Comments on: McG May Direct Terminator 4

By: DarkKinger

DarkKinger — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 23:37:04 +0000

Okay, WHEN are we just going to leave a trilogy alone? After T3 (which I liked), I think we got full circle. I just don’t see commitment for T4.

By: shane razey

shane razey — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 23:04:05 +0000

I will build my own Terminator, assign it McG as it’s primary target and end this shit right now.
Anyone have a few million dollars I can borrow?

By: Darren j Seeley

Darren j Seeley — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 23:02:18 +0000

In addition, Gio— I have to disagree with you on a “pre -concieved” notion. I don’t mind Arnie not being in the film …but it is supposedly set in FutureWar, is it not? A time which we have seen bits and pieces of in the films and (if it counts, probably doesn’t) T2-3D. A battle which has been fought and won. A battle which is passe. A batttle which…there would be no need for Terminators to be sent back in time (not according to T3, anyway, unless it is another TX)

Yes, I understand, it is something “fans” (hell with them) “want to see”. Yet, it is so much cooler if we only use the bits already shown, and our imaginations.

On the other hand…and I said this before…the film series does wrap around a paradox theory. If the machines don’t build the time machine/send a terminator back in time….then Resse won’t be sent back. If Reese isn’t set back…

Oh, I’m sorry H’wood. That requires thought.

By: Darren j Seeley

Darren j Seeley — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:53:18 +0000

I confess that I have not seen the film Charlies Angels 2. That is because I sat through Charlies Angels 1 and thought it was one of the worst films I ever seen in my life. In fact, even Andy Sidaris could have done better than that. Yeah, Andy Sidaris. Hot tubs, booty shaking women in a crime-spy spoof. Same damn thing-just with a higher budget.

Before Brett, there was the threat of McG on Superman. Both bullets were dodged.

We are Marshal? Yuck.

Folks burn houses down on the mention of Ratner …entire neighborhoods have been known to go up in a smoke of anarchy at the mention of McG.

By: ED

ED — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:05:35 +0000

I don’t like it.

By: chris

chris — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:52:27 +0000

hey, u know whats funny to me….people who luv the 1st charlies angels but hate the second…..they both were basically the exact same movie……3 not so hot chicks doin crazy shit with corny dialogue and a weak storyline….am i wrong?

anyway t4 seems like a bad idea no matter who the director…..just my 2 cents

By: calviin

calviin — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:15:25 +0000

There is enough additional content available in the Terminator universe that they could do this right. I don’t think McG is a bad choice. He’s definitely got more pluses than minuses to his credits. And, except for Pixar, nobody’s perfect. I’m staying undecided so far, but I do think this is better news than if they hired some guy that’s never been involved in a movie set before. *cough* *cough*

-Calviin