John Connor

I think the biggest **** up occurred in the first film. Reece has just explained to Sarah that the terminator is an unsympathetic machine that will stop at nothing short of its own destruction to kill Sarah, They then drive off being chased by said terminator in a police car. The police car crashes and Reese and Sarah's car stops right next to it... When they look over the terminator has run away. Anyone else have alarm bells ringing. They were less than 3m apart why the hell did the terminator not just get out of the car and put its fist through Reese and Sarah's Head?

I think the real story is as follows for the Terminator Films

Skynet becomes aware and takes over. It develops time travel and develops a plot to become aware "Earlier in Time" in order to prevent the resistance from winning the war. it does so by sending a terminator back into the past with the instructions of attacking an individual. Knowing that a soldier would follow the terminator into the past this leads to the terminator being destroyed but allowing for its recovery so that skynet can become online "Years ahead of its time".

I think each attempt to kill Connors is an attempt to ensure he keeps the course of "Skynets history" on track however the Destruction of the Skynet Buildings was not foreseen and probably reverted the time line back to Pre T1 (ie jumping back into the past to kill Connors).


It could also be argued that every Terminator film we see is on a different time line than Pre the first Jump in time (which dates the original T1 film)
 
Kronologic said:
I think the biggest **** up occurred in the first film. Reece has just explained to Sarah that the terminator is an unsympathetic machine that will stop at nothing short of its own destruction to kill Sarah, They then drive off being chased by said terminator in a police car. The police car crashes and Reese and Sarah's car stops right next to it... When they look over the terminator has run away. Anyone else have alarm bells ringing. They were less than 3m apart why the hell did the terminator not just get out of the car and put its fist through Reese and Sarah's Head?
Click to expand...

Didn't he damage his eye or something? I guess he made a calculated decision that it would be better to go and repair or whatever and fight later rather than take them on whilst damaged and potentially fail his mission because of the handicap caused by the car crash.
 
Aye, if memory serves he retreats to affect repairs on his eye.

Unstoppable doesn't mean it's not willing and able to pause in the pursuit of it's ultimate goals if that pause increases the chances of it's mission being successful
If anything it's the most logical course of action, as it's mission isn't massively time critical at that point, so it's better for it to go into action as close to 100% effective as possible than risk going in at an unnecessary disadvantage and failing.
 
yeah not believing those injuries either tbh. When you consider 2 scenes later he trashes a police station etc or later gets burnt in an explosion and keeps going or blown up with c4.

and how hard would it have been to walk those 3m and kill her I mean we have all seen what a T100 can do.
 
Kronologic said:
yeah not believing those injuries either tbh. When you consider 2 scenes later he trashes a police station etc or later gets burnt in an explosion and keeps going or blown up with c4.

and how hard would it have been to walk those 3m and kill her I mean we have all seen what a T100 can do.
Click to expand...

The thing is, he crashed his car head on into a wall, without a seatbelt. He may have felt some shock to his systems. The police were bearing down on them in considerable number. The terminator may have decided that in his weakened state that he might get taken down by the police and their cars and not complete his mission. When he attacks the cop shop, it is on HIS terms, with his systems fully functional.

And, the distance between the two cars is closer to 30m than it is to 3.

About Reese being the father: I once read a theory that Sarah was already up the stick from a one night stand. The kid would have been born with or without Reese. She called her kid "John" in the original timeline. Reese comes from the first timeline into the second and tells her the kid's name from the first timeline. The only paradox from this scenario is the photo, but if you make a leap and consider the photo that Reese has is just dramatic licence, and that Reese probably had another photograph, then that clears up that paradox.
 
Personally I thought it was genius that the 3rd film wrote off the efforts of the 2nd as merely a return to the original timeline before the 1st film. It explained the apparent paradox of the 2nd anyway - the 'I'm my own Grandfather' scenario i.e. that the birth of Skynet was the result of sending it's own Terminator back in time to plant the seeds of technology.
 
Skyfall said:
What I never get about the terminator films is why, each time they managed to get enough power to send someone back in time they didn't send them to the same time as the first terminator, giving him a better chance at kiling Sarah.
Click to expand...

Skynet should be able to do a whole host of stuff to ensure the complete demise of John Connor. But on the other hand, they have to be discrete and targetted, since skynet also has it's inception to consider. A difficult one.

Skyfall said:
Also the whole rhys being John's dad doesn't make sense, if John Connor exists it is because rhys was sent back in time, so in the timeline where the terminator was sent back to kill Sarah Skynet would have to already know that their original terminator failed it's mission, not to mention the subsequent missions.
Click to expand...

Skynet doesn't know everything. Besides, it might be the case that the action of sending back the Terminator wouldn't affect their universe, but would cause the universe to split off in a random direction.

Skyfall said:
God the Paradoxes raised in T3 make things even worse, if as the terminator says "Judgement day is inevitable, you only posponed it" then surely it follows that it was impossible to kill John as he was inevitabley(sp?) part of it.
Click to expand...

No. John isn't inevitabily tied to judgement day. If the Terminator had succeeded in assasinating John then Judgement Day would still have happened?
 
Last edited:
All this talk about time paradoxes and the terminator series as a whole is extremely interesting - but unfortunately making my head hurt lol. :)

Why do most of you think T3 is crap? i thought it was ok...
 
Bengaboy said:
All this talk about time paradoxes and the terminator series as a whole is extremely interesting - but unfortunately making my head hurt lol. :)

Why do most of you think T3 is crap? i thought it was ok...
Click to expand...

I thought it was ok, but was more like a film on its own rather than part of a series of films, if you get what I mean. :)
 
I do get what you mean, but pardon my ignorance - why do you think that?

Is it because all the issues and events raised in T1 and T2 didnt really matter as T3 made its own issues and events that make no sense in the terminator timeline (if that makes sense lol) , thats what i think people posting in this thread have said.

I dont see why though. T3 to me seems like it fits in the timeline and events and bla,bla,bla ok - why doesnt it? lol :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom