T4 Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins

Outlawnoob wrote: »

Can someone Explain to me how John Connor could have possibly been born in the first place to warrant the Terminator to be sent back in time to stop it?

Because time travel is bullsh1t.

im not taking this as a film continued on.

Terminator 1 and 2 happend, and they were classics.

There are 3 new films appearing this being the first. So I'm going to take it rather like the star wars franchise, and I so happend to prefer the new ones to the old ones.

I' a big terminator fan and I'll see what happens. I'm over the fact that its not going to be near T1 or T2.

But at this stage I literally do not read critic reviews anymore, because they cannot dictate to me what is a good or bad film, there is no right or wrong.

My two cents, I'll probably love it.

Outlawnoob wrote: »

Can someone Explain to me how John Connor could have possibly been born in the first place to warrant the Terminator to be sent back in time to stop it?

Its been pretty much confirmed by terminator 2 and the sarah connor chronicles (terminator 3 f*cks it up) that the timeline is to quote the doctor *wibbly wobbly elastic time motion*

-The central notion behind time travel in the terminator franchise is that the future can be changed, this was stated enough in terminator 2 to stick.

Essentially the core events, judgement day and the creation of time travel will happen...*but* when they happen can be shoved around by the events and actions of time travel.

So for example originally in terminator 1, judgement day happens and a leader named john connor rises and just before Skynet was destroyed they created time travel and sent back a terminator. And john sent back kyle.

But this action changed the future. Now skynet is broght online earlier (1997) and is much more advanced and john connor's resistance is created before judgement day via sarah connor training him extensively. Again time travel is created except this time the pawns are changed.

Terminator 3 started off well with judgement day being pushed back but completely f*cks it in the arse by simply saying judgement day happens, it cannot be stopped, thus destroying the entire message of the franchise.

Sarah Connor Chronicles though essentially proves the theory because every time a terminator/resistance fithter jumped back the future changed, this was proven by Derek Reese who in two episodes shows that the future he remembers is different to that of other resistance fighter Jessie and that the key detail is the date of judgement day. Also Sarah Connor Chronicles threw in a reverse idea in that time jumps forward have the same effect. As shown by the fantastic season 2 finale.


I understand terminator 4 sort of touches the same ideas in that how the future war was expected to happen had changed due to again time travel, but I dont know if they f*ck it up again like Terminator 3 or if it actually makes sense.

theres another point about the timeline..

the first Terminator was sent back in 1984...

now, in Terminator 2 John Connor is supposed to be 13...(as he says this in T3 that they tried to murder him when he was 13)

but in T2, theres a scene where the terminator is explaining to sarah connor about how in 3 years Cyberdyne Systems will become the largest supply of military computer systems and that skynet will become self aware on august 29th 1997....

now that wud mean that T2 is set in 1994. which would actually make John Connor only 10 years of age, because he was conceived in 1984...

has anyone else ever noticed this?? it always puzzled me...

SirLemonhead wrote: »

Yep, he's 10 in Terminator 2.

edit: Terminator 3 is just wrong, no surprise.

a 10 year old who can hack ATM machines and break pin codes to locks and can ride a scrambler motorbike lol

i think they just didnt think about the progression of the years when they made T2 lol

im not sure T3 was wrong..

Terminator 3 got his age from the age Edward Furlong was when he made terminator 2 (which was 13/14)

but the script for terminator 2 as already pointed out had him as 10.

wiki also confirms this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Connor#Terminator_2:_Judgment_Day

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/

Terminator: Salvation is already weak-kneed. The McG-directed 4th in the franchise starring Batman's Christian Bale is running out of steam after making $14.8 million in domestic grosses both Friday and Saturday for a 3-day weekend of just $42M from 3,530 venues. That's lower even than Watchmen's non-holiday Fri-Sat-Sun opening. T4 already brought in $3M from its Wednesday midnight showings and $13.5M Thursday for what should be an underperforming $52M for the 4-day holiday and a cume of $62M for the 5 days.



Goodbye Terminator franchise

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

62 million is good tbh. It will definitely make more than was put into it.

Either way I don't wanna see 3 of the same film over the next few years. I'm just gonna pretend that 3 never happened and everyone lived happily ever after

It's got a $200m production budget (not counting around 50m for marketing) and will need at least $400m WW to break even. Without Arnold, it's difficult to judge how well it will do overseas. Also a strong overseas gross won't justify a sequel if the domestic numbers are woeful (i.e The Golden Compass). Right now I see TS bottoming out at a maximum 130m domestic and possibly as low as 115m - either way that's a disaster. The prospects are looking really bad, I think word of mouth is really hurting it and in this economy plus rapid-fire feedback from twitter etc it's nearly impossible for the numbers to spike upwards - if your movies isn't nearly unanimusly great (Star Trek) or a light crowd-pleaser (Taken, Paul Blart) it won't survive.

Not sure how they got this so wrong but I suppose we'll all see in two weeks (or rather won't)

interesting review from the spoony one

http://www.spoonyexperiment.com/2009/05/22/vlog-5-22-09-terminator-salvation/#comments

spoilers in the 2nd half though, but he warns you when it is coming.