PDA

View Full Version : Sarah Connor - SPOILERS!



NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-14, 03:41 PM
Since I have very few memories of T3, I really don't have a lot to add here. But; I did find out it doesn't matter anyway, and worthy of discussion.

Anyway; since I have few memories of T3 I went searching to see how the series compared to it.

One of the first things that I found was an article with an interview with the creator of SCC who basically said that T3 was terrible, casting problems changed the story, and T3 cannot be used as canon.

He said that SCC is to be the real T3 and that T3 will basically be ignored.

Now; flash to the present... (intentional terminator-like segway here)

Thoughts on the show.
My biggest... I hope the pilot was just a way to set up the show, and not a sign of every episode.
I didn't see a whole lot of substance, just a lot of relax-found-chase-almostdead sequences.

And the friendly terminator? Obviously a way to get the young male viewers who don't remember T1/T2.

Moose
2008-Jan-14, 04:24 PM
I'm curious as to specifics. The only thing T3 does to canon is prove Sarah Connor wrong: it is not true that there is no fate but what you make. That, apparently, is merely an illusion. Both Skynet's and the Connors' attempts at tampering with the past did nothing other than cement the future.

Both sides tried to create a paradox in their favor, and failed. What resulted ended up not being a paradox at all.

Matherly
2008-Jan-14, 06:17 PM
And the friendly terminator? Obviously a way to get the young male viewers who don't remember T1/T2.

I disagree. Even without wires and other effects, Summer Glau can move in ways that border on superhuman. I think she was a perfect choice to be a non-Arnie Terminator.

(Why yes, I am a "Firefly" fanboy. Why do you ask? :) )

Moose
2008-Jan-14, 06:42 PM
Summer Glau's playing the friendly-side Terminator? No way!

This seems even more appropriate: http://www.xkcd.com/311/ (SFW)

crosscountry
2008-Jan-14, 06:49 PM
Since I have very few memories of T3, I really don't have a lot to add here. But; I did find out it doesn't matter anyway, and worthy of discussion.




the Sara Conner stuff? what a waste of time. That's television that wasn't good enough to actually make tv until the writers went on strike. I can't imagine anything else I'd rather NOT do.

sorry, that sounds awful. I'm still not going to watch it.

NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-14, 07:47 PM
I disagree. Even without wires and other effects, Summer Glau can move in ways that border on superhuman. I think she was a perfect choice to be a non-Arnie Terminator.
That's my point. It's not that they chose her, but that they chose an easy to look at character to be a friendly terminator.

If I were much younger, I'd probably... (what was I saying?)

Jim
2008-Jan-14, 08:32 PM
... That's television that wasn't good enough to actually make tv until the writers went on strike. ...

It was planned as a mid-season replacement prior to the writers' strike.

I watched the first ep; it wasn't great, but then it's purpose was to introduce the characters and get them from 1999 to 2007. Plus a little gratuitous (and network-friendly) nudiditity.

The series pretends T3 never happened (or hasn't happened yet). I didn't really like that one, so that's fine with me.

I'm willing to give it another ep or two to get its legs.

Besides... Summer Glau, dude!

Matherly
2008-Jan-14, 09:29 PM
I'm with Jim on this one.

Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if Cameron (Summer's Terminatrix) and Number Six got in a fight...

Mmmmmmmm (Matherly goes to his happy place)

OH! 'Scuse me. :shifty: I'm back.

Larry Jacks
2008-Jan-14, 10:14 PM
I watched it last night. It was fair at best. One thing that annoyed me is that terminators were about as common as sharks in "Jaws III". Every time someone turns around, there's a terminator trying to kill them. I hope it gets better but I'm not optimistic.





Possible spoilers:
The time travel was a fair trick to realign the timeline from 1999 to 2007. I wonder if the terminator they killed in the vault is the source of the chip used to build Skynet.

BTW: Skynet is the name of a series European military communications satellites dating back to the 1970s. The current generation is Skynet 5.

pghnative
2008-Jan-14, 10:28 PM
Plus a little gratuitous (and network-friendly) nudiditity.
Is there really such a thing??? (network friendly, that is.... though I suppose there are some who think there is no such thing as gratuitous nudity)

Jim
2008-Jan-14, 11:05 PM
Considering NYPD Blue showed Sipowicz's backside in all its "glory"...
.
. .
. . .
Sorry, went temporarily blind from the memory.

Yeah, they had some shots that didn't really show anything... long distance, blurred, masked by smoke and lighting effects... but gave the impression. And it did fit the story continuity and moved the plot, so not really gratuitous.

Oh, there were just the two Ts; the bad one just kept coming back.

mike alexander
2008-Jan-14, 11:29 PM
Just a personal opinion, but nudity is rarely gratuitous.

flaminio
2008-Jan-14, 11:45 PM
Just a personal opinion, but nudity is rarely gratuitous.

Especially if it's Summer Glau nude. Always welcome, never gratuitous.

I've given up trying to grok the Terminator timeline. I like the stories, and the new show looks like it's off to a good start, so I'll watch it, but I'm not going to think too deep on what goes where and when.

novaderrik
2008-Jan-15, 12:56 AM
how long can they keep doing the same plot lines over and over and over?
we know the kid won't die- he has to be alive to send his father back in tome to get freaky with his mom so he can be born.
i wonder if they'll get a lot of use out of the "Star Trek Voyager" reset button?
as to why they chose a hot actress (i thought she looked familiar...) to be the "nice" terminator- they weren't going to send an ugly terminator back in time to make friendly with the 15 year old future savior of mankind, are they? he sent her back from the future to make sure he makes it to the future alive.
i think maybe my head might start to hurt...

Gillianren
2008-Jan-15, 02:08 AM
as to why they chose a hot actress (i thought she looked familiar...) to be the "nice" terminator- they weren't going to send an ugly terminator back in time to make friendly with the 15 year old future savior of mankind, are they?

I think Arnold Schwazenegger is singularly unattractive, so apparently yes, they will.

DataCable
2008-Jan-15, 12:42 PM
Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if Cameron (Summer's Terminatrix) and Number Six got in a fight...
Immediately post-timejump, even. (wink wink, nudge nudge, grin grin, say n'more)

Gemini
2008-Jan-15, 01:16 PM
Immediately post-timejump, even. (wink wink, nudge nudge, grin grin, say n'more)

To quote Jayne "I'll be in my bunk"

antoniseb
2008-Jan-15, 01:30 PM
I saw the first two episodes. I'm not enthralled yet. Glau may have some interesting 'Commander Data'-like bits where she's practicing being more human. I think that will get old pretty quickly.

They've introduced a few secondary characters:
- the paramedic ex-fiance
- the fleshless terminator
- maybe the gang who gave them new documents

Still, unless the writing team gets imaginative, this could be a short-run series.

NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-15, 02:25 PM
Argh...it got the "spoiler" tag. I was hoping to avoid that, but I can see talking about a current movie or series that it's inevitable.


I think Arnold Schwazenegger is singularly unattractive, so apparently yes, they will.
That was my point.
Although; it might be a smart progression. In T2 the future John knew he needed a good strong father figure.
Now that the present John knows terminator, and has grown up enough that a father figure is not present, the future John knows he won't be effective. So he sends somebody to hold his interest.

On the third hand, that's over-analyzing, and they just wanted a cute character.

Jim
2008-Jan-15, 02:52 PM
(Sorry about the spoilers tag, but it seems that some people (http://www.bautforum.com/1151862-post7.html) just have to spill the beans.)

If you look at the start of the first ep, John has just started a new school; who better to get close to him - a 15-yo guy with hormones starting to rage - than a cute girl? John knew what would interest John.

(Of course, the creators also know their intended audience... a bunch of older guys with hormones in full rage.)

Moose
2008-Jan-15, 03:13 PM
Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if Cameron (Summer's Terminatrix) and Number Six got in a fight...


Immediately post-timejump, even. (wink wink, nudge nudge, grin grin, say n'more)


To quote Jayne "I'll be in my bunk"

To quote Jayne: "I could stand to hear some more."

Doodler
2008-Jan-18, 07:49 PM
To quote Jayne: "I could stand to hear some more."

To quote their intended audience.

"Screenies or it didn't happen."

I just watched the pilot ep, iTunes has it as a downloadable freebie. Not a bad start, but I'm with Antoniseb, this metal skeleton needs some fleshing out. The only TV series to ever trump its science fiction big screen origin was Alien Nation, because it introduced a concept without an enclosed story to frame the end of it. Even dismissing T3 (which is about as difficult as ditching Galactica 1980, tbqh), they still have some work ahead of them. I'm not convinced this has the ability to reach that same golden ring.

Van Rijn
2008-Jan-18, 10:22 PM
I found the second episode to be more interesting than the first. Not great, mind you, just more interesting. I did think the "headless robot" gimmick was pretty silly.

Fraser
2008-Jan-18, 10:30 PM
I thought it was medium. Not terrible, not great. Medium. But I guess I'm firmly out of the target demographic now.

Doodler
2008-Jan-18, 11:52 PM
One of the first things that I found was an article with an interview with the creator of SCC who basically said that T3 was terrible, casting problems changed the story, and T3 cannot be used as canon.

He said that SCC is to be the real T3 and that T3 will basically be ignored.


For this reason alone, I like the show. I think they might have an interesting premise in that Glau's terminator character doesn't know who built the new Skynet. Definitely ups the ante for the series, and maybe does give it a concept to work with for a few years.

novaderrik
2008-Jan-19, 12:34 AM
i wonder how many times Jon Connor gets killed, only to be "saved" when the cute female terminator uses a time machine that was conveniently placed by someone sent back from the future to go back and prevent his death- or maybe another Terminator is sent back from the future to prevent it from happening..
i bet it will get more convoluted than Voyager and Enterprise combined..

DataCable
2008-Jan-19, 05:50 AM
I thought it was medium.No, that's immediately after, on NBC (http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0412175/). :cool:

DataCable
2008-Jan-19, 05:54 AM
Definitely ups the ante for the series, and maybe does give it a concept to work with for a few years.Could also be interesting (or tedious, depending on how it's implemented) if their objective keeps changing due to alterations they cause in the timeline. Obviously, it's already happened... Judgement day still occurs, it just got pushed back.

NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-21, 03:36 PM
i wonder how many times Jon Connor gets killed, only to be "saved" when the cute female terminator uses a time machine that was conveniently placed by someone sent back from the future to go back and prevent his death- or maybe another Terminator is sent back from the future to prevent it from happening..
i bet it will get more convoluted than Voyager and Enterprise combined..
From what I saw, it was only a quick way to bring the series to the present, eliminate T3 from canon but still pull in some minor elements from that movie.
I don't see them going to the ST reset button until they start running out of ideas.
But; I do see terminators from the future as a recurring theme since it is the basis for the entire theme.


I found the second episode to be more interesting than the first. Not great, mind you, just more interesting. I did think the "headless robot" gimmick was pretty silly.

The pilot was filled with too much chase. The second one was better, but there were still lots of chase scenes even if they were in short bursts.

And they actually took some effort to set up the headless thing... Yes, silly.

And the cat poster? You mean to tell me that the police are that inept that they couldn't tell there was something behind the poster. Definitely could have been more creative.

I do like how they gained that extra time for the 120 second reset.

Jason
2008-Jan-21, 04:19 PM
Let's count the ways the headless terminator thing doesn't work:

1. How did the head survive going through the time machine? I thought mechanical things could not survive the journey unless they were surrounded by something living (indeed, none of the clothes or weapons the group has with it survives the trip). The skull doesn't have any living flesh around it.

2. So the Terminator body sat in a scrap heap for seven years, and nobody noticed it or ground it up for, say, scrap? Notice that the head gets picked up by a curious worker minutes after it appears.

3. If the headless body can kill people and go where it needs to to get its head back, why does it need a head at all? It seems to be doing just fine without.

phunk
2008-Jan-21, 05:08 PM
Maybe the head had a wifi link to the body? :)

The thing that always bothered me about the terminator series is the 'no guns' time travel bit. If wrapping a terminator in flesh let the machine time travel, why couldn't they wrap up some of their future weapons in a steak or something and bring them back?

Jason
2008-Jan-21, 05:13 PM
The "no guns" bit was a nifty dramatic device to limit Reese to weapons he could find in 1984 and prevent him from proving his case to the authorities.

Doodler
2008-Jan-21, 05:53 PM
1. How did the head survive going through the time machine? I thought mechanical things could not survive the journey unless they were surrounded by something living (indeed, none of the clothes or weapons the group has with it survives the trip). The skull doesn't have any living flesh around it.

It was covered when the field was tripped, Sarah's shot didn't hit the body until after the field formed. The meat burned off in transit.

(That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. Otherwise, nice plothole find)

Noclevername
2008-Jan-21, 11:53 PM
If wrapping a terminator in flesh let the machine time travel, why couldn't they wrap up some of their future weapons in a steak or something and bring them back?

It has to be living flesh, "field around a living body" as Reese said in the first film. And I guess the T-1000 and Terminatrix could mimic the field. Which makes it even sillier, if they could do that.

One of the Terminator comic books had a Terminator stuff a plasma blaster inside a human's gut, and keep them alive long enough for the time trip back. (This was pre-T2)

Krel
2008-Jan-22, 02:10 AM
When the first Terminator film came out, one movie reviewer posed the question of why they just didn't put some weapons in a cow and send it back also. They should have been able to keep the cow alive long enough to journey back.

David.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-22, 03:05 AM
When the first Terminator film came out, one movie reviewer posed the question of why they just didn't put some weapons in a cow and send it back also. They should have been able to keep the cow alive long enough to journey back.

David.

There may have been a mass limitation. Certainly Skynet could have put some built-in weapons in the Terminator. But in all the films, the attempts had a jury-rigged feel, as if Skynet just threw whatever it had on hand into the time machine. No wonder the damn thing couldn't even stop some ragtag humans from smashing its defense grid; Poor planning skills!

Jason
2008-Jan-22, 03:06 AM
Like I said, it's a dramatic device, not an attempt at serious speculation on how a time machine might actually operate.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-22, 03:11 AM
Like I said, it's a dramatic device, not an attempt at serious speculation on how a time machine might actually operate.

But since it's the basis of the whole premise, it stretches the suspension of disbelief to the breaking point. A supercomputer that conquers the world, and has all this hyperadvanced Terminator technology, makes such a dumb rookie mistake, and keeps making it? Are you familiar with the old robot saying, "Does not Compute"?

Jason
2008-Jan-22, 03:17 AM
The impression one gets from the original movie is that the time machine was brand new experimental work and only was used twice - once by Skynet and once by the humans.
If Skynet was not aware of the living flesh limitation until the machine became operational, and if it knew humans could capture it at any moment, then it makes sense that it sent what it had available rather than modifying terminators to carry weapons.
Reese said the equipment would be destroyed as soon as he went through to prevent more items from the future being sent back.
It's only after T2 and other sequels that the premise begins to break down, because if the time machine was still available for use then yes, you figure Skynet would have found a way to get around its limitations pretty quickly.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-22, 03:43 AM
The impression one gets from the original movie is that the time machine was brand new experimental work and only was used twice - once by Skynet and once by the humans.
If Skynet was not aware of the living flesh limitation until the machine became operational, and if it knew humans could capture it at any moment, then it makes sense that it sent what it had available rather than modifying terminators to carry weapons.
Reese said the equipment would be destroyed as soon as he went through to prevent more items from the future being sent back.
It's only after T2 and other sequels that the premise begins to break down, because if the time machine was still available for use then yes, you figure Skynet would have found a way to get around its limitations pretty quickly.

Yes, the original film at least had the idea that there was some fighting to get Reese into the time machine. It's possible that whatever Skynet had planned to send was destroyed then, and it had to go with whatever man-sized killing machine that it had handy. But once the first film was a success, they had to jump back on the ol' gravy train, and the premise of "send back a naked Terminator to kill X" worked so well the first time out.

Jim
2008-Jan-22, 02:10 PM
I watched last night's episode and the series seems to be progressing well. No shoot 'em up stuff and lots of character development; looks like they'll have some fun getting Summer Glau's Terminator to adjust to human society... human high school society at that.

Hokie
2008-Jan-24, 01:10 AM
I was shocked to see The slide lock back on on the gun when Sarah emptied the mag during the opening of Mondays episode. Most of the time they just have the silly click click.

Cameron has regressed in dealing with people she did a good job talking to John in the first episode. Now she is not so good talking to people.

Van Rijn
2008-Jan-24, 01:31 AM
Cameron has regressed in dealing with people she did a good job talking to John in the first episode. Now she is not so good talking to people.

They probably just figured she needed to be more robotic, so changed her character midstream, but there is a rationalization: It's fairly easy to create a script, accounting for some likely responses, that can make a program seem fairly human for a short time. The longer or more complex the interaction, the more likely the illusion will be broken. In this case, "future John" could write a script to fool "past John" - for a while.

Doodler
2008-Jan-24, 04:22 AM
They probably just figured she needed to be more robotic, so changed her character midstream, but there is a rationalization: It's fairly easy to create a script, accounting for some likely responses, that can make a program seem fairly human for a short time. The longer or more complex the interaction, the more likely the illusion will be broken. In this case, "future John" could write a script to fool "past John" - for a while.

They do pretty well when they mimic behavior with a specific directive in mind. When they have to wing it, then they stick out badly.

Doodler
2008-Jan-25, 03:58 AM
Just caught episode 3. I think this is one I'll stick with for a while. They've got some interesting long range arcs with the episodic stuff thrown in for fodder. I think they'll do well for a season or so.

Doodler
2008-Feb-16, 04:09 AM
Anyone else still watching this, or am I alone in REALLY liking where they're taking this thing?

Moose
2008-Feb-16, 11:01 AM
Well Doodler, I'm not right there with you (no cable), but you're one of the people from whom I'll take a show recommendation. I'll probably end up picking up the DVDs when they start releasing seasons.

Doodler
2008-Feb-16, 04:39 PM
Its on broadcast,actually. FOX carries it. I watch it from iTunes for $2 an episode (nice with no commercials).

Moose
2008-Feb-16, 05:04 PM
FOX doesn't broadcast in Canada, Doodler, and I'm not anywhere near close enough to the border to pick it up. It's no big deal for me, I'm perfectly content* to wait for the DVDs (my preferred medium). Only now, SCC is on the "list" where it probably wouldn't have gotten there.

(* I'd have to be, having willingly gotten rid of my cable as a bad bargain not long after FOX cancelled Firefly. It's certainly not because I can't afford it or can't get it. I simply don't want it.)

Gillianren
2008-Feb-16, 06:56 PM
I was going to say that I who live in the US--and near a major metropolitan area, at that--would have to have cable to get Fox, but actually, I think it may be the one channel we can get without it here in Olympia. (We're close, but far enough away so that you pretty much have to have cable if you want to watch TV.) Actually, when I lived in Port Angeles, the only two channels we got there were both from across the border.

Lukas
2008-Feb-18, 12:51 AM
Easiest way for skynet to kill John Connor:

1. Skynet sends back two terminators.
2. T-#1 attacks john connor & T-#2 calls out "if you wanna live, come with me."
3. T-#2 wins trust of john & then kills john
4. ... profit

Noclevername
2008-Feb-18, 02:11 AM
Easiest way for skynet to kill John Connor:

1. Skynet sends back two terminators.
2. T-#1 attacks john connor & T-#2 calls out "if you wanna live, come with me."
3. T-#2 wins trust of john & then kills john
4. ... profit

Skynet has shown a signifigant lack of tactical sense in its actions so far. I'd say the old machine has been exposed to a few too many cosmic rays for its own good.

A Terminator with a tactical nuke in its belly can get the whole job done all at once.

NGCHunter
2008-Feb-18, 03:33 PM
Skynet has shown a signifigant lack of tactical sense in its actions so far. I'd say the old machine has been exposed to a few too many cosmic rays for its own good.

A Terminator with a tactical nuke in its belly can get the whole job done all at once.

Just to play devil's advocate, according to T3 (which isn't canon, I know, but certain details seem to carry over) skynet is software that took over every computer in the world in a failed bid to destroy a virus sent back from the future. Therefore, every home computer connected online eventually contributes to skynet's intelligence. As skynet kills people in the past with terminators, it kills potential consumers who would have bought home computers that later contribute to skynet's pre-apocolyptic intelligence. Perhaps skynet is concerned that if it kills too many people and destroys too many computers, like with a nuke, it would prevent skynet from becoming "self aware" when it eventually gets turned on.

Noclevername
2008-Feb-18, 04:04 PM
Just to play devil's advocate, according to T3 (which isn't canon, I know, but certain details seem to carry over) skynet is software that took over every computer in the world in a failed bid to destroy a virus sent back from the future. Therefore, every home computer connected online eventually contributes to skynet's intelligence. As skynet kills people in the past with terminators, it kills potential consumers who would have bought home computers that later contribute to skynet's pre-apocolyptic intelligence. Perhaps skynet is concerned that if it kills too many people and destroys too many computers, like with a nuke, it would prevent skynet from becoming "self aware" when it eventually gets turned on.

Yes, but then it starts an all-out nuclear war, destroying all of the PCs! Thus reducing its network to a bare minimum. Which might account for the vast divergence in intelligence displayed-- on the one hand, it can invent time travel and liquid metal Terminators, and conquer the planet. On the other hand, it can't hold onto what it's conquered and has to resort to sending Terminators into the past over and over in hopes one will finally get the job done.

NGCHunter
2008-Feb-18, 04:13 PM
Yes, but then it starts an all-out nuclear war, destroying all of the PCs! Thus reducing its network to a bare minimum. Which might account for the vast divergence in intelligence displayed-- on the one hand, it can invent time travel and liquid metal Terminators, and conquer the planet. On the other hand, it can't hold onto what it's conquered and has to resort to sending Terminators into the past over and over in hopes one will finally get the job done.

Very true, it makes me wonder why skynet shot itself in the foot so badly? If it runs off of home computers it would make more sense to develop and use biological weapons on the pesky humans to preserve the computers it runs on. Just one more plot hole introduced by the sequels i guess.

Noclevername
2008-Feb-18, 04:17 PM
Very true, it makes me wonder why skynet shot itself in the foot so badly? .

It picked up a virus-- or adware. Somewhere in the future Skynet is trying to make its sex life more "satisfying".

Doodler
2008-Feb-19, 03:37 PM
Pretty surreal episode last night, though an awesome tie in to Terminator (the first one)

Jim
2008-Feb-19, 08:03 PM
I really enjoyed it. It gave a glimpse of the future under SkyNet and some of the backstory to the original movie and to the previous "Turk" episodes.

I also liked the tie-in to Summer Glau's character, and her remark that "Sometimes they go bad. Nobody knows why." So, she may be a bad girl after all. Is that why she pocketed what she did?

Matherly
2008-Feb-19, 08:22 PM
I love the Summinator's ability for self assesment

"I freak him the [not board friendly] out"

and

"I am a [not board friendly] [not board friendly]"

NGCHunter
2008-Feb-19, 09:21 PM
I also liked the tie-in to Summer Glau's character, and her remark that "Sometimes they go bad. Nobody knows why." So, she may be a bad girl after all. Is that why she pocketed what she did?

That left my head spinning. It basically invalidated what Sarah assumed in the second film. The terminator would never hurt john, she said. Maybe, maybe not. It's an interesting twist, though I hope they eventually reveal more about why a terminator might "snap." Is it because they are mistreated? Can it be prevented by forming a friendship with the machine? Or is it truly random?

In summer's case I wouldn't assume she's doing something bad just yet. It's possible that she's actually evil and is unwilling to destroy the memory chips of other terminators for her own reasons. I do see a way out for her character though; perhaps she was ordered to preserve the chips by future john (without sarah's knowledge of course, she'd never go along with it) so that they could be analyzed in the future to learn more about skynet's preparations before the war broke out, either to attempt to change things in the past again or to destroy hidden supplies in the future. My money's on her character actually teetering on the edge, not willing to fully obey either side.

Doodler
2008-Feb-19, 11:34 PM
I think killing the T-888 unhinged her a bit. I was rather impressed with the writers' touch in having her write a note while Sarah was treating Derek.

NGCHunter
2008-Feb-20, 05:32 AM
I think killing the T-888 unhinged her a bit. I was rather impressed with the writers' touch in having her write a note while Sarah was treating Derek.

Good point, I had forgotten about that. It was a very nice touch indeed. If I remember, they didn't make it the focus of the scene to get the point across, I really appreciated that.

Jim
2008-Feb-20, 03:55 PM
... It basically invalidated what Sarah assumed in the second film. The terminator would never hurt john, she said. Maybe, maybe not. ... It's possible that (Summer)'s actually evil and is unwilling to destroy the memory chips of other terminators for her own reasons. ... perhaps she was ordered to preserve the chips by future john ... My money's on her character actually teetering on the edge, not willing to fully obey either side.


I think killing the T-888 unhinged her a bit. I was rather impressed with the writers' touch in having her write a note while Sarah was treating Derek.

That's what I like about this development. When they announced the show, and when it started out, I never expected the sort of gray area character development that has come out, and certainly not from the terminator character. I expected angst from Sarah and John (and we're getting it), but from a cyborg?

Neat turn.

NEOWatcher
2008-Feb-20, 04:04 PM
I'm starting to lose distinction between characters. (At least the future ones)

An open thermite fire in a wooden garage? Riiiiight...

Delvo
2008-Feb-20, 06:40 PM
I missed the scene in which "she" wrote a letter. Who was it to and what was it about? Or if we don't know that, then how could it reveal anything about the character?

Jim
2008-Feb-20, 06:54 PM
An open thermite fire in a wooden garage? Riiiiight...

Hey, she had cinder blocks around it.

phunk
2008-Feb-20, 06:56 PM
Not nearly enough thermite to do the job though

Matherly
2008-Feb-20, 10:12 PM
Y'all are compaining about the thermite, and yet nobody's mentioned the fact that if Sarah is Blood type O, John can't be Blood type AB. So either Sarah isn't really John mother or (more likely) somebody ramroded this script through development before the writers went on strike.

Jim
2008-Feb-20, 11:14 PM
Oh, yeah! I caught that and promptly forgot it. But, he was AB Neg, IIRC. Had he been AB Pos, he could have received Sarah's O Pos. They could have handled that much better.

Yes, an O parent cannot have an AB child. Unless...

Maybe John is adopted?

Doodler
2008-Feb-20, 11:17 PM
Y'all are compaining about the thermite, and yet nobody's mentioned the fact that if Sarah is Blood type O, John can't be Blood type AB. So either Sarah isn't really John mother or (more likely) somebody ramroded this script through development before the writers went on strike.

I don't watch fiction for an education in biology.

HenrikOlsen
2008-Feb-20, 11:39 PM
Yes, an O parent cannot have an AB child. Unless...

Maybe John is adopted?
Or a mutant?

Which could also explain why he specifically is so special for the future.

Noclevername
2008-Feb-20, 11:58 PM
Oh, yeah! I caught that and promptly forgot it. But, he was AB Neg, IIRC. Had he been AB Pos, he could have received Sarah's O Pos. They could have handled that much better.

Yes, an O parent cannot have an AB child. Unless...

Maybe John is adopted?

Switched at birth? (And if so, will we see a time-travel reason for it?)

Doodler
2008-Feb-21, 07:00 PM
more likely that the writers, like most Americans, learned most of their high school biology in someone's back seat...

Moose
2008-Feb-21, 07:16 PM
Yes, an O parent cannot have an AB child. Unless...

... Unless the other parent is AB.

An O child can only have O parents.

Matherly
2008-Feb-21, 07:26 PM
... Unless the other parent is AB.

An O child can only have O parents.

Everything I read suggests that an O mother (oo) would have a child who was either A (ao), B (bo) or O (oo). To be AB, you would have to get an A gene from one parent and a B gene from the other. A O (oo) couldn't do it.

Jim
2008-Feb-21, 07:43 PM
An O-type parent cannot produce an AB child, regardless of the other parent's type.

For some Fun with Blood Types, try http://www.biology.arizona.edu/human_bio/problem_sets/blood_types/inherited.html

Moose
2008-Feb-21, 09:19 PM
Oh, I see now. Okay. I'd been under the mistaken impression that blood type was simply additive, but then that begged the question of how come everybody hasn't ended up AB+ after so many generations of semi-random cross-breeding.

Doodler
2008-Mar-05, 01:53 AM
Season finale available on iTunes.

Hello floor, meet jaw. This one's a very serious keeper.

Noclevername
2008-Mar-05, 09:05 AM
I don't watch fiction for an education in biology.

Some variation from reality is allowed, but jarring, needless inaccuracies of real facts take you out of the fiction. Suspension of disbelief can apply to a premise (Superman can fly, the Enterprize goes faster than light), but violations of reality that are not part of that "agreement" (Chicago is on the West Coast, bears lay eggs) are just plain sloppy storytelling.

Jim
2008-Mar-05, 02:09 PM
Season finale available on iTunes.

Hello floor, meet jaw. This one's a very serious keeper.

I'm glad they called it a season finale. It deserves a shot at a full run.

Possible Spoiler Alert!
.
..
...
....
.....

The "ice cream in the park" scene was interesting. It's the first time John sees him, and he's five years old. Ain't time travel grand?

I liked the way they handled the SWAT Team going after Kester. The camera work, the background music... nicely done. Sorry to see the lady fed get it. Why did he let the other one walk?

And, c'mon, you call that a cliffhanger? Is there any doubt that she'll walk out of that nearly unscathed?

Matherly
2008-Mar-05, 02:31 PM
Possible Spoiler Alert!
.
..
...
....
.....

The "ice cream in the park" scene was interesting. It's the first time John sees him, and he's five years old. Ain't time travel grand?


Very cool.



I liked the way they handled the SWAT Team going after Kester. The camera work, the background music... nicely done. Sorry to see the lady fed get it. Why did he let the other one walk?


It worked... and it kept the budget down!

As for why he left Ellison alive... I think it was because A) Ellison wasn't a threat (as opposed to the SWAT team who actually were what with all the assault rifles and such) and B) Ellison may be useful to Crome Artie in tracking down the Conners. Just my $0.02 and I could be wrong.





And, c'mon, you call that a cliffhanger? Is there any doubt that she'll walk out of that nearly unscathed?

I don't think she'll be unscathed (athough her endo-skelleton is obviously OK). Maybe an arc in the next season (crosses fingers) will revolve around making her appear acceptable. Something to do with the chucks of Vic's flesh she kept?

NEOWatcher
2008-Mar-05, 02:37 PM
I don't think she'll be unscathed (athough her endo-skelleton is obviously OK). Maybe an arc in the next season (crosses fingers) will revolve around making her appear acceptable. Something to do with the chucks of Vic's flesh she kept?
And being able to restore her previous look may depend on contract negotiations. ;)

Doodler
2008-Mar-05, 03:13 PM
The imagery of the raid was awesome. Minimum actual violence, so the anti-bullet porn league can't knock it. Plus they used Cash with Kester walking away in black clothes. If THAT isn't imagery, NOTHING is. As far as sparingEllison, he was no longer a threat, and was not a mission objective. No reason to off him.

The scene with Derek and John watching the kids was pure awesome. Yeah its a sci fi twist, but it was the most human moment of the series. Plus it nicely resolved the odd decision to keep Derek in the dark about his relationship to John.

As far as the bomb at the end, I get the feeling this marks the end of their life in LA. The Turk is no longer there and even if Cameron is restored, how would they explain it to the cops who investigate the bomb. That is WAY too much exposure to risk. They're going to go back underground next season. The Baum family is over.

Matherly
2008-Mar-05, 03:48 PM
And being able to restore her previous look may depend on contract negotiations. ;)

EXECUTIVES! GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANTS OF SO HELP ME I WILL GET RIVER TAM TO COME AND KICK YOU IN THE HEAD REPEATEDLY!!!!!

(Ahem... sorry 'bout that)

Larry Jacks
2008-Mar-05, 09:14 PM
Reminds me of this cartoon (http://xkcd.com/311/).

Here's a good interview (http://www.canada.com/globaltv/globalshows/et_story.html?id=59569db4-91a7-4a7f-adc2-130f17a08347) of our favorite terminatrix.

After a trippy, largely experimental start, Glau has eased into the role in recent weeks. Her character is different now than she was at the beginning.

"People have noticed that from the pilot to the series," Glau said. "We were experimenting with Cameron quite a bit early on. We wanted her to be able to seem human. We wanted especially for John (Connor) to be fooled by her, so he would let her into his life. And so, in the pilot, I do act very human. As I've gone through the series, I've taken steps back, though, and I'm acting more now like a terminator would. We did that for several reasons."

...

Learning to fight like a fembot has not been easy, Glau admits.

"When I met (fight supervisor) Joel Kramer to talk about the fighting, I said don't know how a terminator fights. He said, 'Well, it's going to be very different from what you did before with River. You're not going to be doing all these beautiful martial arts movements. It's not about being creative and using dynamic movement. It's just about brute force.' It's been a real fun change of pace for me, because I worked so hard on Firefly and Serenity. I had to learn all those martial arts. I did it myself. I did it from start to finish, every fight scene, and it was incredibly challenging.

"With Cameron, it's challenging, but in a different way. I have to constantly remind myself not to react humanly, not to move in a human way. Even things like crossing my legs. I can't touch my hair to move it out of my face. I have to really reprogram my mind. But as far as the actual fighting goes, it's really fun."

Ara Pacis
2008-Mar-05, 09:17 PM
*Sigh* The problem with learning to write screenplays is also predicting what will happen in a show or movie. I knew the jeep was gonna blow up as soon as I saw her walking towards it.

It's a good show though; I want to see more.

Matherly
2008-Mar-05, 09:53 PM
Reminds me of this cartoon (http://xkcd.com/311/).

Admitedly, that cartoon was exactly what I was thinking of when I made the above post :)

Larry Jacks
2008-Mar-05, 09:58 PM
Her years of ballet training allows Summer to move so gracefully. Her fight scenes in Serenity were very well done. It's interesting how different the fights are in the current role. Somehow, I don't see River wrapping a pile around someone's neck and twisting the way Cameron did in a big fight a few weeks ago. I mean, damn!

I also love the droll humor in both series, like in the finale where she was asked about a car and she said something like, "It belongs to the guy I killed and stuffed in the trunk" as if that were a normal thing to say.

NEOWatcher
2008-Mar-06, 01:31 PM
*Sigh* The problem with learning to write screenplays is also predicting what will happen in a show or movie. I knew the jeep was gonna blow up as soon as I saw her walking towards it.
The predictability is one thing, one thing, but they sure gave plenty of time to let you think about it.

Larry Jacks
2008-Mar-06, 02:18 PM
*Sigh* The problem with learning to write screenplays is also predicting what will happen in a show or movie. I knew the jeep was gonna blow up as soon as I saw her walking towards it.

I've never learned how to write screenplays and I have no trouble predicting how most shows will turn out. It's a rare and often wonderful thing when something even remotely unpredictable makes it to the screen. Probably 90% of all shows are as predictable as a sunrise. I find myself watching TV and movies less each year.

Ara Pacis
2008-Mar-06, 09:37 PM
True, but predictability is part of the contract with the audience. A good story quite often makes it's end predictable, but it's how they get there that's exciting.

Infinity Watcher
2008-Mar-06, 10:44 PM
True, but predictability is part of the contract with the audience. A good story quite often makes it's end predictable, but it's how they get there that's exciting.
It depends a bit really sometimes you know how something is going to end and you go to see a story told well (or in the case of most of the james bond films a lot of stuff blow up, and some cool gadgets for blowing said stuff up or getting Bond to the point where he can do so) other stories might be fun because you don't immediatly see the end (whodunnit type stories for example) so either can work if done well