Terminator Genisys (July 1st, 2015)

[Snake Plissken]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

Terminator is very subjective to the person on what is canon, and how the timelines work... can't be any more apparent since the studios don't even know what the hell they're doing anymore to keep it coherent.

Personally, the series begins and ends with T1-2.

Cameron-verse > everything else

 

[Johnny Utah]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

For me it's all T1/T2/T:SCC, and Malibu's Terminator 2 comic series in the 90s. Extremely well done for its time.

 

[a-dev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

Considering T-1000 was autonomous, I always wondered why it followed Skynet commands anyway. It was learning just like the T-800, even more so. Why didn't it just think, "eh, who gives a **** about John Connor" and do it's own thing?

Cameron and Bill Wisher said the T-1000 was Skynet's last ditch effort to save itself, and that even Skynet feared the T-1000 prototype. If that's the case, it might have been interesting if T-1000 went AWOL.

It's a cool idea and while the RP T-1000 didn't rebel it seems like The Sarah Connor Chronicles were going that way with their version of the T-1000. Shame we didn't get to see that pan out.

It would've. It definitely gave a headscratcher to T3. The TX seemed more like backward technology with the mimetic polyalloy around the endo when that wasn't even necessary for the T1000.

Yeah she was crap. An ''anti-Terminator Terminator''? Arnie's Terminator ends up beating her one-handed.

In the video game Dawn of Fate, (fun little game) it explains that John and Kyle get to this complex inside Skynet's main base, and discover the first T-800 sent through. John reasons it is the time machine and the complex they are in is somehow resistant to time "distortions" or whatever. It doesn't explain anything about the T2 terminators, but I think it is a good jumping off point.

Actually that's not a bad idea. I'm not sure how scientifically accurate it would be but then the whole idea of time travel is whack according to science, particularly time travel into the past. The idea that the time displacement equipment perhaps create a temporal distortion inside of which everything will remain unaffected by timeline changes until the distortion dissipates or something. Star Trek First Contact had something similar where the Borg travel into the past through a ''temporal vortex''. The Enterprise gets into the ''wake'' of this vortex. Before they actually make it through the portal itself they scan Earth and find that it is entirely borg. Earth has become assimilated in an instant and yet the Enterprise and its crew still exist - they explain that the wake must have protected them from the changes to the timeline - otherwise they would have ceased to exist.
If something similar were going on in Terminator it would explain why the resistance has the time to send Reese and Uncle Bob back - assuming they were already inside this temporal distortion i.e Skynet had only very recently sent its Terminators back as the resistance broke into the facility. Meanwhile as far as the world outside was concerned Sarah Connor had been killed by the T-800, John Connor was never born.

Why'd I never think of that before? Star Trek First Contact has been out since 1996. It has a made-up but workable answer to the Terminator problem and, unless someone else can think of something, it need not be contradicted by anything presented in T1 and T2.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

I guess I have to add a-dev's name to DiFabio's "I Saved the Terminator Franchise" t-shirt.

It will be way at the bottom in small letters though.

 

[a-dev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

To his credit Indiana there presented the idea, I merely elaborated on it, gave another example and explained how it could indeed apply to Terminator aswell.

It would also explain away the question of why Skynet persists with this strategy of time travel and why the resistance even bothers to respond. Well, if we go with the Star Trek First Contact theory, it actually might have worked had the resistance not already been inside in the facility and if they had taken no action.

It would become more problematic though if you keep having separate time travel events in which each time the resistance happens to be inside the distortion enabling their response. It would be overly coincidental.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

... ...

 

[Khev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

I like the idea of a second soldier going with Reese and being impaled when appearing within a solid object. The arrival of both Arnold and Reese was very clean and convenient (no solid objects, even the cops that immediately spy Reese still work out in his favor since he learns the date and gets a pistol and shotgun.) Having Sumner die in such an abrupt and tragic manner would have been one more element showcasing how risky every aspect of Reese's mission was.

On another note I just find the idea of an original timeline with a non-Reese conceived John Connor who does win the war just freaky and disturbing. Think about it. History plays out without any time travel or paradoxes. Just nuclear war, machines, and then machines vs. man. Connor is born without any craziness and steps up and through his heroism and leadership the humans defeat the machines. But the machines in one last ditch effort try to prevent Connor's existence so that they won't lose. They send the T-800 back and it fails to kill Sarah. But Reese goes back and as already suggested by DiFabio conceives a son with Sarah instead of John's original dad and eradicates his savior's entire existence! And this is completely unbeknownst to everyone because Sarah chooses to name her NEW son "John" on account of Reese's tale. "Now I know what to name him."

But that is NOT John Connor the hero who originally saves the resistance and sends back Reese. It's Reese's boy who erased the original John, and then through happenstance appears to be a self-fulfilling prophecy "guy named John is born to Sarah and leads the resistance" but it's just blind luck (or fate) that both boys raised by Sarah accomplished victory over the machines. Everybody (machines and humans) thinks that both parties played with the timeline and ultimately just created some chaos in 1980's/90's Los Angeles but then events still played out the same. But they didn't. The machines achieved total victory over that first John. Because of his heroism he was forever erased by Reese's actions and no one will ever have any concept of who that original John was. Ever. It will always be Reese's John that people just think was stuck in a paradoxical loop and one man, that can never be recalled by anyone, who paid the ultimate price. Not death. Not a celebrated hero's sacrifice. But complete erasure. *shudder*

 

[RIDDICK]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

View attachment 102039

 

[a-dev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

I like the idea of a second soldier going with Reese and being impaled when appearing within a solid object. The arrival of both Arnold and Reese was very clean and convenient (no solid objects, even the cops that immediately spy Reese still work out in his favor since he learns the date and gets a pistol and shotgun.) Having Sumner die in such an abrupt and tragic manner would have been one more element showcasing how risky every aspect of Reese's mission was.

On another note I just find the idea of an original timeline with a non-Reese conceived John Connor who does win the war just freaky and disturbing. Think about it. History plays out without any time travel or paradoxes. Just nuclear war, machines, and then machines vs. man. Connor is born without any craziness and steps up and through his heroism and leadership the humans defeat the machines. But the machines in one last ditch effort try to prevent Connor's existence so that they won't lose. They send the T-800 back and it fails to kill Sarah. But Reese goes back and as already suggested by DiFabio conceives a son with Sarah instead of John's original dad and eradicates his savior's entire existence! And this is completely unbeknownst to everyone because Sarah chooses to name her NEW son "John" on account of Reese's tale. "Now I know what to name him."

But that is NOT John Connor the hero who originally saves the resistance and sends back Reese. It's Reese's boy who erased the original John, and then through happenstance appears to be a self-fulfilling prophecy "guy named John is born to Sarah and leads the resistance" but it's just blind luck (or fate) that both boys raised by Sarah accomplished victory over the machines. Everybody (machines and humans) thinks that both parties played with the timeline and ultimately just created some chaos in 1980's/90's Los Angeles but then events still played out the same. But they didn't. The machines achieved total victory over that first John. Because of his heroism he was forever erased by Reese's actions and no one will ever have any concept of who that original John was. Ever. It will always be Reese's John that people just think was stuck in a paradoxical loop and one man, that can never be recalled by anyone, who paid the ultimate price. Not death. Not a celebrated hero's sacrifice. But complete erasure. *shudder*

Its a pretty damn good idea. And it actually seems like it could work even in the context of what Cameron actually put on screen. Reese can indeed be the father of the John he knew in T1's particular iteration of events and thus he wasn't lying or giving false information to Sarah. He and no other character knows, either man or machine, that this was not always the case, that 'John Connor' was originally an entirely different individual born of Sarah Connor but not fathered by Reese.

I just don't think Cameron had such a thing in mind. I wish he did.

 

[steven.giunta]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

No fate but what we make!!!!!!

 

[Khev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

Its a pretty damn good idea. And it actually seems like it could work even in the context of what Cameron actually put on screen. Reese can indeed be the father of the John he knew in T1's particular iteration of events and thus he wasn't lying or giving false information to Sarah. He and no other character knows, either man or machine, that this was not always the case, that 'John Connor' was originally an entirely different individual born of Sarah Connor but not fathered by Reese.

I just don't think Cameron had such a thing in mind. I wish he did.

I've actually considered the notion of an "original John Connor" a number of times over the years (and have had conversations with my friends just as geeky as this one) and it's all okay if each travel to the past creates an alternate universe (so the first John still lives out his life but the T-800 and Reese create an alternate timeline when they go back that has a slightly altered "future" and so on.) But if there are no alternate universes and it's just one timeline in one reality and John 1 got permanently erased from existence....yikes.

 

[thenammagazine]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

I like the idea of a second soldier going with Reese and being impaled when appearing within a solid object. The arrival of both Arnold and Reese was very clean and convenient (no solid objects, even the cops that immediately spy Reese still work out in his favor since he learns the date and gets a pistol and shotgun.) Having Sumner die in such an abrupt and tragic manner would have been one more element showcasing how risky every aspect of Reese's mission was.

On another note I just find the idea of an original timeline with a non-Reese conceived John Connor who does win the war just freaky and disturbing. Think about it. History plays out without any time travel or paradoxes. Just nuclear war, machines, and then machines vs. man. Connor is born without any craziness and steps up and through his heroism and leadership the humans defeat the machines. But the machines in one last ditch effort try to prevent Connor's existence so that they won't lose. They send the T-800 back and it fails to kill Sarah. But Reese goes back and as already suggested by DiFabio conceives a son with Sarah instead of John's original dad and eradicates his savior's entire existence! And this is completely unbeknownst to everyone because Sarah chooses to name her NEW son "John" on account of Reese's tale. "Now I know what to name him."

But that is NOT John Connor the hero who originally saves the resistance and sends back Reese. It's Reese's boy who erased the original John, and then through happenstance appears to be a self-fulfilling prophecy "guy named John is born to Sarah and leads the resistance" but it's just blind luck (or fate) that both boys raised by Sarah accomplished victory over the machines. Everybody (machines and humans) thinks that both parties played with the timeline and ultimately just created some chaos in 1980's/90's Los Angeles but then events still played out the same. But they didn't. The machines achieved total victory over that first John. Because of his heroism he was forever erased by Reese's actions and no one will ever have any concept of who that original John was. Ever. It will always be Reese's John that people just think was stuck in a paradoxical loop and one man, that can never be recalled by anyone, who paid the ultimate price. Not death. Not a celebrated hero's sacrifice. But complete erasure. *shudder*

It certainly explains why the adult John Connor in T2 looks nothing like the one in Salvation.

 

[Khev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

We need a "Terminator: Universes of Future Past" movie where Reese's John tries to go back and restore the original John. Maybe he's the only one to really ponder how he could exist in a paradoxical loop and commits to restoring the man that he erased.

John 2 to John 1: "Come with me if you want to exist."

 

[a-dev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

I've actually considered the notion of an "original John Connor" a number of times over the years (and have had conversations with my friends just as geeky as this one) and it's all okay if each travel to the past creates an alternate universe (so the first John still lives out his life but the T-800 and Reese create an alternate timeline when they go back that has a slightly altered "future" and so on.) But if there are no alternate universes and it's just one timeline in one reality and John 1 got permanently erased from existence....yikes.

The only way they could acknowledge it in the actual movies is if some character really thought it through as we are attempting and postulated the idea. Even then it would just be an 'idea' to them. They couldn't prove it had been the case.

 

[Khev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

See my post above. Who better to ponder such musings than "John" himself?

 

[a-dev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

See my post above. Who better to ponder such musings than "John" himself?

Even if he thought about it I don't think the Reese-fathered John would take any action to potentially undo his own particular existence, certainly not based on an idea of some 'might have been'.

 

[steven.giunta]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

We need a "Terminator: Universes of Future Past" movie where Reese's John tries to go back and restore the original John. Maybe he's the only one to really ponder how he could exist in a paradoxical loop and commits to restoring the man that he erased.

John 2 to John 1: "Come with me if you want to exist."

Or he could go back to the day he sent Reese back and give him a box of condoms for his trip.

 

[Khev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

Even if he thought about it I don't think the Reese-fathered John would take any action to potentially undo his own particular existence, certainly not based on an idea of some 'might have been'.

Yes. The risks would be so astronomical he'd definitely need more than an assumption to go on. He could erase himself as you say or even inadvertently change something that lets the machines win. He'd almost need some kind of godlike awareness of whether or not there are multiple universes (in which case the original John wouldn't need saving, he'd just be living out his life on a parallel world) and if he could find out that there was just one reality and that a previous John *had* been erased he'd need to have some way of enabling the existence of both men. Maybe find a way for Sarah to have twins. And then you can work in human Arnold and Danny DeVito and the strong John Connor twin is what the machines base the 101 off of and....okay I'm getting a little carried away.

 

[a-dev]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

And so original John seemingly is erased forever. Kyle Reese's fault.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: Terminator: Genesis (July 1st, 2015)

I'm glad a-dev and Khev are intrigued by the original John Connor. Last night I thought I was nuts.

Seriously though, **** this "older Arnold Terminator" ****. I'd love to see a film/story that depicts the very first timeline that follows the original John Connor, then see all this stuff like the future war, Skynet, the time displacement field, Terminators, the cold storage room, etc. Then all these different scenarios.

You'd think Kyle Reese would be like, "d'oh, what the **** am I doing, I'm bangin' John's mom" at some point! I mean, he's even like, "up, shouldn't have said that". Then again, he had no idea that they'd conceive John. The REAL mind **** is the fact that, after the events of T2, Kyle Reese never exists. Poetic irony? Kyle Reese erased the original John Connor. The new John Connor pined to see his dad when he was older. Since John, Sarah and the Terminator destroyed Cyberdyne, Skynet won't exist. No Skynet, no Judgment Day. No Judgment Day, no Kyle Reese.

Even though it's all prevented, Sarah and John still have to live with the fact that they're out of their own time and they ain't never going to see Kyle Reese again.