

That was icing on the shit cake that was Gynesis. Both movies are garbage.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I think killing Connor and rendering the first two films irrelevant would bother people no matter who they replaced him with.

reply

[–] movielover1990 (127) 4 years ago

Terminators movie was always about Sarah Connor not John. John was the important co star but not the main. This film killed off the co star and that’s it. Lol

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

?

John Connor was a main character in Terminator 2.

Anyway, he was essential to the plots of the previous movies. This most recent entry negates everything that came before.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

The main character was Sarah Connor, yes, but the plot was about John. Just like the main character of the Alien movies was Ellen Ripley, but the plot was about the xenomorphs. You could make another movie starring Sigourney Weaver as Ripley again but this time she's battling Klingons, but that would be a bit... ehhhh...

In the Terminator franchise it is even worse because the entire point of the first two movies is the survival of John. Everyone else was expendable, even his mother, but John had to live. The future of mankind depended on it. If John can be replaced, then the first two movies are pointless.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4096) 4 years ago

^^ Agreed. Although I would say, in response to movielover, T1 was about Sarah. T2 was about John and his relationship with the Terminator. I´d bet my life savings Ed Furlong had more screen time than Linda Hamilton seeing as though she doesn´t appear in the movie until they bust her out of Pescadero, so no John was not the co-star to her being the "main star".

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

bullshit... the whole premise of t1 and t2 is that John must survive

reply

[–] Boricanator (1369) 4 years ago

Being angry at killing John is a legitimate criticism, even if I don’t agree with it.

But the whinefest the haters have over a Mexican girl being the leader is pathetic.

Anyhow, killing John didn’t make the first two films irrelevant. If anything T2 made T1 and John irrelevant by stopping Judgement Day.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Yes he stopped judgement day then why is he killed by a terminator in dark fate then? That terminator should not even exist

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

There is that too, yes.

T2 doesn't make T1 irrelevant at all. If Sarah is killed and John never born, neither of them are around for T2 to stop judgement day.

reply

[–] Boricanator (1369) 4 years ago

This was explained in the film.

He was a remnant of a future that no longer existed. That Terminator was sent before the events of T2 and still had it’s orders from the original timeline.

It is still possible for it to exist since by preventing Skynet Judgment Day, they created a new alternate timeline. But that didn’t erase the original timeline.

It had nothing to do with the Legion Judgment Day.

reply

[–] movielover1990 (127) 4 years ago

That terminator was already there during t2 that’s why he still existed! Do ya not pay attention lol..while they was at the factory at the end the other terminator was already in that time looking for them. (2 Arnold’s )

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

I think it's more that it's so obvious that they killed off John so they could have a girl in his place instead. Had John been Jane from the very beginning, I really don't think she'd have been killed off in Dark Fate. Whether I am right or wrong in thinking this, it is inevitable that people are going to think it and be distracted by something they see as pure pandering. So it was a bad move either way.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

GREAT....BUT BULLSHIT....THE PROBLEM IS EDDIE FURLONG...UNHIRABLE....KILLING THE FUCKERS CHARACTER WAS NECESARY.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

So they could hire someone else to play John, like they did in Genisys. Problem solved.
And are you following me, or what?

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

LMAO...WINNER WINNER...NOT...JOHN CONNOR IS TOAST,ANY RECASTING WOULD JUST BE MORE SHIT ON THE CORPSE.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

On whose corpse? Your objection to what I said was that Edward Furlong is "unhirable". Well, don't hire him, then. Then you don't have to kill him. If you don't kill him, there's no corpse.

reply

[–] maul (1530) 4 years ago

Kowalski clearly has some mental issues, I don't know how successful you'll be in getting a logical response.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

Clearly - he doesn't even seem to be aware that John has been recast four times already - rendering all his objections here moot.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 4 years ago

Yes, he does. He argued with me with the same hostility on another post and swears that he isn't a troll. I guess he simply have some real anger issues and that makes all his arguments (even those that make some sense) totally hard to take seriously.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

THEYRE RECAST MANY TIMES.NEVER WORKS.THE CHARACTER AND HIS ARC IS OVER....AS ITSHOULD BE...THEY MIGHT HAVE MUCKED THE MOVIE UP ,HOWEVER WHACKING JOHN WAS THE RIGHT CALL.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

Why was whacking John the right call?

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

JESUS....BECAUSE FURLONG IS A METH HEAD AND THEYVE ALREADY RECAST MULTIPLE TIMES.THE LAST TIME IN GENYSIS BEING THE WORST...THE CHARACTER HAS HAD HIS DAY AND A FEW EXTRA.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

None of those are valid reasons. T3 and Genisys worked fine. Not that they were terribly great movies, but that had nothing to do with the recasting of John Connor. Nor with the story arc of John Connor. And how is anything going to be improved by killing off one character just to add the SAME story-arc over to some chick? If John's story-arc is dead as you say, well, it's the exact same story-arc the chick has inherited. And if it isn't the same story arc, let the chick's story-arc be John's, and don't kill John. Why do I have to spoon-feed you the obvious?

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

ALL YOU ARE DOING IS REPACKAGING YOUR FLAWED OPINION.JOHN CONNOR HAS BEEN USED AND USED AND USED UP.MAYBE THEY CHOSE A REDUNDANT STORYLINE OR DARK FATE,HOWEVER THAT IN NO WAY CHANGES THE FACT THAT JOHN CONNOR AND HIS BATTLE WERE FOUGHT,RESET,FOUGHT,RESET,FOUGHT...STORY OVER.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Maybe, but there was no need to kill him.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

THE OTHER WAY TO GO..IS CONNOR IS HIDING SOMEWHERE LIKE A LITTLE BITCH FROM A FUTURE THAT DOESNT WANT HIM ANYMORE TO BEGIN WITH...LAME WUSS JOHN

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

No, he could've lived a normal life, suddenly free of the burden of being humanity's saviour.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

YET HIS MOTHER CONTINUES BATTLING TERMINATORS WITHOUT LOOKING TO HIM FOR HELP OR VICE VERSA...IN THE FRAME OF THE FILM THE PRODUCED.THAT WOULD BE A WEAK EXPLANATION.THAT FOLKSLIKE US WOULD BE TEARING APART HARDER THAN THIS STUPID SHIT WEVE BEEN BATTING BACK AND FORTH LIKE TOO DRUNKEN HOUSECATS.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Sometimes I wonder why I bother...

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 4 years ago

Yeah, don't bother. I tell you, he'll keep saying his horseshit... he did the same thing to me on another post.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

Repackaging my opinion? That's what you're doing. I'm just pointing out its flaws. And you really do look quite deranged and hopping mad when you insist on writing in all-caps.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

YOU COME OFF AS WEAK AND LIMITED MENTALLY WHEN YOU INSIST ON INFORMING ME OF WHAT IVE CLEARLY INSISTED ON.

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

forget about Kowalski..... he/she/it is locked away in an asylum and has only a laptop for company for the next 25 years

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

I just put him on ignore and thought I'd reply to you - but it seems that by ignoring him, I also ignore whole strands of comments following his posts, so even your post was MIA. Oh well, I guess I'll just have to ignore him the old fashioned way.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

IS IT THE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION OR CAPITOL LETTERS THAT MAKES YOU DISLIKE ME SO MUCH?

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1451) 4 years ago

Let me put it this way: the all-caps sure don't help.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

IM SORRY YOU HAVE THIS WEAKNESS.

reply

[–] RichWorld32 (44) 4 years ago

Seriously, the caps make you look like a ****ing moron.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

CALLING COMPLETE STRANGERS FUCKING MORONS...THATS WAY COOLER.

reply

[–] RichWorld32 (44) 4 years ago

Turn the caps off lol you look mentally ill.

reply

[–] Kowalski (57875) 4 years ago

YOURE NEW,ITS CUTE...20 YEARS OF CUTIES LIKE YOU OVERSTEPPING..JUST WORRY ABOUT YOUR OWN COMMENTS.

reply

[–] RichWorld32 (44) 4 years ago

"20 YEARS OF CUTIES LIKE YOU OVERSTEPPING" What!? lol

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

*CAPITAL*

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

LOL

reply

[–] BillySlater (4096) 4 years ago

It has nothing to do with Eddie. The script was made without Furlong in mind. They could have sat him in a gym for a year and paid him a bunch of money if they really had wanted him to come back, like they did with Carrie Fisher but they had no intention of bringing back John. This was admitted by Jim Cameron.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4096) 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

"But the whinefest the haters have over a Mexican girl being the leader is pathetic."

why? You can't even drink the water in mexico...... imagine a 5 foot girl from that place will lead the entire world....LLOOOOLLL

reply

[–] ReelReviews14 (1029) 4 years ago

My gripes specifically is the film is a crapfest written by franchise killer David S. Goyer and it gives us the same tired premise from the last sucky sequel by claiming to be the "true" Terminator 3 and retroactively claiming the other sequels "never happened"

reply

[–] 10200 (656) 4 years ago

Well regardless of what Cameron says, the other movies, good or bad, do exist and have John surviving in the futrure, so it's pretty had to erase that from our memories - not that I want to.

reply

[–] ReelReviews14 (1029) 4 years ago

Here's a nice summery of why Dark Fate was doomed to failure and we knew it would suck from the beginning. You will note that "John Connor replaced with a Mexican girl" is NOT one of the reasons mentioned AT ALL:

https://jamesjguild.com/blog/2019/10/29/review-why-terminator-dark-fate-sucked-so-bad

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10971) 4 years ago

You're putting up a straw man. People aren't complaining about the new leader being Mexican, not in any real numbers. The critics don't like the movie either, and not one has mentioned "a Mexican" as a problem.

reply

[–] Boricanator (1369) 4 years ago

What are you talking about? The critics loved the movie..

It seems all of the films haters are in this forum.

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

critics are left wing shills..... hollywood suck ups
only fools like you still listen to them

reply

[–] Burk48917 (10971) 4 years ago

Bouncing around between 65-70% on RT is NOT love,it's barely fresh. Moreso, if you actually read the reviews, they almost all complain about it, but bump up the review score because of the progressive casting. And obviously there are more haters than this forum, because the movie is already considered a bomb at the box office.

reply

[–] maul (1530) 4 years ago

Nice strawman.

reply

[–] tom8 (2883) 4 years ago

just how dumb are you?

very dumb

reply

[–] HarlemEagle42 (16155) 4 years ago

I'd agree. The main human character for the whole franchise was a woman ffs. The casting was never the issue here. It's that this movie looked no different from Terminator: Genesis which was nothing but fanservice and was GARBAGE. But whaever, let's keep listening to KKKeyboard jihadists that woke culture is to blame. Fucking fans are so gullible these days.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 4 years ago

Wrong the franchise wasn't about Sarah, but John. HE was the leader, Sarah was just his mother. But this time they made a Mexican female gnome the future leader of humanity which is about as realistic as a blue haired 300 pound feminist wining the 100m dash at the Olympics. And let's not talk about The Terminator being an interior decorator specializing in changing diapers. I bet my life that with this one they weren't just thinking about making a "woke" movie (which is a normalcy these days) but rubbing it in fans faces.

reply