Terminator

[Hurlshort]

Ok, I'm watching the pilot right now, and it actually seems pretty solid. It takes place shortly after T2, so the cops are after Sara and John. There's a Terminator trying to kill John, but there's also a surprising female Terminator protecting him. It's Willow from Firefly. I was pretty shocked! Sara Connor is played by the lady who played the queen in 300. She's pretty good as well.

 

The bad Terminator seems pretty generic, why couldn't they get the liquid guy from T2? He's not doing anything, I saw him in a WWE movie awhile back and he could use the work. John is also played by someone I've never seen before.

 

Anyways, considering the writer strike has basically killed new shows, this is a decent little gem amongst all the reality crap.

[Hurlshort]

Ok, after finishing the episode and reading up a bit on wikipedia, I have no clue what crazy timeline they are using here. It's going to be an odd series, that's for sure.

[GreasyDogMeat]

 

At the end of the first episode Sarah, John and the female terminator go through a 'time warp' to our modern 2008 time. This is actually a fairly clever way to use an alternate storyline to the Terminater 3 version of the future.

 

As for the series... I really don't know yet.

 

[Sand]

The new Terminator series is pretty decent. I have seen better, but I have seen worse.

 

Also Hurlie, Willow is from Buffy. River is from Firefly/Serenity.

Edited January 29, 2008 by Sand

[Humodour]

The bad Terminator seems pretty generic, why couldn't they get the liquid guy from T2? He's not doing anything, I saw him in a WWE movie awhile back and he could use the work. John is also played by someone I've never seen before.

 

Not to spoil, but the vibe I'm getting is that there is no main terminator, hence being generic.

[Sand]

Pretty much. Remember, these guys come off an assembly line then dipped in a cloning vat. The T1000 was a prototype as was the Terminatrix in the third movie. The ones that Arnold played and the ones in the television series are the basic generic T101 endoskeleton terminator with cloned fleshy covering.

[Dark_Raven]

Looks good to me. But the mess we make when we go and tamper around with the timeline. If Skynet was so smart if would go back to the time before Sarah was concieved and kill one or both of her parents.

[Guard Dog]

Looks good to me. But the mess we make when we go and tamper around with the timeline. If Skynet was so smart if would go back to the time before Sarah was concieved and kill one or both of her parents.

 

Actually, if you really want to start poking at the whole concept let's look at the first movie:

 

Event 1: Skynet has a time machine, they are losing the war. They send terminator back in time to kill JC.

Event 2: Shortly after resistance wins, finds time machine and sends someone back in time to stop teminator.

 

Why did they bother? If time did not change the instant the terminator went back it's obvious he blew it and there would be no need to save anyone. And if he did kill Conner, none of the resistance or machines would ever know about it anyway. The whole concept is a little screwy no matter how you look at it.

[Humodour]

Looks good to me. But the mess we make when we go and tamper around with the timeline. If Skynet was so smart if would go back to the time before Sarah was concieved and kill one or both of her parents.

 

Actually, if you really want to start poking at the whole concept let's look at the first movie:

 

Event 1: Skynet has a time machine, they are losing the war. They send terminator back in time to kill JC.

Event 2: Shortly after resistance wins, finds time machine and sends someone back in time to stop teminator.

 

Why did they bother? If time did not change the instant the terminator went back it's obvious he blew it and there would be no need to save anyone. And if he did kill Conner, none of the resistance or machines would ever know about it anyway. The whole concept is a little screwy no matter how you look at it.

 

[Hurlshort]

The new Terminator series is pretty decent. I have seen better, but I have seen worse.

 

Also Hurlie, Willow is from Buffy. River is from Firefly/Serenity.

 

Ooops, you are very right. I can't keep my fantasy TV series characters straight. This is almost as embarrassing as when Spike became an FBI agent in Bones and Angel became a Billy Idol impersonator on the Las vegas strip.

[Sand]

Actually, if you really want to start poking at the whole concept let's look at the first movie:

 

Event 1: Skynet has a time machine, they are losing the war. They send terminator back in time to kill JC.

Event 2: Shortly after resistance wins, finds time machine and sends someone back in time to stop teminator.

 

Why did they bother? If time did not change the instant the terminator went back it's obvious he blew it and there would be no need to save anyone. And if he did kill Conner, none of the resistance or machines would ever know about it anyway. The whole concept is a little screwy no matter how you look at it.

 

It depends on the how you view temporal changes. Some say that time will change in an instant at the present whenever you change the past. In other works of science fiction when you introduce changes to the past it creates a tangent timeline which is splintered from the original. While other authors view time has to "catch up" whenever changes are done in the past so those in the present have moments to reacts before the changes are permanent.

 

"Circular temporal physics makes me dizzy."

[Hurlshort]

The time machine concept was a bit easier to swallow before this TV series. It seemed like a rather difficult trick to pull off, but now they are saying some engineer was sent back to 1963 and created one. What are the limits here? It almost seemed like there was some sort of limited window to send stuff back, hence the reason that you have a good and bad character being sent back through at the same time in the three movies.

 

So where are the limits on time travel? Why not just send an entire army back?

[Guard Dog]

It depends on the how you view temporal changes. Some say that time will change in an instant at the present whenever you change the past. In other works of science fiction when you introduce changes to the past it creates a tangent timeline which is splintered from the original. While other authors view time has to "catch up" whenever changes are done in the past so those in the present have moments to reacts before the changes are permanent.

 

"Circular temporal physics makes me dizzy."

 

I'd think if such a thing were possible any change would happen instantly, the very moment a time jump happened. Heck the very act of sending someone through time cannot help but change the future from the point they appeared. No matter what they do they will effect some change that may seem small in the present tense but make unknowable changes in the future. That was the premise to Ray Brabury's The Sound of Thunder.

 

But of course it is impossible. I think Stephen Hawking said it best, if time travel were possible they would already be here telling us about it.

[Sand]

But of course it is impossible. I think Stephen Hawking said it best, if time travel were possible they would already be here telling us about it.

 

Unless, of course, they are taking great pains to hide the fact that time travel is possible or that this era is just not important enough to visit.

Edited January 29, 2008 by Sand

[Fighter]

Time travel plots rarely make any sense. Best to not fret over it.

[Hurlshort]

Time travel plots rarely make any sense. Best to not fret over it.

 

Except for Jean Claude Van Damme's "Timecop". That movie was wicked accurate.

[Sand]

Timecop is the best movie Van Damme has ever done.

[Gfted1]

^I would have to vote Bloodsport for best Van Damme movie.

[Blarghagh]

The Terminator's paradox hurts my head.

 

I mean, John Connor sends his own dad into the past to become his dad, right?

 

But... his dad only becomes his dad because he sent him back into time. So... if you go back to the original timeline, eventually there will be no John Connor, because he wasn't there to send his dad back in time to become his dad and get born. Ow.

 

Also, why doesn't Skynet just send some terminator to kill John Connor's great great granpappy or something?

[Krookie]

You're asking to many questions, just let the bullets fly and gas tanks explode in an actiony style and everyone will be happy

[kirottu]

I'd think if such a thing were possible any change would happen instantly, the very moment a time jump happened. Heck the very act of sending someone through time cannot help but change the future from the point they appeared.

 

If you would send someone back in time to change something, wouldn

[Pidesco]

The only way to get away with a time traveling plot without paradoxes is to make the whole thing a self fulfilling prophecy.

[Hurlshort]

You're asking to many questions, just let the bullets fly and gas tanks explode in an actiony style and everyone will be happy

 

I agree, that's why I think they should stay away from the time travel stuff as much as possible.

[Dark_Raven]

Good old temporal mechanics.

 

If Jon sends Kyle back and prevents the Apocalypse, it would mean he would have been born because he would not have been able to send back Kyle because he would not exist the results of the timeline being changed.

 

Back to the topic, I guess the hottie terminaor is suppose to appeal to the younger crowds.

[Humodour]

I hate you guys. You're forcing me to think about it.

 

This is why I suspend disbelief when watching Terminator, Dr. Who, Back to the Future, etc.