ROTTEN TOMATOES: Terminator 4 in 2009?

Terminator 4 in 2009?

From Rise of the Machines to Rise of the New Trilogy?

by Jeff Giles | September 26, 2007

Ready for Terminator 4? How about Terminator 5 and Terminator 6?

That's the plan, according to a report published by IGN Movies yesterday. The site spoke with James Middleton, a consulting producer on Fox's 2008 midseason replacement series Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, and Middleton shed some light on upcoming developments with the franchise.

First of all, numbered installments are now passe; the next chapter in the Terminator saga -- which is being written by T3 scribes Michael Ferris and John Brancato -- "will not be called Terminator 4, but instead will use the title Terminator and have some sort of subtitle, as in Rise of the Machines." The Halcyon Company will be producing, and is aiming for a 2009 release.

The idea, according to Middleton, is for T4 to be the first film in a new Terminator trilogy -- one which follows the war with the machines. As for casting, the article tells us that the return of Claire Danes and/or Nick Stahl is still an open question, dependent on "many factors, including the thoughts of the eventual director and others involved."

Middleton also tells us that the next film will introduce a new hero in the saga, saying "Ben-Hur was influenced by Jesus Christ, but it was his story. Much in that way, this character will be influenced by John Connor."

Source: IGN Movies

Related Items

Movie:	The Terminator
	Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
	Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Celeb:	Michael Ferris
	John Brancato
	Claire Danes
	Nick Stahl

(1-20 of 23 posts) | Reply

Bruce Campbell writes:
on Sep 26 2007 04:51 AM

James Cameron.

That's all I ask.

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Sep 26 2007 05:49 AM

Finally! Some Terminator movies set in the timeline during the war with the machines. Now please create a good story and get a good director. There's some real potential here.

Let me pre-empt the coming posts by saying No, Schwarzenegger should not be in these movies and it wouldn't make sense if he was.

(Reply to this)

rockster11 writes:
on Sep 26 2007 05:59 AM

This is a bad idea from start to finish. JMO

(Reply to this)

dahluzz writes:
on Sep 26 2007 06:26 AM

elixor, let me post-empt you by saying ahnold must be back. what they'll probly do is a cg replication of how he looked in the first one in a scene where the human soldiers are determining what kind of disguise they'll put over the machine they're going to send back in time. oh, or he could appear as some sort of corrupt government official in the future. a little method acting, ya know? by the by, james cameron would NEVER do this movie. they'll probly just get that guy who did u571 again. yay.

(Reply to this)

MMacKK writes:
on Sep 26 2007 06:30 AM

Be original?

And what happened to the return of Ed Furlong that was predicted, and would have made these sequels all the more fruitier?

I sense this could go awry.

(Reply to this)

nolan bautista writes:
on Sep 26 2007 06:33 AM

In reply to this comment (#1149398)
i haven't been here in while..but is that really you Bruce..umm..i mean Mr.Campbell?

(Reply to this)

Ender7406 writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:12 AM

The series was best left untouched by actual plot development in the "future." This is going to be stupid.

(Reply to this)

jasperoosterveld writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:41 AM

This is just to much, such a shame

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on Sep 26 2007 08:40 AM

In reply to this comment (#1149622)
Even so, it's a bad idea that'll make a ****load of money. I want it too be good, but it seems like it's just being made for the $$$$.

(Reply to this)

Metafact writes:
on Sep 26 2007 11:18 AM

Ahnuld = Terminator

No Ahnuld = "Terminator" in name only

(Reply to this)

ck100 writes:
on Sep 26 2007 11:30 AM

Whatever happened to letting a good thing just rest in peace? T1 and T2 are classics and should have been left alone. T3 was only made because Arnold's career was struggling. This T4 stuff is only milking the cash cow to keep the franchise alive.

(Reply to this)

reyes writes:
on Sep 26 2007 01:06 PM

In the T2 commentary, Cameron states that the model 101s all look like Schwarzenegger, with a 102 looking like someone else, leading to speculation that the 101 refers to the physical appearance while the 800 refers to the endoskeleton common to many models

so no arnold does not have to appear in the next installment

(Reply to this)

eastern2western writes:
on Sep 26 2007 01:48 PM

Only one we need is cameron because the man is the soul of the whole franchise. Arnold is only a mannequin who is following directions.

(Reply to this)

crystalwhiteeyes writes:
on Sep 26 2007 02:29 PM

James Cameron & Arnold Schwarzenegger. Two key elements as to why this franchise succeeded in the first place. The story was told through 2 movies and a third one was not needed, especially a 4th, 5th or 6th. The war should not happen to begin with because....Skynet was destroyed, John Connor was saved, and the plans for Terminator development was destroyed as well. Why more?? No other reason than money and that's precisely how you tarnish a franchise. So if you are in fact going to continue with this story...then do it the right way. Most of us want to see what the war would have been like. We continue to see the war with the machines WITHOUT flesh so you do not need Arnold for this picture. The only thing I want to see is John Connor as a General they claim him to be. Humans vs. Machines should not be that difficult to mess up, but I'm always surprised as to how directors and writers continue to fall short. Again, this franchise should have died after 2 because the story was told, and it's extremely hard to top.

(Reply to this)

Floor Man writes:
on Sep 26 2007 03:26 PM

SIGH. Hollywood, Hollywood. Why do you torment us so?

(Reply to this)

chaddukes writes:
on Sep 26 2007 05:45 PM

In reply to this comment (#1150172)
they can reinvent the franchise. Arnold was great but the concept is better. I have no problem starting over. batman begins is great because of batman, not the man behind the cowell.

(Reply to this)

Wlad writes:
on Sep 26 2007 05:56 PM

In reply to this comment (#1150325)
Because Hollywood would never learn.

Instead of giving us a SEQUEL THAT WE REALLY WANTED, like Serenity 2, they keep milking a franchise that was perfectly over with the second one.

:(

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Sep 26 2007 06:59 PM

lets just do a star wars 1

(Reply to this)

NoneMoreBlack writes:
on Sep 26 2007 08:04 PM

In reply to this comment (#1149398)
I agree completely with Bruce Campbells post.

(Reply to this)

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe writes:
on Sep 26 2007 09:38 PM

what the hell? jeez, no more please the last installment was bad enough

but now three more?!?!? good god, you guys are gonna need jesus and ben hur to make

this movie worth anything more than bupkis! and please governator, don't come back

you and the state of california are too good to be in this now soon to be disgraceful

movie franchise. well, will always have the first two installments.

note: no terminator movie has been good since linda hamilton left the franchise and

trust me this is a curse that will not be ending any time soon!!

(Reply to this)