ROTTEN TOMATOES: Terminator 4 Gets a Shiny New Title

Terminator 4 Gets a Shiny New Title

The sequel's still on track for summer '09.

by Jeff Giles | October 10, 2007

Apparently, those recent reports about Halcyon fast-tracking Terminator 4 were right on the money.

In a report posted at Variety last night, it was announced that the fourth installment in the Terminator saga has a new title (Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins), a new North American distributor (Warner Bros.), and the same target release (summer 2009). The Warner Bros. deal comes on the heels of a concerted acquisition effort by MGM:

The Warner deal dashes MGM's hopes of corralling distribution rights to the film. The Lion planned to pepper its slate with tentpoles such as "The Hobbit" and "Terminator," but neither project has worked out for the distributor.

Halcyon sued MGM in July in Los Angeles Superior Court, claming the distrib was interfering with its distribution plans on the fourth "Terminator" film on the basis of an MGM claim that it had acquired an exclusive 30-day negotiating window.

The article goes on to report that the producers expect Salvation's costs to be leaner than Terminator 3's $200 million tag, though the sequel will still "have an event-sized budget," and it reaffirms earlier reports that the filmmakers hope to launch a new trilogy here. Producer Moritz Borman tells Variety:

"The third film was really the conclusion of what happened in the 'now.' You will find the most-loved characters, but the intention here is to present a fresh new world and have this be the first of a trilogy."

Boritz' statement begs the obvious question of whether or not Arnold Schwarzenegger will play one of those "most-loved characters," and the article touches on that. Boritz goes on to say:

"We've left it open for him to maybe do a cameo...he has an important job, as we know, and the final decision will be based on his desire and availability, along with what the director wants."

T3 screenwriters John Brancato and Michael Ferris have written the script for Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins, and Variety echoes the "industry buzz" (earlier reported here) that McG is "the odds-on favorite" to direct, but says no final decision has yet been made.

Source: Variety

Related Items

Movie:	The Terminator
	Terminator 2: Judgment Day
	Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Celeb:	Arnold Schwarzenegger
	John Brancato
	Michael Ferris
	Moritz Borman
	Joseph McGinty

(1-20 of 38 posts) | Reply

AgentSmith writes:
on Oct 10 2007 06:27 AM

Sounds interesting the idea of making a Terminator movie in the war against the machines. In my opinion (and please don't kill me, guys, hahahaha), the third one was lacking of that perfectionism that James Cameron put in the 2 first movies, so I found it as a movie that you can enjoy with popcorn and Pepsi and to f*** around at the movie theater. I wish Cameron would direct it again, but since he's in his new proyect, we can't do anything... well, I just hope that this new movie be (at least) as good as the second one.

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on Oct 10 2007 08:00 AM

terminator 3 had a few things going against it:

1) arnold wasnt the same arnold. he was governor of california and had done a few too many jingle all the ways, kindergarden cops, and twins. he wasnt the bad *** austrian action star he was in the 80s and early 90s.

2) nick stahl and claire daines. they are both ok actors, but they really do not belong in a terminator movie.

3) 3 lacked the hard edge that cameron put in the first two movies. the director (who did an ok job, he just couldnt compare to cameron) made a decent action flick, but it just wasnt enough.

i doubt mcg and vin diesel can rectify these errors.

(Reply to this)

Warheart1188 writes:
on Oct 10 2007 08:17 AM

That movie title has straight-to-dvd written all over it; it shouldn't even bother to come to theaters. T3 wasn't needed and neither is this. Now, if Arnold and James Cameron came back, we might have a worthy movie that could just cancel out the terrible plot of the third Terminator movie and declare this one the true sequel. But that will never happen and us fans of the first two Terminator films will have to continue crying at how the franchise got ruined over T3 and now T4. And Moritz Borman was wrong, T2 was the conclusion, not T3. T3 just tried to milk the franchise but pretty much saying T2 never happened.

(Reply to this)

ck100 writes:
on Oct 10 2007 08:19 AM

I wish we could just let the franchise rest in peace. How many more unnecessary sequels do we need? Like the old saying goes: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Well apparently these people want to completely rebuild the freaking thing.

(Reply to this)

travis_blum writes:
on Oct 10 2007 08:31 AM

You can't pollish a turd.

(Reply to this)

TrisTan2007 writes:
on Oct 10 2007 08:40 AM

I don't think Arni becoming a governor and doing softies like jingle all the way have anything to do with the fate of the movie. Those movies came before Terminator 2, yet, Terminator 2 is classic. It's just that one can not compare James Cameron with any other director who makes a sequel to Cameron movies. Cameron is the best. So whenever someone goes to the theater to watch the sequel to Cameron movies (or Spielberg movies for that matter), people start to make a huge *** comparison.

T3 is not a bad movie. Once the action starts it never seems to stop, and that is exactly where the problem is -- it's a huge adrenaline rush but at the same time your brain can not understand where they spent $200 million, and at the end you feel like there were so much action in the movie that you can not even remember one sequence when you come out of the theater -- and when you reach home you forget if there was even any neat action sequence (something like Arnie on a horse chasing a dude on a bike in "True Lies", or Arnie on a bike saving a boy on a bike being chased by a 18 wheeler). It's just one small thing that motivates you to go to the movie theater again, or buy a DVD, and T3 lacked it.

(Reply to this)

walkingdead09 writes:
on Oct 10 2007 08:42 AM

I agree is CK100, at some point you need to stop squeezing money out of franchises that have since past. Hollywood needs some fresh ideas not just rehash old ones that will never live up to originals. It won't be long before we see a scarface sequel where at the end of the movie the ambulance comes in and saves him from the fountain that he was floating face down in. Get some new ideas to come up with cash. T2 was the conclusion, it was the best way to end it. They saved the world Arnold destroyed himself because he was no longer needed.

(Reply to this)

nathanpoitras writes:
on Oct 10 2007 09:13 AM

Should be a good time, I'd rather see another 5 Terminators than 1 more Transformers.

(Reply to this)

TheNextReel writes:
on Oct 10 2007 09:26 AM

What an awful title.

Terminator:
Dawn of the Future

I liked that rumored one better.

Or how about...Terminator: Salvation ?

I know it's the beginning of a new trilogy but you can still keep the only constant in the title the word Terminator. This title is cumbersome and lame.

(Reply to this)

TheBlackGuy writes:
on Oct 10 2007 10:18 AM

weak

(Reply to this)

dahluzz writes:
on Oct 10 2007 10:30 AM

i can't believe they rejected my suggested title of "Terminator Wars: T War" it's a proven winner! This is funny because I was also going to offer "Terminator: The End's Beginning" and it actually came pretty close. Every article that I read about this movie further solidifies my intial impulse: this movie can't not suck.

(Reply to this)

pwnsauce3k writes:
on Oct 10 2007 11:15 AM

dahluzz' suggestion is clearly the best.

Let us not forget that Salvation was also the subtitle of another sequel powerhouse... The third installment in The Crow franchise!!!111one

And since this film has two subtitles instead of one, it'll be even more Awesometacular!!!(TM)(C)(R).

And just to throw my hat into the ring, how about...

Terminator: Operation Terminate - Termination from the Future Past (Terminal Velocity), brought to you by Carl's Jr.

They could call it T:OT-TftFP(TV)btybCJ for short.

(Reply to this)

pwnsauce3k writes:
on Oct 10 2007 11:15 AM

Oh, and one more thing. It could be worse.

It could have been Terminator and the Palace of the Crystal Skull.

(Reply to this)

Shatter24 writes:
on Oct 10 2007 11:31 AM

The Terminator series NEEDS conclusion. The third movie has set-up the future war and now we need to see this through resolution. I hope Arnold is involved, even if only briefly, in this fourth film.

2nd, Terminator 3 was a good movie, and does not deserve to be panned. It is a natural extension of the prior two films, kept the same feel as the prior two, and was exciting in the same way. And T3 made money, thereby showing people still wanted more from this series.

3rd, I don't like McG as a director. That is the WORSE thing that this series could get. All action and no brains. Bring the director from T3 back, he has a good feel for the material. Or give it to someone like Finchter (SeVen, Fight Club), or Alex Proyas (Crow, Dark City). The future is dark and scary, not Charlie's Angel land.

(Reply to this)

crystalwhiteeyes writes:
on Oct 10 2007 12:31 PM

I agree T3 was good in it's own rights, but the only reason it gets bashed is because the film was not needed. 1 & 2 told the story through it's entirety. My only question is....how can you have a war made into a trilogy?? We've already seen terminators going through time to kill Connor two times now. What can be made of this now? You've already set up the war....now start it up and end it! It doesn't take 3 movies to show a war of people versus machines. This will either do 2 things.....die out fast because the writers can't come up with anything new....or they will have fillers in lots of places and audience members will fall asleep. I can almost guarantee you there's a love stor

(Reply to this)

crystalwhiteeyes writes:
on Oct 10 2007 12:34 PM

I agree T3 was good in it's own rights, but the only reason it gets bashed is because the film was not needed. 1 & 2 told the story through it's entirety. My only question is....how can you have a war made into a trilogy?? We've already seen terminators going through time to kill Connor two times now. What can be made of this now? You've already set up the war....now start it up and end it! It doesn't take 3 movies to show a war of people versus machines. This will either do 2 things.....die out fast because the writers can't come up with anything new....or they will have fillers in lots of places and audience members will fall asleep. I can almost guarantee you there's a love story somewhere. The Title is lame too. I'm done bashing this idea because it's pointless. The movies will just come out anyways and ruin my favorite franchise. I hope it flops!

(Reply to this)

eastern2western writes:
on Oct 10 2007 01:08 PM

I am okay with another terminator movie, but do you have to hire the guy who directed the crappy charlie's angel movies.

(Reply to this)

POPCORNLUMPY writes:
on Oct 10 2007 01:52 PM

THE TITLES TO LONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Oct 10 2007 02:13 PM

Splitting the baby; YES, T3 was a decent action flick. I liked it. Hell, *MY* money was well spent when the naked chick walks down the avenue, regardless of where the other $199,999,990 went. I thought it was fun and relatively respectful of Cameron's baby. They even solved the 'how do you have a plot now that they stopped judgment day' problem-- 'Judgement day is inevitable'.

But let's not go insane-- this movie WAS COMPLETELY a cash-in on the franchise. There was absolUTELY no reason this movie needed to be made. And to be completely clear, it was *NOT F$CKING REMOTELY* in the same league, tone, manner, skill or class as the original two films. You can't watch the first two without feeling the passion Cameron had for his vision. And for those who know the story, it really WAS a vision: He was Italy on vacation with a horrible fever and had a dream about a man walking through fire with his face melting away to reveal a robot--watch the DVD extras--. John Mostow did a servicable job, but NOT the same thing. NO WAY.

(Reply to this)

bobbquackenbush writes:
on Oct 10 2007 02:38 PM

Why not just set up a SciFi Channel like series with a decent budget and some fresh blood, forgetting all the %u201Cloved%u201D characters but moving through the ending of the last film and focusing on the man vs. machine war idea.

(Reply to this)