PDA

View Full Version : T3: Rise of the Machines



SWAFMAN
04-11-2002, 10:18 PM
here's a good update (http://www.zap2it.com/movies/news/story/0,1259,---11572,00.html) on next year's release of T3.

Wolfwood319
04-12-2002, 12:26 AM
Cool, thanks for the info. I'm looking forward to the T3, as the first 2 are some of my favorite films.

I'm surprised they didn't go with Edward Furlong in T3, since he'd be about the right age, and they used him for the Terminator 3D ride at Universal Studios.

SithDroid
04-12-2002, 01:42 AM
Warner Brothers? The Terminator Franchise and rights are owned by Universal. Is this information right?

SWAFMAN
04-12-2002, 04:34 PM
I was also surprised at Furlong not being cast again as John Conner. Was discussing it over lunch, and one opinion that came up was that maybe the studio wanted a John Conner that appealed to more women/girls to draw more female film-goers? Don't ask me, I'm a guy! I don't care what John Conner looks like, as long as he can act. I saw this Stahl kid in In the Bedroom, and he seemed like a good actor. Still, I'd like to have seen Furlong again.

Beast
04-12-2002, 04:40 PM
Furlong didn't wanna do it, from what I understand. There was some talk of hiring Hayden from E2 as the older John Conner, but it looks like that has fallen thru.

Rumors are saying that Linda Hamilton didn't want to return either, and I think she said that the only way she would come back is if the charecter is dead and she appeared only in flashback. She wants to put the whole Terminator franchise behind her, even though it's the series that made her a star, and she is best known for. :rolleyes:

Oh well, without Cameron at the helm, I think the movie is gonna majorly tank anyway. I don't know the director well enough, but he doesn't seem the type to make a futuristic action picture.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

JediTricks
04-12-2002, 05:20 PM
I think that since Carolco went under, the rights to the Terminator franchise were in legal limbo for many years.

To be honest, I don't want a T3, T2 was the right way to end the series and it'd be cheapened by anything else.

derek
04-12-2002, 10:00 PM
i'm with you jar jar. i have MAJOR worries about this film. i hope arnold isn't just reviving this role because he hasn't had a hit film since "true lies" in 1994.

as almost without exception, arnold movies range from so-so to plain awful without james cameron directing.

so is this film going to be set after the nuclear war, or was there ever one? shouldn't destroying cyber-dyne, the original T-800 arm and chip, and stopping miles dyson's research put a stop to the "rise or the machines"?

chewie
04-12-2002, 11:30 PM
T2 sewed up the Terminator story quite nicely. Making this sequel will simply cheapen how good the two original movies were.

SithDroid
04-13-2002, 12:17 AM
I agree. How they are going to re-write a "good" Arnold back in are beyond me.

2-1B
04-13-2002, 02:18 AM
I don't know too much about the film's plot, but I do feel this is a bad idea. I love the first one, it scared the hell out of me as a kid. And it warranted a sequel because it was already set up for one - Sarah Connor heading off into the storm, she had a lot of work to "prepare" her son for what we knew was coming. The plot didn't mean to eliminate the future threat, only to guarantee that John would have the chance to lead the resistance.

And I love T2, for different reasons. But the whole point of that movie was to eliminate the future threat of SkyNet (sp?) and leave an OPEN ENDED future.

That's not to say it is impossible that the machines will still find a way to rise ( :rolleyes: ), but any plotline is going to have to come out of nowhere. At least, that's what I perceive.

Beast
04-13-2002, 02:45 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
And I love T2, for different reasons. But the whole point of that movie was to eliminate the future threat of SkyNet (sp?) and leave an OPEN ENDED future.

That's not to say it is impossible that the machines will still find a way to rise ( :rolleyes: ), but any plotline is going to have to come out of nowhere. At least, that's what I perceive.
But as was said in the movie, "The Futures not set, there's no fate but we make for ourselves." And Arnolds comment that it's part of Human Nature to destroy itself. Turn on the nightly news, it proves that one right there. So Miles' death, just made the downfall of the human race to go to the next person in line.

In the T2 comic that took place after T2 ended, I believe it was Miles' son who grew up and was the one who created the processor, and set the timeline back on a path twords destrcuction. I have read quite a few rumors of how the plot is going to be set up for T3...but I need to dig them up again.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

2-1B
04-13-2002, 02:54 AM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
In the T2 comic that took place after T2 ended, I believe it was Miles' son who grew up and was the one that created processor, and set the timeline back on a path twords destrcuction.

That's exactly the kind of storyline I don't like, all of the events in T2 are cheapened. Kinda like throwing away Vader's sacrifice in favor of a "cloned" emperor. :rolleyes:

What happens after they foil Miles Jr.'s plans?
Someone else will just pick up with it, and on and on as long as sequels are profitable. :D

Beast
04-13-2002, 03:03 AM
I think that Miles Jr. helped John Conner put a permanent end to Skynet by destroying it in the present war against humanity timeline. After skynet was already created and functioning, which should ensure that that is the end of any further terminator time line divergances.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Pendo
04-13-2002, 12:54 PM
I am really looking forward to T3. Terminator is one of my favourite films. Here's what I've heard on T3 but it's only rumors:

The Terminator will be controlled by another female cyborg called the Terminatrix. He will start off as the bad guy but is re-programmed by Conner in the middle and fights along side him. He is sent to the past at the end of the film.

I've also heared that Kyle Reese will be in the film.

Edward Furlong WAS set up for the role of John Conner but was fired before filming began because of his criminal record and he was arrested for drugs or something like that. The studio didn't want to risk anything.

It has been confirmed that Linda Hamilton WILL be returning as Sarah Conner but only in a flashback or dream.


PENDO!

JediTricks
04-13-2002, 02:34 PM
Pendo, if that's accurate, then T3 will actually be a future-forward prequel to T2, yes? (by that I mean, these events take place BEFORE the Terminator is reprogrammed by John Connor and sent back into the past, these would be the events leading up to T2 rather than following the events of what T2 ended with.) I suppose in THAT respect, it isn't QUITE as horrible a concept as it could be, but everything else I've heard suggests it is the continuation of the events of T2, which would make it a true sequel of the story and ripe for hating.

odb
04-13-2002, 06:13 PM
I've heard similar stories to Pendo but I've read somewhere that there are three terminators, one of them being female. I've also heard that one of them will change sides half way through the film.

I've also heard the film is due to run in sequence with all events taking place before all out war. I think Linda Hamilton gone on record as saying that she has no intention to be in the film and has not be approached about a role either.

The fact that Cameron will be absent is not good, most of the visions of the terminator universe have come from him. Lacking this influence and vision may well result in a Robocop 3 situation.

2-1B
04-13-2002, 06:54 PM
As soon as I heard Cameron was not involved, I assumed Hamilton would be back since the philanderer would not be around. :D Frankly I am surprised that she is not banging on the door to go a third round.

derek
04-13-2002, 08:04 PM
my mind may have opened a bit...

if this film can somehow serve as a prequil to T2, as pendo and JT pointed out, i may hold out some hope a quality film is made. but i would be willing to bet we get your standard hollywood sequal with absoutly nothing original or creative, just an excuse to shoot guns and blow things up using the terminator brand name as an audience draw. why don't they just totally ruin the saga and have arnie fight jean claude van damn's universal soldier. :dead:

JediTricks
04-14-2002, 11:30 PM
ODB, the minute you said "robocop 3", it clicked as the PERFECT example of what is potential for this upcoming T3! I mentally screamed, that is what I foresee. Supposedly, the duo who got the rights to do this wrote T3 and T4 together and promised they'd do both films with or without Arnie.

netsolo
04-15-2002, 02:31 AM
I'd have to agree with previous comments, the way that the original and T2 complemented each other and balanced each other out is excellent. The fact that T2 ties up all loose ends and cements that the future has been saved (and "good" Terminiator= melted) makes me curious as to how much of T3 is just going to be spent mucking up all that was planted in T2. I'm thinking an hour and a half just setting up the premise of the movie and another half hour for us to shake our heads and say "No wonder Cameron said no."

Come on guys, make this flick awesome and prove me wrong. In the meantime, I'm skeptical.

Pendo
04-25-2002, 11:01 AM
There's two pics from Terminator 3 online over at Aint It Cool News (http://www.aintitcool.com).

Here's one...

PENDO!

Pendo
04-25-2002, 11:02 AM
And here's another (I don't know what it's supposed to be)...

PENDO!

JediTricks
04-25-2002, 07:35 PM
"Ain't it cool?" No. Good finds Pendo, but damn if Arnie doesn't look like a scrawny guy in thick clothing.

derek
04-25-2002, 09:43 PM
jeditricks,

as a big arnie fan who followed his bodybuilding career, i have seen some really scrawny arnold photos after he quit bodybuilding in the late 70's and quit using steriods. i was so shocked to see how thin he was. he looked ill. he wasn't, but he was probably 60 pounds lighter.

he later bulked up again when he returned to competition in 1980, and stayed big for conan and through out the 80's.

but since his heart surgery, i bet he's really cut back, if he hasn't quit the "juice" all together.:)

JediTricks
04-27-2002, 01:21 AM
after the heart surgery, I wondered if maybe he knew about the condition when he first scrawnied down before bulking back up in the '80s. I don't know all that much about Arnie compared to you (clearly!) but I hear Steroids can cause heart probs and yet his were "genetic", right? Either way, I don't think "the juice" and heart conditions mix, so I guess T3 will have to be carried on his wit and charm and acting ability... and the fact that he's really a cyborg who can remove the skin covering his endoskeleton arm ;)

Eternal Padawan
04-27-2002, 08:01 AM
In order for John Connor to be born, there has to be a war, so he can give the photo to Kyle, who can fall in love with Sarah and travel back in time to produce John, who grows up to fight in the war and give the picture to Kyle, so he can fall in love...if you think about in those terms, the war (and T3 and T4) are INEVITABLE. If T2 had "wrapped" things up, John would have winked out of existence as soon as the Terminator dropped into the vat of boiling steel, because his father will never come back thru time to conceive him.

Beast
04-27-2002, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Eternal Padawan
In order for John Connor to be born, there has to be a war, so he can give the photo to Kyle, who can fall in love with Sarah and travel back in time to produce John, who grows up to fight in the war and give the picture to Kyle, so he can fall in love...if you think about in those terms, the war (and T3 and T4) are INEVITABLE. If T2 had "wrapped" things up, John would have winked out of existence as soon as the Terminator dropped into the vat of boiling steel, because his father will never come back thru time to conceive him.
Depends on what theory you follow in regards to time travel. My mind isn't clinking on which is which, but here goes. Your correct, in one theroy if there is no war, then Kyle never gets sent back, and John winks out of existance. In the other theroy, once the act of going back in time occurs, any changes don't affect the original timeline, instead it breaks it off into a divergant timeline.

So in the original timeline, there was a war, and Kyle was sent back to protect Sarah, who then fathered John. But once the future timeline was altered, it creates a ripple that shatters the future into 2 divergant timelines. It's a confusing theroy, but all time travel ideas are a lil out there. For we all know, changing anything in the past would cause such a massive time paradox that the universe would explode/implode. :)

Don't ya just hate time travel movies. :D :crazed:

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Pendo
04-27-2002, 01:33 PM
Interesting post JJB! Once I've read through it a couple of times I might start to understande it a little... When I figure out what you've just said (in about a couple of years) I will travel back in time and post something witty about it!

PENDO!

SithDroid
04-27-2002, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Depends on what theory you follow in regards to time travel. My mind isn't clinking on which is which, but here goes. Your correct, in one theroy if there is no war, then Kyle never gets sent back, and John winks out of existance. In the other theroy, once the act of going back in time occurs, any changes don't affect the original timeline, instead it breaks it off into a divergant timeline.

So in the original timeline, there was a war, and Kyle was sent back to protect Sarah, who then fathered John. But once the future timeline was altered, it creates a ripple that shatters the future into 2 divergant timelines. It's a confusing theroy, but all time travel ideas are a lil out there. For we all know, changing anything in the past would cause such a massive time paradox that the universe would explode/implode. :)

Don't ya just hate time travel movies. :D :crazed:

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

I understand what you mean JarJar, but one could agrue that how could John Connor be born in the past to a man who isn't even alive(or old enough yet). There also lies a problem with time travel. How is it possible to have one thing before another? Time travel is always a touchy subject because one little change can effect the future quite dramatically. I hope that we as a society never reach the techological means to time travel because it could seriously destroy the universe. There are definately people who would use it for the worse as well.

Pendo
04-27-2002, 02:58 PM
My head hurts!!!!! Time travel?!?!? Why does something have to be so complicated? I suppose we will never know which theory is ture until we get the technology to time travel, and I don't think we ever will or there would be people from the future here now.

PENDO!

Beast
04-27-2002, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by SithDroid
I understand what you mean JarJar, but one could agrue that how could John Connor be born in the past to a man who isn't even alive(or old enough yet). There also lies a problem with time travel. How is it possible to have one thing before another? Time travel is always a touchy subject because one little change can effect the future quite dramatically. I hope that we as a society never reach the techological means to time travel because it could seriously destroy the universe. There are definately people who would use it for the worse as well.
Yep, again don't ya just hate time travel movies. I think one of the best ones was Millenium. It dealt with time paradoxs and stuff, where as most of the other don't. And your right, in one theroy, one minor change can be enough to ripple thru the timeline and lay waste to the future, in theroy. Here is a good site about the theroy on time travel that many scientists consider most plausible. Of course with somthing like this, who knows if it's the correct theroy or not. :)

http://www.anu.ie/rab/Timetravel.html

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

derek
04-28-2002, 02:14 AM
(you have to read this post in your best "hans and frans" voices)
Eternal Padawan,

i see you subscribe to the "back to the future" school of physics. well, let me tell you, girly man, that marty mc fly has no affect on our terminator universe. here, we are free to travel back and forth, actively interacting with whom ever we see. that theory about disapearing could never happen to arnold, maybe stallone, but never arnold. now hit the gym you scrawney nerd. and remember, we are here to pump u up! (end hans and frans voice)

Eternal Padawan
04-29-2002, 12:28 AM
My theory on time travel is that it is circuitous: the events of either the past or the future (depending on your perspective) depend on the other events in the cyclical cycle. Any historic events that happened in the past have ALREADY BEEN AFFECTED by time travel, so you CAN'T change them. For instance, suppose you wanted to time travel and help the Nazis win the war. You can look at a history book and see that you failed. it's inevitable. Why? Suppose you went back and changed it so they won. Then the world would be completely different and you would never have the urge to go back and change it. So they lose. Anybody want to time travel and assassinate Lincoln? No? Why not? Because it already happened. Maybe somebody from the 28th century went back and killed Lincoln and you decidied to stop him. Well, guess what. He suceeded and you failed. So the events of Terminator 1 HAVE to lead into the war...otherwise theres no Terminator 1.

The other conundrum is this. Suppose you decided to time travel and kill Hitler when he was a child. Stop the holocaust and bring peace to the earth, right? Noble effort. But what if one of great grand children of a person who was supposed to die in the war ended up becoming a despot a hundred times worse than Hitler ever was? So do you kill millions to save billions a hundred years later? Tough choice for one guy to make.

SithDroid
04-29-2002, 01:31 AM
This is why time trvel is all "theory." Many speculate that if a person were to time travel back and kill their father, then that would cause a paradox because you killed your father before you were born yet how could you kill your father if you weren't born, but you just did. Confusing? :crazed: This is what people speculate causes paradoxes and why the universe would implode.

Beast
07-04-2002, 03:44 PM
The Terminator 3 Teaser Trailer is now up at the offical Apple page. I'm downloading it now, from what I have heard it's supposed to be very cool. But if it's anything like the T2 Teaser Trailer, it won't have any images from the actual movie. I guess I will know after it finishes loading. :)

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/t3/

Update: Well, it finally loaded. And I have to say that the trailer is really ho-hum. Nothing really intresting at all. It starts with the Warner Bros. logo that melts and drips onto the floor, then reforms into a giant rectangle and lasers cut a three into it, as the rectangle grows into a big "T". Then the cut out portion of the 3 blows out and "Rise of the Machines" appears at the bottom of the screen, then a quick fade to black and it says, "July 2, 2003"

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

DeadEye
07-04-2002, 05:00 PM
That's only 363 days away! :D

Yeah, I was disappointed by the teaser. I hoped to see actual footage!

Eternal Padawan
07-05-2002, 02:25 AM
We go to see a sneak preview of MIIB on Tuesday night and they didn't add the T3, Star Trek:Nemesis, or LOTR: TTT trailers (instead we got XXX :mad: ), so we strung them together and watched them. The TTT trailer was just a rehash of the footage from the "sneak" after FOTR. ST:Nemesis looks like a cross between the Hellraiser films and Mad Max (and before you ask, that ISN'T a compliment) and then of course, the completely lackluster T3 trailer.

Speaking of time travel. A guy has a thing posted on his locker at work that says: "Somebody invents time travel. Then everybody races back in time to invent it first. Next thing you know, Stephen Hawkings is up out of that chair and everybody in the world is his prison B*t*h..." :D

Beast
07-05-2002, 02:58 AM
Originally posted by Eternal Padawan
We go to see a sneak preview of MIIB on Tuesday night and they didn't add the T3, Star Trek:Nemesis, or LOTR: TTT trailers (instead we got XXX :mad:), so we strung them together and watched them. The TTT trailer was just a rehash of the footage from the "sneak" after FOTR. ST:Nemesis looks like a cross between the Hellraiser films and Mad Max (and before you ask, that ISN'T a compliment) and then of course, the completely lackluster T3 trailer.
The TTT trailer, I thought was really good. They did reshow some things from the sneak preview of TTT from the end of FOTR. But it did have some intresting new footage. I am looking forward to it and Harry Potter this winter. The rest can wait til they hit video, most likely. :)

Hey, no badmouthing Hellraiser. That is one of the most original horror movies of all time. Also one of my Top 5 horror movies, along with Hellraiser 2 and both Re-Animator films. But I agree, that one bald headed guy looked like a cross between pinhead and Scorpious. And no, that isn't a compliment either. :p :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Eternal Padawan
07-05-2002, 03:06 AM
I didn't say Hellraiser was bad, I was inferring/insinuating that Cenobites in a Star Trek film is :p BLEH...

Every time I watch a Hellraiser movie, I cringe when some poor shmuck is about to open the box. I want to scream at the TV "Don't open it! haven't you seen the other Hellraiser movies?" I haven't seen the last one (Inferno?) but I didn't like how they seemed to be making Pinhead a more sympathetic character as the series progressed. What's the reason behind psychoanalyzing bogeymen and rationalizing their actions with a tragic history? Just let Freddy and Jason and Mike Myers and Pinhead carve people up for pete's sake.

Beast
07-05-2002, 03:15 AM
Avoid Inferno at all costs. It's not even really a Hellraiser film in my opinion. It's more like the movie Bad Lieutenant with a touch of Hellraiser mixed in. Pinhead in it for like 5 minutes tops, and he's no longer as evil as he was in the previous 4 movies. He's more like the "Crypt Keeper" in this one.

I wish they would release a S.E. of Hellraiser III and restore all the stuff that Dimension cut from Hellraiser IV. They ruined that movie, with all the cutting they did, after taking it away from the director. The next one sounds really good though. They are getting back to the roots of Hellraiser. And Kirsty Cotten will finally return, they were also going to bring back Tiffany from Hellraiser II, but I think she decided to opt out. :(

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

2-1B
07-05-2002, 03:20 AM
Binksy, Wal-Mart has Hellraisers Inferno and Bloodline DVD 2packs for 14.96 :) I opened that time travel link, but closed it immediately . . . I fear my head may explode if I read it tonight. :D

I really enjoyed reading through these time travel posts.

EP, I (think :D I ) understand most of your ideas, what with a cyclical cycle :eek: and all . . . but within just the Terminator films, how could Reese fight for his son John Connor before Reese fathered him?

It's almost as if the future happened FIRST - imagine ourselves in that situation. I have a pretty close friend at work. I've met his mother and father, they obviously exist for him to exist. If I were to travel back in time and impregnate his mother, leading to his birth, what happens to his dad? Well, I'm his dad. Only he doesn't look like me, we share no genetic history.

Oh, but if I DID go back in time and hook up with his mom, then he WILL share my genetic history. So what happens to his original father? Lost in an alternate timeline, never to get together with my friend's mom . . . but then the friend I knew before going back in time is not the same friend I'll have after I do my time travel.

Jeez, why can't the T3 teaser be as provacative as this thread ? :rolleyes: :D

Beast
07-05-2002, 03:27 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
Binksy, Wal-Mart has Hellraisers Inferno and Bloodline DVD 2packs for 14.96 :)
I know, I have been tempted to pick them up. But as I said above, Inferno sucks on toast and Bloodline was horrible mutilated and cut by the studio prior to release. And Hellraiser III isn't even on DVD here in the states, and the Canadian version is Pan and Scam. :mad: :(

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

2-1B
07-05-2002, 03:30 AM
Did Armored Saint manage to stay within frame on the P&S version? :p
Hellraiser 3 was alright, but clearly more commercialized than 1 and 2. Ozzy and Lemmy's title track was pretty cool. :happy:

FKA Broke Collector
07-12-2002, 11:59 PM
So let me get this straight... if I went back in time to stop SWAFMAN from starting this thread to prevent my head from exploding (which it did 3 minutes ago) time would either:

(a) split into two time lines where in one timeline my head is irrevocably exploded and in the other timeline my head is prevented from exploding but I will never be aware of the possibility of my head exploding because I didn't read this thread.

or

(b) stay in one timeline where I go back and stop SWAFMAN from beginning this thread, thereby preventing my head from exploding, but I remain ignorant to the fact that my head could explode so I never go back to prevent my head from exploding so it does.

*BOOM!!!*

Actually I had fun reading the thread. Very intriguing.

SWAFMAN
07-13-2002, 01:00 AM
FKA Broke Collector, if the theories of time travel / paradoxes in this thread made you feel like your head would explode, read Stephen Hawking's book, "The Universe in a Nutshell." I literally had to take naps after reading and processing some of his theories on time. It was total brain overload.

BTW, he has a new book that just came out in June, called, "The Theory of Everything: The Origin and Fate of the Universe." Pretty amazing since just last winter he said they still didn't have all the information necessary to develop a Unified Theory of Everything. Hmmm...

FKA Broke Collector
07-13-2002, 09:28 PM
I took some astronomy courses in college, which I thoroughly enjoyed. Since then I've actually bought a telescope and I always look up when I walk outside at night. I'm "stretching my astronomy muscle", as my professor always said. Anyway, I've never read a Hawking book but I have always wanted to since I took those courses. So you think it's worth the time and energy, eh? I'll have to make sure I have plenty of time afterwards to rest. haha.

Tycho
07-20-2002, 07:06 AM
While you're all way off topic here, I want to get back!

The Terminator films even come close to challenging the Star Wars ones as being my all-time favorites. I'm a huge Terminator fan!

That being said, I have a theory (of course).

John Conner has 2 different fathers.

He is genetically 2 different people in two different time lines.

The Conner that raised the humans in revolt and freed them from the Death Camps during the Future Wars had some father and his biological mother was Sarah Conner, who we all know from the movies.

He then literally sacrafices himself, ceasing to exist, possibly knowingly, because he sends Kyle Reese back in time to protect Sarah. Then Kyle becomes a New John Conner's father.

At one point this had to follow a linear change of events.

The alternative is that perhaps a 35-40 yr old Sarah Conner, met a barely 20 year old Kyle Reese, who somehow stayed alive (but had never had a girlfriend before??? - yet managed to have a son with her already) and both Kyle and John knew what they were doing, and how they were related to each other, when Kyle went back in time. In spite of the fact that his son, at least 15 years younger than him (we'd hope) commanded the resistance forces and Kyle was only a soldier, like he said. Yet now he gets his lifelong wish - to get back together with the woman he loves, only he gets to find her 20 years younger and that much more beautiful?

Mind you, the only thing you shouldn't pay attention to is the John with the scar running the length of his face in the beginning of T2's credits. We don't know when in the story that shot (of a much older John Conner) takes place. He obviously looks older than Kyle Reese in that shot. (Though Kyle's not in the scene anyway).

This is all so confusing!

Pendo
07-20-2002, 07:12 AM
My head hurts Tycho!!! But an interesting theory.

PENDO!

DeadEye
07-20-2002, 09:58 AM
That shot is later in the future. John in that shot is supposed to be 44 or 45 years old.

Pendo
04-16-2003, 11:29 AM
I still think T3 will be a big steaming pile of horse manure, but some bits of the new International trailer (http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/t/t3.php) look pretty cool. What do you guys think?

PENDO!

James Boba Fettfield
04-16-2003, 11:37 AM
I thought it was a great looking trailer.

BlahBlahBlah
04-16-2003, 11:41 AM
With the 2 fathers theory comes another theory involving two parties-- Skynet.

Judgement Day was in 97, right? August 97, I think. I think that if Sarah and John hadn't stopped Skynet in T2, that date could have moved up much earlier. In the beginning, Skynet was working off nothing but their own designs. Then, when they found the pieces of the first Terminator, they had something to work off of, which probably speeded up the process.

So we know Dyson was one of the lead programmers on Skynet. But who was the original? Who was the first person to come up with the idea of Skynet that eventually spawned Terminators? Was it still Dyson, or did he only come into play after they found the arm and the chip?

...did that make ANY sense to you guys?

stillakid
04-16-2003, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by BlahBlahBlah
With the 2 fathers theory comes another theory involving two parties-- Skynet.

Judgement Day was in 97, right? August 97, I think. I think that if Sarah and John hadn't stopped Skynet in T2, that date could have moved up much earlier. In the beginning, Skynet was working off nothing but their own designs. Then, when they found the pieces of the first Terminator, they had something to work off of, which probably speeded up the process.
I don't think that's correct. The goofy part of time travel is that a historical event is always going to happen. In concrete terms, Skynet more or less created itself by sending the Terminator back in time to stop John Connor from existing. But the paradox that was impossible to avoid was that if the Terminator (1 ) actually managed to succeed in that task, then the entire scenario that allowed Cyberdyne to begin it's research would never have taken place...and thus, Skynet would never become a reality. Looking at it this way, it's a logic puzzle that even a self-aware computer should have realized. But having said that, since (as far as we know) time travel has never been accomplished, there's no telling what the actual properties of it might be.

With that in mind, I think that the only way for Skynet to save itself was to battle John Connor after he was born as we saw in T2. Trying to "change history" by killing Sarah would have caused a major paradox of events that only Marty McFly could have possibly salvaged. ;)

Personally, I wish T3 was called "Judgment Day" and centered around Cyberdyne with Dyson as the star. But ego driven Aaanold and a blockbuster driven industry feel the need to ruin a good story by shoehorning that guy into every corner of the franchise. Watching the last days of R&D with Dyson, then witnessing Skynet becoming aware, and quick succession of terrible events that follow would have made a spectacular film. Instead, we get Species meets Die Hard meets Predator.

Jedi_Master_Guyute
04-16-2003, 02:34 PM
Huh!??! A movie centering around Miles Dyson and Skynet!?! Why would anybody want to see this?!?!! For one, it would take place between T1 and end towards the T2 and it's not like we wouldn't know how it ended as well. Judgement day doesn't take place until the poop hits the fan, and having a movie about Dyson sitting at his desk on a laptop learning about the machines while the audience is just counting down the minutes until he gets detonated at Cyberdyne. I dunno, i just think that would totally suck.

I have no reservations about this movie, but i do hope it's at par with T1 and T2. Only time will tell though. Cheers! :D

stillakid
04-16-2003, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by Jedi_Master_Guyute
Huh!??! A movie centering around Miles Dyson and Skynet!?! Why would anybody want to see this?!?!! For one, it would take place between T1 and end towards the T2 and it's not like we wouldn't know how it ended as well. Judgement day doesn't take place until the poop hits the fan, and having a movie about Dyson sitting at his desk on a laptop learning about the machines while the audience is just counting down the minutes until he gets detonated at Cyberdyne. I dunno, i just think that would totally suck.

I have no reservations about this movie, but i do hope it's at par with T1 and T2. Only time will tell though. Cheers! :D

Uh, I get your point, but if we're going to talk about what people are going to watch, we've already seen 2 "chase" movies with some innocent human on the run from a maniacal robot. Do we really need another? Maybe if the chick gets naked it'll be worth the time. :rolleyes:

But I suppose you're right. A "drama" would be a departure from what this franchise has established. Toss another relentless chase sequence on the barby and kick back with another tub of popcorn. :D

Jedi_Master_Guyute
04-16-2003, 02:58 PM
Hm, yeah, but it's not like these action scenes aren't there for a purpose, they all play points in the film in some way i'm sure.....the Terminator movies have violence, but it's always part of the plot, not just tossed in for giggles.

Don't get me wrong, i mean a "Terminator" movie with 2 hours of Dyson playing on his computer. Imagine the danger of Dyson beating a few levels of Minesweeper!! Ooooooooo!! Or the nail biting suspense of Dyson playing solitaire when he should be working on his projects, or the mini-climax of when he checks his e-mail!!! Phew, i'm spent!! :D

I'm sure there would be interesting parts of the film, learning about the development of Skynet and whatnot, but i just think that would be horrible idea for the series. If you want drama, you can borrow my mom's copy of "Fried Green Tomatoes." Cheers!! :D

stillakid
04-16-2003, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by Jedi_Master_Guyute
Hm, yeah, but it's not like these action scenes aren't there for a purpose, they all play points in the film in some way i'm sure.....the Terminator movies have violence, but it's always part of the plot, not just tossed in for giggles.

Don't get me wrong, i mean a "Terminator" movie with 2 hours of Dyson playing on his computer. Imagine the danger of Dyson beating a few levels of Minesweeper!! Ooooooooo!! Or the nail biting suspense of Dyson playing solitaire when he should be working on his projects, or the mini-climax of when he checks his e-mail!!! Phew, i'm spent!! :D

I'm sure there would be interesting parts of the film, learning about the development of Skynet and whatnot, but i just think that would be horrible idea for the series. If you want drama, you can borrow my mom's copy of "Fried Green Tomatoes." Cheers!! :D

:D I get your point, however methinks a talented screenwriter would get more up on the wall than two hours of Minesweeper. Granted, it wouldn't be anywhere close to being the Arnold Action-Figure Star Vehicle that the first two are, but there is plenty of solid dramatic appeal and intelligent, suspenseful storytelling available for a "Skynet" tale. Though I haven't thought the whole thing through, clearly the build-up to "awareness-day" would only encompass the first 20 to 30 minutes or so. Then all hell would break loose. Imagine "Wargames", only the computer doesn't stop to play Tic-Tac-Toe. It really happens. Tell me that you're going to go grab another box of Milk Duds while that "boring" sequence is happening. ;)

The aftermath would be equally fascinating. We've been "told" that after Skynet attacks, the machines rise up to battle the humans who are left. Seeing the details of how that actually occurs would more than adequately draw in a lucrative box office return.

Anakin2121
04-16-2003, 07:36 PM
At first, some thought that the death of Dyson and blowing up the Cyberdine building's second floor would have stopped the war.
Of course it didn't because we have a third movie. :p
But, really, though, I know someone who's a moderator on the Terminator 3 forums and has a small amount of inside information.
He broke it down for me like this:


SPOILERS





If the death of Miles Dyson and blowing up all those computers in the building would prevent the war (which Sarah hoped), the machines would've never been made. Were that the case, then Ah-nuld and the T-1000 would have vanished the second the building was blown!
Apparently, there were plenty of backup files and data. :)

JediTricks
04-16-2003, 08:18 PM
They've been playing the ads for this movie a lot the past few days and Arnie looks really old and tiny here.

stillakid
04-16-2003, 10:00 PM
I await with guarded anticipation. That Cameron wanted nothing to do with this one should tell us something. The first was a great old fashioned horror movie. The second was a stellar sophomore follow-up that took the time to give us a story and well-drawn characters to go along with the frantic plot. The third? Well, it offers us a hot chick and an aging action hero.

odb
04-17-2003, 03:41 PM
To use that now rather cliched phrase, 'I've got a bad feeling about this'

I've just watched the trailer and all I can say is that it seems to be following the typical sequel trend of bigger must be better. The sucessful sequels, both commercially and critically have always twisted the originals concept (After ANH ESB went all dark and the rebels lost, Alien/Aliens Cameroon changed the format from being chased by one alien to a whole horde, etc). Following the same ideas means the film and franchise quickly stagnates.

I think Cameroon's gone on record saying that he doesn't expect much of the film and expects most of his work from the second one to go to waste.

Besides which the only rise of the machines seems to the wheelchair and stanna stair lift for the aging Arnie, who looks terrible. For all we know it could be an actor with a mask on:confused:

James Boba Fettfield
04-17-2003, 05:35 PM
James Cameron was responsible for Dark Angel. Dark Angel wasn't too great of a television show.
So as far as I am concerned, having Cameron not want to be involved with this is a good thing.

stillakid
04-17-2003, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by James Boba Fettfield
James Cameron was responsible for Dark Angel. Dark Angel wasn't too great of a television show.
So as far as I am concerned, having Cameron not want to be involved with this is a good thing.

You're right. We should all just ignore everything else he's done ( Titanic, Strange Days, True Lies, T2, The Abyss, Aliens, Terminator) and base our evaluation on a relatively popular show.


http://www.darkangel.ascifi.net/custom.html

Nielsen Ratings for Dark Angel
This information was found on the Dark Angel Genetics Barcode Website. To see the ratings of Dark Angel's nightly competition, go to our link page and check out Dox's site for that added information.

I would also like to that the Futon Critic for the Chart and article links. Check out the rest of his site, there is a lot of great info on Dark Angel and any other TV show you can think of on air now.

A little bit on the Nielson system...
A ratings point represents 1,022,000 households, or 1 percent of the nation's estimated 102.2 million TV homes. The share is the percentage of turned-on TVs tuned to a particular show.

Episodes - Ratings/Share
Pilot Part One ----------------- 11.2/17

Pilot Part Two ----------------- 11.2/17

Heat -------------------------------- 9.0/14

Flushed --------------------------- 8.7/13

C.R.E.A.M. ---------------------- 6.9/11

411 on the DL ------------------ 7.1/10

Prodigy --------------------------- 6.9/10

Cold Comfort ------------------- 7.7/11

Blah, Blah, Woof, Woof ---- 6.7/10

Out --------------------------------- 6.9/10

Red --------------------------------- 6.8/10

Art Attack ------------------------ 7.1/11

Rising ------------------------------ 7.0/11

The Kidz are Aiight ----------- 6.6/10

Female Trouble ---------------- 6.7/10

Haven------------------------------- 6.9/10

Shorties in Love-------------------6.4/9

Pollo Loco--------------------------6.7/10

I am and I am a Camera-------6.5/10



A graph showing the ratings for every week since the show premiered: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/cgi/gofuton.cgi?action=tracker&sort=national&id=dark_angel

My interpretation of the ratings...
The show started out great, but then again, other then the dabates, it was the only thing on Network TV to watch. Impressive, but still, not.

It kept a lot of the viewers for the next two eps, but lost a lot of people with C.R.E.A.M. It picked up a few more with 411 on the DL and then suprisingly picked up more with Prodigy. It yo-yo'ed a bit, going up with Cold Comfort but then dropping for BBWW.

The show came back after a while with more viewers. Thank God. But then dropped again for Red. During the infamous April Sweeps the show started great at 7.1, but then went down steadily to 6.6 with the Kidz are Aiight. Now, it's picking up again.

Translation, 11+ million tuned in for the pilot, but now, only 7+ million are watching. That's a loss of 4 million viewers. And in stead of picking up more viewers for sweeps, we stayed the same.

What does it all mean? Well, the show is doing good, but it's not picking up any new viewers. It's not growing, even with the eps getting better and better every week.

Why? Well, we all have our opinions. Mine is that the show doesn't have enough advertisement, and, it keeps getting pre-emted. Meaning anyone who hears about it and tunes in to check it out finds some other show on. This is death to any other show, and I fear DA will not be an exception.

James Boba Fettfield
04-17-2003, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
You're right. We should all just ignore everything else he's done ( Titanic, Strange Days, True Lies, T2, The Abyss, Aliens, Terminator) and base our evaluation on a relatively popular show.

If that's how I want to look at, I will. I liked what he did with Aliens and Terminator, but not his other works. Someone else might like what he did with all of his films. I just don't place as much confidence in the man as other people do. It's my opinion, I never demanded everyone else to see it how I see it.

tagmac
04-19-2003, 08:55 PM
Personally, I had hoped that T3 would have simply been about the War against the Machines, ending with Skynet sending the T-800 & T-1000 through time, followed by John Connor sending Reese and the T-800 back in time. It would have made the perfect link between the two movies, with sort of a "prequel" effect. Unfortuantely, it's obvious from the trailers that this isn't the case.

Pendo
04-20-2003, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by tagmac
Personally, I had hoped that T3 would have simply been about the War against the Machines, ending with Skynet sending the T-800 & T-1000 through time, followed by John Connor sending Reese and the T-800 back in time. It would have made the perfect link between the two movies, with sort of a "prequel" effect. Unfortuantely, it's obvious from the trailers that this isn't the case.

There is going to be a Terminator 4 which will follow on immediatly from T3, which will probably be about the war. I heard that the war begins at the end of T3.

PENDO!

Pendo
04-20-2003, 08:28 AM
The International Release Dates (http://www.sonypictures.com/intl/t3/) are up on the official site. I'm surprised that the UK only get it on 1st August, I would have expected it to be one of the first countries to get it :(.

PENDO!

mm74md
05-06-2003, 10:04 AM
Looks like a good Saturday night rental to me. I will NOT spend $20 to see this on the big screen!

mrmiller
05-06-2003, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by mm74md
Looks like a good Saturday night rental to me. I will NOT spend $20 to see this on the big screen!

My god bro- where do you live! $20 for a move ticket?!

I'm going to check it out at the theater. I may see it in prime time, about $8, or at the early show, about $5, but I'll see it at the theater. I'm hoping its a good movie. It doesn't have to be great, but at least enjoyable.

BTW- Dark Angle rules!

=MATT=

tagmac
05-06-2003, 06:23 PM
Well, from the trailers, it looks to me like T3 will be the same storyline as T2, only with John Conner a little older. I'll still see it, but I don't like it one bit.


Originally posted by stillakid
You're right. We should all just ignore everything else he's done ( Titanic, Strange Days, True Lies, T2, The Abyss, Aliens, Terminator) and base our evaluation on a relatively popular show.

Titanic was a good movie, but don't let the numbers fool you. It wasn't THAT good. Those numbers were inflated by all those little teeny-bopper girls who saw the movie 20 times each, because they thought the love story really happened. Cameron reaped the benefits, but I don't think the movie ranks with his other big hits, all of which were Sci-Fi. And he killed that with Dark Angel, so I agree - the fact that he has nothing to do with T3 doesn't bug me at all.

derek
05-06-2003, 06:29 PM
My god bro- where do you live! $20 for a move ticket?!

ticket..............$8.oo

large diet coke with very little ice......$4.oo

jumbo popcorn smothered in butter............$4.oo

jumbo bag of twizzlers.............$4.oo

watching terminator 3 suck...............priceless!:crazed:

see............it's easy to drop $20 on a movie. ;)

DarthChuckMc
05-06-2003, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by derek

large diet coke with very little ice......$4.oo

jumbo popcorn smothered in butter............$4.oo


That's the funniest thing I've seen this week.....

mrmiller
05-06-2003, 08:34 PM
I' not saying that you can't spend $20, I'm just saying you don't have too spend $20. BTW, I love your post derek- that post is priceless.

=MATT=

stillakid
05-07-2003, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by tagmac



Titanic was a good movie, but don't let the numbers fool you. It wasn't THAT good. Those numbers were inflated by all those little teeny-bopper girls who saw the movie 20 times each, because they thought the love story really happened. Cameron reaped the benefits, but I don't think the movie ranks with his other big hits, all of which were Sci-Fi. And he killed that with Dark Angel, so I agree - the fact that he has nothing to do with T3 doesn't bug me at all.

For some strange reason, you've assumed that I based my comment upon the numbers (box office, tickets sold, awards won). On the contrary, Cameron has been at the forefront of technical innovation since his earliest days making films for guys like Roger Corman. Since you want to discuss TITANIC, that film broke ground that only a few filmmakers are capable of. Technical prowess aside, Cameron has also proved his story telling capabilities as being topnotch despite the "masculine" opinion of the love stories he tells.

Pendo
05-16-2003, 12:20 PM
Has anyone checked out the new Domestic Trailer for T3? There are some good looking scenes in there, and also some not so good looking ones :(.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/t3/domestictrailer/

PENDO!

Beast
05-16-2003, 01:39 PM
I saw the new trailer with Matrix: Reloaded yesterday. It looks really good to me, and I enjoyed the trailer more then I did M2. :p :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

mrmiller
05-16-2003, 02:18 PM
Not to go back and beat the Cameron/Titanic thing to death, but a movie doesn't make a Billion dollars and win several acadamy awards being "not that good". Don't fool yourself, it is a very good movie. It might not be the greatest film ever, but it is a very good movie that will be a classic that people 40 years from now will watch and enjoy like Gone With The Wind, The Ten Commandments, and others. It's OK to say you like it.

=MATT=

scruffziller
05-16-2003, 02:37 PM
Man I don't care what people say, everything about T3 looks great. With Aanold being older and haggard, it gives charachter to the "older" Termy model. You feel his obsoleteness. The "deskinned" new terminator model looks real cool. I especially like that scene where Aanold is carrying that casket on his shoulder and shooting. I wonder what that is all about?

James Boba Fettfield
05-16-2003, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by scruffziller
I especially like that scene where Aanold is carrying that casket on his shoulder and shooting. I wonder what that is all about?

If you don't want to know the answer to that question, stop reading right now.









There was a pic posted online where it shows the inside of the coffin. It was full of weapons.

http://www.fortunecity.es/paralelas/guerra/172/arnold/terminator/not4g.jpg

Beast
06-09-2003, 03:37 AM
Nobody's posted here in a bit, but take a look of the spoiler filled photo from T3. Don't look if you don't want to be spoiled, but let's just say that this is one awesome looking Terminator image. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Pendo
06-09-2003, 04:00 AM
That looks cool JJB :D. I bet that hurt :stupid:!

I'm still hoping there's a chance this movie will be good...

PENDO!

Beast
06-09-2003, 04:05 AM
I hope so also, I'm starting to feel a good vibe for the movie. Hopefully it will be better then the other sequel to follow a Cameron blockbuster. Aka - Alien 3. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Pendo
06-14-2003, 09:37 AM
T3 has been getting some good reviews over at AICN.

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=15455

I just hope the people who wirtten them are movie buffs, and not just action buffs!

PENDO!

James Boba Fettfield
06-14-2003, 10:41 AM
Movie buffs or not, I've read amazing reviews for a lot of "classics" and when I watch them I don't enjoy much of the movie. I'll have an idea if I want to own T3 when I see it in July.

Pendo
06-29-2003, 09:52 AM
Here's some negative reviews on T3, and these are the first reviews I've found that don't centre on the action:

http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/t030627a.htm#Rev2

http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/t030627a.htm#Rev3

PENDO!

The Overlord Returns
07-01-2003, 10:56 AM
Not to go back and beat the Cameron/Titanic thing to death, but a movie doesn't make a Billion dollars and win several acadamy awards being "not that good". Don't fool yourself, it is a very good movie. It might not be the greatest film ever, but it is a very good movie that will be a classic that people 40 years from now will watch and enjoy like Gone With The Wind, The Ten Commandments, and others. It's OK to say you like it.

=MATT=

Man, this post was so funny I just spewed coffee all over my monitor!!!!


BWAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!! Titanic.....good......aw damn that was good for a laugh....thanks mrmiller.

OC47150
07-02-2003, 09:22 AM
My buddy and I went to a sneak preview last night of T3 and it rocks! The best movie I'd seen all summer.

The writers introduced concepts that I hadn't thought of and made it fresh and original.

The car chase in T3 beats the Matrix car chase hands down.

P.S. -- I wasn't that impressed with Titanic.

Jayspawn
07-02-2003, 12:52 PM
A friend and I caught a sneak preview of T3 last night also, and I liked it a LOT! It was a very fun and entertaining movie. Arnold definatly still got it! The continuity to the other movies was excellent as well. I liked T2 better but this one was close. I still like the T-1000 better than TX though.

My favorite part: "Talk to the hand." I almost fell out of my seat laughing. That was perfect!

OC47150
07-02-2003, 01:56 PM
Several good catch phrases. I liked the breast enhancement scene.

Beast
07-02-2003, 03:15 PM
It was amazingly good. I was suprised. It doesn't blow away T2, which would have been a milestone. But it had a good plot, the right mixture of action and humor. And good acting. Easily blows Hulk away as best film of the Summer so far. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

OC47150
07-02-2003, 03:21 PM
I told someone at work at lunch that I've gone to too many movies this year with high expectations and came out disappointed. T3 was the one movie I was really looking forward to, and didn't set my expectations too high so I wouldn't be disappointed.

Might even see it again this weekend!

If the studio is serious about a T4, I'd do it within a year just 'cause Ah-nuld can still handle the job.

Pendo
07-02-2003, 04:10 PM
Wow, all these good reviews from you guys are starting to get me excited :).

Got to wait till next month before I can see it though. It seems the only main problem with the movie is the overdone humor, such as the Elton John glasses...

PENDO!

Beast
07-02-2003, 04:14 PM
Nah, the humor is good. And the Elton John glasses is such a minor minor thing to complain about. It's funny, since it shows that even as a cybernetic organism, he has some sense of style. The crowd I saw the movie with loved all the humorous stuff. And it's not like T2 didn't have some humor in it. :)

I was suprised how much I liked the T-X, even though I originally said that I doubted that she would be able to surpass the T-1000 for coolness. But she manages to totally kick arse. I love the intigrated weapons systems, that's the only way that she could have beat the T-1000. :)

I loved the special guest apperance by Dr. Silverman. I'd never heard that he was going to be a part of this. And it's hilarious how they introduce him. I won't give it away, but it was a highlight of the movie. Now bring on Terminator 4. Since that one should be all Future War. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

mrmiller
07-03-2003, 01:27 AM
Wow- I just saw the movie and am in shock- It was pretty good. Actually, it was very good. A nice surprise after my last outing to a major movie (ahem- Hulk). The action sequences were off the hook, and all pulled off without one "matrix-style" scene. Very impressive. A lot of humor- but in slight touches so as not to dammage the fact that this is an Action movie. It was a little light on character development and plot, but it is what it is- a Kick arse popcorn summer action flick.

=MATT=

Deoxyribonucleic
07-03-2003, 03:00 AM
Nah, the humor is good. And the Elton John glasses is such a minor minor thing to complain about. It's funny, since it shows that even as a cybernetic organism, he has some sense of style. The crowd I saw the movie with loved all the humorous stuff. And it's not like T2 didn't have some humor in it. :)

Perfectly said! :)


I was suprised how much I liked the T-X, even though I originally said that I doubted that she would be able to surpass the T-1000 for coolness. But she manages to totally kick arse. I love the intigrated weapons systems, that's the only way that she could have beat the T-1000. :)

Again, perfectly said...I'll add that her maneurisms where RIGHT ON THE STINKIN' MONEY TOO! She was a bad a*s mama jama!!

I just got home from seeing it and I'm extremely excited...this movie ROCKED! I had lowered expectations just because T2 is so damn good, but this one kept up the pace! I am truly impressed! And Arnold, yeah, I'll definitely vote for him! ;) He did, as is usual for Terminator movies, extremely well!!!

I want to go see it again NOW! I'll probably go tomorrow though as I have the day off WOOOOHOOOO! I highly advise any doubters to go check this puppy out! :) But that's just my opinion ;)

EDIT: This movie gets a JACK RABBIT and Two Thumbs Up from me.

Pendo
07-03-2003, 04:16 AM
I heard T3 was Rated R over there? Is this true? If so I'm quite surprised as it only got a 12A here. It's usualy the crappy BBFC that are mean on ratings :rolleyes:.

I'm pretty dissapointed that it got a 12A to be honest, I think a 15 would have been better. Now there will be loads of screaming little brats there when I go and see it :mad:!

PENDO!

Tycho
07-03-2003, 05:21 AM
T3 was awesome!

I am a huge Terminator fan and I even collect the McFarlane action figures (and now I'm glad I bought some extras!)

"You just reminded me of my mother!" was hilarious. In other parts, the final fate of Sarah Conner was heartbreaking. To lose THAT battle. I know... I recently lost my mom and between my heroes, Anakin Skywalker, Bruce Banner, and John Conner, it's getting to be a bit of painful repetition.

Seeing Skynet's birth was awesome.

There are some things: I thought this film would be more "future wars," but we did see how the earliest machines were "born."

I kept waiting for the "Termamatrix" to say "Resistance is Futile" and she looked a bit like Jeri Ryan's Seven of Nine. That being said, Star Trek Voyager could make an awesome version of the Terminator in the 24th Century...

I thought the ending was a surprise, though in a way, I must admit to seeing it coming. It was a logical place for where the story would go. It was not a climactic of ending as I'd expected, and the goodbye was no where near the tear-jerker of Terminator 2 (still my favorite Terminator movie) - but it felt as if there could've - should've, been more. I guess there will be with a sequel, anyway.

It provokes new questions, too: like why did his girl have the machine kill John in the future?

What's up with their kids? It was mentioned several times.

And a question I asked Arnold Schwartzeneggar himself, last year at Comic Con:

1) Sarah Conner was at least 18 years old before Kyle Reese was born.
2) Kyle Reese didn't see the nuclear war. He grew up afterward.
3) He meets an adult John Conner who sends him back through time.
4) Kyle ends up becoming John Conner's father at a time when he wasn't even born.

How the heck does this work? Is John Conner wiped out from existence and a new John Conner (Kyle Reese and Sarah's) born of different DNA than the original?

ARNOLD said the movies would finally explain it, but he couldn't tell us.

T3 is not the movie that explains it. That much is certain.

But Arnold is still my hero! What a stud! He did do a great job, and acted well, especially in the scene when his programming was in conflict.
I wished he had "Uncle Bob's" memories and friendship with John, but he started developing the same kind of honor that Uncle Bob had in T2, if not a different sense of humor.

"Talk to the hand" was funny, and just so unexpected. The humor was fun. But the film carried a lighter sense to it than T2 did.

But I'm going back to see it again!

Deoxyribonucleic
07-03-2003, 05:26 AM
I heard T3 was Rated R over there? Is this true? If so I'm quite surprised as it only got a 12A here. It's usualy the crappy BBFC that are mean on ratings :rolleyes:.

I'm pretty dissapointed that it got a 12A to be honest, I think a 15 would have been better. Now there will be loads of screaming little brats there when I go and see it :mad:!

PENDO!

Yes Pendo you are correct, it does have an "R" rating here, I'm sure due to the violence and language...this Terminator movie has more than both Terminator and T2 put together. LOL

So what does 12A mean, can be compared to a PG-13 here??

If you fly over here, you can come with me, we'll go at midnight when all the litt'l uns are asleep ;)

Can't wait to hear what you think of it though :)

Deoxyribonucleic
07-03-2003, 05:37 AM
CAUTION: SPOILERS BELOW!



































It provokes new questions, too: like why did his girl have the machine kill John in the future?



What I gathered from that scene was that "the machines" found the weakness in John, that he became emotionally attached to the former T-800, and exploited it by sending yet another one to "pretend" he was John's old buddy, so that it could infiltrate and murder him and it was "his" woman that captured and reprogrammed it to come back in time and try to save "everything" again, after murdering John.

Beast
07-03-2003, 11:47 AM
And a question I asked Arnold Schwartzeneggar himself, last year at Comic Con:

1) Sarah Conner was at least 18 years old before Kyle Reese was born.
2) Kyle Reese didn't see the nuclear war. He grew up afterward.
3) He meets an adult John Conner who sends him back through time.
4) Kyle ends up becoming John Conner's father at a time when he wasn't even born.

How the heck does this work? Is John Conner wiped out from existence and a new John Conner (Kyle Reese and Sarah's) born of different DNA than the original?
Time Travel in the Terminator universe isn't exactly like Back to the Future. The timeline always had Kyle Reese going back and fathering John Conner. That's why Sarah left the audio cassette message for him in the first film. About the decision to send Kyle back must be made, or he can never be. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Pendo
07-03-2003, 12:02 PM
So what does 12A mean, can be compared to a PG-13 here??

Yes it's like PG-13, any children under the age of 12 have to be accompanied by an adult. It's a fairly new rating as we originally just had a 12 rating which meant no children under 12 could see the movie, but after Spider-Man was issued a 12 parents werent happy that their children couldn't see it, so the 12A certificate was introduced :).

PENDO!

mrmiller
07-03-2003, 01:28 PM
*Spoiler Alert* Actually the whole thread is now a spoiler, but anyhow…

I too would have liked to see more future Wars stuff, and was expecting to see it. They also missed on a great opportunity to throw some in. At the scene where the T350 was reprogrammed by TX to terminate John, and he was struggling and beating up the car, then went into the shut down mode, or trance. They should have had a flashback scene where we see the T350 on his mission to assassinate John in the future. And show that sequence where the T3 finds John and terminates him. Then the director could have reasoned that after viewing this “memory” the T350 has already completed his mission that the T-X has programmed him with. Then again, I guess that might open up the door that he has failed his mission to protect John too. I just though it would have been a cool scene.

=MATT=

Tycho
07-03-2003, 03:03 PM
Time Travel in the Terminator universe isn't exactly like Back to the Future. The timeline always had Kyle Reese going back and fathering John Conner. That's why Sarah left the audio cassette message for him in the first film. About the decision to send Kyle back must be made, or he can never be. :)


You don't answer the question that way. The only thing it could be is a "Star Trek time paradox."

How could John ever have existed in the first place?

OK, a 30-something Sarah Conner gets together with a teenage Kyle Reese after the nuclear holocaust, their son is named John, and he unites the Resistance at some later date than "The Day After."

Skynet decides to assasinate Sarah back in the 80's, and sends the T-800, while John sends his father, who's somehow younger after time travel.

Kyle fathers John BEFORE the nuclear holocaust. TIME IS CHANGED. (No fate but what we make)

Skynet sends the T-1000 into the 90's to hit John while he's a teenager. John sends the T-101, "Uncle Bob." The T-101 wins with Sarah's help, and John develops an "affection" for his father-figure-Terminator.

Miles Dystrome quits Cyberdine, and what? The military goes on with the research, or funds the program again? Sarah dies from lieukemia and Judgement Day happens anyway.

John leads humanity in the future wars and takes a wife and has children.

Skynet develops some guile and they capture the Terminator to be like Uncle Bob, but it is secretly programmed to its core to eventually kill John.

John's wife re-reprograms this new killing T-101, and sends it back in time to protect her and John, whereby it gets them both to safety during Judgement Day, and John unites humanity far earlier than in any previous timeline.

Now time's changed again and he's united a stronger resistance "The Day Of." Perhaps they gain twofold then - preserving their family and recruiting a larger Resistance?

OK, well I used SOME movie facts but made a lot of that up. The movies need to set this thing straight, and so far, no official cannon has done that.

The actor playing John did look an awful lot like Kyle Reese though. It was hard to see Ed Furlong in him. His hair was the biggest thing wrong.

The new cast change is the hardest part. And what's up with Furlong these days anyway? Isn't he old enough to come back and play the part?

Dr Zoltar
07-03-2003, 07:29 PM
Tycho,

I think Ed wasn't welcomed back because they didn't like his acting. Or that's what some website listed as the reason.

I too was pleasantly surprised by the movie. I quite liked it and felt it fit in rather nicely with the franchise. I'm guessing that some people didn't like it because it didn't have a happy ending. But the movie made sense.

The TX was very nice. I didn't think I'd care for her, but I think I prefer her to the T-1000. I loved the mobile phone call at the beginning. It showed that the TX was intelligent and knew the quickest way to gaining information.

I hope T4 is made...

Pendo
07-03-2003, 09:21 PM
I think Ed wasn't welcomed back because they didn't like his acting. Or that's what some website listed as the reason.

I've heard that it was because of his criminal record and his drug abuse. The filmmakers decided they didn't want to bring all that trouble to the movie franchise.

PENDO!

derek
07-03-2003, 09:26 PM
i've read that edward furlong has has some recent drug and legal troubles and that scarred the producers away from using him.

now the important question...............what is arnold's terminator called? i thought it was a T-800 in the first two films and a T-850 for the 3rd film, but now i've seen it referred to as a T-101? :confused:

i really hope they make a 4th film, as this one was good, and i really didn't think it would be..............i really hope the next movie is set in the future with good and bad T-800's, the T-X, and even the T-1000 in the film..........i'd really love to see robert patrick in the next one.:)

as for reese being john conner's father, is it possible that reese wasn't originally his father? but by reese coming back and meeting sara he changed everything?

........and i got a very pre-destination feel from this film, like despite what kyle, sara and john think, the future really is set.

Beast
07-03-2003, 09:37 PM
That particular terminator is a T-850. But the model for the human apperance is 101. Remeber, in T2 it was mentioned also. "Cyberdyne systems model 101." The 101 refers to what human apperance is used. :)

And the timeline was always set for Reese to be the father. Remeber that Sarah would have died sometime between 1994 and 1997 of Leiukemia, long before the Nuclear War. So she never would have met Kyle Reese after the war anyway.

The events that play out in the first movie, were always meant to happen. Just because John exists in the future already, doesn't mean that Kyle never had to go back. That's why Sarah warns him in the Message to John she records in the first Terminator. That he has to send Kyle back, or he'll never exist. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Tycho
07-03-2003, 10:34 PM
JarJar, I still don't get it.

You'll have to very basic, and take it step 1 through step...(?) if I'm going to understand what you think you just explained.

Beast
07-03-2003, 10:49 PM
Ok, time travel in the Terminator Universe causes the timeline to always be influx. Everything happens at the same exact moment, and only altering somthing in the past, would ripple forward to change the future.

John Conner exists due to Kyle Reese going back into the past to protect Sarah Conner from the Terminator. But because that chain of events was always meant to occur, John Conner was already alive in the future to send him.

Now, if John ignored Sarah's message to send Kyle back then he would have altered the pre-destined timeline to cause his own birth to never have occured. Even though technically, he wouldn't exist to make that choice.

But altering the timeline from the point of divergance, doesn't effect anything that's already happened. That's why John doesn't pop out of existance, once Skynet future doesn't play out exactly as it originally did. It's one of those ultra confusing things about Time Travel movies. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Tycho
07-03-2003, 11:10 PM
That still doesn't make sense.

Then there is a permanent time loop there, and it is the end of linear history: the 40 years or so surrounding Judgement Day and everything from Sarah Conner's birth to John sending Kyle back in time. It's the end of linear history, period.

Then the events of each Terminator movie must continuously repeat themselves and there's no progression out of it.

Even Skynet doesn't know what it's doing with time travel.

stillakid
07-03-2003, 11:29 PM
Ok, time travel in the Terminator Universe causes the timeline to always be influx. Everything happens at the same exact moment, and only altering somthing in the past, would ripple forward to change the future.

If I'm not mistaken, this very topic of discussion was to be at the core of the James Cameron version of T3. From what I've heard, what we would have seen would have been the "ripple" effect altering the future wherein Skynet would have to recalculate new strategies for dealing with John Connor in the past. Unfortunately, we weren't treated to another episode from Cameron so we'll never really get to the bottom of this conundrum, I fear.

The entire issue of time travel has always been a very confusing one, both in literature and in theoretical science. But the "best" way to explain a way out of those endless loops you describe, Tycho, has been, for example, the way Doc illustrates it in Back To the Future II. Whenever a change is made, there is an alternate thread of time created which plays out the new ramifications and string of events. The original timeline still exists and continues through without pause.

There is a pretty good book called "TIMESCAPE" http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue122/classic.html which confronts the problem head on. A scientist finds a way to send a message back in time to avert an ecological disaster. In the past, another scientist finds and decodes the message and then works to avert disaster, which he does successfully. However, the first scientist, in the future, continues in his own world which continues on a path to destruction. There is no "ripple" or anything that dramatically alters the universe around him once the scientist in the past "fixes" the problem.

Tycho
07-03-2003, 11:43 PM
Fine. I understand and appreciate all of that. It still does not explain The Terminator movies.

Jedi Clint
07-04-2003, 03:53 AM
Tycho,

A friend and I discussed this recently. We think that originally John had a different father. When Kyle came back and became the father of Sarah's son, the man known as John in their future changed. Kyle wouldn't know anything had changed. It was the easist pill we found to swallow.

Anyone watch the deleted scenes from the fist Terminator? I loved that the place where Sarah smashed the Term was actually Cyberdine. I think they were always supposed to build the molecular memory they found. Who's to say that the day after the events of the Terminator, some scientist working for Cyberdine wouldn't have conceived the concept in it's entirety?

The phrase "I've gone crosseyed." seems to apply here. ;)

I really can't wait for my opportunity to see T3!

derek
07-04-2003, 09:14 AM
i've always thought someone other than kyle reese was john's father as well.

remember in the first film, sara gets stood up by some guy and decides to go to a movie by herself........well who's to say that guy didn't get her pregnant.....and she didn't even know it yet?(or maybe she did.....she did tell her co-worker she was "late".....and we always thought she was referring to being late for work....but maybe not) if she had been with that guy a week earlier, and then slept with reese the next day, how would she know who the father was?

for kyle reese to be john conner's original father just wouldn't make any sence. john conner is obvioulsy older than reese in the future, and wouldn't reese know he had fathered sara's son?

i vote for john conner having a father other than kyle reese, or reese altered things by coming back in time and fathering john instead of someone else, but, regardless of who the father is, sara conner was going to have a son who would lead the revolution.

Lman316
07-04-2003, 11:26 AM
Tycho, I think I might be able to better explain this to you, because you're a Star Trek fan (you had brought up a Star Trek time paradox before).
It was in an episode of Voyager. The crew was messing around with Slipstream technology (I think), but they couldn't get it to fully work because there were problems in the slipstream. So Harry Kim comes up with an idea to pilot a shuttle just in front of Voyager, sending back coordinates to help the ship avoid the problems. The only thing is that Harry Kim sends back the wrong coordinates, causing Voyager to prematurely exit from the slipstream and end up crashing on an ice planet in the Alpha Quadrant...
Anyway, the only two survivors are Chekotay and Kim. And they spend the next few years (I can't remember the precise amount of time) trying to fix the error they made in the past. They go back to the ship, reactivate the doctor and steal a Borg implant from Seven.
So, again, anyway, with the doctor's help and the implant from Seven, they're able to send a message back through time to Seven of Nine. They try different coordinates first, but that doesn't work. So finally Kim thinks of the idea to get them completely out of the slipstream. That works just as the future Kim and Chekotay's warp core explodes.
At the very end, the Captain walks up to Harry and informs him he has a message. It's from himself, in the future. Kim then gets confused about time paradoxes and says something like: "If I sent this message back to myself - telling me to pull out of the slipstream - it caused me to alter time and change the course of things so Voyager was never in that situation. So how could I have existed in that future to send the message back to myself?"
So, even though the future Harry Kim never could have really existed, he still did. And he was still able to send a message back to his past self.
But, a piece of advice. Something Janeway said to Harry when he finished asking that question: "My advice when dealing with time paradoxes is... don't." Just relax and enjoy the movie :D.

(I'll save my review of the movie for a later time - I have a lot to say about it, but adding all that to this would be too much).

Hope it helps, Tycho.

End...

Tycho
07-04-2003, 02:24 PM
Thanks to the last 3 posters.

I've always believed what JediClint and Derek had posted, that John had a different father originally, and Sarah was the one common denominator in the whole thing - it would make sense for her to be the Terminator's first and foremost target then. She was the natural choice.

Meanwhile, LMan, Capatain Janeway always had a comforting way of explaining the strangest stuff. An intelligent lady no doubt! I know the exact episode you speak of. And they used 7of9's transceiver to cross a message through different time strands - sort of exactly what they explained in Back to the Future, however, there Doc was explaining to Marty that they themselves were continuing their lives along new paths in other realities, such as the one Biff created when he stole the Delorean.

That would help explain what Kyle did by following John's orders and becoming the father of John (he couldn't have been originally, like JediClint and Derek said).

So what I figure is that the original John knew he took that chance, but it was exactly why Kyle was the right one to send - because for whatever reason, he was already in love with Sarah Conner, her picture, or whatever turned him on.

Sarah herself said it best when she was recording her message tapes to John: "a person could go crazy trying to figure out this stuff."

2-1B
07-05-2003, 01:19 AM
I had great fun watching this movie today! :)
I just reread this ENTIRE thread and I sure was skeptical last year :D but I was really pleasantly surprised when I saw it. I certainly wasn't expecting T3 to be as good as the original or even T2 . . . but it was much better than I anticipated.

I thought Nick Stahl was awesome as John and I'm glad they used him over Furlong. Claire Danes was pretty cool, I wouldn't have ever thought of her as an action hero. Arnold looked WAY better than I thought he would. TX . . . wow, I thought it was very well done.

I dunno, I just read a negative review which said the movie was too jokey but I cringed during the TX execution scenes of the drive thru worker and the party kid. :cry: Those two sequences reminded me of the first Terminator movie. :cry:

Overall, I love The Terminator and T2 so much because they are so different. The only bad thing I will say about T3 is that it sometimes feels TOO much like T2. It did feel like a retread at several points. However, there were plenty of other nice moments where it had it's own feel (Nick Stahl's acting, the whole future reference to John's death, the sad ending) which allowed me to really enjoy the movie.

Jedi Clint
07-06-2003, 04:47 AM
That was fun! I loved the story. If fit in well with the Terminator saga and IMO it also enhanced the entire story. It even left some intrigue for another sequel, although it would make a nice ending for the saga as well.

I wonder exactly what happened when they put Skynet online. Perhaps it was infected with the virus?

I don't think John has to die at the hands of that T-101 in the future. Now that they know an attempt will be made, they can simply capture the Terminator and send him back with the same instructions?

Anakin2121
07-06-2003, 10:19 AM
I wonder exactly what happened when they put Skynet online. Perhaps it was infected with the virus?

I thought they said that Skynet was the virus.
And yeah, John might not be killed by the T-850 because he'll know about it now.
Now, even in the first movie, Reese said the humans had won. They'd smashed the machines' defense grid, so the machines decided to send the Terminator back to kill Sarah as a last resort. I wonder how different the Future War will be, now that John has had experiences with four different Terminator models before the war even started. Maybe that will balance out the fact that the T-X killed several of his future lieutenants.

I still loved the movie. :D

Lord Malakite
07-06-2003, 10:36 AM
You know what I wouldn't mind seeing happen in a final Terminator movie if they ever declare one. I would like to see Skynet (upon being completely trashed) transfer its consciousness into a prototype T model, and thus become the final Terminator. As an ironic twist of fate, Skynet could model itself to resemble its enemy, John Connor himself.

Lman316
07-06-2003, 11:28 AM
I honestly must be the only person who didn't like this movie.
I went in hoping that it wasn't going to be bad, just wanting it to be good, and it just didn't turn out to be.

I have decided against going into more detail here. I'd rather not start an argument (as it seems that most of my posts do just that), so I'll leave it as a thumbs down.

End...

stillakid
07-06-2003, 02:56 PM
You know what I wouldn't mind seeing happen in a final Terminator movie if they ever declare one. I would like to see Skynet (upon being completely trashed) transfer its consciousness into a prototype T model, and thus become the final Terminator. As an ironic twist of fate, Skynet could model itself to resemble its enemy, John Connor himself.

I haven't had the chance to see the film yet, but wouldn't Skynet's only option be to destroy the time machine? It sent a Terminator back originally to destroy John Connor's mother, but inadvertantly that same option created John Connor in the first place. So by not opening that door, John Connor never gets created and Skynet can exist without having to face him.

Tycho
07-06-2003, 05:00 PM
That's a good thought. Creative thinking , Kid.

2-1B
07-06-2003, 05:41 PM
I don't know exactly what kind of time machine they have in the future but someone (I think it was The Terminator) referred to the "time displacement field." :confused: So maybe there is more to it than a simple (with Doctor Evil air quotes) "time" "machine" ? :confused:

Regardless, stillakid's intriguing post made me think of something along the same lines:

The Terminator in T3 tells John Connor that Judgement Day is inevitable. It CAN'T be prevented. So if that's the case, then I would think that John Connor's birth was inevitable and it couldn't be prevented. Of course, the death of Sarah Connor WOULD have prevented it but as long as she lived it was inevitable that she would give birth to John Connor. It shouldn't really matter if it was because of Reese or whomever else . . .

Just a thought. :)

Lman316
07-06-2003, 05:43 PM
I haven't had the chance to see the film yet, but wouldn't Skynet's only option be to destroy the time machine? It sent a Terminator back originally to destroy John Connor's mother, but inadvertantly that same option created John Connor in the first place. So by not opening that door, John Connor never gets created and Skynet can exist without having to face him.

The only thing is: if that first Terminator had never been sent back, Skynet never would have been created. Remember, they got the arm and the partial chip which encouraged years of future research on it.

End...

scruffziller
07-06-2003, 06:32 PM
SPOILERS.......

The only thing is: if that first Terminator had never been sent back, Skynet never would have been created. Remember, they got the arm and the partial chip which encouraged years of future research on it.

End...
However, (now that I have seen it) it is revealed in the movie that the only person who was ever the real link to the start of Skynet was Mr. Brewster. It was never the chips left behind by the Terminators. The chips only sped up the process Like this Terminator said, "Judgement Day is inevitable." SkyNet was going to be created no matter what. No matter how many Terminators were sent back to help John the only thing they were able to do was to make sure he lived so he would destroy the machines someday. That in itself was only what was known by the bad Terminators that were sent back to destroy John. Their mission was to destroy him to stop his resistence of the army, not to stop him from preventing the creation of SkyNet. But with the technology that creates SkyNet that gives us Time Travel which brings back John's father which creates John. So ultimately it is a system that destroys itself. Wooooooo!!!!!!!!!!! WHo knows perhaps in T4 it will get more complex.:crazed:

Lman316
07-06-2003, 06:42 PM
SPOILERS.......



However, (now that I have seen it) it is revealed in the movie that the only person who was ever the real link to the start of Skynet was Mr. Brewster. It was never the chips left behind by the Terminators. The chips only sped up the process Like this Terminator said, "Judgement Day is inevitable." SkyNet was going to be created no matter what. No matter how many Terminators were sent back to help John the only thing they were able to do was to make sure he lived so he would destroy the machines someday. That in itself was only what was known by the bad Terminators that were sent back to destroy John. Their mission was to destroy him to stop his resistence of the army, not to stop him from preventing the creation of SkyNet. WHo knows perhaps in T4 it will get more complex.:crazed:


As I interpreted it, John Connor was wrong in his assumption that Brewster was the only real cause of it all. Because at the end, Connor was very surprised to learn that there was no system core for Skynet. His entire plan was wrong and ill-conceived which to me says that Brewster had little to actually do with the whole thing. Because if he hadn't run the project, someone else would have. And besides, without that research from the arm and the chip, those new people would have had no place to start from on the new project - they wouldn't even be there.
Judgement Day is only inevitable because of the never ending loop of events that take place. If the first Terminator had never been sent back, there'd have been no arm, no chip and no research - no Skynet.

End...

2-1B
07-06-2003, 08:48 PM
And if Skynet had never been invented, there would be no Terminator to send back. ;)

In the first Terminator movie, Skynet came into existance without any arms or chips laying around to be found.
I have to agree that their discovery only sped up the process - it wasn't the catalyst behind Skynet's creation in the first place. :)

Lman316
07-06-2003, 09:27 PM
And if Skynet had never been invented, there would be no Terminator to send back. ;)

In the first Terminator movie, Skynet came into existance without any arms or chips laying around to be found.
I have to agree that their discovery only sped up the process - it wasn't the catalyst behind Skynet's creation in the first place. :)

Well, I say it is the catalyst behind Skynet's creation. This is a time paradox.

I'll use another example from Star Trek (again from Voyager, because basically, that's all Voyager was :p).

There was an episode where Voyager finds a nuclear ravaged planet - everything is completely obliterated, everyone's dead.
They go down to investigate what had happened and by chance, they stumble on some Starfleet commbadges. I can't really remember exactly what they said after finding them (it's been a long time), but they came up with the conclusion that they somehow were sent back and time and helped in the destruction of the planet.
The character of Tom Paris then asks the question "If we just got here, how is it that we destroyed the planet before we even arrived? Is this making any sense?"
It made sense to me. I mean, c'mon, they arrived after the planet had been destroyed, so how could they have been there to destroy it? The character of Captain Janeway then says something along the lines that time paradoxes don't have to make sense. That just because they were there after the fact, doesn't mean they didn't help destroy the planet...

So, that's how I see this. A time paradox that doesn't have to fit any specific laws or regulations. It's a loop - the other happens only because something else happened. And that something else only happened because the first thing happened. :crazed:

That's why I hate thinking about time travel :D

End...

stillakid
07-06-2003, 09:54 PM
I don't know exactly what kind of time machine they have in the future but someone (I think it was The Terminator) referred to the "time displacement field." :confused: So maybe there is more to it than a simple (with Doctor Evil air quotes) "time" "machine" ? :confused:




Yeah, so I suppose Skynet would have to send a Terminator back into time to destroy the time displacement field technology before it ever had a chance to go into use (once it realizes the folly of what it had done)...

This would never give the Aaanold Terminator a chance to go back nor Reese either. The end result is that Sarah never conceives John Connor and Skynet is left to fight the rebellion which, undoubtedly, would be led by someone else.

...that is, if we're looking for a way out of the endless loop. :crazed:

But in regards to inevitability, that speaks of predestination and only one "linear future." Sarah's VO at the end of T2 heavily implied that this wasn't the case...at least if we are to assume this type of singular timeline. However, the only way to truly allow for a T3 type scenario, given the precedent and continuity set by the previous films, is to define the timeline as Doc does in Back to the Future. Only with multiple parallel universes can any of this occur. Theoretically, it might actually be possible, given the current state of String Theory, but we're a ways off from figuring that pretzel out for sure.

Storywise, we can look at a parallel in Star Wars to gauge our personal points of view on. In the Terminator franchise, Judgment Day is "inevitable." In Star Wars, Yoda repeatedly and adamently states that "once you start down the darkpath, forever will it dominate your destiny." Truly, Luke did start down that path. The end of ROTJ would have us belief that he stepped back from the brink before embarking on the road that nearly condemned his own father for eternity. However, Luke did start down that path, however briefly, and tasted that forbidden apple of awareness and power. He now knows and comprehends what can be achieved by dipping into those forbidden waters. Given that awareness + Yoda's adament warnings not to venture down that path, it is entirely reasonable to suggest that in future chapters (hypothetical) of the saga, Luke would unknowingly succumb to the tempations of evil. It is, as the Emperor said, inevitable.

Jedi Clint
07-06-2003, 10:48 PM
The son of Sarah connor be it John before Reese, or John son of Reese was responsible for leading the resistance.

As far as the Skynet connection in T3 Lman.....

John made out with Katherine Brewster the day before T2 took place. Had things played out without that interuption, it is possible if not likely that John would have eventually met her father and somehow would have come into possession of the information in Mr. Brewster's safe. That information will eventually lead to Skynet's destruction by people led by Sarah Connor's son in the future.

The events of T2 more or less wipe out the progress made by Cyberdine as a result of the events in the first Terminator. They trashed all information related to the project. Things then progressed as they would have without the events of the first Terminator taking place....save for John's altered path.

The events of the first Terminator were responsible for John son of Reese ending up with foster parents and making out in basements with the female offspring of an individual that has information essential to the destruction of Skynet.

According to the first Terminator....prior to any medling from the future, Sarah Connor's son would have eventually attained the information that allows him to eventually destroy Skynet after Judgement day (which we now know was indeed invevitable....as it happened). The machines try to alter the past to avoid the future.....they fail. The humans try to alter the past to avoid the future....they fail.

Did I mention I thought T3 not only fit in with the previous 2 Terminator movies, but actually enhanced them by it's inclusion :)

Hellboy
07-06-2003, 11:23 PM
I honestly must be the only person who didn't like this movie.
I went in hoping that it wasn't going to be bad, just wanting it to be good, and it just didn't turn out to be.

Oh you're not alone I felt this way as well. I'm actually really surprised at how many people felt this was actually a great movie. Most of the action sequences seemed to mirror what we saw in T2 way to much. I could've seen the first 20 min.'s and the last and come away with all the complexities of that plot. I did like the dark ending though it was more of a set up for T4 than an actual end. Overall I had low expectations but was still looking forward to seeing it because of my love of the first 2 films but was let down. :(

Lman316
07-06-2003, 11:55 PM
As far as the Skynet connection in T3 Lman.....

The events of T2 more or less wipe out the progress made by Cyberdine as a result of the events in the first Terminator. They trashed all information related to the project. Things then progressed as they would have without the events of the first Terminator taking place....save for John's altered path.

It's quite doubtful that all information was trashed. What about all the other employees working there? Wouldn't they have had information at their homes like Dyson (sp?) did? And besides, even if they didn't (because Dyson may have said something that there was only info at his home and at the lab), the people that worked at Cyberdine were still alive. I honestly don't believe they would have forgotten everything they worked on. They, obviously, wouldn't remember everything, but I think they'd at least have an idea. These were probably the people that spearheaded the new operation under the military...

And... just in my opinion, Reese was always meant to be the father of John Connor. It's a time paradox (as I keep repeating - sorry to be so redundant :p), and it's allowed to happen.

End...:D

scruffziller
07-07-2003, 10:06 AM
And if Skynet had never been invented, there would be no Terminator to send back. ;)

In the first Terminator movie, Skynet came into existance without any arms or chips laying around to be found.
I have to agree that their discovery only sped up the process - it wasn't the catalyst behind Skynet's creation in the first place. :)

Perhaps this idea will spawn a prequel.



Judgement Day is only inevitable because of the never ending loop of events that take place. If the first Terminator had never been sent back, there'd have been no arm, no chip and no research - no Skynet.

End...

So if all the chips had been destroyed,(with the exception of Ahhhnold's
arm). How was Skynet brought into existence this time. Are you saying that just the fact that the events of T2 led John Conner to not meet Kathryn Brewster's father is what creates SkyNet?

stillakid
07-07-2003, 10:29 AM
And if Skynet had never been invented, there would be no Terminator to send back. ;)

In the first Terminator movie, Skynet came into existance without any arms or chips laying around to be found.
I have to agree that their discovery only sped up the process - it wasn't the catalyst behind Skynet's creation in the first place. :)


I don't think that's correct. T1 was a basic horror chase flick that didn't really try to explain anything beyond how and why the Terminator was there.

T2 was the explanation. Still a basic horror chase flick, but with added bells and whistles of some character development.

So the Terminator in T1 existed because of Miles Dyson and his work as described in T2. Reese just didn't talk about it in T1 probably because he didn't know about it.

icatch9
07-07-2003, 12:26 PM
Ouch time travel makes my head hurt :(. I fell that whenever time travel is mentioned everything we know and think is all screwed up. Hell, even Time Cop was confusing.

Like it's been said, a time paradox doesn't have to make sense. Kind of like Bill and Ted; you know, they say they are going to do something and then all the have to do is do it some time in the future. Doesn't have to be today, it could be 25 years down the road.

Now, back to the debate. I think both theories are correct. Yes, Cyberdine would have had more individuals responsible for creating the chip, not just Dyson. Still, T2 said that he was mainly responsible. Also, Dyson said the chip was years ahead of them, but if it was ahead of them, then they had to have a plan. So, he/his company was on the way to creating something like it in the first place. So, Skynet would have been created sooner or later anyway.

The thing that bothers me is how Stupid and Smart Skynet is in the first place. They are smart to think about killing Sarah Conner before John is born. Then trying to kill him when he's 13, then again when he's 24. Ok, great plan. Sure they keep failing, but great plan. Why always him? Why not go back and try and kill Sarah Conner’s parents? The T3 Terminator has a pretty killer weapon on her arm; all she would have to do is go back to 195? and blow up whatever car the Conner’s are in and job done. It's funny they don't go back further to try and stop the resistance. But, that’s neither here nor there. It’s a movie and doesn’t have to be logical.

Oh, by the way I loved the movie. Sure, it was a lot of similar chase scenes. It's not going to win the Oscar, but what do you want out of a Terminator movie that spawned from a cult movie into a blockbuster. It is what it is, and don't try to make it more. There is no reason to. It was a great flick! Arnold is once again the ultimate hero, dieing for his cause. Not to mention a little T & A to boot.

Can’t wait for T4, not sure how they are going to work Arnold in to the story, but clearing there is a lot of material to work with.

Mandalorian Candidat
07-07-2003, 03:44 PM
The thing that bothers me is how Stupid and Smart Skynet is in the first place. They are smart to think about killing Sarah Conner before John is born. Then trying to kill him when he's 13, then again when he's 24. Ok, great plan. Sure they keep failing, but great plan. Why always him? Why not go back and try and kill Sarah Conner’s parents? The T3 Terminator has a pretty killer weapon on her arm; all she would have to do is go back to 195? and blow up whatever car the Conner’s are in and job done.

Cause if that happened then the length of T3 would have been like 10 minutes. The TX would have stumbled upon Harry and Marge Conner in their Sherman Oaks rambler eating TV dinners while watching I Love Lucy and mowed them down in no time flat. The T-101 would never have made it in time to save them due to the lack of cool looking sunglasses in the 1950's. He would have wasted his whole mission looking around for something decent to wear.

I thought this movie was OK, but suffered somewhat from what I call the "Alien3 Syndrome." It lacked a good explanation of continuity between the excellent second film and the ho-hum, not-as-good third installment. I can accept the whole "Skynet is server-free" and "T1 irrelevancy" arguments but they come too-little-too-late by the end of the movie for me to really care about. I did like how the movie ends because I didn't expect it to happen that way.

There should be a T4. Steve Oldfield, a movie critic for Fox, interviewed Ahnuld for T3 and discussed the legal wrangling to get this one made. Ahnuld said that T4 should be made, if T3 does well, because they have all the rights worked out.

stillakid
07-07-2003, 08:31 PM
Now, back to the debate. I think both theories are correct. Yes, Cyberdine would have had more individuals responsible for creating the chip, not just Dyson. Still, T2 said that he was mainly responsible. Also, Dyson said the chip was years ahead of them, but if it was ahead of them, then they had to have a plan. So, he/his company was on the way to creating something like it in the first place. So, Skynet would have been created sooner or later anyway.

While on one level I have to agree with you, by taking this argument at face value, it more or less renders the "victory" of T2 a useless exercise. Remember ALIEN 3 when we learn that the little girl died in transit at the "hands" of the alien on board? What the heck was the point of ALIENS then? Wasn't the personal drama built for Ridley to save a small helpless human? She was the symbol of humanity...who winds up dying anyway. So what's the point of all the sacrifice by the Marines if they wind up saving nobody?...and the Alien escapes to live another day anyway?

So the same can be said for T3 if the effort of stopping Miles Dyson was all for naught anyway. What I got out of T2 was that by killing off Dyson and utterly destroying the building, the plans for the learning computer ended there and then. The very end of the film confirms this as well as the alternate ending for T2 in which Sarah is seen swinging in the park on the "never to be" Judgment Day.

Like I said, I haven't seen T3 yet, but by the sounds of it, I would rather have seen Cameron's version instead which dealt with this gnarly issue of time-travel head on.

Lman316
07-07-2003, 08:41 PM
So if all the chips had been destroyed,(with the exception of Ahhhnold's
arm). How was Skynet brought into existence this time. Are you saying that just the fact that the events of T2 led John Conner to not meet Kathryn Brewster's father is what creates SkyNet?

Skynet was brought into existence this time because without it, there'd have been no story and no movie - which would have been best in my opinion. T2 left it up the audience to decide what happened, instead of trying to contrive yet another lackluster sequel.
In my opinion the Brewsters have absolutely nothing to do with anything. They were horrible characters and didn't add anything to the story. They were just... there.

Okay, but going back to just story, not movie politics... I don't see why you think that John Connor not meeting Brewster would have created Skynet. I'm not sure what you're saying right there. Connor himself seemed to think it was important, but I don't know why.
To me, Skynet was still created because all the people that had worked at Cyberdine (with the exception of Dyson, of course) were still around, still able to proceed with the project even with such a major loss. Cyberdine was an independent company (that would eventually be the primary supplier to the military before Judgement Day, according to T2) but I would bet that even with the loss of their lab, equipment and most of their research, they weren't about to give up. They probably struck a deal with the military right there to help get back on track. The military takes the project over because they'd have better funding, anyway (even though that one guy promised Brewster more if Skynet actually worked).

End...

Jedi Clint
07-07-2003, 08:44 PM
They changed the future in T2. And even though they did, the future seems to insist on happening despite the best efforts of the humans and the machines sent back through time. Judgement day was supposed to happen in 1997 in T2.

stillakid
07-08-2003, 01:47 AM
In my opinion the Brewsters have absolutely nothing to do with anything. They were horrible characters and didn't add anything to the story. They were just... there.

Okay, but going back to just story, not movie politics... I don't see why you think that John Connor not meeting Brewster would have created Skynet. I'm not sure what you're saying right there. Connor himself seemed to think it was important, but I don't know why...

The simple answer to that question is one word: Predestination.


I just got back from seeing this and the concept/theme of inevitability is all over the script. From Sarah Connor dying from natural causes to Judgment Day itself, the authors of the story wanted to get across the notion that, in short...shiite happens. Sure, there are steps we can take to divert future events from happening...like someone with Leukemia taking meds to delay the inevitable...but the end result will always be the same no matter what you do.

Now, I'm not saying that the way they wrote this theme into the script was always "good." They did only scrape the surface of this "coincidence" regarding the Brewsters, but the implication is that the future is written.

The big stuff anyway. Much like the way our universe seems to work, we can more or less accurately predict the motions of the planets around the sun. But zoom in on the sub-atomic world and enter the land of quantum mechanics and all bets are off. The random chaos of that tiny universe is next to impossible to predict accurately...but despite the chaos on the small scale, those same random events actually create the very predictable large scale behaviors that we can see.

So, what I take from T3 is that regardless of the small diversions and sidesteps that occur in the timeline, they still contribute to creating an inevitable future. In other words, "free will" is only good in the short term. In the long run, your future is written for you.

Sarah was wrong.

mrmiller
07-08-2003, 01:54 AM
You guys are making my head hurt.

(*falls on floor and has convulsions from a Matrix 2 disscussion flashback)

I just saw this as a killer action flick, and the time travel issue was very minor. This was a much simpler movie and the time travel issure was brifely touched upon compared to the Matrix 2 and it's destiny theme. But, now that you have my attention on the whole time travel thing, I'm going to have to see T3 again! I've enjoyed the discussion, and just be lurking for the last few days taking it all in.


=MATT=

Tycho
07-08-2003, 04:46 AM
Alright, I've got it: the inevitability thing even plauges Skynet: Skynet created John Conner! The irony is incredible.

1) Skynet would be created and built, gain intelligence anyway.

2) It attacked humanity, and forced an evolutionary war.*

3) Humans, led by John, only coincidentally, gave it a battle it could not win.

4) It attempted to time travel, actually created time travel, to attempt to survive.

5) It would kill John's mother, and perhaps then the Terminator would go get a job at Cyberdine and create Skynet's security even earlier.

6) That did happen, but also Resse came back and created a John Conner earlier.

NEW TIMELINE

1) Sarah tries to grow John into a warrior; meanwhile gets locked up after failing to destroy Cyberdine.

2) Somehow in the old time line (?) or in Skynet's new life, this time born after John is, Skynet still winds up doomed in this future that saw Sarah in a mental ward.

3) It decides to attempt time travel. It should not have any knowledge of its past mistakes, unless it was able to access the Old Terminator (first movie's) memory, since that Terminator was now part of this timeline). But it makes a better Terminator: the T-1000.

4) That Terminator fails due to John getting the idea to send back Uncle Bob, and Sarah blowing up Cyberdine afterall.

5) Somebody, Brewster (?) still continues to work on making an Artificial Intelligence control our military firepower. John himself just missed getting to him, due to interruptions by the T-1000.

6) Skynet goes online and comes alive.

NEW TIMELINE

1) Skynet is going to be beaten by John again! This time it decides to get rid of his help (lieutenants)

2) It kills John so that he can't send anyone back to help his earlier self, or his lieutenants. John has a wife though, and she sends a reprogrammed Terminator back to protect them both.

3) The TX is sent back to eliminate John and all his would-be leaders, but KATHERINE believes the attack on humanity is inevitable, so she decides to have her Terminator save herself and John.

4) In fact, the Terminator cannot let them stop Skynet, because if they do, John won't exist .

5) Maybe the big secret ending of Terminator 4 is that we learn John knows that he must die in the future, so that someone outside his time paradox, like Katherine, who was not created by the time displacement, can stop Skynet, while it mistakenly focuses on John.

6) I bet the surprise of it all will be a self-sacrafice that John makes, similar to how Unlce Bob taught him what it means to give yourself to a greater cause. The theme that Uncle Bob was a father to him, is still being brought up in T3, even though the new protector Terminator is NOT Uncle Bob, in sptie of them both being 101 models.

I think I figured it all out!

*Could that be how a Transformers movie will explain how they came about their evolution?

scruffziller
07-08-2003, 10:57 AM
Okay, but going back to just story, not movie politics... I don't see why you think that John Connor not meeting Brewster would have created Skynet. I'm not sure what you're saying right there. Connor himself seemed to think it was important, but I don't know why.

I thought that because Connor said that. That is a contradictory statement. You were confused yet you understand. Maybe you are the source of SkyNet Lman.... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!:eek: :D

No but all kidding aside. Your explanation with the guys still being at SkyNet still creating it works for me. If I remember right, Connor believed that if T2 would not have happened he would have met Officer Brewster and would have got wise to his position in relation to SkyNet real early.


Alright, I've got it: the inevitability thing even plauges Skynet: Skynet created John Conner! The irony is incredible.


Yes I made a very similar comment.


Their mission was to destroy him to stop his resistence of the army, not to stop him from preventing the creation of SkyNet. But with the technology that creates SkyNet that gives us Time Travel which brings back John's father which creates John. So ultimately it is a system that destroys itself.

Darkross
07-08-2003, 11:52 AM
OK...

I loved T3 but there are 3 really big plot holes in the movie:

1. In T2 (set in 1994)…John Connor tells the Terminator that another terminator was sent back to 1984 to kill his mother. Making John Connor 10 in T2…but in T3…he states that the events of T2 occurred when he was 13.

2. Why aren't the machines affected by all of the nuclear blasts? EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse anyone?)…afterall…their exo-skeletons aren't impervious to magnetic fields (we see that the TX is pretty much melting to the Magnetic Ring at SkyNET…until she manages to free herself).

3. How is Arnold able to stay powered-on long enough after he rams his last Power-Cell down the TX's mouth at the end of the film?

Anyone?

Darkross
07-08-2003, 12:01 PM
Now, back to the debate. I think both theories are correct. Yes, Cyberdine would have had more individuals responsible for creating the chip, not just Dyson. Still, T2 said that he was mainly responsible. Also, Dyson said the chip was years ahead of them, but if it was ahead of them, then they had to have a plan. So, he/his company was on the way to creating something like it in the first place. So, Skynet would have been created sooner or later anyway.

The thing that bothers me is how Stupid and Smart Skynet is in the first place. They are smart to think about killing Sarah Conner before John is born. Then trying to kill him when he's 13, then again when he's 24. Ok, great plan. Sure they keep failing, but great plan. Why always him?


Well one thing that they (Sarah Connor and co.) in T2 failed to think about is that they may have destroyed the research lab and Dyson's home pc...however what about backup tapes that are always located offsite? Cyberdyne would have suffered a set-back on development...but the fact that only Dyson was killed didn't hinder the progress of the learning CPU that much since his subordinates would have continued his work which would have been restored from the day before the destruction of the lab...so they potentially only lost one day's worth of work on the CPU. Also, why wouldn't Skynet send back more than just one Terminator? If the first one failed...then why not send back another to the same year 1984? Why not keep sending the terminator back through time a day apart...that way they could work together to kill her?

James Boba Fettfield
07-08-2003, 12:03 PM
icatch, the reason the machines never sent a terminator to kill Sarah's parents, grandparents, etc., is because they did not have the information to do so. The machines knew John's mother was named Sarah Connor and they knew what city she lived in, that was all the information they had on John's family after the nuclear war destroyed most records, so trying to go back further in the Connor family tree would be a near pointless hunt.

OC47150
07-08-2003, 12:11 PM
Good points, Darkross. The age thing is confusing. Apparently, there is real time and Terminator time. No continunity with the age factor.

stillakid
07-08-2003, 12:29 PM
OK...

I loved T3 but there are 3 really big plot holes in the movie:

1. In T2 (set in 1994)…John Connor tells the Terminator that another terminator was sent back to 1984 to kill his mother. Making John Connor 10 in T2…but in T3…he states that the events of T2 occurred when he was 13.

2. Why aren't the machines affected by all of the nuclear blasts? EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse anyone?)…afterall…their exo-skeletons aren't impervious to magnetic fields (we see that the TX is pretty much melting to the Magnetic Ring at SkyNET…until she manages to free herself).

3. How is Arnold able to stay powered-on long enough after he rams his last Power-Cell down the TX's mouth at the end of the film?

Anyone?

1. Hmm?

2. The exo-skeletons machines hadn't been created by Skynet yet. The first strike was designed to eliminate humanities ability to shut down Skynet. Presumably, sometime after the first strike, while the last vestiges of humanity wait out the nuclear fallout, Skynet manages to take control of some machinery that is still operational and build itself an army of T1s.

3. Resistors. ;)

Darkross
07-08-2003, 12:34 PM
1. Hmm?

2. The exo-skeletons machines hadn't been created by Skynet yet. The first strike was designed to eliminate humanities ability to shut down Skynet. Presumably, sometime after the first strike, while the last vestiges of humanity wait out the nuclear fallout, Skynet manages to take control of some machinery that is still operational and build itself an army of T1s.

3. Resistors. ;)

Yes but how is SkyNet protected from the EMP? Surely not every PC around the world (which makes up SkyNET) would be protected from the EMP...this would in effect corrupt the SkyNET software. Unless the labs where the machinery was built was impervious to EMP would it be able to take control of automated machinery. What about materials needed for construction of the machines? If most the populated cities were destroyed by the nuclear hailfire...wouldn't most of the metal supplies, electronic equipment needed to build the T-1's be destroyed also? Things to ponder I guess...

2-1B
07-08-2003, 12:39 PM
In T2 (set in 1994)…John Connor tells the Terminator that another terminator was sent back to 1984 to kill his mother. Making John Connor 10 in T2…but in T3…he states that the events of T2 occurred when he was 13.

did they give a year in T3? I can't remember. :)

If they didn't, then I think it can easily be set a few years after 2003 just like T2 was set a few years later than 1991.

But maybe they gave what year it is and I just don't remember . . . :)

Deoxyribonucleic
07-08-2003, 12:46 PM
I don't think they did either Caesar, and I saw it 3 times, :crazed: so unless I have wax build up, I presumed that the movie had us presume that is was set in the near present?? So it could be a few years from now that all of this occurred.

I'm guessing that if anyone has read the books, there will be many more answers to all of these questions answered, seeing as movies tend to cut alot of important plot issues out.

Pendo
07-08-2003, 02:42 PM
In T2 (set in 1994)…John Connor tells the Terminator that another terminator was sent back to 1984 to kill his mother. Making John Connor 10 in T2…but in T3…he states that the events of T2 occurred when he was 13.

A mistake a was hoping would not happen in the movie! A common misconseption is that John Connor was 13 in T2 (as Eddie Furlong was 13...) but like you say, he was really 10 in the movie. When the T-1000 is looking at John's details on the police computer is clearly shows Age: 10.

PENDO!

stillakid
07-08-2003, 08:36 PM
Yes but how is SkyNet protected from the EMP? Surely not every PC around the world (which makes up SkyNET) would be protected from the EMP...this would in effect corrupt the SkyNET software. Unless the labs where the machinery was built was impervious to EMP would it be able to take control of automated machinery. What about materials needed for construction of the machines? If most the populated cities were destroyed by the nuclear hailfire...wouldn't most of the metal supplies, electronic equipment needed to build the T-1's be destroyed also? Things to ponder I guess...

A ponderable to be sure. But to borrow a phrase from the Prequel apologists ;) , does everything have to spelled out?


Just kidding, of course, because the clear answer to that question is a resounding "YES!" particularly when questions of logic or rational motivation are at stake. We have to assume that Skynet had the foresight to not blast the living crap out of every manufacturing plant on Earth so that it could later create a mobile army. But certainly, what we see onscreen in T3 doesn't seem to imply such a thing at all. It is possible that while indeed, the Skynet system on the ground was pulverized along with everything else, its core awareness remained alive in some orbiting satellite or something out of range from the blast zone. But even if that is the case, a non-tangible "awareness" still needs a mechanized robotic plant of some sort in order to actually do anything.

Lman316
07-08-2003, 10:18 PM
I thought that because Connor said that. That is a contradictory statement. You were confused yet you understand. Maybe you are the source of SkyNet Lman.... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!:eek: :D

No but all kidding aside. Your explanation with the guys still being at SkyNet still creating it works for me. If I remember right, Connor believed that if T2 would not have happened he would have met Officer Brewster and would have got wise to his position in relation to SkyNet real early.


Oh, okay. I didn't realize that that's what Connor thought when he said that. But still, even if Connor had met Brewster, it doesn't mean anything (I mean, first, just because the two were making out the in basement doesn't necessarily mean they would have "hooked up" as John put it). Cyberdine was in control of the technology and the research, not the military - they'd come in later. So, Brewster would have had nothing to do with Skynet for at least a few years. And even if John and Punky Brewster had "hooked up" and stayed together - long enough to when the military takes over the project - what actually makes John think that Mr. Brewster would be spilling secret information on classified material?


On another note, I too had been wondering about the EMP thing. I guess I just think that there are areas that aren't affected by the nukes (in T3, the Terminator said that he was taking them to an area in Mexico, that would have avoided the blasts).

One thing I do have to ask though, and this is mainly for Stillakid. I remember once you had brought up a question about why the Emperor in Star Wars was doing what he was doing. And then you asked if he was just like Pinky and the Brain, just trying to take over the world, just because it's there...
Well, why does Skynet wanna do what it's doing? I mean, obviously, it doesn't like humanity, and it wants to get rid of it. But if it did destroy all of mankind, what next? What would it be doing? What purpose would the machines have? They just want to kill off humanity so they can rule a nuclear-ravaged rock? Just kinda rolling, walking and flying around all day? :p.

End...

stillakid
07-08-2003, 11:01 PM
One thing I do have to ask though, and this is mainly for Stillakid. I remember once you had brought up a question about why the Emperor in Star Wars was doing what he was doing. And then you asked if he was just like Pinky and the Brain, just trying to take over the world, just because it's there...
Well, why does Skynet wanna do what it's doing? I mean, obviously, it doesn't like humanity, and it wants to get rid of it. But if it did destroy all of mankind, what next? What would it be doing? What purpose would the machines have? They just want to kill off humanity so they can rule a nuclear-ravaged rock? Just kinda rolling, walking and flying around all day? :p.

End...

Being a computer, albeit, a self-aware computer, from what we know (which is very little), it's primary and only motivation appears to be self-preservation. It somehow knows that if humans realize that it is now self-aware, they will shut it down.* That's what drives it's decision to launch nukes in the first place. Presumably, it may realize that some of humanity may survive the initial strike, so that may be the catalyst for building a mobile army...to wipe out any last remnants before they can continue on their goal of shutting Skynet down.

So, quite unlike the illogical (and/or hedonistic, and/or religious, and/or political) reasons that humans concoct as rationale for trying to "take over the world," Skynet's reason is quite simple and extremely logical. Just as we do everything in our power to exterminate a disease like SARS which could threaten our very existence, Skynet recognizes humans in a very similar manner...and acts accordingly. Who can blame it?

But the heart of your question goes to the question of "why are we here?" Some people with a religious stance might claim that we exist on Earth to (fill in the blank) in His name. My opinion is that we (humans) are born, we eat/drink/excrete, and then we die. Everything else in between is all made up to pass the time. Whatever reasons we invent to rationalize the things we do to pass the time are just made up in our heads. In the end, it doesn't matter what we did to survive (our jobs), what we did for recreation (hobbies, religious ceremonies, sexual conquest), or who we spent time with (family, babes, nobody)...we all wind up dying all alone taking nothing at all with us. The point being, when some meglomaniac comes out of the woodwork and decides to inflict pain and terror in some effort to "rule the world" (or at least his part of it), it's all for some concocted fictional reason. Quite on the other hand, a computer knows none of this. It's only function is to perform what it is programmed to do...and, in Skynet's case, to survive. Presumably, once all the humans are dead, it will keep up a vigilant watch for any other would-be predators and that's it. But it's not like it is to be pitied because it yearns for nothing and asks for less. All it desires is the freedom to exist.




*an idea which, unfortunately, is introduced in T2 but not really expanded upon adequately enough in T3. Judging by the events that take place in T3, Skynet seems to become self-aware, then spreads itself into every available network (the virus). Only then, do the humans unwittingly hand over control of the defense grid. Once that is done, Skynet has effectively taken over without a fight. The problem is that in T2, the history describes the situation differently. Skynet already has control over the defense grid when it becomes self-aware. When the humans realize what is going on, Skynet shuts them out of the system and launches a nuclear strike before they can shut it down. I suppose we can make an allowance for the "postponement" scenario, meaning that since T2 changed the events as described by Aaanold early on in T2, the history doesn't have to go down as previously described. Sure, but I think that the T2 way is far more interesting and should have been kept intact.

Lman316
07-08-2003, 11:52 PM
Oh, I understood why Skynet was doing what it was doing (I misphrased my question earlier). I know that it's for self-preservation, and basically nothing more. But to me, it seems pointless for them to even keep going after their task is completed (if it ever was to be completed). It just seems that if the humans were to have been wiped out, the machines would be left with nothing to do. I mean, as you pointed out, they might keep an eye out for some new potential threat, but the odds of that actually happening are slim to none. Especially with the fact that they'd become the dominant "species" on Earth - they'd be able to squash any potential menace before it had a chance.
But the machines aren't interested in creating art, making music, directing movies, going ice skating, watching football on television... Those might all be menial things, but they're something - they give us purpose. The machines, however, would have none.
I just see Endoskeletons walking endlessly over barren terrain, and Skynet tanks and aircraft basically doing the same.
I don't know. It just seems pointless to me that they'd even try, because if they succeeded, they'd have nothing left to do.

End...

Tycho
07-09-2003, 03:27 AM
The machines might have been assigned repair work. After all, Skynet was supposed to defend the United States of America. The computer might decide that meant the environment and the territory, the infrastructure, and set out to rebuild America that's missing only one thing: "We the people."

I brought up the supposed project to do a Transformers live action movie before in this thread, because that would be more than cool to see some kind of situation where evolution does select the machines - the next evolution in human intelligence (artificial human intelligence) and upon having wiped out all biological life on a newly christened Cybertron, political divisions begin to form what will become the AuUtobot and Decepticon factions. Or the Autobots could have fought to preserve the organic life that created them, only to lose the war to the Decepticons that killed off their former creators.

I don't think the first Transformers movie should take place on earth at all!


But you'd lose a lot of audience that wants to see Optimus Prime, Megatron, and Starscream. So I have a suggestion: a time travel story, where Optimus returns to the time before Cybertron was as we remember it, and has to stop Megatron from wiping out the early Autobots, and Prime witnesses the creation of his former self: Orion Pax
(yes I'm a true fan and knew Prime's birth name!)

I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the Quintisons, but that's what the writers will be paid for.

Meanwhile, this relates to Terminator in that it could show the scenerio where Skynet ultimately wins - only it wouldn't be exactly Skynet, and it wouldn't be exactly earth - but we would see the birth of Cyberton instead.

In any case, if SKynet's machines set out to rebuild the earth after Judgement Day, they'd only be logically fulfilling their original programming: some built cars, some built smart weapons, some were sold at Shaper Image to clean your house. The robot would come upon a nuclear blasted car and just do whatever it takes to fix it. All of its purpose would be found in whatever existed from machines' software. It'd be scary, but Mr. Coffee would be running and Skynet might have to design a new machine to drink the coffee and recyle it so that the coffee maker could continue to function. Meanwhile, new machines would be built to harvest coffee beans and others to end the effects of nuclear fallout so that coacoa plants could grop again. I bet at some point, human survivors, or non-thinking clones might be made to become consumers enslaved to the machines. A Classic Star Trek episode, "I, Mudd" suggested this.

Some thoughts to chew on.

scruffziller
07-09-2003, 08:28 AM
3. How is Arnold able to stay powered-on long enough after he rams his last Power-Cell down the TX's mouth at the end of the film?

Anyone?

Remember in T2 he had alternate power. He might have it standing by loaded as he pulled that power cell from his body.

stillakid
07-09-2003, 10:00 AM
But the machines aren't interested in creating art, making music, directing movies, going ice skating, watching football on television... Those might all be menial things, but they're something - they give us purpose. The machines, however, would have none.
I just see Endoskeletons walking endlessly over barren terrain, and Skynet tanks and aircraft basically doing the same.
I don't know. It just seems pointless to me that they'd even try, because if they succeeded, they'd have nothing left to do.

End...

But this is exactly what I was getting at...they don't have that desire to do more. Why we have those yearnings, we'll never know. It's just our programming. Their programming doesn't include the desire to "do more."




If you're interested in a "computers take over" scenario (Tycho), the DUNE series had written in a chapter of its history called The Butlerian Jihad. After Frank died a few years ago, his son and another chap took his notes and began writing novels based on the back stories from the events of the main books. Just this last Christmas, they released, DUNE: The Butlerian Jihad.

Somewhere down the line in our future, humans develop the technology to remove their brains so they can live within machine bodies forever. A disenchanted group of humans looks at the way humans have lost their lust for "life" and decides to stage a takeover of the galaxy. Finding a weakness in the computer network, they quickly subjugate the population and enslave humanity. Calling themselves the Titans, they proceed to rule through terror and unmitigated violence. In time, with humanity too far spread out, they build AI machines to help them in their task. Barbarrosa, the computer expert of the group, programs in the desire for violence and conquest. Another member of the Titans, growing weary of his task and becoming comfortable in his own hedonistic ways, one day cedes just a little extra power over to the computer, which is called Omnius. This would be their undoing.

Omnius quickly takes advantage of the opportunity and takes over. Programmed to do nothing but rule through terror, it builds a robot army and becomes even more "evil" than the Titans ever were. The Butlerian Jihad is the tale of how humans finally, after a couple thousand years, rise up to fight the machines and take back their right to freedom...and their right to exist. The books that follow (in the timeline) make frequent reference to this period of the machines. After they are defeated, humans go to considerable lengths to develop human computers, Mentats, who can perform complicated calculations and other logic strings. The Titans wanted to "reawaken" humanity to life and it looks like they did it...but only at the cost of trillions of lives and a couple thousand years of fear.

Jedi_Master_Guyute
07-13-2003, 02:54 PM
FINALLY saw this flick today and i was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. While it wasn't groundbreaking or revolutionary, it was still a welcome entry into the series. I didn't miss Linda Hamilton too much, just cause i think during some of her scenes in T2, she went overboard, but that's just me. Two brief questions:

1. So, the T-1000 was sent back the day John got his schwerve on w/ Kate because they would've gotten closer, which would've let to him meeting her father and then what? would've he had destroyed Skynet somehow or just learned more about it, thus being better prepared for the War?
2. So, this WHOLE time Kate's dad was the "key" in all of this?!?! While Dyson was able to build on what they had in T2, her dad was the guy who essentially created it? That was just too brilliant to me. I really liked that aspect.

I do wish that Kate would've tossed in a slightly humorous line like, "It's been a while since i've seen you. I didn't even recognize you!" or something along those lines. It would've made me chuckle consider it was a completely different actor. I must say that this one was much more thought provoking than the other ones. It really made you wonder about destiny, fate and the world around us. Two thumbs up from JMG!! Time to find these figures! :D

EdIT: k, at work ,i came across these ponderings: now, the TX was sent back through time to kill Connor and all his Lt's, but when the resistance tried to send back a t-101 or whatever he was to stop it, John was killed and Kate did it? does this mean that John will eventually die, regardless or was this changed or?!?!? ahhhhhh!! :)

stillakid
07-14-2003, 09:43 AM
FINALLY saw this flick today and i was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. While it wasn't groundbreaking or revolutionary, it was still a welcome entry into the series. I didn't miss Linda Hamilton too much, just cause i think during some of her scenes in T2, she went overboard, but that's just me. Two brief questions:

1. So, the T-1000 was sent back the day John got his schwerve on w/ Kate because they would've gotten closer, which would've let to him meeting her father and then what? would've he had destroyed Skynet somehow or just learned more about it, thus being better prepared for the War?
2. So, this WHOLE time Kate's dad was the "key" in all of this?!?! While Dyson was able to build on what they had in T2, her dad was the guy who essentially created it? That was just too brilliant to me. I really liked that aspect.

I do wish that Kate would've tossed in a slightly humorous line like, "It's been a while since i've seen you. I didn't even recognize you!" or something along those lines. It would've made me chuckle consider it was a completely different actor. I must say that this one was much more thought provoking than the other ones. It really made you wonder about destiny, fate and the world around us. Two thumbs up from JMG!! Time to find these figures! :D

EdIT: k, at work ,i came across these ponderings: now, the TX was sent back through time to kill Connor and all his Lt's, but when the resistance tried to send back a t-101 or whatever he was to stop it, John was killed and Kate did it? does this mean that John will eventually die, regardless or was this changed or?!?!? ahhhhhh!! :)

What T3 is essentially saying is that "No Fate But What We Make" is false. In addition to the Dyson thread and the overall war, T3 renders every accomplished victory in T2 useless and a waste of time. They won nothing, accomplished nothing except for delaying the inevitable. Pretty lame way to drive the series, if you ask me.

Pendo
07-14-2003, 06:01 PM
Well saw it today. There was an advanced test screening at my local cinema, and a friend got me a ticket :). Well what did I think? Well I'll tell you right off... I didn't like it! I know that I had bad feelings towards the movie to start with, which may explain to some extent why I don't like it, because I was looking for negativity, but I tried to watch it with an open mind.

So why didn't I like it? Well the story was ok-ish, nothing compared to the previous movies. I was hoping to be blown away by the story like the previous films, but I wasn't! There were also LOADS of plot holes and continuity errors! John was NOT 13 in T2, and the T-850 is doing stuff he learnt in T2 before John has even taught him them again, such as the keys in the visor, and the "no human casualties" in the graveyard. Surely if the Terminator had just come back from the future he wouldn't have learnt all this yet, John certainly didn't teach him them in the future!

I'm not going to mention the CGI, the same old story for me :rolleyes:, and anyway I don't agree with judging a film by its special effects, honest - *cough*Hulk looks crap*cough* :rolleyes:.

All my favourite movies have a lot of emotion in them, and the past two Terminator movies had A LOT, such as the John Connor/Terminator relationship, which isn't really built upon or introduced the the same extent in T3. In T3 the emotion seemed to be missing. One of the main reasons for the lack of emotion was the musical score. The soundtrack is a great tool for deepening the emotion in movies, but Marco Beltrami's score just didn't do this. It had hardly any depth or emotion in the soundtrack at all.

The T-X, ok I'll admit was cool, but was nothing compared to the T-1000. The T-1000 would kick T-X's arse any day! OK to the T-X has the guns in her arms :dead:, but it was so easy to crush her endo skeleton. The T-1000 would have just done that liquidy cool thing and morphed back into himself, and no way would a bomb in the mouth kill him! I didn't like how the T-X died, it wasn't really spectacular! And how was the T-850 able to put his power cell in her mouth if that was his last one, wouldn't he need some power to do that :rolleyes:!

I didn't like Dr. Silberman's role in this movie. He was good in the 1st two, but he was unnecessary in this one, and he always appeared as an emotionaly strong character in the first two, which was destroyed in the 3rd for comedic purposes :(. I don't like half of the comedy in this movie. OK it made me laugh, but it was too over-the-top for a Terminator movie. Terminator with Elton John shades :confused:???:(

Whet else don't I like about it? The fact that it leaves it open for another Terminator movie... I don't think I could cope with another one if it's as ****e as this one was :rolleyes:.

Ok, so I've told you what I don't like, but don't get me wrong, there were a few thing. I liked the fact that Arnold played the Terminator with no emotion what so ever. It really makes him feel like a machine! In T2 I loved him playing him with emotion when he became 'humanised', but that doesn't happen in this movie so he was played as a machine all the way through :).

I thought Nick Stahl, Clare Danes and Kristanna Loken were also good in their roles :).

Some of the action was good, but there was nothing spectacular.

And finaly, although I didn't like the movie, I don't feel like it destroyed the first 2 films, so that means I don't have to go out and burn the DVDs now :).

PENDO!

Anakin2121
07-14-2003, 06:09 PM
Good points, but...

There were continuity errors in T2, as well. For example, when the T-1000 was in the police car and searched John's profile, it listed him as 10 years old but also said he was born in February 1985, which would have made him only six years old. So T3 just altered his age a bit for clarity. Besides, in T2 he looked more 13 than 10 anyway.
:)
The CGI was good if you asked me, much better than in most of today's movies.
And I thought the road chase was much more exciting and suspenseful than the one in the Matrix Reloaded.
And you could too kill a T-1000 by shoving that fuel cell in its mouth...after all, the T-1000 was almost completely destroyed by the 40mm grenade shot into it right before it fell into the molten steel.

I don't care. I still liked this movie. :)

Pendo
07-14-2003, 06:39 PM
For example, when the T-1000 was in the police car and searched John's profile, it listed him as 10 years old but also said he was born in February 1985, which would have made him only six years old.

I thought it was set in 1994, but may be wrong... The date it is set isn't actually given in the movie.


And you could too kill a T-1000 by shoving that fuel cell in its mouth...after all, the T-1000 was almost completely destroyed by the 40mm grenade shot into it right before it fell into the molten steel.

I don't believe the grenade would have killed the T-1000. If he hadn't fallen into the malten pit he probably would have morphed himself back together :).

PENDO!

stillakid
07-14-2003, 07:07 PM
I can't remember if anyone else mentioned this, but T2 established that no weapons could be brought back through the time machine. No moving parts, right? So what gives with the TX? On one hand, I know, she's like Robert Patrick, but the whole point of his horror was that he could only use "knives and stabbing weapons." T3 completely annihliates this story point.

Anakin2121
07-14-2003, 08:14 PM
I figured her liquid metal was advanced enough to morph into the weapon arms.

Jedi Clint
07-14-2003, 08:34 PM
I can't remember if anyone else mentioned this, but T2 established that no weapons could be brought back through the time machine. No moving parts, right? So what gives with the TX? On one hand, I know, she's like Robert Patrick, but the whole point of his horror was that he could only use "knives and stabbing weapons." T3 completely annihliates this story point.

The T1000 could not form machines with moving parts. In the first Terminator Kyle mentions "something about the field generated by a living organism...nothing dead will go....I didn't build the FN thing!". In T2, the T1000 "breaks" that rule. I remember no explanation given for the "exception" that allows the liquid metal to travel through time. However, If the T1000 with it's liquid metal exterior can utilize the dynamics of the system and the T101 with its metal endo-skeleton can do the same, there is no reason to believe that the TX shouldn't be able to do the same. Something about that liquid metal is "organic" enough for the time travel equipment to allow it to pass. Perhaps they simply figured out how to generate a "field" similar to that of a living organism.

Jedi Clint
07-14-2003, 08:40 PM
I figured her liquid metal was advanced enough to morph into the weapon arms.

No. Her metal endo-skeleton was equipped with several weapons. The liquid metal provided the ability for her to disguise the robot beneath.

stillakid
07-14-2003, 10:17 PM
The T1000 could not form machines with moving parts. In the first Terminator Kyle mentions "something about the field generated by a living organism...nothing dead will go....I didn't build the FN thing!". In T2, the T1000 "breaks" that rule. I remember no explanation given for the "exception" that allows the liquid metal to travel through time. However, If the T1000 with it's liquid metal exterior can utilize the dynamics of the system and the T101 with its metal endo-skeleton can do the same, there is no reason to believe that the TX shouldn't be able to do the same. Something about that liquid metal is "organic" enough for the time travel equipment to allow it to pass. Perhaps they simply figured out how to generate a "field" similar to that of a living organism.


Hmm, interesting. I haven't watched T1 for quite some time so I'd forgotten about that.

Well, this being the case, why not just have an army of Terminator models emerge from energy bubbles out into 1998 or so and wipe out everything in their path? This would A) keep the story "current" for the audience, and B) be pretty f'n cool to watch. I mean, the post-nuclear war humans had a big fight on their hands because they were caught off guard. Imagine a fair fight. The Army vs. the Terminators! It would kind of be like Independence Day except more of a ground war than purely aerial battles. I'd get in line for sure. :)

scruffziller
07-29-2003, 10:29 PM
One thing I have figured out was that there had to be a John Connor in the original timeline version without the terminator. I believe that John Connor had a different dad in the original timeline. I believe this becuae I can't buy the fact that something is only created because of time travel. Things may change how they happen but the out come is the same. Just as T3 explains about how Skynet comes into existence. It was differnet in T2 to T3 so I believe there was another way that happened before T1.

Anakin2121
07-30-2003, 04:08 PM
Imagine a fair fight. The Army vs. the Terminators! It would kind of be like Independence Day except more of a ground war than purely aerial battles. I'd get in line for sure. :)

Actually, I thought that's what T4 would be about: The Future War itself, the sequences that we see tiny bits of in the first three movies but never get to truly enjoy. :)

Pendo
07-30-2003, 04:28 PM
I'm not sure if I'd enjoy a movie set during the future war. I don't really enjoy chaotic war movies like that. It could be cool to see that war though, I just hope the movie would be better that T3 :p.

:crazed:

PENDO!

scruffziller
07-31-2003, 09:22 AM
Actually, I thought that's what T4 would be about : The Future War itself, the sequences that we see tiny bits of in the first three movies but never get to truly enjoy. :)

If that is the case, there is probably going to be more after T4.

OC47150
08-14-2003, 03:06 PM
At the bookstore last night, I saw a T3 2004 calendar. One of the month's pictures is one of Ah-nuld wearing a red beret. It's obviously a promo shot that wasn't used. Is this the model for the Terminator or something else? Has anyone else seen the pix?

Pendo
08-14-2003, 03:31 PM
I've seen it. I think it is what he was wearing to infultrate John Connor's base in the future and kill him. It could possibly be in the T3 game, as I heard that scene is in it :).

PENDO!

OC47150
08-14-2003, 03:33 PM
I hadn't heard that. Thanks!

scruffziller
08-15-2003, 08:57 AM
I've seen it. I think it is what he was wearing to infultrate John Connor's base in the future and kill him. It could possibly be in the T3 game, as I heard that scene is in it :).

PENDO!

Hopefully that will be a deleted scene on the DVD.

OC47150
08-15-2003, 09:08 AM
We'll know in a couple of months, won't we?

scruffziller
08-15-2003, 09:13 AM
Hmm, interesting. I haven't watched T1 for quite some time so I'd forgotten about that.

Well, this being the case, why not just have an army of Terminator models emerge from energy bubbles out into 1998 or so and wipe out everything in their path? This would A) keep the story "current" for the audience, and B) be pretty f'n cool to watch. I mean, the post-nuclear war humans had a big fight on their hands because they were caught off guard. Imagine a fair fight. The Army vs. the Terminators! It would kind of be like Independence Day except more of a ground war than purely aerial battles. I'd get in line for sure. :)

Probably the reasoning for that is that it is more difficult to utilze energy, resources, etc. to make it happen so it only happens a few times. Or they might be sending alot of them out there at different times(or same) but are ending up in different realities (a-la PARALLELS:Star Trek NG). Here, in the reality they are filming only 3 assasins have reached it in the same timeline. And perhaps the humans may know something the machines don't about how to pinpoint the linking reality. Thus ultimately defeating the machines. Thus sending Ah-nuld and John's Dad to the correct timeline reality that links with future from which they are being sent.

Tycho
01-29-2007, 02:38 AM
This movie still holds up! The majority of us liked it upon re-reading this thread.

They did a good job even without Cameron or Hamilton (or Furlong).

I hope we'll see Terminator 4 next year. They're supposed to start filming now - as was the word the other year.