Talk:The Terminator

Neo Noir

Has Terminator got enough hallmarks to be defined as a neo-noir film?Internet Informant (talk) 05:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

The Neo-noir article makes no mention of Terminator (or James Cameron), but does include a See Also to Tech-noir. If you can find sources to support the inclusion, then yay, but as it stands there's nothing to justify the genre. Chaheel Riens (talk) 05:43, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Tech-noir is the name of the discotheque in the film. Drsruli (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

"Tech-Noir" is certainly a term that has been retro-actively applied to several films and has origins in this. From this and " Razzamatazz Buckshank's journal article, I am tempted to create a "style" section in this article as it appears to be a continued point of interest for readers and does seem to have significant study since the films release in academia. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Famous Lines

First instance of "Come with me if you want to live." Drsruli (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

What about it? Without further context, its hard to discuss. I believe The Terminator franchise article has bit more context, and "I'll Be Back" has its own article (!). We probably could have some section in the legacy of this article about how its more popular lines have entered pop culture, but from this sentence, I'm not sure what you are requesting specifically. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Slasher horror film+Serial killer film?

James Cameron stated that John Carpenter's Halloween (the movie that invented and codified the slasher film and is also very much a serial killer film) as a major influence on the film, and many film critics have pointed the similarities between the two, it would be appropriate to categorize the Terminator as a slasher film and a serial killer film. https://responsejournal.net/issue/2021-11/feature/mechanical-monster-cyber Razzamatazz Buckshank (talk) 00:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Some discussion or just edits have been made to try to include these in the past, while they have similarities, Terminator in most research I did when I expanded the article at most made some mild comparisons to Halloween, but I don't recall any describing it as this genre. So per MOS:FILM standards on genre, I don't think we should include it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:25, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry on reading your journal you shared @Razzamatazz Buckshank:, there are valid points. I mis-read your link as part of your user-name on my phone. While it does make interesting cases, it does also state that "this paper defends The Terminator as a horror film, elements of science fiction and action clearly prevail in the movie’s storyline". So this is where things grow complicated. I think if there was more specific genre analysis in the article, we could maybe find a way to include this without just saying "terminator is a 1984 American science fiction slasher action serial killer film" with a dozen citations next to it, but I think some better approach would be some genre analysis applied, thought this could be a bit overkill for something as generally not so debated as The Terminator. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright, well, I was directed to this talk page to settle this ongoing dispute by an admin: do we or do we not think it's appropriate to categorize Terminator as a horror film at the bottom of the page? It was done before, but after it got removed by some other users these past few days I've been quite alone in wanting to re-add the categories back even though I wasn't even the one who put them there in the first place.

I will just copy some of what I wrote on their talk page previously:

There's no real explanation from either of these users why they think it's warranted to remove the categories in the first place as they continually ignore my comment that it's already mentioned in the article body with a source provided, and that part has remained untouched by either of them which makes me suspect they didn't read the entire article and were thus probably unaware of that section entirely. Terminator 2 not being a horror film is also completely irrelevant when talking about Terminator 1 being one and is quite frankly pure whataboutism. T2 still has horror elements but not to the extent it can be called one (in my opinion at least), they're not the same movie just because one is a direct sequel, but that's really irrelevant here like I said. The Terminator#Genre has a small section on it which sources the article provided in the first post by Razzamatazz Buckshank and then it appears to have been added to the article body by Andrzejbanas subsequently.

The general consensus is that it's a sci-fi action movie like I stated in my edits and like it's stated in the "genre" section of the article, but I'd just like to point out that James Cameron himself has never hidden the fact that his intention with the first Terminator was always to make a "last girl"/slasher horror film, but since we're not allowed to use WP:PRIMARYSOURCES either I didn't bring it up before, but it was always intended to be viewed as one and so that's why in recent years it seems to have received a bit of a critical re-evaluation: https://www.bfi.org.uk/interviews/terminator-james-cameron (this particular interview is from 2021)

There was also a recent interview from Cameron commemorating the 40th anniversary of T1 back in December of last year where he also confirms it and while I know it can't be used as a source either, this is more just to hammer the point home that from a filmmaker's perspective at least it's not totally wrong to see it as a horror film too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OnDUpjNqiw&t=1556s

I've also found a few other articles that also talks about how T1 is a horror/slasher so the source that ended up used isn't the only one, although it is the only one that analyses it to that extent that I could find, but again it's not strictly the "general consensus" which is why it seemed appropriate to just add horror as simple categories on the article in the first place instead of in the lead sentence. I think I've made my own stance quite clear on the matter and even though I hoped this had already been settled last year, I will respect whatever consensus is reached now. I do urge everyone involved to please remain neutral regardless of what one might personally think if this movie fits under their own definition of what a horror film is or not. There are secondary sources to back it up on top of the primary ones at the very least, and the one that was used as a source is a pretty good analysis on its own and was found to make strong points in favor of Terminator's status as a horror movie. Memez24 (talk) 12:52, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

When it comes to genre in the lead and for categorization purposes. I much prefer leaving it to sites such as AFI or BFI (or, secondarily, AllMovie) to settle disputes about such things (or at least allow us to find some common ground between them), versus going off individual commentaries or one-off articles or such. It's important to distinguish a film having elements of a certain genre from being a film of that genre. As an example, The Terminator has elements of humor in it, but I don't think anyone would seriously consider calling it a comedy film.

All of which is to say that rather than going by individual articles, I think any discussion regarding what the appropriate genre descriptors for the film are should go back to what genre classifications those sources or others of similar stature use. DonIago (talk) 20:02, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Just a quick note that I believe WP:FILM has deprecated the use of AllMovie as a reliable source, since many of its listings are now simply reporting what's already written on Wikipedia. Also to expand on earlier comments, the specific genre guidance is at MOS:FILMGENRE. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 20:15, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't think Wikipedia considers AFI or BFI as reliable sources, otherwise neither The Shining or Alien would be listed here as horror. AFI and BFI are film databases, as is IMDb, Letterboxd etc. and I've been told that databases aren't to be used when categorizing film genres on Wikipedia. It's about the critics' consensus for the primary genre and then a subgenre, if applicable, that are put in the lead sentence of a film's article, and then the less important genres or subgenres usually get categorized via external links.

I can sense that you disagree with the categorization though unless I'm mistaking. I'd just like to point out that it isn't just a single article, as the thread starter mentioned the similarities between Terminator and Halloween have been noted before by other critics so I still think a simple categorization (I'll say it again: I'm not debating changing the lead sentence at all) is justified by the provided analysis which actually goes into depth if you read it. What about you GoneIn60? Memez24 (talk) 22:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Here's my take... First, I recommend you review WP:OVERCAT if you haven't already. To avoid overcategorization, it is best to categorize based on defining characteristics of the article's topic. The guideline explains this in detail at WP:NONDEFINING and WP:TRIVIALCAT. When it is not clear if a particular characteristic is defining, then a good rule-of-thumb is to ask yourself, "Would it be appropriate to mention the characteristic in the article's lead section?" If it fails that test, then it most likely isn't defining enough to categorize, even if some mention of it exists in the article's body. This isn't a hard-and-fast rule, so there are definitely exceptions.

After you've thought about that and read the guideline, do you still think the horror categorizations should be applied? If so, what is the basis for your argument at this point? --GoneIn60 (talk) 23:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Can you provide more information regarding what's led you to believe that AFI and BFI aren't considered reliable sources? I actively monitor WT:FILM and I've never seen anyone assert that; on the contrary, I've seen them be encouraged as sources for the purposes of genre classification. DonIago (talk) 04:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

It says so in the MOS:FILMGENRE: "Genre classifications should comply with WP:WEIGHT and reflect what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources." - and this is only specified for the lead section mind you which shouldn't include the categories located at the bottom of a film's article page, at least from what I can gather.

AFI is just a single source/entity, an online film database, and unlike AllMovie before their purge, they don't write an analysis about each movie like a critical review would. Why should they hold more weight and importance than for example The New York Times which actually provides in-depth reviews about a film's plot and content written by a professional film critic, and is a Tomatometer approved publication? AFI only provides synopses and information about a film's history if applicable. With The Shining for instance, their "history" section acknowledges it was made as a horror movie, but they still list the film's main genre under drama and the subgenre under suspense, and not horror. That's not what I would call reliable at all personally. BFI is the exact same, they don't provide any in-depth analysis of a film's content, they just provide a brief synopsis and an even briefer section on the work history behind it.

WT:FILM has, as GoneIn60 points out, declared AllMovie an unreliable source now because it uses Wikipedia itself as a source for providing synopses for movies now, but it still lists the genres all the same so it's effectively just like any other online film database now including AFI/BFI, or even Rotten Tomatoes which will sometimes list movies under genres that aren't reflected by the critics consensus and vice versa, because RT is also functionally just an online film/television database on its own, it's just helpful as an aggregate for reviews made by professional critics.

I may be new here, but it seems to me that if AllMovie is no longer considered a reliable secondary source by Wikipedia for determining a film's genre(s) just for removing their in-depth reviews and analyses of a film's content, then I don't see why AFI/BFI should be treated any differently just for being ran by professional film institutions when, as I said, neither of them do what AllMovie used to do when they were considered a reliable source.

But I'd just like to point out that if we could still use AllMovie as a source, they do in fact list it under horror also: https://www.allmovie.com/movie/the-terminator-am6331

GoneIn60 I'll take a look at your links later, and then come back with an answer. Memez24 (talk) 09:24, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Genre discussion

As genre has been brought up time and time again, I've tried to add some clarification for the genre within the article. I've used the sources mentioned above and felt that as the discussion of horror film traits and also the whole "Tech-Noir" thing should be evaluated upon. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:42, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

It's real.

I came back to the article to see who authored the screenplay back in the 80s thinking to myself, "before machine learning, before powerful robotics and drones or anything like that... how on earth could they have known this would come true?" It _feels_ like the article is incomplete now without some coverage on how forward looking this was, 40 years before this is coming true in every aspect of our lives. 147.161.198.116 (talk) 05:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)