Terminator Genisys

Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
2,909
Location
Oregon
Unfortunately, James Cameron endorsement doesn't mean that much to me. That said the movie looks interesting. But the Arnold moments seem forced and almost out of character.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
5,740
Reaction score
64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbshvW8Pl8w

^^^ Endorsement by none other than James Cameron himself! Now that has 'put a cat amonst the pigeons' so to speak!
For those of us unfamiliar with that apparent colloquialism, can you explain what a cat amongst the pigeons represents?



I'll watch anything with Aronld. One of my favorite actors. I'm hoping the rumors of a new Conan movie with him are true.
Conan the Octagenarian?
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
5,711
Reaction score
259
Location
Wellington, New Zealand
For those of us unfamiliar with that apparent colloquialism, can you explain what a cat amongst the pigeons represents?QUOTE]

:) Sure!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throw_the_cat_among_the_pigeons
Throwing (also putting and setting) the cat among the pigeons is a British idiom used to describe a disturbance caused by an undesirable person from the perspective of a group.

Another use of the term is to "cause an enormous fight or flap, usually by revealing a controversial fact or secret", or in other words: to do something suddenly or unexpectedly which leaves the people worried or angry.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2]
[/SUP]


I was very generally, using it in the second sense of the phrase: as a means to describe how Camerons' comments have suddenly caused something of a stir, among many Terminator fans (who up until recently) had been talking down Genysis, and heavily criticising it as being 'not their terminator movie, etc..' - many of whom were citing James Cameron's T1 and T2 as the only 'true' terminator movies, due to Cameron's direction.

So, all of a sudden, James Cameron is giving an interview, in which he's praising Genisys and overall being extremely positive (slightly unexpectedly) about it as a succesor to his own directed movies - and this has (in many cases) suddenly caused a lot of the naysayers to rethink their position on Genisys.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
11,139
Reaction score
286
Location
Hillsboro, IL, USA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbshvW8Pl8w

^^^ Endorsement by none other than James Cameron himself! Now that has 'put a cat amonst the pigeons' so to speak!

Also of equal interest (IMO) is reading (across the interwebs) some terminator 'fans' opinions of Terminator: Genisys suddenly turning 180 degrees in the opposite direction (from hate, to love just like that!) :p

Could this be evidence of 'The James Cameron Effect' in action?

Breathtaking to observe... :wtf:
Yeah, still no interest in the movie from me primarily because of the aging Arnold in the role of a Terminator.

I'll watch anything with Aronld. One of my favorite actors. I'm hoping the rumors of a new Conan movie with him are true.
You'd think someone who likes the actor that much would at least put in the effort to spell his name correctly. :p
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,453
Reaction score
2
Location
(un)Sunny Belfast
Well folks......just got back from the midnight screening of Genisys.....and absolutely LOVED IT!!!

Like Jurassic World it is a return to form for the Franchise. The CGI is incredibly well done when it comes to young Arnie.

And the scene recreation/homage to the 1984 movie is amazing. The whole movie is a lot of fun.....

Thats 2/2 so far this year.....

December is threatening to cap of an enjoyable year(fingers crossed)

.....and me and my son.....we kinda love the whole Terminator vibe....strange....when I'd NEVER dress up for a Star Wars movie.....but....well ill let the pics do the talking....


My wife and daughters don't get it....but it was a fun wait in line....

Darren
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,453
Reaction score
2
Location
(un)Sunny Belfast
With the tumbleweeds blowing through this thread I thought I'd continue my one man mission to confound the stupid critics and reviewers(rotten tomatoes) in regards to this decent flick....

Having sifted through the horrible reviews I found this....

Review: 'Terminator: Genisys' Is True Heir To Cameron's Films

this is probably as accurate and in-depth as I would have prodded,and reflects my opinions/feelings on the movie.

In all fairness....the casting of Jai Courtney is the only thing I would have changed....Michael Biehns desperate,weary and wiry warrior was a million miles away from the Muscle-bound Schwarzenegger....not his weightlifting gym partner....

everything else....I enjoyed immensely.

And believe me....I've been a fan of this franchise from the beginning(and watched every one sans the original) in a theatre on day one.

The CGI is what got me,though....I love the fact the Young Arnie is on screen(looking every inch the Austrian Oak he did in '84)taking on a creaky version of himself....

Darren
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2003
Messages
21,552
Reaction score
1
Location
Sausalito, CA
Saw it tonight and quite enjoyed it as well. I place it as being the best of the last three as well. The first two will always be the better ones to me with the second on as the best of them all kinda like Star Wars is for me.
 

GNT

Moderator
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
70,755
Reaction score
423
Location
Australia
Saw it today, totally enjoyed it. Makes you wonder if Sarah ever returns to her normal time line?
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
8,840
Reaction score
1,174
Location
Glen Burnie, MD
100% in agreement with everything you said...especially the casting of Jai C. As Kyle Reese...he just didn't do it for me, like he phoned in his part. I didn't like him as John McClane's son, either. Thought Emilia Clarke nailed Sarah Conner perfectly.
With the tumbleweeds blowing through this thread I thought I'd continue my one man mission to confound the stupid critics and reviewers(rotten tomatoes) in regards to this decent flick....

Having sifted through the horrible reviews I found this....

Review: 'Terminator: Genisys' Is True Heir To Cameron's Films

this is probably as accurate and in-depth as I would have prodded,and reflects my opinions/feelings on the movie.

In all fairness....the casting of Jai Courtney is the only thing I would have changed....Michael Biehns desperate,weary and wiry warrior was a million miles away from the Muscle-bound Schwarzenegger....not his weightlifting gym partner....

everything else....I enjoyed immensely.

And believe me....I've been a fan of this franchise from the beginning(and watched every one sans the original) in a theatre on day one.

The CGI is what got me,though....I love the fact the Young Arnie is on screen(looking every inch the Austrian Oak he did in '84)taking on a creaky version of himself....

Darren
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
10,323
Reaction score
593
Location
Detroit, MI
Definitely the best since T2, and old Arnold was handled well. The first half felt exactly like the James Cameron films.

The second half (post-time travel) got overblown and boring. It felt like the whole John Connor angle was forced just to say they did something new.

And Jai Courtney, I have to agree, was a terrible Reese.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
3,722
Reaction score
96
Location
Lansing, Michigan
Got back from Terminator Genisys.

The first half was the good part. The jump to 2017 was when it started to decline and decline fast. From what I got John became a terminator because of all the past films time jumps? They didn't accomplish anything in the end. The fact Pops(Arnold) still existed after they blew up the buildings means Skynet still exists from wherever Pops is from. Which I believe Judgement Day is just inevitable. I could not stand Jai Courtney as Kyle Reese, way too cheesy and just bad. Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor...might've been the lines she was given but I didn't like her in it either. The score was totally forgettable I don't understand why Zimmer is getting all these films. Dark Knight and Interstellar is all I can think off. A lot of the time I was reminded of Roland Emmerich way too much in the dialogue/characters. Arnold was okay...but the point of his character is a robot with no emotion so don't know how you can say he's great considering that. All in all it started off great then fell hard. The 1984 stuff was really fun and interesting.

I would say it's worth a rent. Don't waste $14 on it in theatres. It's third best with T1 2nd and T2 1st IMO.

Edit: Also really disappointed there was no 80's theme tracks/scores.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
6,092
Reaction score
447
why did they need to build a 'time machine' to travel FORWARD into the future? :rolleyes:
--> all they needed, was to build a 'freezer' -- they do this on Futurama all the time. LOL :p

(also: they're wanting to go from 1984... to 1992? really? THAT requires a time machine?:rolleyes: (they couldnt' just play backgammon in a cave for 8 years?)).

  Spoiler:  
^^ (in fact, a 'freezer' would make more sense: in T2, it was quite believable that Sarah & co. would have a secret cache of guns hidden in a mexican bunker in 1992 -- it's not quite AS plausible, that Sarah & co. would have a freaking 'time machine' in a bunker in 1984, apparently, built on a shoe-string-budget by a nine-year-old-girl and her pet-robot -- especially, when a FAR MORE Advanced Terminator couldn't succeed to build the same thing, in the same movie, some 32 years LATER in 2017, with an UNlimited corporate budget(!) -- this makes no sense)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
6,092
Reaction score
447
Got back from Terminator Genisys.

The first half was the good part. The jump to 2017 was when it started to decline and decline fast. From what I got John became a terminator because of all the past films time jumps? They didn't accomplish anything in the end. The fact Pops(Arnold) still existed after they blew up the buildings means Skynet still exists from wherever Pops is from. Which I believe Judgement Day is just inevitable. I could not stand Jai Courtney as Kyle Reese, way too cheesy and just bad. Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor...might've been the lines she was given but I didn't like her in it either. The score was totally forgettable I don't understand why Zimmer is getting all these films. Dark Knight and Interstellar is all I can think off. A lot of the time I was reminded of Roland Emmerich way too much in the dialogue/characters. Arnold was okay...but the point of his character is a robot with no emotion so don't know how you can say he's great considering that. All in all it started off great then fell hard. The 1984 stuff was really fun and interesting.

I would say it's worth a rent. Don't waste $14 on it in theatres. It's third best with T1 2nd and T2 1st IMO.

Edit: Also really disappointed there was no 80's theme tracks/scores.
  Spoiler:  
john became a terminator because Skynet realized it couldn't win by going back in time to prevent his birth -- so instead, it decided to 'assimilate' his body in the future -- this would end the war and skynet would win. the resistance would be over. done and done. there's only one problem: right before John was 'assimilated', Kyle just went back in time. so he had to be eliminated from the timeline, in order for this to work.

re: "the fact pops still existed" -- this isn't back to the future LOL ;) pops is just an exile from a different timeline. "theoretically" he could go back in time and live with the dinosaurs, and make 'changes' thus preventing humankind from ever happening -- in that case, he wouldn't just "blink" out of existence.. he would live out his life with the dinosaurs, grow old, and die there.

re: where did Pops come from? -- he came from the last scene of the planned trilogy: Sarah herself will be the one to send him back.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,453
Reaction score
2
Location
(un)Sunny Belfast
Got back from Terminator Genisys.

The first half was the good part. The jump to 2017 was when it started to decline and decline fast. From what I got John became a terminator because of all the past films time jumps? They didn't accomplish anything in the end. The fact Pops(Arnold) still existed after they blew up the buildings means Skynet still exists from wherever Pops is from. Which I believe Judgement Day is just inevitable. I could not stand Jai Courtney as Kyle Reese, way too cheesy and just bad. Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor...might've been the lines she was given but I didn't like her in it either. The score was totally forgettable I don't understand why Zimmer is getting all these films. Dark Knight and Interstellar is all I can think off. A lot of the time I was reminded of Roland Emmerich way too much in the dialogue/characters. Arnold was okay...but the point of his character is a robot with no emotion so don't know how you can say he's great considering that. All in all it started off great then fell hard. The 1984 stuff was really fun and interesting.

I would say it's worth a rent. Don't waste $14 on it in theatres. It's third best with T1 2nd and T2 1st IMO.

Edit: Also really disappointed there was no 80's theme tracks/scores.
thats harsh!!!!

i think Jai Courtney is the real reason for the failure......I too would have loved some more 80s music(the Tech Noir scene was always a favourite)

the brilliance of the original Terminator......was the entire world(sans Reese) were oblivious to the relentless threat that the small microcosm(Sarah,Reese,Dr Silverman(?)involved were exposed to....that would have devastating consequences for everyone!!!

the tension(and brutallity) of the original was something even T2 struggled to match....(although the T-1000 had some great kills)....the new movie....with the 12A certificate was always going to struggle as far as gory violence was concerned.

Which is a shame. But we all know the wider story now. So reveals,surprises and interesting exposition are going to be difficult to achieve because the narrative is mostly known to the viewer.(without switching it up which might upset more die-hards)

Arnie being reduced to comedic relief....isn't that enjoyable.....but given his advanced years....and involvement in every movie(CGI in Salvation)means we need him in any capacity to make it a "proper" Terminator flick.

The most important thing for me. That they absolutely(well 98%)nailed the Austrian Oak in his pomp. Which means that in any possible sequel(s) we may get a convincing non-humanised cyborg....that kills without thought...and keeps on coming...and absolutely will not stop....until you are DEAD!!!!

Darren
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
6,092
Reaction score
447
  Spoiler:  
now that Pop's been upgraded to a shapeshifting T-1000, they can use any actor, and still maintain continuity. for the sake of ticket sales and movie trailers, "pops" can morph into a CGI version of your Austrian Oak (at any age)... but the actual 'character' can now be played by anyone, with any face
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
6,092
Reaction score
447
They've spelt Genesis wrong. It sounds like a Codename: Kids Next Door episode title.
I thought the same thing . but in the story, it turns out to be the name of a "hip" new Apple OS. therefore the misspelling makes perfect sense. :rolleyes:

(it's an in-movie marketing ploy, based on witty pun; like mercedes "4matic", or "toys-R-us", or "Krispy Kreme" -- it is widely assumed, by Marketing Professionals, that Joe Public is functionally illiterate.. and/or, that witty misspellings WILL capture his unwilling attention -- we see this TOO OFTEN in 'real life' marketing, where common words are misspelled on purpose, to create a 'Brand Name' for a hip new consumer product -- it seems to be a recent trend -- so when it showed up in the movie, it made all kinds of sense, as part of a fictional "2017" era)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
3,722
Reaction score
96
Location
Lansing, Michigan
I don't understand what's so hard about making a future war terminator movie. It's way long overdue. Salvation tried but failed in spots miserably. It'd be nice if the second movie focused on the T1000 going back but that timeline has been erased with this new movie. They are doing an x-men first class kind of thing so who's where they'll go from here.
 

GNT

Moderator
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
70,755
Reaction score
423
Location
Australia
Technically when Sarah and Kyle jump to the future, shouldn't the original John not exist in this time frame as Sarah hadn't given birth to him prior to the jump? For him to be in exactly the same time frame and be the exact same John, wouldn't he have needed to jump back to 84 then jump forward similar to them to 2017 (to remain in the correct reality)?

Even if John did time shift after Kyle had gone through (he did time shift back a couple of years), he should've gone to the same reality as Kyle and Sarah as they had changed the past (he was never born). It should be a totally different reality....


Time travel does my head in....
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
5,740
Reaction score
64
Thinking about going to see this. I've seen the first three Terminator movies, but not "Salvation." Is the viewing experience going to be lacking in any way for not having seen "Salvation?"
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Thinking about going to see this. I've seen the first three Terminator movies, but not "Salvation." Is the viewing experience going to be lacking in any way for not having seen "Salvation?"
No, they don't even mention the past two films.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
6,092
Reaction score
447
Thinking about going to see this. I've seen the first three Terminator movies, but not "Salvation." Is the viewing experience going to be lacking in any way for not having seen "Salvation?"
not at all. this is a sequel to T1 and T2. the rest is a deleted timeline.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
6,092
Reaction score
447
Technically when Sarah and Kyle jump to the future, shouldn't the original John not exist in this time frame as Sarah hadn't given birth to him prior to the jump? For him to be in exactly the same time frame and be the exact same John, wouldn't he have needed to jump back to 84 then jump forward similar to them to 2017 (to remain in the correct reality)?

Even if John did time shift after Kyle had gone through (he did time shift back a couple of years), he should've gone to the same reality as Kyle and Sarah as they had changed the past (he was never born). It should be a totally different reality....


Time travel does my head in....
he would actually need to travel back before 1984, to the time when sarah was 9 years old. that's when the changes to the new timeline started.
(that's where sarah's path changed -- which would ultimately prevent the scene in T1 , where john was conceived).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,453
Reaction score
2
Location
(un)Sunny Belfast
.........Sooooooo......IMDB is currently rating it at 7.1/10......which is testament to nerd/fanboy power.

I hope that word-of-mouth increases the box-office domestically,as its doing ok here overseas,whilst simultaneously flipping the middle finger to the critics.

Jai Courtney.....he's the biggest problem with this movie.....and I kinda feel sorry for him(being made the fall guy and all)but he was horribly mis-cast in the role of rat-eating Reese....the head of casting should get it in the neck for selecting him in the first place.....

he seems to be following a similar career path the other terminator alumni Mr Sam Worthington(worth nothing??)

suddenly in everything and recently in nothing.......I hope Mr Courtney's agent is watching....

Darren
 
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
4,577
Reaction score
1
Saw a matinee today. It had some good moments - the CGI Arnold was excellent.

But overall it wasn't very impressive. Courtney was awful - I just think he's a bad actor. And while I get the comments on him being too buff (certainly way more so than Biehn) - it makes me wonder who the original Terminators were meant to fool. If everyone in the nuked our future is thin and scraggly - wouldn't the appearance of a hulking buff "person" be an immediate alarm?

I also thought the "Pops" stuff wore thin. Though I think overall Arnold wasn't too bad.

I'd give it a 6/10. I think I may just love the original and T2 too much.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,453
Reaction score
2
Location
(un)Sunny Belfast
Saw a matinee today. It had some good moments - the CGI Arnold was excellent.

But overall it wasn't very impressive. Courtney was awful - I just think he's a bad actor. And while I get the comments on him being too buff (certainly way more so than Biehn) - it makes me wonder who the original Terminators were meant to fool.

I'd give it a 6/10. I think I may just love the original and T2 too much.
....it makes one wonder if Lance Henrikksen had landed the role of the Terminator instead of the bit-part detective,where the franchise would be right now.....Maybe the sequel wouldn't have been made(such was Arnold's Star-power)and it would have been a stand-alone eighties "B" movie.....

however....I think a scary,unstoppable Lance Henrikksen would have been terrifying.

.....what could have been....

Darren
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
3,585
Reaction score
100
I'm sick of movie bad guys who are basically just clouds that float about the place.
 
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
4,577
Reaction score
1
I also don't like when movies use "physics" in whatever manner suits the situation, ie a character can turn into particles the size of dust to get through a floor grate but they remain solid when impaled by something or when held by an opponent.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
3,585
Reaction score
100
I also don't like when movies use "physics" in whatever manner suits the situation, ie a character can turn into particles the size of dust to get through a floor grate but they remain solid when impaled by something or when held by an opponent.
See my comment above yours. Clouds as bad guys. I hate 'em.
 
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
4,577
Reaction score
1
See my comment above yours. Clouds as bad guys. I hate 'em.
Yeah. I was following up on your comment. Basically you have an undefeatable enemy who is eventually only defeated because they don't use the powers or abilities they've displayed previously.

I was amused by a tracking shot in the hospital where a dozen or so people were all glued to their smartphones.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
3,585
Reaction score
100
Yeah, that made me laugh but not in a good way. That and the cackhanded expositional dialogue by that doctor/nurse. May as well just slap you in the face and scream "hey, ever notice that everyone is on their phone all the time?!"

Pretty sure Doctor Who covered that material years ago.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,453
Reaction score
2
Location
(un)Sunny Belfast
You see....I will always bite when one tries to explain away a fictional pretext as the flaw in an otherwise enjoyable slice of entertainment.

We all have worthy opinions. And of course you don't have to like it.

Look,the movie wasnt perfect.....but Skynet was always a computer program.....that became self-aware. The "physics" argument....when the John Connor robot was solid and fully formed it had to adhere to the laws of physics so getting impaled whilst in solid form would require a little futzing to switch between malleable/solid modes......hold up.....we are talking about "physics"......

Rotten Tomatoes scored feckin "Sharknado" 82%.....I'm not having that Genisys scored 29%....

that is total BULL!!!

Sharknado vs Genisys???

give me a break!!

Darren
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
You see....I will always bite when one tries to explain away a fictional pretext as the flaw in an otherwise enjoyable slice of entertainment.

We all have worthy opinions. And of course you don't have to like it.

Look,the movie wasnt perfect.....but Skynet was always a computer program.....that became self-aware. The "physics" argument....when the John Connor robot was solid and fully formed it had to adhere to the laws of physics so getting impaled whilst in solid form would require a little futzing to switch between malleable/solid modes......hold up.....we are talking about "physics"......

Rotten Tomatoes scored feckin "Sharknado" 82%.....I'm not having that Genisys scored 29%....

that is total BULL!!!

Sharknado vs Genisys???

give me a break!!

Darren
I agree, they both scored far better than what they deserved. :sneaky:
 

Daigo_Bah

Moderator
Joined
Jul 14, 2000
Messages
8,557
Reaction score
591
Saw this today, and agree with much of what you guys wrote. The first half was much better than the second; in fact, I was watching a good 30 minutes plus, thinking what are all the complaints about? Then it started to show its weaknesses. Oh, and I also hate the "cloud-like" antagonist idea too. That was a big part of Transformers 4 that bothered me, the transformium digital characters that could float around and solidify at will. I guess I much rather the 80s version of the future, rather than the 2000s version: I want to see pistons and engines, not pixels and digitization.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
4,716
Reaction score
256
I'm a big fan of the Terminator franchise (the films & the Sarah Connor Chronicles TV series), but had avoided watching Terminator: Geneisys for a while, since I wasn't sure I would like the film - and because I also felt there was no need for a new film.

However, I recently gave in & watched T:G on on Blu - it was my first time seeing the film. Wow! I really enjoyed the movie, much better than I thought I would. Some comments:

-I knew very little about the film going on, and in the first scenes I literally thought it was going to be a straight re-make of Terminator 1 (1984) - which I felt would be somewhat boring (despite the advances in special effects over the years). However, when we saw that Terminator infect John Connor right when Kyle Reese was going back in time, you knew that things were going to be different.

- I liked how they had elements of Terminator 1 & 2 in the film, while at the same time having a completely original storyline:

One of my favorite scenes was when the '84 Arnold Terminator was about to confront those punk rockers (like in the first film), and the older "Pops" Terminator (reminiscent of the T2 "good" Terminator) attacked him.

Cool that they had a T-1000 policeman in the film; again, nice homage to T2.

Also nice to see the John Connor cyborg?! creature come out of the flames towards the end - again, cool homage to T2.

- The actress who played Sarah Connor looked similar to the young Linda Hamilton from T1; great casting here!

- Interesting that in this time-line, the "Pops" Terminator actually saved Sarah Connor as a child in 1973 - very different from what we had seen before.

- The last scene of the film definitely opens up the door to another sequel; i.e., "The Future is not Set" line.

- Great touch to have the iconic T2 music over the credits - again, excellent homage.

I will definitely need to watch the film again at some point - there were so many things going on that it was somewhat convoluted at times - and that's not a complaint, just an observation.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
10,323
Reaction score
593
Location
Detroit, MI
I think I've said it before, but I loved the first half and hate the second. Pretty much after the time traveling. The Cyber John just seems lazy and uninspired. And as good as they did casting Sara, they really screwed up on Kyle.

I would have still been down for a sequel, but it looks like it's been cancelled.
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
2,909
Location
Oregon
Pretty much summed it up for me.
I was hesitant about this too, for a long time. Then finally caved with a Redbox coupon. And I couldn't believe how good it actually was, especially compared to the last movie. I like most of teh tone of it, but the John twist seemed to be reaching. As if they needed to one-up everything.
 
Top