Was this supposed to have sequels?
Was the plan for to have one or a couple of sequels until it bombed?
shareYes. It was supposed to be the first of a trilogy.
share
MovieChat Forums > Terminator Salvation (2009) Discussion > Was this supposed to have sequels?
Far as Im concerned... it ended after T2...
But that's just me.
No need for any after the'92 T2.... cant kids today just appreciate old perfect movies without ruining them?
I agree. The series really didn't need to go any further than T2.
shareIt may not have NEEDED to but I like having more than just two movies to watch that are based around the Terminator concept. Even though T3 and Salvation are multiple levels below T1 and T2 I'm still glad they exist.
shareT3 and TS are solid action movies, but I wouldn't care if they never existed.
shareThey're certainly not essential but I'm glad they're sitting on the shelf when I feel like watching them, and I appreciate the fact that they continue the build out the Terminator mythology.
As long as they are at least of pretty good quality, I like having new stories in existing cinematic universes that I care about. I'm disappointed, for instance, that there are only three Indiana Jones movies instead of 10. Or that Hackers never got a sequel when it really deserved one.
Of course sometimes things run off the rails. The Die Hard series is useless now because there have been multiple shitty movies in a row. And the Underworld franchise only has two worthwhile movies, in my opinion. (Maybe three, depending on how you feel about Rise of the Lycans.)
But as long as the filmmakers can keep the quality of the films up, I like having long-running series. Rocky is a great example. While some are better than others, there's not a truly bad movie in that whole franchise. (Nope, not even Rocky V.)
Indeed, most of the movies you mentioned are solid entertainment. But I still prefer quality over quantity....mostly, I'm referring to the Terminator series and the Die Hard series.
shareWell as I see it, the "quality" films are going to exist regardless of what happens later on down the line. T3 has no effect on T2 whatsoever. It's not like you have to choose. Same goes for Die Hard. The sequels in no way affect the existence or quality of the first film.
So as I see it, looking at the Terminator franchise, you can either have two great movies . . . or two great movies AND two pretty good ones. So why not be happy to have two extra pretty good movies to watch?
That's a fair point. I won't argue with that. I can agree that there's still some entertainment value to be found in (at least a couple of) the sequels.
sharePrimeMinisterX There's 4 Indiana Jones movies and a 5th one on it's way. The only bad Die Hard movie is the fifth one, the first 4 are awesome.
share