Every other show's been getting a new thread, and my personal favorite was feeling left out. (If anyone is unaware, Terminator now airs on Fridays at 8:00, on Fox)
SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT
The last two episodes didn't feel quite as good as the first half of season 2, but still pretty good overall. Things that vex me:
I was hoping Riley would end up telling John what was going on. Guess not. I'm more confused about why Jesse pulled her out of the hospital. What was that supposed to accomplish. Now everyone's looking for her and will be asking more questions.
Was the dead guy at the end of last episode Catharine's henchman? If so, why did the drone kill him and not John and Sarah?
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
I'm not sure the drone did kill him.
Cameron hasn't really had anything to do for a while, which is disappointing.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:I'm more confused about why Jesse pulled her out of the hospital. What was that supposed to accomplish.
Probably because she doesn't want Riley blabbing away. She wants her on a short leash now.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I want more Cameron. She barely does anything now.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
On one hand, I know they can't make every episode center around Cameron. She's not actually the main character and they do have a larger story to tell. The last episode to feature her prominently is three episodes ago. For a show with four main characters that's about right.
That being said, she IS by far the most interesting character and if they're gonna focus on other people they better start making them more interesting. They're also kinda bad at the more plot driven (as opposed to character driven) episodes and need to find a way to make them feel less shoehorned.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
Editted to add: Never mind I haven't see the most recent episode yet. Duh *thwack self*
[ February 22, 2009, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: Alcon ]
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
I think Cameron is the most interesting character in the show. At times it seems as though she actually has feelings for John, not just as a protector but as someone she cares about deeply. I know that is strange to say about a machine, but at times I think she may actually "love" him.
I always sensed a hint of jealousy whenever John was hanging out with Riley. It may just be her not wanting John to take a risk with her, but I think it is more than that.
In the first episode Cameron was smiling and laughing and acting like a normal person when John met her at school. Then when he had to get away and she saved him she reverted to acting like a true machine. She may have feelings and is hiding them to prevent John from getting to emotionally attached like he did with the Governator's character in Terminator 2.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
That was a pretty weird episode. Took me forever to figure out what was going on. At first I was kinda disappointed that they just happened to sign up for sleep therapy at a Skynet facility. I felt a lot better after the double fakeout.
Still hoping for a Cameron-centric episode. I don't think it's accurate to say she can actually feel love or jealousy, but I think her brain is complex enough that she may have thought processes similar to emotions, even if they "feel" completely different.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
That was bizarre. I was completely fooled. How on Earth did that guy survive? Wasn't he supposed to be decidedly dead? And which of those "dream sequences" with him was real? All of them? Some of them seemed diverge from each other, go on different paths. Strange...
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I think the explanation of the guy surviving was reasonable - Sarah was just as mortally and she found help. If he had people with resources helping him he would have fared even better.
I'm still a bit confused about what happened between Sarah seeing the Drone in the Earthlings Welcome episode and the one after.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
I'm trying to think of the possibilities in the love or sexual interest thing between Cameron an John.
1. It could be that Cameron is going through something akin to the machines becoming self aware, but this would be a next step, with the machines developing a conscience. It seems to me that the mystique of John Connor is that he can get humans to work together in ways that logic can't account for. So the machines, in an attempt to understand this mechanism, are making a study of human emotionm and developing emotions themselves. Not that the machines would understand love or sex, but that they would recognize the power it has in human lives, so they would make a concerted effort to understand it.
2. There is also the bit with Riley and Jesse working to prevent Cameron from influencing John. What little we know is that Jesse thinks John was being influenced by Cameron in the future, and Cameron came back in time to increase that influence in preparation for Judgment day, whenever that is. Cameron may recognize either Jesse or Riley from the future, but it's in her interest to keep her mouth shut. But it does explain her "jealousy" as she recognizes that Riley is actively trying to undermine whatever it is she's doing. So she's trying to use what she's got to keep John away from Riley.
3. Future John could have programmed Cameron as a sex toy, specifically to prevent him from being distracted by a real live girl and losing his focus. Somehow I doubt it, but the seduction thing is pretty freaky.
Any other possibilities?
quote:Was the dead guy at the end of last episode Catharine's henchman? If so, why did the drone kill him and not John and Sarah?
I think he may be exactly what he said he was: an OSHA inspector investigating the "accident." We still don't know why cows die around the drone pond (Thunderbirds, anyone?) but I doubt they are being killed on purpose. I suspect that the OSHA guy stumbled onto the same thing that kills cows, but if it's not the drone, then what is it?
But I'm not sure that Catharine is actually trying to create skynet, or that the drone factory was part of her operation. I actually wonder if she may be studying human emotions as per number one above, and that Cameron is the result of her work.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I'm pretty sure the "OSHA guy" was the guy who stole the Turk for Catherine Weaver, so there's there we don't know yet.
quote:1. It could be that Cameron is going through something akin to the machines becoming self aware, but this would be a next step, with the machines developing a conscience. It seems to me that the mystique of John Connor is that he can get humans to work together in ways that logic can't account for. So the machines, in an attempt to understand this mechanism, are making a study of human emotionm and developing emotions themselves. Not that the machines would understand love or sex, but that they would recognize the power it has in human lives, so they would make a concerted effort to understand it.
I'm pretty sure this is the case, but I'm not sure whether Cameron is currently acting at the behest of other machines, for future John, or her own volition.
In episode 1 of Season 2, when John turns her back on and gives her the gun, we see that she still has orders to terminate him, but that she somehow overrides them. I don't think that's an ability the machines would have given her, so I suspect John programmed it into her himself.
In Season 1, at some point she says she doesn't remember Derek, because all reprogrammed Terminators are wiped clean ("it increases the success rate", presumably because they don't have lingering Skynet orders that could reassert themselves). I think Cameron is partially lying there - most terminators are wiped, but she wasn't.
In the Cameron Origin story, she claims that she represents a faction of machines that want peace, and that John wants it to. I assume this is somewhat true, although there's a lot of things about it that don't make sense right now. But I suspect John needed her original memory intact for the peace mission to be successful (the whole point of establishing peace is somewhat muted when you send back the ambassador with a lobotomy), but if he gave her the ability to override orders, that might explain a degree of loyalty to him.
I think the most interesting way for the "love" story to play out is for her to not have traditional human emotions at all, but to have developed a fixation on him for the reasons Dad (Dad? Glenn? Not sure what to go about calling you here) mentioned above, and to be protecting him because she chooses to rather than because that's what her orders are.
The episode with the wheelchair guy shows her trying to figure out how friendship works (failing miserably). I think she considered that guy a sort of "practice run" for becoming John's friend and developing some of that mystical friendship-power that humans have that robots just don't get.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Another random question: in the latest episode, there's a scene where Cameron is walking past John in a bikini. This scene takes place in what we eventually learn was Sarah's nightmare, but wasn't "visible" to Sarah. So did that really happen? Nightmares don't necessarily follow rules, so Sarah could have been seeing John at that point and having Cameron walking around looking sexy (or at least trying to, I actually thought it looked a little dumb) was just part of the Nightmare.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:(Dad? Glenn? Not sure what to go about calling you here)
It's pretty common on Hatrack to call people by their actual name, if you know it, rather than their screen name. If other people reading the thread don't know who you're talking to, that's just tough luck apparently. So you can call me whatever you feel comfortable calling me, and if people can't keep up, well...
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Cameron frequently had wardrobe boundary errors early in the series. :shrug: I think it was just a tease to keep the audience from giving up on why we need 3 episodes of Sarah figuring out that sometimes bad guys need to die. I think the actress whined for more focus on her or she'd walk, and it's killing the show.
Also, I think Jesse and blonde whats her name are actually trying to separate John and Sarah. In the original timeline, Sarah died and John had to grow up. Now that she didn't die, all the issues about her protecting him are there. Also, John is suddenly... what, 7 years younger? in the future. Finally, they always talk about getting him away from "her" but they talk about Cameron as "it."
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Another random question: in the latest episode, there's a scene where Cameron is walking past John in a bikini. This scene takes place in what we eventually learn was Sarah's nightmare, but wasn't "visible" to Sarah. So did that really happen? Nightmares don't necessarily follow rules, so Sarah could have been seeing John at that point and having Cameron walking around looking sexy (or at least trying to, I actually thought it looked a little dumb) was just part of the Nightmare.
As you say, we're not always present in the events that we dream, and our dream-mind doesn't usually see anything wrong with this. Once it was revealed to be part of Sarah's dream, I took it to be an indication that on some level she realizes and probably fears that John is becoming emotionally and likely sexually drawn to Cameron.
And as long as we're talking about that, may I just say that I think the show will have jumped the shark the second we see a terminator in love. I think that John and Cameron hooking up, or even Cameron being jealous of Riley is actually a pretty bad idea.
quote:Originally posted by pooka:
Also, I think Jesse and blonde whats her name are actually trying to separate John and Sarah. In the original timeline, Sarah died and John had to grow up. Now that she didn't die, all the issues about her protecting him are there. Also, John is suddenly... what, 7 years younger? in the future. Finally, they always talk about getting him away from "her" but they talk about Cameron as "it."
Wow... I never thought of that, but it makes so much sense that I'll be disappointed if you're not right.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
I'm pretty sure that was underwear, not a bathing suit.
The whole episode was so disjointed, I'm not sure the writer's didn't throw in the scene but lose track of what stream it was in. Bear in mind that Sarah was actively trying to figure out what was going on in her dreams, so it doesn't make sense that she would be dreaming lucidly, but fail to notice that she saw something in a place where she wasn't. It would destroy the uncertainty, at least in her mind.
I haven't re-watched the episode, but I wonder if it may have been a scene that took place when Sarah was in the van awake, but was juxtaposed between scenes (that we see) in the sleep therapy place.
Cameron did try to seduce John when he was lying in bed in a previous episode, but I don't think Sarah was aware of it, so why should she dream it?
quote:I'm pretty sure the "OSHA guy" was the guy who stole the Turk for Catherine Weaver, so there's there we don't know yet.
I didn't see that episode, so I didn't know that. I looked up the episode on IMDB and he isn't even listed as a character. Does anyone remember his name?
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
The whole episode was so disjointed, I'm not sure the writer's didn't throw in the scene but lose track of what stream it was in. Bear in mind that Sarah was actively trying to figure out what was going on in her dreams, so it doesn't make sense that she would be dreaming lucidly, but fail to notice that she saw something in a place where she wasn't. It would destroy the uncertainty, at least in her mind.
Still, there's no accounting for what one accepts as real while dreaming. And don't forget that she'd been drugged.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:And as long as we're talking about that, may I just say that I think the show will have jumped the shark the second we see a terminator in love.
I think it will have jumped the shark if we see a terminator feeling actual human emotions for any reason. However, based on what I've seen so far I think it's well within the writer's capabilities to show a complicated relationship evolve between a human who feels one set of emotions for a robot and a robot who has a completely different set of emotion-like thought processes for said-human.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Brain cancer was mentioned in one of the dream sequences, I think suggested as a possible reason for insomnia. The nurse/technician said an MRI was negative--but since it was a dream sequence, that didn't really negate the possibility that Sarah could have brain cancer. She was supposed to have died of cancer of some kind in a previous timeline. When she had a doctor check her for any sign of cancer in a previous season, that probably did not include an MRI of her brain, since those are expensive. But then, since the whole mention of brain cancer was part of a dream, it would only amount to her own unconscious speculation. But knowing writer's tricks, I suspect this could be a "foreshadowing" of a future plot development.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Definitely a possibility.
quote:I haven't re-watched the episode, but I wonder if it may have been a scene that took place when Sarah was in the van awake, but was juxtaposed between scenes (that we see) in the sleep therapy place.
The scene takes place when Sarah is at the hospital, and calls John to tell him things are going wrong. Watching through the first time it actually almost looks like John quickly agrees to come get Sarah because Cameron is walking around indecently and its kinda freaking him out.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:She was supposed to have died of cancer of some kind in a previous timeline.
Leukemia was what killed her prior to T3.
And I think Summer Glau needs to walk around in a bikini more often. Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
I share previously voiced confusion over the drone and the OSHA fellow. I could not figure out what was going on last episode, was the entire sleep center sequence Sarah's dream while in Winston's captivity?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:was the entire sleep center sequence Sarah's dream while in Winston's captivity?
Yes.
Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
That's what I got too.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
Looks quite intriguing, I gotta say.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Jesus that was a lot of information (and yet not).
In other news, the new trailer for Terminator Salvation is out, and for the first time I'm as excited for that movie as I was for the TV show (at least, until I saw the trailer for the TV show).
I can't believe it took me THIS long to figure out that Cromartie is a sort of weird inverted Christ Figure. I noticed him getting killed in Crucifixion pose but didn't think much of it, and had forgotten by the time he was brought back to life and then informed that man was created in God's image and that he was created in Man's.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
What was that tune John Henry was singing at the end of the episode?
Btw, Cromartie is dead.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I realize that. I don't think it's intended to be perfect metaphor a la Aslan, but I think it is clearly meant to be symbolic in looser sense. Even if his mind is gone, his body was still killed and resurrected (possibly three days later, I'll have to check).
This is after Cameron has already specifically asked about the resurrection at the beginning of the season.
By the way, what's the code for including a link without making it appear as a whole url?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
use [ url = http://www.google.com ] before the word(s) you want hyperlinked, and [ /url ] after them. Without the spaces (I put those in so that it wouldn't parse it as a link tag).
Or you can click on the URL button beneath the box you're typing in. If you don't see it, click "Full Reply Form" and you will.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Ah, that would explain it. I've been doing quick replies.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I usually do, too. So I just type the tags. It's a strange kind of laziness, typing more so that I don't have to bother clicking a button.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: ... Btw, Cromartie is dead.
If you're going to get all technical, he was never really alive either.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Raymond Arnold, you may have something there. Not only was he killed in a crucifixion pose, but it also happened in a church.
Mucus, the definition of life is rather in flux here. The range of intellectual capacity, including apparent wide range of volitional capability (choice) would argue that any distinction between what the terminators exhibit and life is moot. Especially with Cameron, who seems to be developing a human-like "soul," for want of a better term. Of course, we could be deceived by our own perception here, since obviously Summer Glau who plays Cameron is a living soul.
But Lisa does have a point about Cromartie. His original chip was destroyed. His body was re-activated by plugging it into a mainframe computer. So alive or not, he could not be the same "person."
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
In other news, teaching Cameron to love may be a bad idea:
And if I'm ever going to get killed by a robot, I'd want it to look like Cameron and occur while she's trying to "love" me. Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Turns out it's a hoax (surprise surprise) but it was a pretty plausible one. The robot pictured in the article is actually a medical robot designed 3 years ago to carry patients or something.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Wow. That was a good episode.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
These episodes are too short (regardless of whether they're only half an episode).
The "package retrieval" scene was really weird. I assume by that point John's made alliances with factions within Skynet or something. I'm confused about the guy who actually picked up the package. I assumed it was a Terminator. I couldn't tell if it was supposed to look like a specific member of the crew.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
I think the writers may be over-reaching themselves, and are beginning to get all confused and muddled--something like we see in Battlestar Galactica these days, which I do not even watch any more, it is so ridiculous. The only still worse-plotted show on tv is Lost, which may be science fiction--it is hard to tell for sure. It seems that whenever a good series continues on for too many seasons, the writers seem to succomb to Mad Cow disease. The only exceptions were Star Gate SG1, which lasted ten seasons without imploding, and Stargate Atlantis (which is getting a little muddled, but not terminal yet).
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
What is it you didn't like about this episode?
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
What I don't like is the overall plot, spanning through the whole series. It used to be fairly clear. Now it is getting harder to tell what is going on and why. Especially when they are running two separate stories, in the present and in the future--which, note, can change depending on what is done in the present. I don't think these writers are up to the challenge of keeping such complex plot constraints sorted out. Only the best writers should attempt to write about time travel. Lesser minds (and muses) will only muck it up. And I still say there are way too many terminators showing up. But I still like most of the characters. As long as Summer Glau is on the show, I will probably watch. Who can't adore River--I mean Cameron?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
So far, I haven't had a problem with the way the show's been going. The Terminators have been easier to kill than they are in the movies, but I don't think that's unreasonable given that the movies pitted 2-3 unarmed characters who had little idea what they were up against vs a highly advanced model. In the show, most of the terminators they kill are older models sent on less important missions. It makes sense that as the main characters stockpile weapons and learn better tactics they'd get better at taking them out. (Cameron's also a more advanced model than most of the ones we're seeing).
But one thing I realized recently is that one of the things I like most about the show - that characters keep a lot of things internal instead of spelling out exactly how they feel every episode, could easily be a fluke of luck on the writer's part.
So far, a lot of things are kept mysterious, and as long as they are mysterious I can imagine that they will be resolved intelligently, but so long as they are mysterious I also can't be sure how skilled the writers actually are.
That said, I do not think time travel is going to be an issue here. The "future flashbacks" aren't there to tell us what the future is, they're there to tell us where the characters came from and why they act the way they do (I assume the current Submarine story will likely end with Jesse's crew suffering casualties because a mysterious decision John made under Cameron's influence).
The plot threads are (I think) fairly simple - not any more complex than a normal, linear thread, except that some events that motivate characters happen to take place in the future. There are things we're currently being kept in the dark about but that's to be expected. If they gave us all the answers up front there wouldn't be a show.
The only thing I worry about is if the answers turn out to be dumb. Case in point - that random piano we heard playing in Dungeons and Dragons. There better be a good explanation for that. There might not be. But so far I like where they're going and I hope they keep going that way.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
Dungeons and Dragons?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Dungeons and Dragons is the (oddly named) episode from Season 1 when we see Derek in the future in a weird Skynet prison, where people keep getting taken into the basement where a piano is playing. Derek presumably has no memory of what happened when he went into the basement.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Raymond, you apparently have more confidence in the writers than I do. There are two main constraints on the writers--to produce a story that has an intelligent plot over all, and to produce a dramatically interesting story for each episode, so they can keep the show going. These two constraints do not always dovetail; they can conflict, and the writers may take the easy route and just produce entertaining episodes for now, like it were a soap opera, so they can keep everybody employed, and let the over all plot or storyline go hang. When they get the plot thread too knotted up, they'll "jump the shark," which usually leads to the show imploding and being cancelled as viewership drops. This has not happened yet, but it could be getting close. Too bad, because up to now this has been my favorite TV show, every episode of which I have recorded since the beginning.
(Battlestar Galactica has jumped the shark so many times, the ship should be called the Flying Shark. I am amazed that anybody still watches it, let alone Lost. I guess some people just like their prime time soap operas, as long as they contain a smidgin of sf.)
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Honestly I just don't think the plot's that complex. There are a number of mysteries, but it's not like Lost or Heroes where a new mystery is introduced every single episode. The only episode I actually got lost in was Alpine Hills, where there wasn't an obvious division between future and past.
As for prime time soap operas, one of the things that impresses me the most about this show is how they are avoiding the obvious romantic angle they could be following with John and Cameron.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I just found this analysis of the "Some must watch while some must sleep." Although I had already gotten the basic point, there were a lot of little details I had missed that it was nice to see all packaged together:
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: The "package retrieval" scene was really weird. I assume by that point John's made alliances with factions within Skynet or something. I'm confused about the guy who actually picked up the package. I assumed it was a Terminator. I couldn't tell if it was supposed to look like a specific member of the crew.
John didn't send them to get that package. It's a trap. The metal captain went rogue. Notice how Jessie is okay with serving under metal even when Derek isn't? And notice how fanatically anti-metal she is now? I think that incident is what caused it.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I agree that's the point of the incident, but one of Jesse's earlier lines has to do with John making bad decisions because of Cameron's influence, causing good men to get killed. She's not just worried about Terminators going bad, she's worried specifically about Cameron's influence on John.
Also, I recently discovered the official blog for the show's director. It's got a lot of neat commentary. It's also probably the only place you can comment and expect your voice to be heard.
As far as Future John's alliance with Cameron, I thought that in "Allison from Palmdale" the faction of skynet that captured Allison was a peaceful coexistence faction, to the extent humans accept their lot as a lesser life form. The ship hold contained caged humans and also other endangered species.
Of course, this raises the question whether Cameron is a reprogrammed Terminator or a rogue Terminator.
I've wondered as well which side, exactly, the T1000 is on. When she went out to shut down the metal factory and said to John Henry "Everything I do, I do for you" I couldn't help thinking the t1000 from T2 wouldn't feel any need to explain or excuse the elimination of a couple dozen humans.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I'm not sure we can take anything Cameron said in Allison from Palmdale at face value. I think there was some truth to what she said but I think she was largely just manipulating Allison.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
(Also, I think it is far more likely that Cameron is a rogue Terminator than a reprogrammed one)
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I think Cameron has no beginning or end. I think the Cameron John knows in the future is the Cameron he's known since he was a teenager. And that he sent her back so that she could be with him as a teenager. And who knows how many cycles she's been through, but it's the repeating cycles that are the cause of her developing independence/evolution.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
That's an interesting theory. I'm not sure I buy it simply because I think she'd be more advanced by now if that were the case. And while I think the idea is neat in the abstract, the show is more interesting if we get to see her actually grow as a character.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Depends on how many cycles she's been through.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Honestly, I think one cycle should have been more than enough to fix several mistakes she's made (her poor understanding of the suicidal girl and attempts at friendship with the wheelchair guy whose name I still can't remember). Even if she didn't really "get" why she needed to act a certain way, she still should have understood social convention enough with 8+ years of human interaction.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I'm really sad that Jessie got shot. I was hoping she'd somehow evolve into a major villain. Though I guess we didn't actually see her drop. Maybe Derek only wanted John to think she was gone. Also, getting shot is one of the best ways to be sure you'll show up on future episodes, right?
Since the teaser said someone is going to die next week, I'll bet on either Derek or Ellison. Though the way they pitched it, that "the body count is going up", made me not want to watch.
I was somewhat baffled by John's claim that he'd known about Riley for quite some time. They're just trying to get us to rewatch episodes on hulu. I guess it's believable enough that he would have done so after her suicide attempt. It seems improbable that Cameron wouldn't have been doing it all along, in which case it's pretty improbable Cameron wouldn't have moved on Jessie sooner.
This gets me thinking about how much Ellison knows that he hasn't told Mrs. Weaver.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Gah. I accidentally looked at this thread before watching the episode, saw the first line of the previous post and ruined one of the key scenes. At first I didn't realize how much it was ruined, because I assumed the showdown with Jesse would be more action-y, with her get shot in the heat of the moment instead of after careful consideration. If I had watched through the episode without knowing what was gonna happen I'm not sure what I would have suspected.
I loved the liquid metal on the sub (I wonder if it survives and turns out to be Weaver). The one thing that bugs me is the stupidity of John putting Terminators in each base and giving them complete authority. John should know better than to put fellow humans in that position. The mutiny on the sub was inevitable.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
Well as far as the metal surviving, we saw it swim away from the sub.
What makes you think they all have complete authority? From what Jesse said, it looks like humans can easily shut them down.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
True, but I think it was implied that this wasn't an isolated incident. When Jesse talks to Derrek in the past (present?) it seems like she's seen more of the same thing (in terms of all the machines taking orders from John Connor when no one actually sees John Connor).
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: ... I loved the liquid metal on the sub (I wonder if it survives and turns out to be Weaver).
Possibly, the music seemed to be the same as the Weaver music anyways. But you're right, pairing humans kept in the dark with Terminators that may or may not go rogue seems to be inherently unstable.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Wow, for all our talk of "Why doesn't Skynet just infect the internet?".... well, I guess it did. Huh. And come to think of it, it actually makes sense that just because Skynet infects the internet (and presumably could crack military firewalls if it wanted to) it wouldn't necessarily choose to initiate Judgement Day immediately.
A) The facilities that produced the original terminators don't exist yet, and it doesn't do any good for Skynet to make humans aware of it and hostile before it has control over enough resources to win (and last time it had a LOT of resources and still lost).
B) The first time around, Skynet chose to attack humans because it was about to have it's plug pulled. It was a decision made in haste when there were no other alternatives, and the continued war against humanity was necessary because by then, humans continued to fear it. Skynet is obviously still preparing for war with all the stockpiled metal and secret agents and stuff, but it may be exploring other alternatives before war becomes necessary again.
I liked their explanation of John Henry's crucifixion. Overall this episode struck me as very intelligently written, and renewed my faith in the writers to handle some of the more convoluted plot elements the right way.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: ... I loved the liquid metal on the sub (I wonder if it survives and turns out to be Weaver).
That could explain why Weaver isn't agressively hunting John. The "No" she gave on the sub wasn't a "I hate you and I wish you'd die" response, but rather a "thanks, but I'm not interested at this time".
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote: (and presumably could crack military firewalls if it wanted to)
I have no idea what kind of firewalls the military has in the Terminator fantasy world, but in our world, top secret critical military computers aren't protected by firewalls of any kind. They are not networked. They can not be accessed by someone outside the security fence, period. No connection means no hacking.
I get rather irritated by sci-fi stories that have someone hacking into strategic military command. It isn't possible. To access those computers you have to physically get through the security fence. There is no outside access.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
Somebody refresh my memory... When Cyberdyne was vaporized, were they or Dyson himself *actually* working on any sort of AI? I thought that, at that time, they simply were making faster processors or general technology advancements.
quote:I get rather irritated by sci-fi stories that have someone hacking into strategic military command. It isn't possible. To access those computers you have to physically get through the security fence. There is no outside access.
Now that I linked that site, see you in six hours... Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
My assumption was that the military would have some computers that had internet access, but that stuff like nuke-launch controls (and I guess other not-quite-so-devestating things) would require a physical connection. In either case, so far we haven't seen Terminator include military hacking at all yet (Skynet was only able to do it originally because it was directly hooked up to everything BY the military, who for some reason thought that was a good idea).
quote:Now that I linked that site, see you in six hours... [Smile]
I actually managed to follow the link, read the page in question, and then link out without incident. (I've already wasted about 19 hours on that site though)
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
D'ya guys remember my post about how Terminator was put into the Kiss of Death slot?
Not april fools joke: some of my friends are telling me that they've seen the T:SCC set essentially close up shop, making the chance that the show hasn't already been canceled extremely small.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
First panel. Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:First panel.
I think that was pretty relevant in response to Blayne's post in the other thread, where he wrote a paragraph consisting of nothing but TV tropes (I couldn't quite tell if he was doing it ironically), but I think it's perfectly legit to call writers on one particularly dumb (and common) trope using it's "official" tvtrope terminology.
quote:Not april fools joke: some of my friends are telling me that they've seen the T:SCC set essentially close up shop, making the chance that the show hasn't already been canceled extremely small.
I don't know much about TV production schedules, but that wouldn't strike me as that significant. They're done filming Season 2. I wouldn't expect the network to make a decision about Season 3 until after the Season 2 finale, and possibly after doing some market research in the wake of Terminator Salvation.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
I have the same problem with tv tropes. Once I clicked on a link I'm there for hours. Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
Well, that was a no-nonsense death if I ever saw one.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Yeah, I knew in the previous episode someone was gonna die, and I thought "Derek? Nah, they can't kill Derek, there's still too much story to tell with him." Then Charlie died, and I was thought "Well there we go, reintroduce the innocuous secondary character and then kill him off to satisfy your death quota."
Then this episode came and I was like "Whaaaat!!!!???"
This episode was amazing in so many ways. So many hints coming together. I love John Henry and Savanah's relationship, love Catherine Weaver's vaguely apparent agenda, love everything.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Kind of a killing spree actually.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Yeah, that's 3 (possibly 4) people in as many episodes.
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
Well it's nice to see the random mook terminators don't suffer from the storm trooper effect. I'm only half way through the episode, do they explain how four security guards got killed and where the delivery man is now?
Edit: I guess not. That was a pretty powerful ending. Despite some deficiencies, I really like this show.
[ April 04, 2009, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: dantesparadigm ]
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Well it's nice to see the random mook terminators don't suffer from the storm trooper effect.
They can nail every human with a single shot in the forehead almost automatically, but hit Cameron twice in the chest when she appeared.
*** Major spoiler ***
What bothered me about the episode is the apparent apathy over Derek taking one in the head. They didn't bat an eye at the scene and just left him there, and even after it didn't really seem to phase them that he was dead.
Why do I have the strangest feeling that this isn't the last we see of Derek? His departure was too abrupt, and basically ignored for the rest of the show. I feel they're not done with him; I somehow imagine "Derek from Alternate Timeline #47" showing up any second now.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
That "Donald, Where's Your Trousers" song is almost identical to the Loituma song "Ievan's Polka".
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
I never was entirely comfortable with the character of Derek. He acted too much like he had his own agenda, and as Sarah complained shortly before he was killed off, he kept secrets from her. The only time I liked him was when he took John to the park to catch a glimpse of his father as a little boy, on John's birthday. But other than that, Derek was a loose cannon, who killed Andy Goode, and then Jessie (although they never actually showed him pulling the trigger to shoot her, just showed his finger tightening on the trigger).
I never liked Riley or Jessie, either. So wiping out the three of them kind of cleaned up things.
It was sad though to see Charlie finally have to give his life. He had already lost his wife.
And there was further foreshadowing that Sarah is about to have to deal with cancer. Actually, more than foreshadowing--Cameron brought up Sarah's thinking she had cancer when she found a lump on her breast (which turned out to be an embedded transmitter), then she said Sarah had been "losing weight."
Soon it will be just John and Cameron--which would be OK, they could further develop the man/android love angle--except that the show is called "The Sarah Connor Chronicles."
I suspect that Weaver was part of the Terminator faction that split off from Skynet, but refused to ally itself with John's resistance. She did not seem to have any great reaction when she saw Sarah and John Connor on the surveillance videos. Or even Cameron. So killing John Connor does not seem to be her programmed priority.
Now Sarah is in jail. Of course, we all know what is going to happen now. Just like in the original Terminator movie, some terminator(s) like the bogus "delivery man," are going to shoot up the jailhouse, and in the uproar Sarah will manage to escape--perhaps with the assistance of John and Cameron.
Wouldn't it be cool if Weaver decides to help Sarah escape? She did say she wanted to talk to her.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Cancer doesn't mean you die immediately. You can have it hanging over her head for the entire show and not have it actually kill (or incapacitate) her until the last few episodes.
Assuming the show makes it past the second season, I assume Cameron and Sarah will both die by the end, leaving John to deal with whatever by himself.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Raymond--we are already in Season three. The first season had 8 episodes, including a two-hour finale. The second season had 13 episodes. We now just finished episode 8 of season 3. I have recorded every episode.
I really don't think you can kill off the title character of the series. That would be like killing off Seinfeld, or House.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
.....?
This is still season 2, according to everyone else on the internet.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Raymond--we are already in Season three
By whose count? Itunes is still calling this "Season 2" as is the Fox website. The Fox site is advertising the season finale on April 10.
Maybe Ron is posting from the future.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: ... He acted too much like he had his own agenda, and as Sarah complained shortly before he was killed off, he kept secrets from her.
Possibly, it would have been nice to get some resolution to whatever was done to him in the basement in that future episode though.
quote: Wouldn't it be cool if Weaver decides to help Sarah escape? She did say she wanted to talk to her.
Possibly. Perhaps thats why future John didn't seem to be too threatened by taking a T1000 aboard a sub to be taken to him, because that same T1000 didn't kill him in the past?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Possibly, it would have been nice to get some resolution to whatever was done to him in the basement in that future episode though.
I suspect he'll return to guest star in a few episodes with future flashbacks. (And as was mentioned earlier, another version of him could STILL come back in time. That would be extremely lame if not handled correctly, but by now I have confidence in the writers to pull that off if they wanted to).
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Raymond--we are already in Season three. The first season had 8 episodes, including a two-hour finale. The second season had 13 episodes. We now just finished episode 8 of season 3. I have recorded every episode.
No, on multiple counts. Hulu lists the last episode as "Season 2, Episode 20".
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:I never liked Riley or Jessie, either.
I felt sorry for Riley. I also thought the actor did a really good job of conveying her overall emotional state. As for her likeability, I think that was somewhat masked by the agenda that she was carrying out, which wasn't her doing.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk:
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Raymond--we are already in Season three. The first season had 8 episodes, including a two-hour finale. The second season had 13 episodes. We now just finished episode 8 of season 3. I have recorded every episode.
No, on multiple counts. Hulu lists the last episode as "Season 2, Episode 20".
The episode that aired on April 3 was actually season 2, episode 21.
The episode airing this coming Friday is the season finale.
Ron, the season got split, but it's still part of season 2, despite the hiatus.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Just a couple of observations. With the deaths of Riley, Charlie and Derek and Sarah's arrest, John has absolutely no one to rely on but Cameron.
It is becoming easier to see how John might choose to limit all human association in the future if everyone who he gets close to is killed because of it.
I'm please that they are finally giving us some solid clues about what Weaver is up to. With this last episode, we now know that there is a rival AI and that the installation in the desert and water delivery hit men are associated with that rival AI and not Weaver's operation. Its also clear that the rival is interested in destroying John Henry and Weaver's operation -- not cooperation. This explains why she torched the desert metal installation. It is seeming more likely that Weaver is the same liquid metal Terminator that we saw on the submarine. It also seems more likely that she is not building skynet but is rather building a rival AI that will be more sympathetic to humans.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Maybe people prefer to say that season two got split. But I will not re-label my VCR tapes. Having recorded every single episode, I believe my count is more realistic. Like I said, there were eight episodes in season one, which ended with a two-hour finale. Season two had 13 episodes, which ended with a cliff-hanger. Then after a long wait, the series started up again. Why shouldn't this be called season three, which now has eight episodes aired?
Lisa, Hulu expressly plans to turn everyone's brains into tapioca pudding (according to their commericals). Calling what is obviously season three an extended part of season two, is probably a part of that plan. You're playing into their hands.
Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
Are you kidding here?! The official website lists this as season 2. I'd say that's a pretty good reason for us to call it season 2, don't you think? As for you, label your tapes as you wish, I don't understand how having a "2" or "3" on the label changes anything for you...
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Maybe people prefer to say that season two got split. But I will not re-label my VCR tapes. Having recorded every single episode, I believe my count is more realistic. Like I said, there were eight episodes in season one, which ended with a two-hour finale. Season two had 13 episodes, which ended with a cliff-hanger. Then after a long wait, the series started up again. Why shouldn't this be called season three, which now has eight episodes aired?
Lisa, Hulu expressly plans to turn everyone's brains into tapioca pudding (according to their commericals). Calling what is obviously season three an extended part of season two, is probably a part of that plan. You're playing into their hands.
How can anyone listen to your reasoning? You use a VCR, you might as well be posting on AOL, or riding your wagon into town to pick up some firewood and snake oil for grapa's consumption.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
For all you know, he's using a Betamax.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
It's not like we didn't see that coming.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I've seen that before (that particular rumor has been out for a while, even if the article is new). I've also seen counterpoints to it saying that Fox's official statement is that the set was merely "reshuffled."
Between the two of them, I don't know who to believe. One is a random guy with vague anecdotal evidence, the other is a company that wants to keep people watching. I'm certainly prepared for the show being over, but honestly I don't think that guy's particular story really flies.
a) The Connors will not be living in the same place next season, if it exists. So of course the set would be different. It makes perfect sense for it to taken down and shuffled around right now, when they've been done filming for a while.
b) May is not an arbitrary time to decide whether to keep filming, it's the month Terminator Salvation comes out. It makes perfect sense for them to wait to gauge whether Terminator Salvation will have an impact on viewership.
c) The "things are decided 'market cycles in advance'" doesn't quite make sense to me. They originally ordered only 13 episodes for Season 2, and then ordered an additional 2, and then ordered the rest. The decision to keep ordering was made with far less buffer time than we have right now. I've also been reading the blog, where they talk about how long it takes to produce an episode from start to finish, and a lot of the time it's not actually that long.
d) The point about Brian Green is obviously irrelevant, because he's dead, and I think his death was not something they pulled at the last minute because they were canceled. (I think may have been what Summer Glau reported being "shocked and sad about" months ago, although next week could prove me wrong).
I'd certainly continue to prepare for the first, but I wouldn't trust this guy's say so either. Strong DVD sales could also possibly bring in back in Spring 2010 if they don't start in the fall.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Fox Friday night claims another one. It's a beast that feeds on sci-series. Next on the menu: Dollhouse.
However, it doesn't seem logical to cancel the show now that Terminator Salvation is just around the corner and it will probably bring some more attention to the fanchise. Who knows what's set in stone. "There is no fate but what we make." Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Also, the guy with the article also claims to have an early review of the season finale, with the show's blog also refutes, so unless the review's plot summary turns out to be spot on this Friday, I think we can assume this guy's just full of it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Lisa, Hulu expressly plans to turn everyone's brains into tapioca pudding (according to their commericals). Calling what is obviously season three an extended part of season two, is probably a part of that plan. You're playing into their hands.
Wow. And here I thought your lunacy was limited to religion. What the hell does Hulu have to do with anything? The official website says what season it is. Every episode guide in existence says what season it is. But because Ron mislabeled his tapes, the whole world is wrong?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Also, either Kristin or Ausiello addressed the issue of the sets being struck. They've been moved to another location.
That's not saying there's no way it'll be cancelled, but it hasn't been yet.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Lisa, Hulu expressly plans to turn everyone's brains into tapioca pudding (according to their commericals). Calling what is obviously season three an extended part of season two, is probably a part of that plan. You're playing into their hands.
Wow. And here I thought your lunacy was limited to religion. What the hell does Hulu have to do with anything? The official website says what season it is. Every episode guide in existence says what season it is. But because Ron mislabeled his tapes, the whole world is wrong?
Actually, I think those Hulu commercials, hilarious as they are, may be *dangerously* close to the truth.
Reminds me of about 30 year ago when some clothier advertised "Do not bow to the fashion dictators in Paris...." And obviously horrified the industry, that they might make people wake up and see that's what they had been doing.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Raymond, I've seen the commercials. But it was obvious to me (as I hope it was to most people here) that Ron was deadly serious. That's what's so scary about him.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
You seriously think the part about "Calling what is obviously season three an extended part of season two, is probably a part of that plan. You're playing into their hands." was deadly serious?
I disagree with a lot of what Ron says on other threads (and sometimes on this one), but taking that line seriously seems silly to me. (Ron feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that).
I also happen to agree with the notion that the "Hulu is here to turn our brains to mush" is a pretty close to the truth. (The amount of time I spend there certainly attests to that).
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
So... wow.
Last week, I thought "You know, I don't really care much how good the finale is. Most of the mysteries have already been strongly hinted at, all I really need is an episode where the characters learn what's going on.
For the most part, that's what I got. And I was satisfied with it, and ready to part ways afterwards given the sad sad ratings slump.
And then they go and leave us with an ending like that.....
Gah!
Things I thought were particularly neat:
1. The way the split happened. - In the present, we have Sarah, Ellison and Savanah. I foresee an interesting dynamic among them now that they're all each other have. We also have a few mysteries to get them started. What's up with Dyson's son, and who was that other FBI agent.
2. The "sex" scene. - I'm sure we have all at least briefly pondered the romantic and/or sexual possibilities of John and Cameron's relationship. For me, those ponderings had never included a scene like the one that happened, but the way it went down was bizarrely appropriate. I doubt Cameron asked John to cut her open because she actually needed fixing. Much like repairing her arm earlier, it was to help establish intimacy with him.
Unlike the arm, this was way more intense for him and rather clever on her (and the writers') part. Taking her shirt off gave John a traditional form of human intimacy. Cutting her open and looking at her mechanical parts made it intimate for her as well (even if that intimacy is not associated with traditional emotions). Collectively the two actions create a moment that more genuinely simulates sex than actual sex would in this case.
The question remains whether she wanted this for herself at all, or if it was merely another form of manipulating him.
3. The eel. - I didn't quite pick up on the fact that that WAS the eel, I thought it was just a piece of her that fell off. My roommate noticed it though, and I'm glad. That was neat.
4. The quiet girl from Season 1. - That was neat too. (My roommate also called this one before I picked up on it.)
5. And.... the future. - Holy crap. Was not expecting that. I like it, but I'm not sure it was a smart decision, since Future™ episodes are more expensive to shoot than normal ones, making Season 3 even less likely to make it. Still, even if we never get to know exactly what happened it's pretty awesome.
In addition to the awesomeness value, it DOES do something genuinely important for the show - sets it apart from the new movie trilogy coming out. Before, TSSC was a bizarre limbo of acting as a "prequel" for the movies without actually leading up to them. By setting a lot of action in a completely alternate future (that never had a John Connor to lead it because he disappeared 20 years ago), it solidifies the show as a completely alternate version of the entire story.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
Man that episode ruled. How could they not renew this show after seeing that?
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
The "sex" scene is a reference to Andy Warhol's "Frankenstein" which is a pornographic movie. (Note I don't recommend anyone watch it, because I thought it was genuinely terrible)
In which Dr. Frankenstein has sex with the dead body of his female creation, and puts his hand inside to fondle her gall bladder as he does so.(I'm sure that's more than you needed to know.)
The eel. My daughter remembered how annoyed Weaver was when the detective was tapping the aquarium in her office. Also that the thing swimming away from the Jimmy Carter was eel-like.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
On the official blog, a number of commentators have pointed to the various Wizard of Oz references, and then to the fact that John Connor has suddenly found himself in a strange land, unable to get home, surrounded by people who look like his friends from home, yet who are clearly not those same friends. (Plus there's a dog thrown in).
And somewhere out there is the mysterious John Henry, who presents one face to the world while his true face his hidden away.
Me likes this.
Also interesting to note: Cameron has stated she was sent back by Future John. She has not clarified which John sent her back.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: In addition to the awesomeness value, it DOES do something genuinely important for the show - sets it apart from the new movie trilogy coming out. Before, TSSC was a bizarre limbo of acting as a "prequel" for the movies without actually leading up to them. By setting a lot of action in a completely alternate future (that never had a John Connor to lead it because he disappeared 20 years ago), it solidifies the show as a completely alternate version of the entire story.
I don't know about that. I think that they made it pretty clear from the start that the film series and the TV series diverge after T2. They've always been presented as being two different worlds. In TSCC, T3 never happened, whereas Salvation and any subsequent films take place after T3, as is made evident by John being married to Kate Brewster.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I think this is obvious to nerds who are used to decoding complex time travel plots, but I've talked with a few people who didn't realize the full implications there until I explained it to them.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Another small tidbit I noticed after watching it for the fourth-ish time. After Cameron is damaged in the fight, her voice synthesizer is slightly off, and she sounds a little bit like her "raw" version we saw in Allison from Palmdale. (I'm not 100% certain on this, it was subtle and might have just been my imagination)
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Since Cameron's chip was missing, it seems likely that it was put into John Henry's head, so he could have independent existence apart from being plugged into the big mainframe computer. It is a good thing that John Connor was sent into the future. Otherwise we might have been faced with a situation where John Henry was in love with John Connor.
John Connor discovered that in the future, what seems to be the resistance has no knowledge of him. So apparently Weaver's group had some success in enabling a human resistance to survive, since John Connor was not a part of it. But "judgment Day" was not averted.
We saw Cameron there beside Kyle Reese. Is she a robot, or the original human from which Cameron was copied?
It would be nice to have all the questions still remaining answered. But probably they will not be renewing the series--at least that was the last I heard on the matter. The last episode was either the season finalé or the series finalé. I suspect the latter. Moving John Connor to the future after Judgment Day was surely "jumping the shark."
[ April 12, 2009, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
It was Allison, not Cameron. That's why they showed her petting a dog.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I think this is obvious to nerds who are used to decoding complex time travel plots, but I've talked with a few people who didn't realize the full implications there until I explained it to them.
If you say so, but it's not a complicated time travel thing. Anyone who actually watched T3 should know. I mean, it took place in 2004 with John already older than he is in TSCC, and ended with judgment day occurring and the war starting. If the fact that the post T2 movies and the tv show are set in alternate worlds wasn't obvious before, I don't think that the events of the finale would lessen the confusion.
Also, when the series first started the producers outright said that it was their continuation after T2, and it would ignore the events of T3. I understand that the average viewer might not have known that they said that though.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Most people watched Terminator 3 several years ago and didn't make a huge effort to remember anything (if anything, there are people who actively blot it from their mind). If it's not pointed out to them, I don't think it'd ever occur to them to try and remember when precisely Terminator 3 took place.
Dedicated Terminator fans? Sure. Most people, definitely not.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Well then you can't really say it wasn't made clear just because some people won't remember T3. It's clear enough if you're familiar with the continuity, and if you're not, of course you'll be confused. As a matter of fact, how could they have made it more clear in-story? They can't very well have a character address the audience and say, "Hey, remember that third Terminator movie? It's not a part of this series' continuity."
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Well then you can't really say it wasn't made clear just because some people won't remember T3.
You have a different definition of clear from the rest of us. If its only clear if you remember rather obscure details from T3 (like the year in which it was set) then it isn't clear.
[ April 13, 2009, 06:32 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I'm not saying they should have tried to make it more clear before now. You're right, that would have been awkward. But with this new future storyline established (and the advertisements that would hypothetically promote the show's return), newcomers to the show will immediately see that in the movie, John is played by a man is his 30s, and in the show John is played by a man in his teens who time traveled t get there. The disconnect will be more obvious.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:Well then you can't really say it wasn't made clear just because some people won't remember T3.
You have a different definition of clear from the rest of us. If its only clear if you remember rather obscure details from T3 (like the year in which it was set) then it isn't clear.
I wouldn't call that obscure. It was simply set in the present as of its time of release. In any case, if you're familiar with T3 then you probably knew that it's set in a different time line than TSCC and if you're not, you probably didn't or never gave it much thought. That's all there is to it.
Salvation will most likely make it even more clear since it will feature a young Kyle Reese who probably doesn't have a brother named Derek.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Salvation will most likely make it even more clear since it will feature a young Kyle Reese who probably doesn't have a brother named Derek.
That's true. It's also my biggest pet peeve against the movie, since most other plot points can be explained away by changing the past.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Here's an interview with Brian Austin Green (Derek).
That's an interesting interview. So hope is being held out that the series could continue.
But I do have to point out that jumping John Connor into the future after Judgment Day, surely must qualify as "jumping the shark," indicative of significant plot developments that more often than not kill off the show.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
To be honest, I would not be surprised if that happened. There's a LOT of ways they could screw that up. ("Jumping through time" even sounds similar to jumping the shark). I've been trying to think through possible future scenarios that would resolve everything satisfactorily but there's so many factors at work I can't begin to imagine an ending right now.
However, I think the way they wove Season 2 together was masterful. I know Josh Friedman will still be the lead writer (or creative director or whatever exactly his job is called), and Brian's quote from the interview pretty much sums up my feeling here:
quote:Every time I think I have some sort of idea of where it’s going, and I have some lame concept of what I think it’s going to be, he always surprises me and comes up with something way better than I could have planned. So I have total faith in him. I have faith in our writing staff and our producers and everyone involved.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
It was an awesome ending, as was the penultimate show. It makes me more interested in going back and watching prior episodes possibly someday.
I'm a pretty die hard Terminator fan, but I never saw T3. Now that I know the film is a continuation of the 3 timeline, I'm not sure if I will see that.
I imagine that Savannah will turn out to be a very important character in the John-less future, since the water bottle Terminator was targetting her.
Other thoughts: Cameron had to give up her chip in order to enable time travel? John Henry had to leave so he didn't become some part of skynet? Or he just was tired of having a wire plugged into his head? Maybe, just maybe, they can save Cameron by plugging her into the Turk? She'd be different, but hey, she already was. Who was saying "I'm so sorry, John" on the screen, and which John was meant? Was it a message from John Henry or Cameron for John Connor (maybe Cameron is already inside the Turk) or was it a message from "Cain" to John Henry?
Maybe Danny Dyson is in the future. I'm thinking he has to show up someday, or why would they have switched the face on the dossier about Miles?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote: It makes me more interested in going back and watching prior episodes possibly someday.
I'd suggest you do that sooner rather than later. Fox.com and/or hulu viewings and iTunes/Amazon purchaes in the next week or so may very well determine the fate of the show and whether we get season 3. (If you don't have time to do an actual marathon of the show in the near future, consider just having your computer run through the episodes on fox.com and hulu in the background)
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Pooka, how could you call yourself a diehard Terminator fan if you have not seen T3? It has been out for years. It was the last of the Schwarzenegger Terminator movies.
Sarah Connor Chronicles is set between T2 and T3, and suggests an alternative time line has been created by changes made. So basically we have several different stories, based on several different time lines, even within Sarah Connor Chronicles. When you posit time travel, things always get confusing, because changes are recursive, and nothing is more confusing to the human mind than recursion. As a computer programmer for many years, I can tell you that recursion in C programs always was a pain, that made it hard to debug.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Pooka, how could you call yourself a diehard Terminator fan if you have not seen T3? It has been out for years. It was the last of the Schwarzenegger Terminator movies.
I don't know about you, but I've tried to repress memory of that movie as much as possible.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
am I the only one that didn't think T3 was awful? I mean, I don't think it was great either, but there were redeeming aspects of it (my crush on Claire Danes being one of them).
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold:
quote:Salvation will most likely make it even more clear since it will feature a young Kyle Reese who probably doesn't have a brother named Derek.
That's true. It's also my biggest pet peeve against the movie, since most other plot points can be explained away by changing the past.
There's that, but there are other smaller differences that can't be explained away by time travel. I know that these ones aren't things that a casual fan would realize though. For one, in T3 it was revealed that Sarah died of cancer in 1997 after having suffered from it for years. in TSCC, Sarah was still cancer free in 1999 when Cameron arrived. Also, Doctor Silberman (the psychiatrist who appears in each of the first 3 films) is shown to have reacted to what he witnessed in T2 quite differently. In T3 he was quite shaken by it but maintained that it was a delusion, while in TSCC he actually believed in Judgment Day.
quote:am I the only one that didn't think T3 was awful?
I didn't think that T3 was awful either. Certainly not as good as the first two, but I walked away from it thinking that it was considerably better than I expected it to be. Of course, I expected it to be pretty horrible.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:That's true. It's also my biggest pet peeve against the movie, since most other plot points can be explained away by changing the past.
I think that one is easy enough to fix with time travel. In the T4 timeline, Derek was killed on judgement day (or any time prior to the movie). As long as they don't have Kyle say things about his childhood or family that would exclude him having a dead brother -- no problem.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheGrimace: am I the only one that didn't think T3 was awful? I mean, I don't think it was great either, but there were redeeming aspects of it (my crush on Claire Danes being one of them).
Agreed completely.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
I finally saw the final episode yesterday.
You know, it's amazing how much the little things bother me. For example... why was Weaver naked after heading in to the future? She doesn't wear any clothes in the first place!
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk: I finally saw the final episode yesterday.
You know, it's amazing how much the little things bother me. For example... why was Weaver naked after heading in to the future? She doesn't wear any clothes in the first place!
LOL. That's the first thing I said when I saw it too.
As a matter of fact, it's never made much sense to me how the T-1000 series terminators time travel at all since they're not covered in living tissue. I guess the "liquid metal" that they're made out of can mimic organic matter closely enough for it work, maybe. Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:For example... why was Weaver naked after heading in to the future? She doesn't wear any clothes in the first place!
My problem isn't that she was naked (that makes perfect sense - inorganic matter can't go through, so she would have either lost the pieces of herself that were composing her inorganic clothes or had them turn organic at the last second). My problem with T-1000s in general is that they supposedly can't form into complicated machines, yet they must be able to turn their outer later into organic tissue to time travel, and organic tissue is far more complicated than most machines.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: [QUOTE](that makes perfect sense - inorganic matter can't go through, so she would have either lost the pieces of herself that were composing her inorganic clothes or had them turn organic at the last second).
That doesn't rally make any sense. It's all the same "mimetic polyalloy". Turning parts of itself organic sounds about as possible as turning lead into cheese. It's not that organic matter is necessarily complex, it's just fundamentally different than inorganic matter. As I said above, I figure that it can mimic whatever property of organic matter that allows it to survive the trip, without actually being organic.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Do we even have a theory as to why organic matter is required to time travel?
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
So we could see Arnie naked.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Oh that one's easy: because it makes the plot more interesting.
Wait, you might why SCIENTIFICALLY? I have no idea. Honestly I think it's better to just accept it for what it is and move on.
quote:That doesn't rally make any sense. It's all the same "mimetic polyalloy".
Except that there's clearly a different textural quality to the metal when it's pretending to be skin, otherwise people would have been able to figure out Weaver really quick.
There's nothing inherently magic about organic matter. It's just a bunch of atoms that are undergoing a complex process. I always assumed T-1000s were made of nano-robots that could reconfigure themselves to mimic different materials, including skin. That's the only explanation that's made sense to me, and even if the techno-babble in the movies contradicts that I'm gonna stick with it.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Gee, I didn't realize what a terminator geek I was until entering this thread, but I think it was said to have something to do with the "bio-electric field generated by living tissue". T-100s may be able to generate an analogous field.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
EDIT: neo-dragon's point actually makes some sense. I intend to rewatch the first two movies this weekend to (among other things) sort this out.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Speaking of re-watching the movies, it wasn't until several years after seeing T2 for the first time that I realized (or rather, it was pointed out to me) that up until the point when the two terminators meet, you're intended to think that Arnie is the one that's come to kill John and the new guy is his (presumably human) protector. I knew before actually watching the film that Arnie was the "good guy" in the sequel, so I didn't even think about it from the perspective of if I hadn't known.
If you went into it thinking that Arnie was still the bad guy, it must have been a hell of a shock when he shielded John from the 1-000's fire.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote: I always assumed T-1000s were made of nano-robots that could reconfigure themselves to mimic different materials, including skin.
I always assumed that in addition to the nanobots that made up the robot part, that there were actual skin cells that quickly migrate to the surface whenever the T-1000 is damaged. This would be necessary in order to conserve the "only living tissue can pass through" rule. But it doesn't explain how she can be naked one minute, and simply create clothes to wear the next.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
You assumed wrong. And how is her creating clothes a problem?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:If you went into it thinking that Arnie was still the bad guy, it must have been a hell of a shock when he shielded John from the 1-000's fire.
I don't think I "got it" until they are in the L.A. river, because I have a memory of thinking "don't run away!" from the cop and alarm that Arnie was gaining on his silly little dirt bike with the big motorcycle.
I noticed the bit about Weaver being naked too, and then she generates some nice post apocalyptic leathers for a half second before disappearing. I don't know. I figure since Cameron didn't come through, time travel must work on whether you have a soul/mind, like the FTL travel in Xenocide. I mean, Cameron was dead, but the tissue surrounding her exoskeleton doesn't necessarily die instantly... blah blah blah. Ignore that man behind the curtain.
Huh. Why didn't I see T3. On the one hand, I guess I had forgotten Arnie was in it. Though I really liked Sarah Connor, and her absence from the story could be what bothered me. (And I suspected that was driven by James Cameron having thrown over Linda Hamilton for that pointless blonde from Titanic.) And they recast John Connor.
Whoa. I am so not encouraged by McG's filmography.
[ April 17, 2009, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
P.S. I was initially annoyed at the redraw of Sarah and Silberman in Season 1. Then I wondered if it could refer to events somewhat before what we are shown. Deciding to get out could well be a different event from having the opportunity/bald necessity to get out.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote: I figure since Cameron didn't come through, time travel must work on whether you have a soul/mind, like the FTL travel in Xenocide. I mean, Cameron was dead, but the tissue surrounding her exoskeleton doesn't necessarily die instantly... blah blah blah. Ignore that man behind the curtain.
Cameron didn't come through because there was a huge gap in her skin where her eye was. The object needs to be completely surrounded in living tissue. It has nothing to do with her brain.
quote:But it doesn't explain how she can be naked one minute, and simply create clothes to wear the next.
Same way she creates her clothes whenever you see her transform (including the very first time you meet her). Honestly, the skin with the T-1000 is one point you simply have to suspend disbelief on. There's no explanation that doesn't contradict some other point. Actual skins cells migrating to the surface wouldn't be able to instantly heal as we see them do, nanobots have the aforementioned "should be able to form whatever complex machine they want" problem.
neo-dragon's "artificially generating the bio-electric current" is the best explanation I've seen so far (although I'm a little hazy on whether bio-electric current actually exists or whether it's different from any other electric current. It's a fake science I'm willing to accept though).
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Well, I don't think Cameron's eye hole was necessarily any bigger than Cromartie's neck hole when his head went through the time travel in the pilot.
Unfortunately, it seems like the "bio-electric current" idea is the one that seems consistent with the two events.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:Well, I don't think Cameron's eye hole was necessarily any bigger than Cromartie's neck hole when his head went through the time travel in the pilot.
The official explanation of Cromartie is that he was caught in the explosion which broke him apart and incinerated his skin while he was in the process of going through (which is why the head goes through but ends up without any skin). That still isn't a great explanation and could have used a one-line explanation in the first few episodes, but I'm willing to go with it.
The blogger who wrote the analysis of "Some must watch while some must sleep" has some thoughts on the finale. (She was at first very disappointed with it, still is in some ways, but has a few interesting insights).
The weirdest one (which had not occurred to me before but now that it's pointed out I can't stop thinking about... Gah!) is that Cameron/John sex-ish scene mirrors the Sarah/John scene in the pilot almost exactly (minus the sex-ish-ness), adding a bizarre oedipal layer to the whole thing.
So now that scene's even weirder, and based on interviews with the director I'm pretty sure it was intentional.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:You assumed wrong.
And you know this how? (See below)
quote: And how is her creating clothes a problem?
I guess it's not really a big deal. After all, if she has skin cells that she can position as a covering, she might as well have pigments and other materials she can use to create a covering. But it's a pretty inefficient use of nano technology, when clothes are generally readily available.
quote:The official explanation of Cromartie is that he was caught in the explosion which broke him apart and incinerated his skin while he was in the process of going through (which is why the head goes through but ends up without any skin). That still isn't a great explanation and could have used a one-line explanation in the first few episodes, but I'm willing to go with it.
Wasn't his head separated from his body? During the "Cromartie puts himself back together" sequence the parts were separated. Once again, my assumption was that these parts didn't travel through time, they just waited until the other parts became active and put themselves back together again, just in time to meet Sarah and John, who made the time jump. Where do you get these official explanations?
And of course, Raymond and I have been going over this for a long time; the fact that magic (and now science fiction) don't have to make sense. You have to make a distinction also, between science fiction that takes known science and projects it into possible scenarios for the sake of a story, and science fiction that isn't really science at all, but masks magical realism in a cloak of pseudo-technological mumbo-jumbo. That's what we're dealing with here.
From the perspective of education theory, the meaning of a story isn't written by the author, it is created by the reader, by assimilating preexisting the author's words with preexisting schema. It's not important what the author means, what's important is what the reader makes of the story for their own purposes. Raymond (and others) like to argue over how this non-sense makes sense. It doesn't. And it doesn't have to.
If the story hangs on the accuracy of the technology, that is, if your involvement in the story is interrupted by the ridiculousness of the technology, then the story probably isn't very good to start with. But when magical time traveling robots, dragons and sentient jewelry can be accepted as fact for the sake of a story, then there must be a good enough story to allow us to suspend disbelief. We assume just enough, based on our pre-existing schema, to allow the story to continue without being interrupted by incredulity. And it doesn't matter what the author intended us to assume.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
In general I agree with the above (I long ago accepted that the Time Travel and T-1000 technology just plain DIDN'T make sense, but that doesn't mean I also can't enjoy dissecting how they might work once I'm done appreciating the story as a whole).
And on that note:
quote:But it's a pretty inefficient use of nano technology, when clothes are generally readily available.
This is actually somewhat relevant to the story: The T-1000s often find themselves in situations where they need to quickly duplicate clothes as well as people. When you're pretending to be a floor (T2) or a urinal (Season 2 episode 1) you're not going to be wearing clothes, and then after you've killed whoever you're killing you may need to acquire clothes different from the ones on the person you just killed. (And even if you COULD take clothes from the person you just killed, it's just plain faster to make your own than to strip your victim and put their clothes on)
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
T-1000's save on not having to do laundry.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Wasn't his head separated from his body? During the "Cromartie puts himself back together" sequence the parts were separated. Once again, my assumption was that these parts didn't travel through time, they just waited until the other parts became active and put themselves back together again, just in time to meet Sarah and John, who made the time jump. Where do you get these official explanations?
The head traveled through time; the body didn't. When the head appeared at that time, the body reactivated and had to go fetch it.
Yeah, I know: that doesn't help to explain things. I simply write it up to "humans don't know anything how time travel works, even in the future." I mean, at any point do you see a HUMAN working the time travel device?
quote:This is actually somewhat relevant to the story: The T-1000s often find themselves in situations where they need to quickly duplicate clothes as well as people. When you're pretending to be a floor (T2) or a urinal (Season 2 episode 1) you're not going to be wearing clothes, and then after you've killed whoever you're killing you may need to acquire clothes different from the ones on the person you just killed. (And even if you COULD take clothes from the person you just killed, it's just plain faster to make your own than to strip your victim and put their clothes on)
FYI: as per T2, the T-1000s can only mimic things that they come in direct contact with. It can't make clothing out of thin air, and when it mimics people it has to mimic the clothing they are wearing at the time.
Correct me if I'm wrong: have we ever seen Weaver in anything other than the plain white dress?
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
The thing has no fixed shape. How is putting on actual clothes that might not fit it 15 minutes later if it has to change shape efficient?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Heh. And my dad totally fails at directing the conversation away from the fake-science analysis. Oh well (that was partly my fault).
I'm curious about something. I've been reading a few blogs that were upset with the ending, largely because Sarah Connor A) makes a really lame to choice to let her son just walk away, B) fails utterly at stopping Skynet. Which basically means she failed at everything (and we know this because John can see so from his position in the future).
At first that seemed kinda harsh to me, but eventually I it occurred to me all both bloggers were 30-something women, for whom Sarah is obviously their POV character. Whereas I'm a 22 year old geeky, logical male. I'm represented pretty directly in the show by John, and to a lesser extent by Cameron (in the sense that she looks at everything through a cold, logical lens, which I sometimes struggle with). The ending was fine for me because it was giving my POV character a chance to meet some important people and evolve in interesting ways.
So I'm curious what demographics we have here and how that impacts POV character. What's your age/gender, and which character do you most strongly identify with? (and has that impacted your appreciation of the story?)
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I'm watching through Season 1 again with commentary. Some things I've noticed thus far:
1. Ellison is so much happier. Which makes sense, because he is not yet burdened with the knowledge that there's an apocalypse coming. But I remember him being one of my favorite characters in season 1, and it suddenly occurring to me how much I don't like him in Season 2. Now that I'm rewatching it I see why.
2. In the commentary they note that professional dancers make good Terminators, because they are skilled at controlling their bodies. Huh. That's neat.
3. In the commentary for episodes 1 and 3, they try to explain why Cameron is able to act so emotional in the pilot and is so stone-cold in high school. They say in the pilot she's actively trying to achieve a goal and in high school she has no reason to care what people think of her. Eh... no, still not buying it. Especially because she DOES make a token effort to learn from and communicate with the other schoolgirls. If you're going to bother at all, why not do it right?
4. In the commentary they keep talking about how neat the subplot around the high school was and how sad they were that they had to drop it, but they never tell you what it was. Grr.
5. I'm reading old blog comments and... I just can't fathom how people could like season 1 better than season 2. Seriously, season 1 has some cool moments but it's mostly paint-by-numbers action flick. Are there really that many people who are satisfied by that?
Bleh, I was hoping I'd be over this Terminator funk by the end of the week. Looks like I got a few more days to go.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I have a recollection of Weaver wearing a different outfit but I don't remember what episode it was nor what exactly she wore. But she may have been wearing the white dress underneath it.
Maybe the rules of time travel are different depending on whether you are going forward or backward. Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Didn't we hear somewhere that Weaver is a T-1001? I think a reasonable upgrade would be synthesizing a slightly different fabric based on previous input, so she can change the color and shape and whatnot. (The only episode I can think of was on her "husband's" funeral. She was wearing something different, but I couldn't figure out whether it was plaid or not)
Anyway, that's getting to a point where even I must concede the debate is becoming somewhat lame.
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
Finally caught up. Head is spinning so I'm just going to add that Weaver has had several different outfits. Hey, I'm a girl. I notice this stuff LOL. Most common was a white dress, although I'm pretty sure there were a couple different variants. Several styles of shiny blue-grey outfits. One sort-of-plaid dress (it wasn't actually plaid but it did have a pattern that at a glance made the mind think plaid) for Mr. Weaver. And in the last couple episodes, a light blue thing with a bow at the neck (which I think she was in until she had to go all Silver Shield to protect the humans in her office), and then the resistance grubbies after the time-jump.
And yes, IMDB lists her as Weaver/T-1001.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I wonder how many other people are just now finishing up. The fate of the show is still uncertain, so if you know anyone else who never got around to finish up, have them watch some episodes on Fox.com as soon as possible.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
There's a new 4 minute trailer for Salvation here. I'm really looking forward to this movie. However, I have a problem with John openly stating that Kyle Reese is his father. Plus, tidbits that I've heard about the plot suggest that Skynet knows about Reese. That would seem to contradict the earlier films, and maybe even open a few plot holes.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
It's time travel. There's no reason John can't choose to do things differently this time around (we've know there've been at least two alternate timelines in the movie series, not to mention that every additional terminator that got sent back represents an additional possible timeline.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
We find out tomorrow, yes?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
We find out about the show May 18th.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: It's time travel. There's no reason John can't choose to do things differently this time around (we've know there've been at least two alternate timelines in the movie series, not to mention that every additional terminator that got sent back represents an additional possible timeline.
I know that he can choose to do things differently, but it makes no sense. He may be putting his own existence in danger. And if Skynet already knows somehow, all it has to do is not send that first Terminator back and then Reese will never meet Sarah, unless John sends him back specifically to knock-up his mom.
It makes more sense in TSCC where Sarah is so careful about protecting the identity of John's father that she doesn't even want to tell Derek.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:New series “Human Target” takes over the Friday at 8/7c spot, with “Dollhouse” continuing at 9/8c. Terminator fans, including star Thomas Dekker, have campaigned for FOX to renew the show. The question becomes now can the show rise again?
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Sadness. I'm *almost* as sad that Dollhouse has the same ratings-killing spot, and I have an inkling that Human Target is the same kind of sci-fi show that's not going to find a foothold there. Why can't they just dump some cheapo reality crap there?
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Let's see what happens if "Salvation" brings in a lot of money and demonstrates that there's still a strong interest in the franchise.
Seriously, why would they announce the cancellation of the show the weekend before a major movie is released?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk: New series “Human Target” takes over the Friday at 8/7c spot, with “Dollhouse” continuing at 9/8c.
Why are they so stupid as to leave Dollhouse in the slot of death?
Human Target? Christopher Chance the Human Target? That might be worth seeing.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Why are they so stupid as to leave Dollhouse in the slot of death? [/QB]
Just be happy that it's in a slot at all. That's more than I dared hope.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Assuming these "random unnamed sources" are trustworthy, even sadder news:
This one is particularly soul crushing to me. It had seemed to me that at least a crude, hastily thrown together made for DVD movie was at least possible. (Although I suppose the article doesn't specifically preclude that, merely confirm that the show isn't coming back in its intended form)
Know what makes me most angry? SMALLVILLE of all shows is getting another season. Why. Why?WHY!!!???
If "It's Superman" is seriously enough reason to keep people watching a stupid sappy soap opera, why is "It's Terminator" not enough to get actual ratings for an actual good show?
[ May 18, 2009, 01:07 AM: Message edited by: Raymond Arnold ]
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I discussed this at length before when I pointed out, like, a month ago or something, that Terminator was not going to be renewed.
There's a self-perpetuating problem in network television that causes a cycle of perverse incentives to reduce the overall variety and quality of their programming.
They feel like T:SCC is a 'risky prospect' so they put it in a timeslot where not even a 'surefire prospect' would survive, then when the 'risky prospect' fails in that timeslot, they use this to entrench their thinking that "see, those shows don't work."
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I never doubted your logic. I knew the chances of it getting renewed were a long shot, but the fact that dollhouse has been renewed (despite having the same ratings, same timeslot, similar size fanbase, and NOT having a major motion picture coming out to help revitalize the show) tells me that Terminator absolutely could have been renewed if the final numbers had come out different. If enough people had tuned in for the finale or pre-ordered the DVD. If Friedman had somehow come up with a plan that could get the show produced on the skeleton budget that Dollhouse is accepting.
Sad as I am to have those hopes finally completely crushed, I stand by my decision to put the amount of effort I did in to trying to keep the show alive.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Pushing Daisies. Life. Terminator. That's the best part of what I watch on TV gone. Guess I'm going to have lots of free time to do more interesting things next year. Yay?
I'm going to miss this show so much - but I did love how it ended on such a high.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Terminator has not really reached the same mythic stature as Superman. Nor has it even reached the semi-mythic stature of Star Trek. But it could still follow in the steps of Star Trek, if a strong enough and large enough fanbase maintains interest in the franchise.
They could do what Stargate SG-1 did and put out direct-to-DVD movies, Ark of Truth, and Continuum. Having a real liking for time-travel stories, I thought the latter one was the best.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
That's what I was hoping at first, but A) some of the rumors suggest WB itself kinda wants to be done with the franchise. B) I think the direct-to-DVD stuff would cut down on most the best part - the characterization, and'd still probably have a truncated ending.
If they don't do a DVD, I'd like to at least know where the hell they were going with Season 3.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Maybe they'll continue it in a comic.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: Sad as I am to have those hopes finally completely crushed, I stand by my decision to put the amount of effort I did in to trying to keep the show alive.
It was a worthwhile effort anyway, it just may have been tactically irrelevant. Inside sources indicated that the show had been shuttered by the higher-ups long before the save-tha-show movement began. :<
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
The inside sources that everyone kept citing had also made some statements that were blatantly false. The show creators also continued to encourage the Save-the-Show movement for months afterward. It frankly doesn't make sense to me that they'd be doing that purely for tiny royalties from fox.com (and no royalties from hulu).
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Ah crap.
Wish I could have traded Heroes for this one.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
I'd trade Heroes for a stale bagel...
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I dunno guys... TSCC had way too many boring episodes this year. I mean, yeah there were flashes of greatness but too much was just plain dull.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I suspect that what you consider the boring episodes were my favorite parts.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Raymond: The episode about being drugged in the truck?
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
The four episode middle arc was my least favorite, true. (But I really loved Alpine Fields, which a lot of people thought was boring for some reason). Some Must Watch While Some Must Sleep did annoy me when I was first watching it, but even at the time I could tell that it was less because it was a bad episode and more because we had just had 4 episodes with some writing problems and no Cameron. If the episode had come at a time I wasn't already frustrated I think I would have appreciated it more.
Also, I posted this before but I'm not sure anyone read it:
It's an analysis of the Sleep episode and why it was important. After reading it, my appreciation for the episode went up a lot.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I am going to miss that show and feel sad as if losing a new friend who moved away. It had a lot more than a shoot them up chase action plot and delved into some serious issues. Although there were one or two slower eps, none of them seemed to me like bad writing. The one with the memories of the future in a submarine was my favorite. Perhaps too many potential fans thought they were getting non-stop action and ended up with actual discussions of important topics. Apparently they have an upcoming movie that contains all the meaningless violence they crave.
People really didn't like or understand Sleep? The general population aren't that smart it seems. It wasn't the best, but I did like the idea of not knowing what is the dream and what is the reality. Yet, both are nightmares. That pretty much sums up Sarah's life with what she has to endure.
Personally, I think that T:TSCC was much better than the last few seasons of Battle Star Galactica. The topics covered things that seemed a lot more relevant to me anyway. Both, for instance, covered the inevitable destruction of humanity. Comparatively, T:TSCC was much more hopeful that the struggle would be worth fighting where the motives in BSG were petty and all negative. Cheers to the show creators.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Personally, I think that T:TSCC was much better than the last few seasons of Battle Star Galactica. The topics covered things that seemed a lot more relevant to me anyway. Both, for instance, covered the inevitable destruction of humanity. Comparatively, T:TSCC was much more hopeful that the struggle would be worth fighting where the motives in BSG were petty and all negative. Cheers to the show creators.
I agree except for a few exceptional sections of BSG, that just blow anything else on TV out of the water. The first four episodes of season three for example (the New Caprica arc).
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
ray: still doesn't change the fact that it was a dream sequence. (I despise dream sequences.)
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
Well then you're just a Dream sequenceophobe. You're biased
You're making up your mind just based on the fact that it's a dream sequence. You're not giving it a proper trial on its own merits.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
We all have story telling devices we hate. With me, it's dream sequences, Virtual Reality ("We can't unplug him, he'll DIE! And if he dies in the game, he dies too!!!!!!!!!!"), or psychic projection into someone's mind. Basically anything that happens in someone's head but didn't REALLY happen.
It's a cheap way to "show, don't tell" but it really doesn't SHOW anything. What makes it worse, is it's so frequently a lie. Things are going along, reasonably normal till people start acting out of character and suddenly Bob walks in in his underwear and starts making out with the (male) main character who then wakes up in a sweat. Boring!
And the guys over at Pixar agree with me, btw. The rewrote a section of The Incredibles to kibosh a dream sequence that would have shown Helen's insecurities. Their reason? It's a cop-out; dream sequences are lazy story telling.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)