Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

Anyone catch the first half last night?

Any opinions?

I hate starting something with a dream sequence.

I knew Laz-e-boys are built tough, but to stand up to machine gun fire? Wow.

Calla Lily · Jan 14, 2008

I chickened out. The potential suckiness factor was too much for me, even tho I like the FX of the glowing blue eyes.

So, did it suck rocks? How many lines did they lift from the movies? (Like "Come with me if you want to live.") Were you actually nostalgic for Linda Hamilton, even in her annoying, hard-a$$, pseudo-military persona from T2? (I hated T2, can you tell? Liked T3.)

rkbentley · Jan 14, 2008

Calla, if you hated T2 and liked T3 then I think you won't like the TV Show since T3 is thankfully ignored.

After seeing it last August via the torrents and now in HD, I thought the show pulled it off. Gunplay was there, Lena pulled off a good Sarah Conner and Summer was her usual butt kicking self.

Hopefully it'll last.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

callalily61 said:
So, did it suck rocks? How many lines did they lift from the movies? (Like "Come with me if you want to live.") Were you actually nostalgic for Linda Hamilton, even in her annoying, hard-a$$, pseudo-military persona from T2? (I hated T2, can you tell? Liked T3.)

I don't think it sucked. I wasn't too keen on a dark-haired Sarah Conner. Me I loved a buff Linda Hamilton.

I'll give it a few viewings just to see where they go with it.

Maybe its just me, but the whole concept of people in hiding and on the run... hasn't that been done to death?

maestrowork · Jan 14, 2008

I was about to start this thread but fell asleep... LOL.

I liked it. I don't think it sucked (not like Bionic Woman... eeek). But it could have been better. The beginning kind of threw me -- I didn't get my bearing of what happened and when it was supposed to be... I knew it was between the second and third movie, but still... I had no idea who the boyfriend was, etc. (I thought he was Michael Baen's character in the first movie -- he looked like him, and Lena looks young in this). And opening with a dream just made me laugh (I knew immediately it was a dream).

Still, I think it was decent, and the ending was fun -- I really loved the concept and I think it has potential. I'll keep watching.

nevada · Jan 14, 2008

I thought it sucked. lol I managed 36 minutes of it. The dream start made me scream (metaphorically) in anger and disgust. And the barca lounger stopping bullets was ridiculous. All the time I kept thinking if these robots are supposed to be running the show in the future how come they can't kill one little kid, because Sarah Connor didn't seem so tough to me. Also how come they were safe for two years and now all of a sudden all these terminators are popping up out of the woodwork?

To me, it was everything a semi-bad book was. Start with an action sequence, make it a dream, then have characters standing around talking so you don't have to do a proper flashback, then throw in some more action, just so people don't get bored.

I changed the channel and watched Masterpiece Theatre instead. Jane Austen's Persuasion. Not as good as the Ciaran Hinds movie but still very good.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

nevada said:
Also how come they were safe for two years and now all of a sudden all these terminators are popping up out of the woodwork?

I thought they explained that, maybe not to your satisfaction.

She had killed the scientist who created Skynet (according to the FBI) and they thought everything was ok, and it was, but then someone else picked up where the scientist left off and that's why the terminators came back because Skynet was activated.

maestrowork · Jan 14, 2008

What nevada means, though, is that if the Terminators traveled through time, why wait 2 years? Why not just go back to 1997 and kill them while they're off guard (thinking they've done it)? I know two years have passed (for Sarah Connor) for Skynet to start again, but to the Terminators, it's irrelevant.

My-Immortal · Jan 14, 2008

I missed it. I kinda wanted to see it, but I was writing and totally lost track of time...

If those machines/terminators had any sense, they'd give up on trying to get the adult SC or JC and go back further - try to get SC as a child or maybe just kill SC's mother....or better yet, trace her family back to say the Civil War era - have them go after great-great grandpa Conners. Muskets vs machines....terminators chasing after horse-drawn carriages... Maybe have one arive in the middle of some railroad track and have a steam engine hit it....

No?

Take care all -

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

maestrowork said:
What nevada means, though, is that if the Terminators traveled through time, why wait 2 years? Why not just go back to 1997 and kill them while they're off guard (thinking they've done it)? I know two years have passed (for Sarah Connor) for Skynet to start again, but to the Terminators, it's irrelevant.

No, I understood what he meant and I answered as to how the story explained it.

I never said I thought the writers had a clue as to what they were really writing. Which scares me about how the series is going to go if they don't have a good handle on the whole time travel thing now in the beginning.

My-Immortal said:
If those machines/terminators had any sense, they'd give up on trying to get the adult SC or JC and go back further - try to get SC as a child or maybe just kill SC's mother....or better yet, trace her family back to say the Civil War era - have them go after great-great grandpa Conners. Muskets vs machines....terminators chasing after horse-drawn carriages... Maybe have one arive in the middle of some railroad track and have a steam engine hit it....
-

The thing is, if they wipe out too many people inthe past, what if one of Conner's relatives CREATED a certain part essential to the creation of computers? Then the machines never would have existed in the first place.

Gah, sometimes time stories become way too quagmirey.

Stormhawk · Jan 14, 2008

The thing about the chair stopping the bullets was explained - when the cops/FBI were there, it had kevlar sewn into it. Fairly reasonable, I think - especially when coming from Sarah's paranoid mindset.

I liked it, and really liked how they ignored T3 (aka, the abomination of the series).

Plus, Summer Glau *squee*.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

Stormhawk said:
The thing about the chair stopping the bullets was explained - when the cops/FBI were there, it had kevlar sewn into it. Fairly reasonable, I think - especially when coming from Sarah's paranoid mindset.

Oh, I remember them mentioning kevlar but I missed what it was in relationship to.

MidnightMuse · Jan 14, 2008

Shadow_Ferret said:
... Then the machines never would have existed in the first place...

The key to why I'll never watch this or any other Hollowood version of time travel. If they traveled back in time and were SUCCESSFUL, they'd have eleminated the reason to ever have traveled back in time in the first place.

Gah.

This whole misunderstanding of the working function of time travel theory makes me see purple.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

MidnightMuse said:
The key to why I'll never watch this or any other Hollowood version of time travel. If they traveled back in time and were SUCCESSFUL, they'd have eleminated the reason to ever have traveled back in time in the first place.

And?

You're much smarter than I, that's why you write sci-fi and I stick with fantasy, but if they eliminate the son (or her originally), then he can't lead the resistance and they win, right? He won't be in the future to lead the resistence and then they won't need to send anyone back in time to kill him and he'll live and he'll lead the resistence and then they'll have to send someone back to kill him..... gah! It hurts!

MidnightMuse · Jan 14, 2008

If they send someone back to kill him, to prevent him from leading the resistance, then he never lives and there's no resistance, hence no threat or need to send someone back to kill him to prevent him from leading a resistance that now never takes place.

It's a logic-loop.

Or lack of logic loop. Unless parallel worlds are invovled, in that case they can go back and BE succesful, but only the new world they're in will benefit, not the one that sent them.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

Or an illogic loop.

Which is why the focus on Sarah Conner destroying Skynet seems so illogical. If she's successful then there are no robots and no one came back in time to kill them, but robots did come back in time to kill them so her attempts to stop Skynet must have failed.

maestrowork · Jan 14, 2008

My-Immortal said:
I missed it. I kinda wanted to see it, but I was writing and totally lost track of time...

If those machines/terminators had any sense, they'd give up on trying to get the adult SC or JC and go back further - try to get SC as a child or maybe just kill SC's mother....or better yet, trace her family back to say the Civil War era - have them go after great-great grandpa Conners. Muskets vs machines....terminators chasing after horse-drawn carriages... Maybe have one arive in the middle of some railroad track and have a steam engine hit it....

No?

Take care all -

Exactly. Especially since the ending of the first episode told us that a Terminator had gone back to 1963... I mean, oh, man, wouldn't the bad Terminators do the same, go back to 1963, kill Sarah Connor as a child, and be done with the whole thing? That just kind of forces me to throw my logic away if I want enjoy this series...

Time traveling stories are so silly.

maestrowork · Jan 14, 2008

Shadow_Ferret said:
And?

You're much smarter than I, that's why you write sci-fi and I stick with fantasy, but if they eliminate the son (or her originally), then he can't lead the resistance and they win, right? He won't be in the future to lead the resistence and then they won't need to send anyone back in time to kill him and he'll live and he'll lead the resistence and then they'll have to send someone back to kill him..... gah! It hurts!

That's what we call a Paradox... no?

maestrowork · Jan 14, 2008

Shadow_Ferret said:
Or an illogic loop.

Which is why the focus on Sarah Conner destroying Skynet seems so illogical. If she's successful then there are no robots and no one came back in time to kill them, but robots did come back in time to kill them so her attempts to stop Skynet must have failed.

I think we can just chalk it up as alternate universe theory... remember how they explained it in Back To the Future? The future (A) goes back to the past, changes something, and alters the universe to go down future (B)... In future (B) no one would have gone back to the past... but it's a split.

So in this case, it's the same thing. If Sarah Connor succeeds in changing the future (no more robots, no more resistance, etc.) she would have created an alternate future... but what the "original" future did (sending back Terminators) would still have happened in her past...

I hate time traveling...

nevada · Jan 14, 2008

Ahem, I'm a she. Thanks.

And I didn't stick around long enough for the kevlar in the Barca Lounger. Obviously, that's the first thing i'd do, sew kevlar into all my furniture. That's so much more practical than actually wearing body armour.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 14, 2008

maestrowork said:
I think we can just chalk it up as alternate universe theory... remember how they explained it in Back To the Future? The future (A) goes back to the past, changes something, and alters the universe to go down future (B)... In future (B) no one would have gone back to the past... but it's a split.

So in this case, it's the same thing. If Sarah Connor succeeds in changing the future (no more robots, no more resistance, etc.) she would have created an alternate future... but what the "original" future did (sending back Terminators) would still have happened in her past...

I hate time traveling...

Is that like time is a stream analogy? Where if you stand at a point in the stream and throw in a rock it creates a ripple that travels downstream. Now you can throw another rock in where you stand (present) but that ripple won't effect the previous ripple as it's already in the future.

In other words, I guess, Time is always changing and moving downstream and what you do to effect the present can't possibly effect the Future present because it will always be moving downstream ahead of your change.

I need aspirin now.

ZannaPerry · Jan 14, 2008

Here we are again about the whole travel questions! I had a hard time keeping up my end of the debate on IMDb.com once upon a time ago. I know the timeline but I won't think about it because it will just confuse me!

I am soooo glad someone decided to post a topic about this series. For being a fan of all three movies (I actually liked T3! Some of it anyway. Hated the idea of Kate Brewster, though...and that actress.)

I taped it last night because I wasn't going to be home in time to watch it from the start. I am taping the second half right now because again, I didn't get home in time. I liked the idea a long time ago that they wanted to do a tv series for this amazing story. I actually would've liked to have seen more of the story in mini segments because I just think there is so much more to tell. I read the book series when it came out, and the final book. Which, I would love for them to continue off from that version.

The only thing I didn't like were the characters they had to recast. I know some of them were hard to cast like Miles' wife and Miles himself. Couldn't they have used old footage from the previous films? One of the producers who has been involved in all THREE Terminators is actually producing the series as well. Couldn't he have had permission to use archive footage, or something? That would have made the show more realistic. In my opinion.

John was a good cast, as well as Sarah Connor. I think Lena is going to do a great job with the character. And I'm glad she's more "human" in the series than she was in T2, and not DEAD like she was in T3. Not sure if I like the concept of a teenage Terminator, but we can't win everything, right?

Overall, the show looks very promising and loaded with action. I really hope this show carries on to seasons beyond seasons beyond seasons. It's getting really good publicity, and I hope for the best for all the actors involved.

Sure, it's no James Cameron T1/T2, but......we gotta give it a shot!

plaidearthworm · Jan 14, 2008

But if they succeeded in going back in time and killing the dude, wouldn't that open up a much larger hole....in Fox's tv schedule?

maestrowork · Jan 15, 2008

After the second episode I'm still not decided yet. John Connor's character pissed me off -yeah, yeah, he was only a teenager but please, after going through what he did in the last few years, I'd think he would have been smarter and more mature already. I was more mature than he when I was 14! And we're supposed to believe he would be the future resistance leader?

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 15, 2008

I know what you mean about being undecided, sometimes the show is pretty fun, but then they go and throw things out there like, she's dead, died of cancer in 2005. Wait. How is that possible if she jumped forward in time to 2007? She simply would have stopped existing for 8 years, right? Why would there be an alternate Sarah Conner to get cancer?

As far as John. I was very immature at 14. So I'm willing to let him want to be a teen after all the hiding and such. That can be like such a drag man, ya know?

Still not sure I'm accepting this actress as Sarah Conner though.

Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles

Court Jester

On hiatus

Court Jester

Fear the Death Ray

Court Jester

Fear the Death Ray

Mr. Invisible

Court Jester

Angry Bunny Girl

Court Jester

Midnight Reading

Court Jester

Midnight Reading

Court Jester

Fear the Death Ray

Fear the Death Ray

Fear the Death Ray

Court Jester

^ Just Me & a Sharpie

Rock and Squiggle

Fear the Death Ray

Court Jester