Terminator Will Be Back, Without Ah-nuld

[ThrillhouseMAX]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/eonline/20070510/e...38_6b4918130e32

Terminator Will Be Back, Without Arnold by Gina Serpe

Thu May 10, 8:08 AM ET

Los Angeles (E! Online) - The Terminator is making good on its coming-back word. The Governator, not so much.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Halcyon Company has announced plans to revive the cyborg-battling movie series with at least three more films, after the production company purchased all rights to the dormant franchise for an undisclosed, though likely eight-figure, sum.

But while Halcyon founders Victor Kubicek and Derek Anderson are looking to begin preproduction on Terminator 4 as soon as possible, they will do so without a leading man. Or man-machine.

Plot details for the fourth film have been kept under tight wraps, though are said to pick up with John Connor, heir to the rebellion, in his thirties, leading the remainder of the human race in its ever-worsening battle against the machines. As the film will mark the beginning of a new trilogy, rather than a continuation of the previous three installments, its unlikely that the Terminator himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger, will even take part in the film reinvention, other than perhaps a cameo.

Of course, there are other reasons why the Ah-nuld won't be featured on the big screen. He has a bit of a schedule conflict due to matters of a more gubernatorial nature.

T4 has already been fast-tracked for production, with Halcyon looking to get the installment in theaters by summer 2009. As it is, Schwarzenegger will be leading the state of California through 2011.

While a spokeswoman for the governor asserts that "no law says he couldn't" star in the reimagined flick if he wanted to, the project was nonetheless "not even on his radar."

Still, the franchise's new minders aren't worried about extending the brand beyond Arnie.

"With T3, we included many incidental details and plot points that, along with the ain narrative, set the stage for an entirely new set of inter-related stories covering the future adventures of John Connor and the Terminators," producer Moritz Borman said. "This new Terminator trilogy will build upon the already huge worldwide Terminator fan base, which was both revitalized and expanded with the global success of T3."

In fact, T3, along with T2 and, well, plain old T, have grossed just over $1 billion worldwide since Terminator was first released in 1984.

"The Terminator franchise represents by far the most popular and successful franchise not owned by a major studio," Kubicek said. "We see this global franchise as a cornerstone of Halcyon's future business plans."

A very large cornerstone.

In addition to the big-screen cyborg saga, the company snapped up all future merchandising and licensing rights to the franchise, future revenue generated by T3: Rise of the Machines and a portion of the rights to an almost guaranteed TV series based on the films.

Warner Bros. has already filmed a pilot for The Sarah Connor Chronicles, an hourlong show based around the Terminator character and mythology surrounding the movies. According to Variety, Fox has already expressed interest in the project, and could opt to pick up the series at next week's upfronts, when the fall prime-time schedules are unveiled.

[VerbalPuke]

I absolutely loved the first two Terminator movies. The third one was decent at best, but felt like a huge car chase with explosions. Plus, the guy who played John Connor was sort of a homo.

I like the idea of the next installment of movies taking place in the future during the war. I think if done right, the movie could really kick some major fucking ass. I'd mark for Kyle Reese's return to the movie franchise, though Michael Biehn might be a bit too old now. Ah fuck it, cast him anyway, I can't picture anybody else as Reese.

[Chris the Human]

I'd go and see it. Obviously the third one was a step down from the first and second (the second was my favourite) - it was still an enjoyably violent popcorn flick.

[VerbalPuke]

Barring The Road Warrior (the sequel to Mad Max), I'd go with Terminator 2 as one of my all-time favorite sequels. I usually believe that sequels are not as good as the first movie of the series, but I'd definitely say I liked Terminator 2 the best of the series as well. Strangely, The Terminator and Mad Max series of films are my absolute, hands down favorite action movies of all-time, as far as the "violent popcorn flick" genre goes.

[Hellfire]

I figured that they would use John Connor from T3 as the new lead, as I thought he played the role pretty decently. I don't think Arnold needs to be in the movies anymore, he carried the franchise on his back for the first two and did a pretty good job in the third as well, but people are going to go to see it regardless now. Plus he's got the whole Governor thing too.

[Vilge Duin]

"The Terminator franchise represents by far the most popular and successful franchise not owned by a major studio," Kubicek said. "We see this global franchise as a cornerstone of Halcyon's future business plans."

[Guest G-Spot]

Star Wars is owned by a major studio though.

[zero]

Star Wars is owned by a major studio though.

I'm pretty sure it's distributed by 20th Century Fox, but George Lucas has 100% ownership of it.

And Terminator 3 sucked... doing another without Arnold will only make it suck more.

Edited May 11, 2007 by Zero

[Guest G-Spot]

I thought LucasArts distributed it?

[zero]

I thought LucasArts distributed it?

LucasArts does the video games. Lucasfilm produces the Star Wars movies while 20th Century distributes. And Lucasfilm is not a major studio, it's privately owned, unlike Columbia Tri Star, Warner Bros and Paramount, which are all owned by much larger companies (Sony, Time Warner, Viacom).

[Guest G-Spot]

Ah i see. My apologies

[Guest G-Spot]

Ah i see. My apologies

EDIT: Sorry. Did not know what went wrong there.

Edited May 11, 2007 by G-Spot

[zero]

Ah i see. My apologies

For what? No need to apologize for just not knowing something. You weren't being a dick or anything. (Y)

[Mick]

Great, another Terminator film that completely ignores the set universe created by James Cameron.

I absolutley hated T3, it is an insult to anybody that saw Terminator and T2, and anybody that says they liked it are in reality in deep denial. This includes Ah-nold.

There might be SOME hope due to the idiots that made T3 not being involved. However, it is my personal feelings that the series should stop at 3, regardless of how horrid it was. I mean, c'mon, we have Judgment Day for fuck's sake, what else is there to know? The resistance wins, that's stated in the first movie, so there's really no point in stretching it out another three movies.

Although....

One small thing, and this is part of a possible paradox. Reese simply states in the first film that he was born after the war, which at the time was post August 29, 1997. So, if Judgment Day happens in 2004 (in which T3 was set, even though it was released in 2003), it is plausible that given the new surroundings, that Reese may have been killed during Judgment Day. So, if Reese is possibly dead....then who knocks up Sarah?

Of course, the damn writers will probably just throw Reese in anyways

[EndOfAnEra]

The idea of the future war is exactly what I've wanted to see, and has been my favorite clip scenes in T1 and T2. If they do it, they don't need Arnold.

[Guest G-Spot]

They could maybe get his permission to have a double of him or something being assembled as the T800

[ROC]

On the upside, Nick Stahl is a guy I wouldn't mind watch act for another two hours...that may be the best rave I could give this news so far.