Ooh Baby. Terminator: Salvation teaser hits the web!

Reader Comments

1. JustinD 07/16/2008 @ 4:04pm

   The man receives way too much hate(Mostly for the retarded MCG monicker) but I like style and I’m intrigued at what he could bring to the Terminator table. The teaser didn’t have enough “Aw-Shit!” imagery for my taste, but it didn’t make it look terrible either, so my opinion on the film is stable at this point.

2. Swarez 07/16/2008 @ 4:25pm

   The moment when the music kicks in when the titles fade up just puts a huge grin on my face.

3. Collin Armstrong 07/16/2008 @ 6:15pm

   More love for CHARLIE’S ANGELS here.  They look like candy-colored ‘50s musicals with kung-fu in place of kicklines.

   And this teaser has my hopes up…

4. brbro4 07/16/2008 @ 10:43pm

   Sorry but both Charlie’s Angels films were really crappy movies but this one looks decent. When i heard Christian Bale was going to be in this I wondered, “what was he thinking?” but this teaser shows some promise. Shows none of the suckiness of the Charlie’s Angels flicks. It’s still way too early to judge but I actually want to see this now.

5. axleu 07/17/2008 @ 12:22am

   That pic looks A LOT like Jin-Roh…

6. Ard Vijn 07/17/2008 @ 1:06am

   True, but any blue metallic armor with red glowing eyes will have the tendency to do so.
   
   Don’t forget that the Jin-Roh Cerberos outfit had its first cinematic appearance in Mamoru Oshii’s “The Red Spectacles”, and that was 4 years after the first Terminator film.
   
   And glowing nightvision goggles have always looked cool, so it’s difficult to say who’s following who.

7. Tuan Jim 07/17/2008 @ 3:07am

   Yeah, and why are they always shown glowing?  The point of night-vision is *not* being visible ;p Stupid movie effects.

8. ChevalierAguila 07/17/2008 @ 3:20am

   People still care about this franchise? The first film is the only one i watch from time to time, the others are pretty much the same thing over and over, but withouth the gritty touch of the first one.

   Also, Charlies Angels flicks are not good “pop” cinema, they are some of the most atrocious, shittiest and most stupid pieces of hackery of cinema that the world has seen in the last years.

   

9. Swarez 07/17/2008 @ 4:43am

   Nope. You are wrong, wrong, wrong. Charlie’s Angels are the most entertaining action films that have been made in the last few years. They are stupid, over the top and they know it. And I love it.

10. venger 07/17/2008 @ 5:05am

    gotta love the fact that movie tastes are just that, tastes. Everyone has one, and everyone claims theirs is the right one. Makes for excellent discussions, or mudfights.

    i didn’t like the Charlie’s Angels flicks however his work on Supernatural and Chuck gives him some credit in my book. I’m not sure about the choice for Bale though, i’ve been seeing him a bit too much in movies lately which doesn’t help for the immersion process, but we’ll see.

    ps Anyone else have a severe Transformer trailer flashback with the choppy soundeffect cuts in the middle?

11. Swarez 07/17/2008 @ 6:21am

    I love how they use sound in the teaser, how the static turns in to the drum rhythm of the theme song and the deep hum in the beginning.
    That’s also why I loved the Transformers teaser. My guess is that it’s probably the same guys that did them.

12. Rhythm-X 07/17/2008 @ 10:45am

    CHARLIE’S ANGELS was great.  The second one didn’t do anything for me.

13. Rousey 07/17/2008 @ 10:51am

    I gotta hold my hands up here, the moment where the terminator theme kicked in gave me goosebumps, but Im happy to geek it out, Im really looking forward to this, McG’s style with new robots to play with should be hugely entertaining.
    And charlies angles rocked!!!

14. ChevalierAguila 07/17/2008 @ 6:10pm

    No, Charlie’s Angels films are embarrasing to watch, embarrasing to see Bill Murray there, embarassing direction and every time i stumble with any of them on tv, even for a brief second, i can already feel my brain cells dying.

    (trust me, i have a lot of battery for this one)

15. Swarez 07/17/2008 @ 7:10pm

    But why do you view them as an embarrasment and shitty?

16. ChevalierAguila 07/17/2008 @ 9:31pm

    Who wouldn’t? They are poorly made in every sense, they faill to be compelling, or to bring any fun even in it’s most basic form. It’s like one long and loud music video, where both the song and the people appearing in it are a pain to watch. The stupid and silly sense of “humour” the movies have don’t help either, or this even more idiotic sense of “action” that is as exciting to watch as watching a kid who didn’t take his ritalin scream and run for two hours. The fights don’t look “cool”, “stylish” or anything at all, they are just the rehash of the rehash of better fights in way better movies. The 3 lead characters are some of the most obnoxious human beings i have seen on-screen since the last Tom Cruise movie i had the bad luck of being forced to watch by some friends. Cringe-inducing barely begins to describe these films, i would have to be either a 15 year old girl who thinks Drew and Cameron “totally rox!” or a 15 year old boy still struggling with his hormones, and who thinks almost every living female creature is fuckable.

    I like pretty women and well made action sequences, Charlie’s Angels have none of that. Is as simple as that.

17. The Visitor 07/17/2008 @ 10:51pm

    The Terminator series ended with T2. all subsequent sequels and TV series have no reason to exist.

    T1 was exciting because of its original concept. T2 was groundbreaking and had one of the best movie car chase scenes (the night highway chase).

    that’s it.

    thank you and good afternoon.

18. ChevalierAguila 07/18/2008 @ 3:31am

    What the visitor said. T2 is very “meh” for me, but it can’t be denied that it has some good moments.

19. Swarez 07/18/2008 @ 4:57am

    Che.
    You just described roughly every action movie ever made, from 80’s Arnold and Sly movies, a good chunk of Asian cinema and recent fairs like the Transporter, The Matrix, Die Hard 4 and Transformers. What makes them less stupid than Charlie’s Angels?
    I find it amazing that anyone could look at them and thought they weren’t fun. And the lead characters obnoxious? What the hell? Are people labeled obnoxious now when they don’t take themselves seriously, have a good time in what they’re doing and make constant fun of themselves? Then I must be one obnoxious sombitch. What’s the difference between Arnold smearing his oiled muscles with black markers in close up and Cameron Diaz shaking her ass in spiderman undies?

    That anyone could look at these films and criticize them for being stupid and then enjoy Transporter or any other action film where there is allot of martial arts is just beyond me. They are just as well made as those films and go even further to amp up the action.
    Honestly I think that guys don’t like them because they feature women doing what men have been doing in action films for decades. I also think that if these films were made in Asia they would be hailed as masterpieces.

20. Ard Vijn 07/18/2008 @ 6:13am

    Swarez, are you trying to say you’re not obnoxious?
    No way dude, England even banned an advert with you in it!

21. Swarez 07/18/2008 @ 6:26am

    Shit. That’s true.
    Well discussion over I guess then.

22. Jahsoldier 07/18/2008 @ 9:26am

    Well I agree with Che. Charlie’s Angels 1 & 2 is not clever or entertaining. They were a low point for all actors involved. And the so-called action scenes and martial arts were poor no matter if you compare them with the aforementioned US action films or asian ones. Not every single martial art film to come out of Asia is a masterpiece (Tsui Hark springs to mind). If you really wanna compare them with Arnie films of the 80’s, the difference is that Arnie’s films were stupid mindless fun and didn’t try to be anything else. Charlie’s Angels tries to be hip, clever, fun and targeted the MTV generation of today. It failed miserably.

    Women can produce great action films too btw. Try Kill Bill, Alien films, Grindhouse, The Long Kiss Goodnight, Alias, Terminator films, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon etc etc. I am afriad the sex argument doesn’t work.

    Getting back on topic, Salvation looks really interesting. The teaser doesn’t say much but it is not negative and that is always a start! Really hoping this is successful. The series needs a reboot.

23. ChevalierAguila 07/18/2008 @ 6:16pm

    The existance of other shitty and poorly made action flicks neither justify or change the fact that CA flicks are equally shitty. Well made action films might be the exception to the rule, but that doesn’t mean that going the lazy route and making a poor excuse of a film is ok just because “oh but there is so much shit these days!”

    Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu and Drew Barrymore are obnoxious because they try soooo hard to be “likeable”, and the movie tries even harder to present theme as sexy/funny/"you rock!” girls that the whole thing ends up being annoying as hell. Neither of them is really a vixen of uncanny proportions, and neither of them look “cool” in any way while performing all their moves, even for wire-fu standards, they just look like pieces of wood being thrown around.

    The action is not exciting, the girls not hot of fun to watch, the direction even less fun to watch. Sorry but there are standards in this genre, CA flicks meet none of those. They are painfull to watch and should just be discarded and dismissed as the pointless and insipid junk that they are.

    And for the record, i didn’t liked The Transporter, and i have seen plenty of crappy action flicks from asia too. So Close, which is a bit less retarded, still failed to impress me in any way, that and a whole bunch of action flicks from the 80’s, 90’s and recent days that will be too much to mention here. And i do think that a solid female lead in a well made action flick can rock a lot.

24. ChevalierAguila 07/18/2008 @ 6:18pm

    neither hot or fun to watch*

25. Swarez 07/18/2008 @ 7:04pm

    “The existance of other shitty and poorly made action flicks neither justify or change the fact that CA flicks are equally shitty. Well made action films might be the exception to the rule, but that doesn’t mean that going the lazy route and making a poor excuse of a film is ok just because “oh but there is so much shit these days!”

    That’s not what I said. What I said that people who are shitting on the CA films are the same people who praise films like the Transporter and its ilk even though they are just as stupid and unreal. But the difference and what makes CA so great is that CA KNOWS it’s stupid and over the top and they have fun with it.
    And the girls don’t have to try to be likeable, they are. All beautiful, hot as shit, funny and bad ass.
    The CA films are top of the line entertainment in its purest form. Plain and simple. 
    So basically my view is the exact opposite of what you said.

26. ChevalierAguila 07/18/2008 @ 11:42pm

    “So basically my view is the exact opposite of what you said.”

    It is indeed, but hey, to each of it’s own. The world would be a boring place if we all liked the same things.

    And i might give Lucy Liu a quick shag, but with a paper bag in her head.

27. Swarez 07/19/2008 @ 5:06am

    “And i might give Lucy Liu a quick shag, but with a paper bag in her head.”

    What a strange thing to say.

28. ChevalierAguila 07/19/2008 @ 8:30pm

    Not strange at all, she has a good body, but her face is just....ugh. It would break my concentration.

    Cameron Diaz looks like a worn out hooker, and Drew Barrymore like somebody’s grandma.

Post Your Comments

• Next Entry
• Previous Entry