Posts Tagged ‘Terminator Salvation’

5 items.

THE ON/OFF SWITCH

by Tom on May 22nd, 2009
17 votes, average: 6.76 out of 10
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars6 Stars7 Stars8 Stars9 Stars10 Stars
THE ON/OFF SWITCH
Vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics

Is it a cop-out to give the Benbot an On/Off switch? A little bit, yeah. But let's be truthful: there's no way I was going to turn this into a 15-strip story arc about a time-displaced Benbot and his dire warnings.

Also, when I stopped to consider the mystery of the Dustin Hoffman "fiasco," the promise of that supposed tragedy was more entertaining to me.

That said, don't expect a story line where we travel to 1982 and witness the incident first-hand.

In summation, move along now. Nothing to see here. Well, nothing to see except the incentive image I put together for you. Another illustration of the T-800 endoskeleton skull. Of the three I've drawn this week, I think it's the best yet. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics.

Quick sidebar about the incentive sketches... Usually I draw something that is a continuation of the joke from that day's comic. But lately, I've become more interested in drawing characters or scenes from the movies I'm referencing. I'm interesting in hearing what you guys like - a tacked on joke drawn in the usual Theater Hopper style, or a more detailed illustration like the last three I've drawn this week?

Because here's the other thing: I've been drawing these cards on the 4 X 6 card stock I take with me to conventions and use to draw the sketches I sell and they actually look like the images you see over at Top Web Comics. They have the blue border, the logo in the corner and even a little synopsis on the back of what Theater Hopper is with the URL and a box where I add my signature.

The sketches I do at conventions are open-ended. They can be whatever the customer asks for. Looking over this last batch of drawings, I'm thinking that these are illustrations I could take with me to conventions and sell out of the box. (Either sell them at conventions or here on the site.) I'm thinking that I would have a better chance at selling a stand-alone image of a movie character than a continuation of a joke from a specific comic the customer may or may not have ever read.

So I guess the other question is, of the sketches I'm drawing as incentive images, do you think you would buy them if I sold them on the site or at a convention? They'd be cheap (probably no more than $5 or so) and they'd be unique. A custom illustration that will never be reprinted anywhere else - A fun bit of Theater Hopper you can own for yourself!

Let me know what you guys think, because I believe I might be onto something here.

Back to talking about movies... As you know Terminator Salvation comes out today and I am... excited? I say "excited" with trepidation because reviews have been lukewarm.

I'm trying to go into the movie with a clean slate, but Warner Bros. isn't making that easy. Among the myriad of movie blogs I follow, there seems to be new clips from the movie being released daily. Whenever I see a studio release a stream of clips online, I immediately become cautious. From a marketing perspective, I understand what they're doing. They're seeding the internet the hope that interest will spring up from it. If a clip becomes viral, even better.

But what a lot of these movie blogs do is round up these clips and put them in one spot. Trailer Addict has 7 pages of Terminator Salvation clips. 7 pages of clips, TV spots, trailers and extended trailers. So, effectively, a potential ticket buyer could watch 10 to 20 minutes of the movie before they even set foot inside a theater.

And studios are worried about piracy? Gimme a break. They're ruining movies for fans just as much as anyone else.

The last movie that did this was X-Men Origins: Wolverine - and we all know how that turned out. That, and you can't force something to be viral. Believe me, I've tried.

I'm not seeing Terminator Salvation until Sunday night and usually by then the studios can estimate the film's weekend box office. If the film is running cool, it will probably lower my expectations to see it. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe I'll walk out of it having been pleasantly surprised.

But this is a Terminator movie. Shouldn't I be more excited to see it regardless of reviews and preview clips and tie-ins and promotions?

Let me know your thoughts about Terminator Salvation. Have you been doing a good job avoiding the clips online? Did you even know there was that much material out there? Do you find it excessive? Do you think movie studios are giving away the store or do you appreciate the extra content and their attempts to woo you into the theater?

Also be sure to let me know what you think about the direction of the incentive sketches: A one panel gag or a stand alone image of a famous movie character? Would you buy a 4 X 6 from the Theater Hopper store or at a convention for less than $5?

Let me know what you think and, if you're in the US, have a safe Memorial Day weekend!

10 Comments

GOOD POINT

by Tom on May 21st, 2009
Posted In: Blog
Be the first to rank this comic!
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars6 Stars7 Stars8 Stars9 Stars10 Stars

Reviews are starting to trickle in for Terminator Salvation and while I am trying to avoid them for the most part, I did read Tom Charity's review over at CNN.

It's kind of a pan, but I was more interested in how he chose to end his review...

"...the gap between the Terminator movies and Transformers is diminishing along with any vestige of adult entertainment. In the virtual era, nobody we care about stays dead for long; there is always a second life just around the corner. They've even stopped numbering the sequels now."

This taps into something I've been feeling about action movies for a while now.

Dropping the sequel number isn't a big deal. That's just a marketing maneuver to make franchises feel like chapters in a larger story rather than a long-in-the-tooth money making scheme. But Charity is completely right about there being nothing at stake. No one ever stays dead and rarely does it feel like anything is at stake. Movies are starting to feel more and more like comic books.

That's not a dig against comic books. Comic books are meant to refresh themselves every few years to stay viable. Trying writing 12 months of content and NOT dragging out old characters people once thought were dead.

But what happened to the movie as a stand-alone story? I look at a movie like The Matrix and how, even though the ultimate conclusion wasn't told, it felt open-ended enough that you could imagine how things went for Neo and the human resistance. Then the sequels came along and. were so overblown and boring. It was all just filler to get you to that ultimate conclusion - the humans win.

So what?

Now movie franchises just go on and on and on and never really deliver anything new. Everything in the old movies is swept under the rug or explained away so producers and studios can have another run at the trough. Audiences are learning not to trust storytellers and that's a big problem when the ENTIRE POINT of movies is to remove the audience from their surrounding and place them inside your world for two hours.

How can death in the movies have significance when the same through it running through everyone's mind?

"They're gonna bring that guy back for the sequel."

4 Comments

I GOT A PINCH FOR YOU

by Tom on May 20th, 2009
19 votes, average: 7.53 out of 10
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars6 Stars7 Stars8 Stars9 Stars10 Stars
I GOT A PINCH FOR YOU
Vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics

Wait. This Benbot came from the future? What do you suppose his warning was all about? I guess we'll never know... Or will we? Come back Friday to find out!

In the meantime, you only have this incentive sketch of another T-800 skull to tide you over. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics.

For those of you who find it out of character for Tom to point a shotgun point-blank to the face of a Benbot when it's usually Jared who does the dismantling, remember that Tom's paranoia against and hair-trigger for robotic interlopers was established long ago. I also think it's funny that Tom has defenses established for the zombie apocalypse and felt forced to improvise with a cyborg in his home.

When did this comic become so weird?

I tried something different with the coloring in the second panel. I guess I was a little worried about the violence being too graphic, so I tried to stylize it a little bit. I think it turned out okay.

I guess I don't have very much left to say for today, so I'll point you to this article about Terminator Salvation from Entertainment Weekly. I was particularly taken by this part about Christian Bale receiving the pitch for the movie from the much-loathed director, McG:

Bale recalls, ''I had this guy sitting there saying, 'Christian, didn't somebody ever take a leap of faith on you to do something radically different than you've ever done before? Give me that opportunity.' So I'm thinking, 'Oh, f---!''' Bale's advisers were against it too. Not just because Terminator Salvation was a sequel to a sequel to a sequel, but also because of McG himself, a man with little more to his credit than The O.C., a couple of Charlie's Angels movies, and a ridiculous name. ''I had people telling me, 'Don't do it, Christian. Don't go with that guy.' In a strange way, I like the fact that he keeps that name because it does him no friggin' favors,'' says Bale. ''But people hear it and they go, 'F--- him!' People were telling me, 'Christian, you're too good for Terminator.' And I'm thinking, I'm too good? I'm not a snob. I really f---ing enjoy watching a good action movie. Who do you think I am?!''

I think Bale is a pretty smart guy who knows that he has to mix it up a little bit and take a paycheck role like John Conner so he can attract the attention of more out-there material like The Machinist or The Prestige. But I think between the Batman and Terminator franchises, he's getting dangerously close to painting himself into a corner.

I also found it interesting that he has this rebelliousness in him that tells him to work with a ridiculous director because everyone else thinks the guy is a joke. Just like there is some truth in stereotypes, there is plenty of evidence to support the idea that McG doesn't have the emotional maturity to direct more than music videos.

Later in the article, McG talks about his credibility problem and how others perceive him...

The artist formerly, and formally, known as Joseph McGinty Nichol knows what you think of him. He's spent the past decade battling the perception that just because of his name, he's some shallow jackass. Or, as he puts it, ''a lightweight with some hip-hop nickname and a gold chain around my neck, who drives a Lamborghini.'' It drives McG nuts that with nearly $570 million under his belt at the global box office, he still has to explain himself. ''If you can't get past my name after 12 years in this industry, you're not invited,'' he says in his L.A. production office two weeks before the film's release. ''If you don't have the hustle to figure out that McG's short for 'McGinty,' which is my mother's maiden name, and that she's the least funky person ever, I'm kind of done. My name won't define my movies. My movies will define my name.'' He pauses to let this sink in. ''Look, I know I have a body of work that would not suggest that I am a credible storyteller. I need to prove myself on this film. Before you can be Johnny Depp, you have to do your time on 21 Jump Street."

First of all, anyone who uses the word "hustle" in that context, I can't take seriously.

Secondly, "$570 million under his belt at the global box office" and "12 years in the industry" don't make you legitimate. Box office is rarely an indicator of quality. It is an indication of effective marketing and some gullibility on behalf of the movie-going audience. So don't point to a stack of money and say "See! I'm talented!" If you want to talk talent, look at James Cameron who brought the concept of The Terminator to life, created something original and groundbreaking. McG is only playing with someone else's toys.

I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because I'm a fan of the franchise. But if the movie turns out to be good, it's not because McG is at the helm. The Terminator concept is too strong, too powerful in our collective imagination. It sustains itself. The only way for McG to go is down and he'll do that if he screws with the formula too much and audiences don't accept it.

There looks to be some interesting tweaks to the Terminator mythology in this film. If people really end up liking the motorcycle Terminators, then I guess I'll have to eat crow. But until McG comes up with a concept as strong as the Terminator on his own, he's still a scrub.

What are your thoughts about Bale, and McG? Do you think Bale is taking a risk with this film. What about Bale's on-set explicative-filled rant from earlier in the year? Do you think it will affect Terminator Salvation's box office take or has it been long enough that people have forgotten? Does McG deserve respect? Do you think he should take the credit if Terminator Salvation's is a hit? Leave your comments below!

20 Comments

NO SHOW

by Tom on May 18th, 2009
Posted In: Blog
Be the first to rank this comic!
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars6 Stars7 Stars8 Stars9 Stars10 Stars

I just wanted to let everyone know that there will NOT be a live recording of The Triple Feature tonight at 9:00 PM. We have canceled the show.

Sorry I didn't mention it earlier, but I'm seeing the Toadies in concert and really the only new movie to talk about was Angels & Demons. Joe saw it, but it wasn't on Gordon's radar.

We will talk about the film next week along with Terminator Salvation after it comes back on Friday. That's a flick that's on EVERYONE'S radar.

See you then!

  Comment

RISE OF THE BENBOTS

by Tom on May 18th, 2009
22 votes, average: 7.41 out of 10
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars6 Stars7 Stars8 Stars9 Stars10 Stars
RISE OF THE BENBOTS
Vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics

For those of you not familiar with the reference Tom makes in the second panel and the menacing, destructive figure in the third and fourth panels, that's a Benbot - a cybernetic duplicate of actor and hair gel host Ben Affleck.

The Benbots were introduced in this arc from 2006. A second, brief encountered was established about five months later. Since then? Not a peep.

I guess the timing felt right to bring them out of storage to explore Terminator Salvation coming out this weekend.

So, yeah. Despite there not being much of a punchline for today's comic, you can expect a continuation of the story line this week. More Benbot action in your browser. LOOK OUT!

Speaking of Terminator Salvation, if your a fan of the franchise, you're going to want to check out the drawing I did for today's incentive image over at Top Web Comics. It's a T-800 and I'm really proud of the way it turned out.

I have ambitions to sell these sketches at some point. I don't know if it will be through the site or at conventions. Regardless, if and when I make these drawings available, I'm pretty my version of the T-800 will be one of the first to be sold. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics.

As for Jared's assertion about the Terminator franchise, I'm sure there are those who will disagree with him. Personally, I love the Terminator films - even the jokey third movie. But you can't help but overlook the fact that a lot of painstaking effort went into sending the increasingly complicated machines back in time to kill John Conner.

Obviously it wouldn't make a very interesting film if the T-800 had been sent back in time with sniper skills. No conflict. But if your contention that Skynet is a ruthlessly organized computer system that prides itself on brutal efficiency... well, having Arnold leave a trail of destruction around Los Angeles is kind of makes it look like Skynet doesn't have it's ducks in a row. When you consider how advanced the T-1000 and the T-X are in the sequels, they should have had even LESS difficulty doing the job.

I'm just sayin...

I have more to say about Terminator Salvation, but I want to save those thoughts for later in the week.

In the meantime, I wanted to talk to you about Angels & Demons, which Cami and I were able to see together this weekend.

I can't tell you the last time we went to the movies together. I go by myself from time to time, seeing stuff she has no interest in seeing at late hours - usually so I have something to talk about for the site or The Triple Feature. So it's nice when we can go to a movie together and it's something she wants to see.

Both Cami and I liked the movie insomuch as we were still thinking about it and talking about it the next day. It's a little bit more straight forward than The DaVinci Code. It doesn't emphasize history as much and I think the plot is bolstered by the fact that the bulk of the story is told within a four hour time span. Also, Tom Hanks's hairstyle is CONSIDERABLY less distracting.

But despite the fact that the movie has urgency, I felt it dragged out a little long. The idea is that there is a bomb planted somewhere in The Vatican, threatening to kill thousands in St. Peter's Square as they await the confirmation of a new Pope. Watching the movie, I kind of wanted them to hurry it up and get to the inevitable scene where they uncover the bomb (with 5 minutes left to spare!) and try to dispose of it. The stuff leading up to it was... interesting. But excessive.

To put this in perspective, there are a few scenes shot inside the Vatican archives. After the movie was over, Cami confided, "I wish they would have spent more time in there! I would have loved to have seen more of their old documents!"

The film also has an annoying habit of over-explaining itself. As Vatican security are being shown a live feed of the bomb from a wireless camera (tech savvy, no?), they realize that it is being illuminated by an independent light source. In an effort to uncover it's location, they cut power to individual grids all over Vatican City.

Every time the power goes out - usually just as something important or tension-filled is about to happen - one of the characters has to remind us that individual power grids are being shut down to find the bomb. It happens at least three times in the movie and by the third time you're sitting there thinking "Yeah! We get it!"

I won't talk too much more about the film because I think, despite its flaws, it's entertaining and worth your time. Although Hanks sometimes appears to be an incidental contributor to his own movie, the performances in the film are very good. Particularly Ewan McGreggor who plays a priest of passionate faith, but who is also keenly aware of religion's competition for influence in the modern world.

Ultimately, I think what I took from the film was more personal. Having been to Rome and visited the Pantheon and Vatican City, it was interesting to me to look at the locations and say "I've been there!" I experienced a bit of cognitive dissonance, however, because I had a hard time believing that the Vatican would give that level of access to the filmmakers in some locations.

I mean, the catacombs in St. Peter's Tomb and the Vatican Archives are obviously sets. But I couldn't reconcile if they were able to shoot interiors in The Basilica of Saint Peter or how they were able to recreate it if they weren't. My eye told me one thing, but my mind told me another. It's a good illusion, but one I never fully accepted.

That's all I have on Angels & Demons. I was a little surprised that it came in first this weekend at the box office. I was expecting Star Trek to edge them out. I began to revise my thinking when I noticed packed the theater was at our showing. Did you see the movie this weekend? What did you think? What about Terminator Salvation? Are you getting excited for it? Leave your comments below!

8 Comments