chanster

Does anyone think the whole point of Skynet sending back to Terminators IS TO NOT REALLY KILL JOHN CONNER. I was thinking about this last night and it seems to me that Skynet needed help in creating itself in both Judgement Day Timelines (1997 and 2003). Yes, I know its a paradox, but hear my out:

First off, its possible that the T1 Skynet is different than the T2 Skynet. The T1 Skynet that sent the terminator is the SKYNET from T3~~~~NOT THE SKYNET from T2 (1997 Judgement Day) Personally, my theory is that the delayed Skynet (the T3 Skynet) is the Skynet that sent back the Terminator in T1..since time travel says that Skynet already had to be created without outside interference..The T1 skynet could have not been created by the events at the T1. The events at the end of T1 led to an accelerated Judgment Day in 1997 (the T2 Skynet). Its a never ending loop.

All of the Terminator movies point to the fact that John Conner cannot be killed. The machines should know this..but they keep sending terminators back in every timeline. It seems that the WHOLE POINT IS TO CREATE SKYNET IN EACH TIMELINE:

In T1, the Terminator leaves its chip at the end causing Judgment Day to be in 1997. T2 is merely a continuation of that story.

In T3, the T-X goes around programming T-1's NOT TO KILL CONNNER but in the words of Arnie - "TO KILL ANYBODY THAT IS A THREAT TO SKYNET" - seems like its mission is to make sure Skynet is up and running. That also explains why the TX did not start off by killing Gen. Brewster - he needed to push the START BUTTON on Skynet. The Skynet that sent the T1 Terminator - NOT THE T2 Skynet.

Does this sound plausible?

Trigger

It doesn't work... it was over with T2 (actually, it was over with T1 - the more sequels they make, the bigger the mess they create)... T3 was made just to fill someone's wallet. That's all.

McHawkson

Well... James Cameron originally made an ending on T2, but changed to road into unknown future.

I remember the original ending showing an adult John playing with his children at a playgound while eldery Sarah writes a journal. I have no clue why Cameron decided to change it.

fumanstan

Personally, i thought T3 was an excellent continuation of the story. I like the idea that it was never Cyberdyne, or Dyson, or even the broken chip from T1... it was always the government creating Skynet. Might be kind of a cop out, but it worked for me.

As for the theory, i think you're overcomplicating things. I find it hard to believe that was the intent of the screenwriters from any of the movies. But part of the fun with these movies is overanalyzing, no? For me, i don't care about different Skynets, or different John Conners.

jarofclay73

The one thing I don't like about this is that it makes Dyson's death in T2 less heroic. In fact, he died REALLY for nothing since it did nothing to stop Judgement Day.

Imodium

Because it was incredibly horrible?

marty888

Actually I don't see why the fact that he dies for nothing would make his death any less heroic - his motivation of self-sacrfice remains, and that is what was heroic. However, now (with what we learn in T3) we can also call his death tragic, agonizingly ironic - whatever - but still heroic.

mikehunt

to leave room for a sequel, even though he ended up passing on being part of it

Trigger

well... T3 did have a decent ending, but the rest of it was kinda crappy and quite stupid IMO... It wasn't nearly as boring as the other 2 were though. I guess all I'm saying is that there's no reason to try to make logical sense of this film because it was just pooped out of hollywood's bunghole to make money.

chanster

Nice thread crap..if you want to complain about Hollywood's bunghole thats fine but every movie is about making money.