-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Best film of the 80s - Ferris Bueller's Day Off v The Terminator
- Thread starter milo
- Start date
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
Terminator is a great 70s film, not a great 80s film: it's essentially an SF version of Jaws, with a script and direction that triumphed over pretty poor special effects. Cameron only became a proper 80s director when people started giving him money.
It can go through, though.
It can go through, though.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Theres a whole story out there that puts this film into perspective massively, and the short version is Bale ruined it.
The original script was (apparently) all about a young Kyle Reese befriending a Terminator, and it was about their journey. John Connor was in it only minimally, he is leading the resistance from a sub and rarely comes up for air. He is a voice on the airwaves, a legend/figurehead type thing.
Come the end Connor comes up to see Reese, gets killed, and the terminator ends up taking on the mantle. Sounded like a really interesting idea to me.
Apparently they took it to Bale for the Terminator role, he said "great, I want to be John Connor!" and so the script ended up getting re-written to accommodate him.
It was also on that movie where his infamous tantrum at the sound guy happened, the dingdong.
Lemonade Money
Steffen Freund
Sloppy work milo, I want a gif of the Terminator pulling Bueller's head off.
Seeing The Terminator here makes me ask one of the film industry's most difficult to answer questions; Is James Cameron a good director?
On one hand, he has directed The Terminator, Aliens and Terminator 2 - three very, very good films. Plenty of directors would retire on the back of such a career.
Opposing that, he has also directed Titanic and Avatar. Genuinely two of the worst things that have ever been committed to film - and I include footage of wars and genocide in that.
On one hand, he has directed The Terminator, Aliens and Terminator 2 - three very, very good films. Plenty of directors would retire on the back of such a career.
Opposing that, he has also directed Titanic and Avatar. Genuinely two of the worst things that have ever been committed to film - and I include footage of wars and genocide in that.
milo
Jack L. Jones
I've never seen Titanic or Avatar. I think that they would annoy me, so I've avoided them.
They would annoy anyone who has any respect for cinema.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Both Titanic and Avatar are great technical feats, but not great films. It seems Cameron got a bee in his bonnet about proving what can be done, and sunk himself too much in pulling off the technical achievement rather than making a compelling movie.
Take Avatar, fern gully rip off, predictable and ham fisted story telling, a 4/10 as a film.
But - the 3d? fudge me that was amazing. I saw it in IMAX when it came out, and it is to this day the most incredible 3d experience I have had, it was breath taking.
I think you could fairly say similar about Titanic RE the story vs Visual effects.
I wonder, if you frame it in that context, could you say similar of his other films? Id say he had a better balance, more mind on stronger stories, but they were each visually progressive as well.
I think Aliens and the first two Terminator movies are just good films. Yes, he relied on effects but those are sci-fi movies and good special effects are, to some extent, baked into the genre.
Titanic was a brick love story shoehorned into some abhorrent historical/special effects dingdong swing. Avatar was basically how a director giving himself and Greenpeace a simultaneous, congratulatory handjob looks on screen. They should have been aborted like ginger triplets before they even became screenplays.
Edit: I'm not sure my disgust for Titanic has been made properly clear here. Just to ensure it is, if I had to choose the worst ever bricky love story shoehorned into an historically inaccurate abomination, this would beat Shakespeare in Love. That's how fudging bad that film is. And Avatar is worse.
agreed regarding Aviatar it wasnt the film it was the 3d in the film - it is the biggest boxoffice because of it... even my Nan went twice.
However he is in the proces of making 4 sequals to Avatar, at a time when the public has said fudge 3d I think they could be the biggest turkeys of all time.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Terminator was a feat of effects on a low budget. It was that well made people forget it was actually a low budget movie.
The quality of the sets and effects on Aliens is outstanding, and stands up today. Alien - there are bits where its clearly a guy in a suit and it takes you out of it. Aliens? Its that good you just believe it all.
T2 - T1000, computer effects done properly, and what a fuss they made about that.
The Abyss was his as well wasnt it? Another effects heavy effort.
None of this is to say Titanic is a good movie (its not) - rather that I think Cameron has always had a leaning to the technical stuff, its not just his later movies. Undoubtedly his early movies were simply better films, the effects working to bring the story across, and a better story at that.
The quality of the sets and effects on Aliens is outstanding, and stands up today. Alien - there are bits where its clearly a guy in a suit and it takes you out of it. Aliens? Its that good you just believe it all.
T2 - T1000, computer effects done properly, and what a fuss they made about that.
The Abyss was his as well wasnt it? Another effects heavy effort.
None of this is to say Titanic is a good movie (its not) - rather that I think Cameron has always had a leaning to the technical stuff, its not just his later movies. Undoubtedly his early movies were simply better films, the effects working to bring the story across, and a better story at that.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Quite possibly (likely?) and they wont be cheap to make either given the degree to which there is CGI/effects etc, without the expense of the 3d cameras and such as well.
Avatar was a novelty, not a good film. And people saw it because of that novelty. Nobody gives a brick about blue cat cartoon people.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
And predictably he goes on about the technical innovation.
Thats all the Avatar movies are, adverts for his cameras and equipment.
I wonder how much he stands to make on his 3d technology for example?
Underwater mo-cap isnt really a game changer though, not for me.