DaneykoIsGod Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 (edited) That kind of question only comes up because Terminator has a muddled sense of time that can't logically be pieced together really.In this case I'd rationalize it as the "original timeline" John Connor sent Reese back to protect his mom. Then we get John Connor v2.0, in the current timeline, who has Reese as a father. So John Connor of this movie still wants to have the same father so that he, V2.0, exists instead of V1.0. These different timelines change everything. If there's a John Connor V1.0 and V2.0, that means there's also a Reese V1.0 (the Reese from Terminator that John Connor V1.0 sent back) and a Reese V2.0 (the Reese from T4 that John Connor V2.0 wants to send back). If they don't save Reese V2.0, John Connor V2.0 continues to exist because Reese V1.0 still knocked boots with Sarah Connor (who, BTW, was Sarah Connor V2.0 ... Sarah Connor V1.0 is the one that popped out John Connor V1.0). Surprisingly, this doesn't make my brain hurt. I guess it could be rationalized that John Connor V2.0 just doesn't want to see a younger version of his dad die. But that's too selfish a reason to risk jeopardizing a mission to take down SkyNet. A more sensible rationalization would be that he saw Back To The Future and doesn't wanna disappear. Edited May 25, 2009 by DaneykoIsGod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 I've got a theory on T4 that means Connor is even more selfish than that but I won't say it since a bunch of people haven't gone yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
American_Psycho Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 The movie as a whole was mediocre. The CGI was very nice and the performances from Sam Worthington and Anton Yelchin were standouts. However, the rest of the cast including the almighty Bale delivered very poorly. I give no credit whatsoever to McG, as he remains as a no-talent hack, in my opinion of course. The plot was absolutely silly, and I can definitely see why James Cameron had many reservations with the direction this film took. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atterr Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) Saw the movie last night and hated it. It is not really a Terminator movie, it felt more like Matrix Revolutions. There is no story whatsoever and tries to compensate for it with way too much action. Ok, it had some good action scenes but Motor Terminators and that Transformer-thingy... WTF??? The performances by the actors are bad and uninspired, with the exception of Anton Yelchin who was a pretty convincing Kyle Reese. The references to the previous Terminator movies made me laugh but not in a good way. This one even makes Terminator 3 look like a masterpiece. I never expected much from the guy who made Charlie's Angels, but this is really bad. Edited June 5, 2009 by Atterr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newjerseydamo Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I still jump with excitement seeing that naked aussie march with purpose across the screen. hes Austrian not Aussie. Aussie is for Australians i just got back from seeing it tonight. after reading a fair range of comments and thoughs on the movie, overall i thought it a good movie, about a 6.5-7/10. a couple of cheesy moments: - the matrix type scene, definitely could of handled that better, and the scenes that followed it where it all seemed like gleaming new future technology, compared to the entire rest of the complex being run down and dirty. seemed out of place. - the end seemed like something out of sarah connor chronicles, i wont ruin it, but yeah, didnt like that too much either everything in this world is based on perception and the context of something. the trailer really did take things out of context compared to the actual scenes when you watch the movie, so i was happy about that. the movie had a gritty feel to it, and overall felt like it belonged in part of the terminator franchise. there were a few scenes that had that typical action movie feeling to it with no empathy derived from it, and thats where the original terminator movies (T1/T2) excelled in. they provoked emotion, and todays action movies are all about the explosions. this movie seemed to weave in and out of that. some parts really were good for the franchise, others were just "insert explosion here". the canon and authenticity of the franchise was really good, they all seemed to fit in naturally too, without being forced. overall, even if you hate the thought of them butchering the series, give it a go. ill watch it again, especially in HD. but definitely time for me to go and get T2 skynet edition in bluray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brodeurfanatic Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Lookalikes.. Sam Worthington Sean Avery Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beezer34 Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 ...in a little over 2 weeks since it's release, the movie has (domestically) made over $100 million! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nature's Minister Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 why did the t-800 prototype throw connor into a wall intead of punching a hole through him like he did to bill paxton in terminator 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRASHER Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 why did the t-800 prototype throw connor into a wall intead of punching a hole through him like he did to bill paxton in terminator 1 "I am a learning computer" it hadn't figured that one out yet though he did pull the Heart Punch on the prototype guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nature's Minister Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 terminators come pre-programmed with extensive knowledge of human anatomy this movie sucked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRASHER Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 terminators come pre-programmed with extensive knowledge of human anatomythis movie sucked but being the first model is it possible this one did not? even Skynet can fvck up now and then too... they did obviously since they lose the war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nature's Minister Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 i would assume skynet can figure out "punch someone really hard" is an effective way to incapacitate a human and "toss them lightly at a wall" is not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 why did the t-800 prototype throw connor into a wall intead of punching a hole through him like he did to bill paxton in terminator 1 cause the writers lack the talent or creativity to do something other then the cliched "bad guy throws a good guy half-way across a room instead of just killing him out-right" device Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.