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?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
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
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.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
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).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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)
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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 ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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."
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
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 ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
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
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?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
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)
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
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).
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
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).
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!
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
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. Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
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.
posted
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.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
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).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
