Terminator: Genisys

re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

"The T600's rubber skin was just a visual camouflage at a distance and nothing else. It was never meant to be skin, organic or fool people. "
of course they were supposed to fool people, they're an infiltration unit. Skynet got it wrong on that model tho, and realised rubber wasn't working so they created flesh.

"If the Terminators are nuclear powered then why didn't the one in T1 use it to blow up Sarah at the end?"
doesn't work that way, you need given amounts of nuclear material to create the chain reaction.
woulda made for a kinda short and stupid film anyway, don't you think?
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

robstyle said:
And then the "dont over think it" comes into play. Ive already mentioned there is no 100% solution to the no thought sequels but there is a logical way to bring as much as possible together for the films to make sense. We are talking T5, not a new T2 or new T3.
Click to expand...
Well... I can accept the inclusion of turds, but then again... why waste time on trying to adhere to turds that didn't want to adhere to what came before. When comes the point that is the point of no return. Do you keep trying to make crap writing fit and continue from that or do you scrap it like a good writer and go back to the source and what works? As it is now, the series reads like a bad trainwreck. Clean up the mess, sure and you can make a nice, complicated when it doesn't have to be, story.

I'm just talking a new Terminator movie and what I would like to see. Not so much just limited to a T5.

Zombie Killer said:
I guess i am looking at it from a timeline perspective.

The reason i say created from nothing is i mean there is no base timeline for T1. To me anytime you time travel you are splitting off an existing timeline and changing something from that base or existing line to create the new line. In T1 the base timeline starts at the point Reese goes back to 1984. There is no base timeline that a John Conner can exist because he is created by the time travel event. So how does Reese get sent back in time by JC from a base timeline? He can't , he can only be sent back from an already altered timeline, one that a John Conner can exist. You could probably explain it with a few generations of time travel to get to the point a JC can exist. One where Reese is sent back in time for something else creating another timeline and just happens to meet Sarah and they have John and he grows up to be a Skynet problem anyways. Then it's possible for Sarah to have the story to tell John and he can then send Reese back to save him and T1 begins.

I am of the belief that anytime you time travel you time travel off of a base line. So if you time travel off an alternate timeline the alternate timeline is the new timelines base line.

Not sure that explains my POV or if it just confuses you more.
Click to expand...
Ah, that's either the multiple timeline theory or, it just seems to me that you are looking at it from the perspective of the time traveler: he has to be born to exist in order to do the things he effects in the past. In my view, not at all necessary, because the time traveler exists in time prior to being born. Like normal people starting their existence when they are born, the time traveler doesn't begin his existence in time when he is born, but rather at the earliest time he travels back to, so all his older self's travels in the past are recorded history when he is eventually born and grows up.

The timetraveler experience his existence like this: he's born in 2017 (A), gets into the time machine in 2035 (B), travels back to 2017 (C) to witness his birth, then further back to 1997 (D) to meet his parents when they were younger, then forward to 2015 (E) to see them get married, then back to 1910 (F) to visit great great grandparents, then to 1947 (G) to visit great grandparents, back to 1879 (H) to watch his ancestry arrive at the shores of USA, and finally back to 2017 (I) again because he forgot to take some pictures of his birth, then finally back to 2035 (J) to continue his life. Though, he is now older in 2035 than when he left, 'cause he keeps aging in the time he spends time traveling back and forth in time, so up to days, months or even years older, when he returns.

A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J

But... that's not important. And, it is imo wrong to view time travel from the perspective of the time traveler, because as the result of the time traveling he exists in time prior to he is actually born. Viewing the time travel from the perspective of time (timeline) the time traveler first exists in this order:

H - F - G - D - E - A / C / I - B / J

H: 1879 (watching his family arrive in USA)
F: 1910 (visiting great great grandparents)
G: 1947 (visiting great grandparents)
D: 1997 (to visit his parents when they were young)
E: 2015 (to watch his parents get married)
A / C / I: 2017 (being born, witnessing his birth, taking pictures)
B / J: 2035 (gets into the time machine, gets out of the time machine)

So, his existence in time doesn't start with his birth in 2017, it starts in 1879, when he first pops into existence through the means of time travel. He EXISTS and could then in essence, father himself, as he exists as an older man prior to himself being born. Because, nowhere, does he not exist, so he is not creating something out of nothing.

The perspective of the time traveler is inconsequential to the argument. When trying to argue the case of time and time travel through the perspective of the time traveler it quickly gets confusing and complicated, where it doesn't have to be, as time really doesn't care about you being born in order for you to exist, as you exist before you are born at the times you travel back to. And the fact that you exist in those times, means you are real and can therefore be your own father. The only way to really understand time travel is to stop looking at it from the perspective of the time traveler - the action of the time traveler getting into the time machine isn't the start of the adventure; it has already happened in time before he gets into the machine to do it - and rather look at it from the perspective of time and the timeline.

This is the age-old question of which came first: then egg or the hen!

Maybe we are just looking at this from different perspectives, but I have found that if you look at it from the perspective of time it all makes sense... but it also brings a very downbeat conclusion to the whole thing: The Life, The Universe and Everything.
 
Last edited:
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

Some of you guys are reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeealy overly thinking things. Im only talking existing films leading into T5. No books, no video games, no comics... There is no multiple time lines, everything has already happened. Im a broken record here. They have no unlimited time travel access as your suggesting. The other issue is dont base everything on T1.

The T600 wasnt an infiltration unit, that was the T800. The T600 is a truck, its noisy, sort of compared to the AK47, run it through hell and it keeps going, its assembled en mass and is disposable. Its a killing machine, with nothing to kill, it sits dormant until something trips its sensors as seen in TS. Its the true essence of a T1 Terminator! But its slow, its dumb, it has no power of reason and deduction. As seen in TS it watched Kyle and Marcus run over a pile of rubble and into a building. The T600 instead of seeking alternate routes just blasted away at the path.

Ive often heard people complain and even at first I was one, about the cut in half T600 and the JC chopper crash and how it didnt just crush him. The idea is the T600's hydraulic system is damaged. Its running without oil or pressure which is why its so noisy and doesnt have the mechanical power to crush him. It grasped will all its strength to pull a boot off, yet it still tries to take out a human by injury.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

robstyle said:
The T600 wasnt an infiltration unit, that was the T800. The T600 is a truck, its noisy, sort of compared to the AK47, run it through hell and it keeps going, its assembled en mass and is disposable.
Click to expand...

Perhaps in the context of TS it is as you describe (I'm not disagreeing with you here), however I'd have to agree with Wolfie on how the T600 was described to us via Kyle in T1-

"The 600 series had a rubber skin, we spotted them easy. But (the 800s) are new, they look human."

By this simple line, my take on it is this-

The end of the war was coming and the Resistance was on the verge of winning; their hit and run guerrilla tactics are the perfect counter to Skynet's "bulldozer" style of fighting.

And while Skynet might know where the Resistance bunkers are (how else would they send in the infiltration units if it didn't), the bunkers are well protected from a large assault by tank or aerial HKs; the Resistance sees them coming a mile away.

So Skynet thinking outside the box creates the infiltration units, however on their first try (the 600s) they use rubber (although it might have been something a little more exotic like silicon) and the humans are able to pick them out without any difficulty at all.

Knowing the 600s have failed, they create the 800 series with true flesh. These are now indistinguishable from actual people and attempt to turn the tide of the war- but since Skynet throws the "Hail Mary" play of sending one back to 1984, it might be inferred that the 800 series was still a case of "too little too late." The Resistance still won the war.


The whole "nothing dead will go" part of the time machine truly throws a monkey wrench into the story telling-

While I'm sure this was done by Cameron as a clever and direct way to explain why neither Kyle nor the Terminator brought weapons, it really does make zero sense that a machine would create a device only living tissue can travel through.

It is a huge nitpick and has to be severely retconned to make any kind of plausible sense. However this is where my "just go along with it" side has to kick in.


Kevin
 
Last edited:
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

SSgt Burton said:
..The whole "nothing dead will go" part of the time machine truly throws a monkey wrench into the story telling-

While I'm sure this was done by Cameron as a clever and direct way to explain why neither Kyle nor the Terminator brought weapons, it really does make zero sense that a machine would create a device only living tissue can travel through.

It is a huge nitpick and has to be severely retconned to make any kind of plausible sense. However this is where my "just go along with it" side has to kick in.

Kevin
Click to expand...

And Terminators could just carry their weapons inside them. Plenty of room in the gut area.

Or just put an H-Bomb in a cow and send it through.

The only way around this is saying that it was part of the physics, 'a field generated by a living organism', and that Skynet was pressed for time. The Time Machine became functional just as Connor broke in. No time for anything but sending a Terminator.
But that doesn't explain the sequels. The humans either had control of it or blew it up.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

terryr said:
And Terminators could just carry their weapons inside them. Plenty of room in the gut area.

Or just put an H-Bomb in a cow and send it through.

The only way around this is saying that it was part of the physics, 'a field generated by a living organism', and that Skynet was pressed for time. The Time Machine became functional just as Connor broke in. No time for anything but sending a Terminator.
But that doesn't explain the sequels. The humans either had control of it or blew it up.
Click to expand...

Sure a weapon or two could be placed within the skin of Terminator. More than likely they would build it into the design like they did with the TX. The field generated by the T-1000 and TX's liquid metal probably was enough to fool the Time Displacement Device TDD (Time Bubble Machine). The T-1000 could have brought a mini-arsenal with him in that case.

Skynet is about targeted attacks, sending an H-Bomb impregnated cow would be a non-specific attack. I can't see Skynet not being focused on putting weapons on a target(s). Unspecified attacks are a desperate tactic.

I do not believe that Skynet would have only one TDD. I think they would have built two, some redundancy as well as a back up in case one was destroyed or sabotaged.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

robstyle said:
Some of you guys are reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeealy overly thinking things. Im only talking existing films leading into T5. No books, no video games, no comics... There is no multiple time lines, everything has already happened.
Click to expand...
No. The only way to explain the sequels - the movies themselves, as I have not read any of the books, video games or comics or whatever - is multiple timelines. No two ways about it. Reese has very specific information that he tells Sarah. The sequels in part or completely contradicts that, by having new stuff happen that John Connor experienced and should have been able to tell Reese before he sent him off. He DIDN'T, he only told Reese about the '84 event. Sure, the whole story might crush his spirit and Sarah's if he told the whole story, but, I doubt he would withhold information like that - just makes John and unpleasant, calculating *******. So, the sequels are not in the same timeline as the first one - they are something else.

We are both talking about just the films. I'm just attacking it from the perspective of T1 and to a degree reluctantly accepting the sequels. You are encompassing all the movies + stuff that isn't even IN the movies - in this case IN Terminator Salvation.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

I'm beginning to think that movies aren't the answer to salvaging this franchise.

A better option would be to do a Band of Brothers kind of tv-series and the first episode starts with the nuclear holocaust on the August 29th, 1997 and then jumps to scattered survivors trying to make sense of the mayhem, panicking, trying to survive. No Connor in the beginning. Following a group of survivors in the post apocalyptic world, when the first machines start to appear, then the disposal camps, then Connor, then the fight for survival by some, while others don't participate, but just tries to survive both the machines and the resistance. The scorching of the earth by the machines to prevent the humans from getting food... and eventually upping the game and bringing in the Terminators towards the end. Finishing with the raid on Skynet to win the war and the volunteering of Reese to go back to '84 to protect the legend, Sarah Connor, from the Terminator that has already been sent through.

And just call the series for SKYNET.

'Cause frankly... any future movie would just try to incorporate the crappy T3 and T4 and waste the perfect opportunity to go straight back to the source and just not worry about those two movies at all.

Hey... I know it'll NEVER happen, but I can dream.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

EndoFacePalm.jpg
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

terryr said:
And Terminators could just carry their weapons inside them. Plenty of room in the gut area.
Click to expand...

this was a plot point in the first comic, except the courier was a fairly unfortunate human, not a Terminator, lol. there *is* potential to hide a weapon, say a small pistol in a Terminator, but how do you get it out? they'd have to cut themselves open and as from T1 it would *appear* that once the body's damaged, it stays damaged. they can sew up the flesh etc, but they don't have the capacity to, eg, produce more blood. once the factory-settings balance is disrupted, the flesh starts to die ("hey buddy, you got a dead cat in there?!") ~ therefore, your role as an infiltration unit becomes increasingly difficult.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

Wolfie138 said:
this was a plot point in the first comic, except the courier was a fairly unfortunate human, not a Terminator, lol. there *is* potential to hide a weapon, say a small pistol in a Terminator, but how do you get it out? they'd have to cut themselves open and as from T1 it would *appear* that once the body's damaged, it stays damaged. they can sew up the flesh etc, but they don't have the capacity to, eg, produce more blood. once the factory-settings balance is disrupted, the flesh starts to die ("hey buddy, you got a dead cat in there?!") ~ therefore, your role as an infiltration unit becomes increasingly difficult.
Click to expand...

heyyyyyy....yeh! that happened in the first ep of the sarah connor chronicles (not starting any kind of discussion about THAT here..) when cromartie cut open his leg and pulled out a pistol...
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

It was Cameron's original concept to shoot a scene of the Terminator consuming an unwrapped candy bar to indicate that it's fleshy coverings did require some sort of fuel source beyond the electrical. With this was the idea that he's got miniature organs in there somewhere.

Why not engineer an organ specifically to hide a weapon? I thought they smelled bad on the outside.
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

i was going to suggest they could smuggle weapons in a similar way convicts get stuff into prison, but i'm not sure anyone wants to see that in the next film :-D
 
re: Terminator 5 (Reboot)

Wolfie138 said:
this was a plot point in the first comic, ..... as from T1 it would *appear* that once the body's damaged, it stays damaged. they can sew up the flesh etc, but they don't have the capacity to, eg, produce more blood. once the factory-settings balance is disrupted, the flesh starts to die ("hey buddy, you got a dead cat in there?!") .....
Click to expand...

In T2 Sarah digs out the bullets and asks it,
"will these wounds heal?"
"yes".
"Good, you're no use if you can't pass for human".

I remember reading that the one in T1 took a gunshot to the heartpump, therefore the skin was rotting from lack of blood. As for more blood, hey, there's blood walking all around.

I had a thought. Not only were Terminators made to infiltrate, but to use the time machine. Skynet knew that it would require a life force, and wouldn't trust humans, so made a replacement.
Then the liquid metal stuff came along. [Which was really just something cool for Arnold to fight.]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jameel Ur
T-800 T2 Arnold Schwarzenegger Biker Leather Jacket!
Replies
6
Views
1,085
joberg
joberg
_Lee_
Film series that should have been left alone.
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
6,582
drusselmeyer
drusselmeyer
C
I need help with T-1
Replies
3
Views
257
cellshift
C
Joker1982
Animated Terminator Genysis Poster
Replies
0
Views
347
Joker1982
Joker1982
Joker1982
Terminator T-800 Lifesize Endoarm
Replies
9
Views
920
Joker1982
Joker1982
Back
Top