<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rGSxss7gWak" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Wow, they must be pretty desperate to reveal that kind of plot twist in a trailer. It worked though.. now my interest in watching this movie has been elevated from "never" to "when it comes out on hbo".
Star Trek 2009 made money. General audience doesn't care about eradicating a story line they liked for a money grab.
I wasn't looking forward to the movie until the latest trailer. I thought they were just cashing in the franchise for another payday, but the story intrigues me now.
Meh. I may see it when it comes on Netflix, but I still doesn't do enough for me to go to a theater. That twist was kind of lame too, at least it was handled that way. Might be kind of cool if they did a Terminator from a completely different angle. Forget Sarah and John Connor. Go to another part of the globe and show the war against the machines from another perspective. Maybe John Connor was just the tip of the iceberg.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3LYE_86w7Gg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Sorry James Cameron, I'm not buying it. It reinvigorates the franchise by rehashing old plot elements and using the same tired lines?
Serious question: how are they going to explain that some of the Arnold Terminators look flabby and geriatric? That's going to be pretty lame for the script.
That is the one that got sent way back, to prepare Sarah Connors, many years before Kyle Reese and the "first Terminator" first showed up. it has subjectively been with Sarah Connors for many years by the time the original film (and this film) start. That is how she is not the shrinking violet she was at the start of the original. It maybe doesn't stand really close examination (flab comes from reduced testosterone and calorie intake - Terminators don't eat, do they have testicles?) but I guess you don't look too closely...
