"1 @ Intrepid point 2) Do the kids count as fans then? They seem to be
doing the same thing, and since toys certainly sell
better among kids than they would among adults, it seems
appealing to kids instead of fans made the franchises extremely
popular. I mention this because if the Terminator franchise holders
figure they can make money by turning Terminator into
Transformers, they will do so, fan protest
be damned. You think Transformers fans are pleased with
the Michael Bay Trilogy? Definite
case of "fans" not mattering at all to a movie's profitability.


"

1 Well of course kids are fans and if you aim your film at them I would expect that is where you get the majority of the people who go to your film.

Transformers the first film was almost good until they brought in Mr Joke/Secret government agent man then it went pear shape for me, otherwise I enjoyed it for what it was and even put up with Shia LaBeouf who I universally can’t stand, the arrogant little ****!

As to the TV Transformer fans vs. the film Transformer fans I guess that was to be expected but as I never watched the TV series I don’t understand the fuss.
However I don’t think you can transfer one medium of entertainment into another and expect to keep it wholly intact, like X-Men with Wolverine who “must” be in yellow spandex and be short, it just “wouldn’t work,” and compromises “must” be made.

And it “was” the “fans” that mattered just not the TV show fans, it was the kids of the current generation who never watched the TV show who made up the bulk of the fan base that support the franchise and merchandise side.

Does that make the Transformers films “good?” well no, they aren’t very “good” films yet I can see that they have all the prerequisites to be a good lightweight action blockbusters aimed at teens and preteens or young adults looking to pass the time.


T3 was badly cast and badly written in continuing a film franchise yet I do agree as an action film it did have some cool action and ideas but fell short in the “story,” which it failed to pay attention too; while “that” certainly didn’t stop it from being successful I “still” think it hurt the franchise by being inconsistent and making the prospect of this franchise to be ongoing a slightly harder prospect.
And T4 “did” have a Transformer in it!

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

One thing I liked about both T3 and T4 is the Kate Brewster character.

I think the idea to take everything back to the present day again is horrendous ... and cheap. We've already had T1,2 & 3 running around in our ordinary world where a robot tries to kill JC _again_.

T4 had an element that I have always wanted to see, the future war, but the plot just fell apart and I did not like the last bit at the dreadful "Skynet Central" which is apparently accessible by helicopter.

What was good about T4 was the world depicted, the "worn future", worn terminator, worn Skynet gear, tired soldiers a bickering Resistance and so on ... it had really great potential.

A T5 & T6 should be set in the future and if I had my way, the ending should be John Connor somehow figuring out a way to destroy the time machine before even the T1 terminator is sent out. Or even destroy the T1 terminator before it was sent and then sending Kyle back to lead a happy life with Sarah Connor. Even if Skynet rises without a chip being sent back, Kyle will still know what to do.

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

"Fox withdrew funding?"

Fox canceled just another good show? I should have know, that only Fox could have been responsible.

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

"TSCC TIE INS:
While the novel features no direct tie ins to TSCC, Cox notes in his acknowledgments:

"I still remember being blown away by the original Terminator movie when I first caught it at a multiplex outside Seattle way back in 1984. Three exciting sequels and a TV series later, it's tremendously exciting to finally get to write a little bone-crushing, killer robot action of my own..."

"...Many thanks to James Middleton of The Halycon Company for graciously letting me pick his brains on all things Terminator..."


PARTING THOUGHTS:
I enjoyed this novel much more than I enjoyed the movie to which half of it's name is owed. It featured equal parts action to human drama and unlike the film, had the time (and desire) to develop it's characters into more than generic, forgettable faces in a crowd. The pace was steady and the narrative leaves room for a possible spin off continuation of one of the characters story arcs. For those who were left disenchanted by McG's "vision" in T4, please do not discount this book based solely on its shared nomenclature. The plot lines are logical, there are no fifty foot transforming Terminators and the writer doesn't cut the majority of the story leaving it as a disjointed mess while promising to release a "Writers Cut" edition later (only to dash your dreams by offering forty extra pages and giving you three). For the die hard T4 haters please be warned, Cox was bound by the visuals laid down by the film, so don't be shocked that his T-600's are of the giant variety.


BOTTOM LINE:
I would recommend this novel to most Terminator fans (even if you just borrow it from your local library) as I felt it was an enjoyable read and helped to fill in some of the gaps left by T4."

I will read this book

It sound good :-)

Peace and Thanks

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?