MovieChat Forums > Terminator: Dark Fate (2019) Discussion > Cameron throws shade on Dark Fate

Cameron throws shade on Dark Fate


think he did the same for T3/4/5 after initially praising them

https://www.bfi.org.uk/interviews/terminator-james-cameron

Today, The Terminator’s £3 billion franchise comprises books, video games, a theme park attraction and five cinematic sequels, each of which has been helmed by different directors. Does Cameron consider any of them a worthy compliment to The Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)?

“I recently saw Harry Enfield’s Terminator 3,” he writes, “A cyborg (Martin Clunes) tries to infiltrate Edwardian England. It’s pretty funny. Somebody should do it as a feature. Couldn’t do worse than Dark Fate (2019).”

reply

Cameron's endorsement has become as worthless as praise from Kevin Smith.

reply

his Genisys endorsement is now the stuff of legend

reply

I mean, Genesys is better than Salvation and Dark Fate, so I think that's fair.

reply

No, it's not. Genesys is worse than Dark Fate.

reply

I think Genesys was an amusing tribute with a spin on the mythos.

Dark Fate was a lazy reboot that spit in the face of the franchise. I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong, but I can't seriously respect it as a Terminator film.

reply

Dark Fate was dripping with anti-male sentiment, its practically radioactive. Why do they make movies and emphasize hatred or disdain for their own audience? Men are the ones who want Terminator the most.

Genisys was much better.

reply

No way, man. Salvation is a far better film than Genisys and is underrated. Genisys sucks badly.

reply

Genisys feels fun. Salvation is taking itself seriously but there's too many things that bug me about it. lol I disliked it more and more after every viewing.

reply

Definitely not underrated.

Acidraindrop is actually right here, but maybe not for the reasons some people think.

There's nuance to this discussion about how awful Genisys is and how good/bad Salvation is.

Salvation is a better directed film, with FAR superior cinematography, sound design, set dressing and special effects. However, people seem to be confusing that with being a better Terminator film, in which case, it is not.

Genisys is stupid beyond belief, but at the same time has fun with an alternate timeline story; it's sensible, in some ways, within its own little nonsensical world.

Salvation tries to latch onto the existing Terminator mythos and that's where things completely fall apart. The script is an absolute mess, and every time I think about it the more frustrating it becomes because it seems like five or ten different movies cobbled together into one.

Skynet is depicted as a memory-adled schizophrenic AI in Salvation, not really sure what it's trying to do (it's trying to kill Kyle and John and knows this is a prime directive yet doesn't do so when many opportunities present themselves, it's like... WTF?).

At least in Genisys there was some consistency in its goals (no matter how ridiculous and silly).

In Salvation, Skynet literally brought itself to ruin with Marcus, which did them zero favors. And when you think about their plan for him, it still makes no sense why they just wouldn't have used an infiltrator unit in his place.

Given how ragtag the humans were, it kind of makes you question at which point did they eventually make the phased plasma weapons or where did they eventually get them from? (I always assumed in the Cameronverse they lifted them off of downed Terminators)

John going into Skynet's base alone made no sense. There was no one from his camp who believed him about the past? No one else who was willing to help him stop Skynet/rescue Kyle? It was all just so nonsensical.

reply

[deleted]

Eh, it comes off as hypocritical, since we know he was at one point actively involved in the writing, at least he was providing and OK-ing ideas from the finished script. One thing he come up with was that John Connor should be killed at the beginning of the movie. Newsflash: this wasn't a good idea, and to top it off, it was ridiculously executed in the movie (are we seriously to believe that a Terminator could get the absolute drop on John and Sarah like it is shown in the movie? Are we seriously to believe that Sarah Connor can't even produce a handgun to at least try and defend John against a Terminator?)

It's honestly baffling to see this. At least he was not involved in making T3, T4 or T5, so he can badmouth these all he wants (and they deserve it!), but main plot developments of T6 were created by him or ran by him, so he is at least partially responsible for how the movie turned out - so no, he does not have the right to joke around about it.

reply

“I recently saw Harry Enfield’s Terminator 3,” he writes, “A cyborg (Martin Clunes) tries to infiltrate Edwardian England. It’s pretty funny. Somebody should do it as a feature. Couldn’t do worse than Dark Fate (2019).”

Wow, I agree with Cameron on that assessment, and you can see the Terminator 3 I would've preferred to have seen in cinemas here, even if it's less than two minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPp5B2m7QwE

As for the Terminator sequels after T2, they can all go hang... except for Harry Enfield's.

reply