Terminator Salvation

[Nightwing]

Sarcasm. Nice.

Oh, come on. They never defined the rules to time travel other than "You can't come back to the future". You can't call them out on rules which were never explicitly defined in the first place.

But there are rules (and by rules, I mean within the world of film) to time travel.

It's the two theories approach. Time is either a flat line that we all go across and no matter what we do when we travel through time we were always going to do that and it won't change anything. Or you go back, alter something and it changes everything.

As a side note, I actually prefer the later. While the former makes for very clever story telling, the later makes it a bit more interesting. But you can't have both.

Oh, there are way more theories than that. You simply believe that there's only anti-paradox time travel (You can't change the past, since you'll create a paradox in the future) and high-mutability time (I step on a butterfly and everything changes, ala A Sound of Thunder).

I already described the concept of "High Inertia" time, where you can actively influence the past, but it's hard to completely change things: certain people will eventually come to power, certain events (like Judgment Day) will happen, even if the details and exact circumstances are different. To me, that seems the most logical: The timeline seems to continue to change with every movie (Judgment Day being pushed back, the involvement of Dyson and developments due to the wreckage of the T-800, etc etc...), but the changes aren't major enough to really push things into a distinctly different future.

Or maybe they went the "Marvel Comics" way: Every time you go into the past, you're creating a completely different universe. So each new terminator being sent back is being sent back by a completely new, different Skynet, and can in no way change the past for that timeline. But it still can drastically alter events in the present.

 

[luke-o]

Or maybe they went the "Marvel Comics" way: Every time you go into the past, you're creating a completely different universe. So each new terminator being sent back is being sent back by a completely new, different Skynet, and can in no way change the past for that timeline. But it still can drastically alter events in the present.

That's a logical explination. But without a "Doc Brown" character to tell us that, it doesn't help the story progress. It's just a cop out.

My problem with the Terminator timeline is that nothing is explained. It's just suggested by fans trying to make sense of something that the writers probably don't care about.

I already described the concept of "High Inertia" time, where you can actively influence the past, but it's hard to completely change things: certain people will eventually come to power, certain events (like Judgment Day) will happen, even if the details and exact circumstances are different. To me, that seems the most logical: The timeline seems to continue to change with every movie (Judgment Day being pushed back, the involvement of Dyson and developments due to the wreckage of the T-800, etc etc...), but the changes aren't major enough to really push things into a distinctly different future.

That also is a sound argument. But it still ties into the point I made about fans trying to make sense of it rather than the writers working it all out.

 

[Sabre]

Finally watched it last night and i quite enjoyed it. The film really suffered from such a low rating and couldnt help laughing as Christian Bale was in full Dark Knight mode in terms of the ANGRY LISP.

It did make some sence and the T-800 CGI was fucking outstanding, especially with the full blown Terminater Theme "DUH-DUH" when CGI Arnie came on screen.

Ill be downloading the blu-ray no problem.

 

[AntiLeaf33]

This is one movie where the rating really doesn't make too much a difference. I just watched T3 the other day, and if you get rid of the 4 or 5 F-Bombs then that movie could very easily have received the PG-13 rating as well. Since the fodder in this movie was mostly machines, then the movie didn't suffer from a lack of gore, or blood that would bring an R rating.

 

[Sabre]

I was hoping for some machines just ripping humans apart during some of the battles, cause why do we have to have robots with guns. Bruce Lee Terminator FTW.

 

[Positively Kanyon]

I'd like to think, after watching this movie and with all the plot holes pointed out that it's only temporary and everything is going to be resolved and tied up in the end.

 

[luke-o]

I'd like to think, after watching this movie and with all the plot holes pointed out that it's only temporary and everything is going to be resolved and tied up in the end.

Just be cynical like me and expect everything to be shit.

 

[DrVenkman PhD]

Here's what I don't get: If the rise of the apes happens when the son of two evolved talking apes from the future is born in our time, causing the revolution that eventually forms the Planet of the Apes in 1991, how did he get to be in 1991 in the first place? His whole existence is based on him existing in a time he shouldn't exist in.

 

[Smues]

Yeah that's another one that gives me a head ache. And it's not really clear to me at the end of Battle for the Planet of the Apes if they're now in a changed world and human and apes might just be able to co-exist, or if it's all leading to how the world was in the first Planet of the Apes. HEAD EXPLODES. Speaking of, does all of this time travel now mean the Earth won't blow up because there's no big war in the church of the bomb in Beneath the Planet of the Apes?

And if it is a new time line and not leading back to the events of the first movie, that means before time travel the events of Battle for the Planet of the Apes never happened, meaning without time travel we wouldn't have been subjected to APE HAS KILLED APE! APE HAS KILLED APE! APE HAS KILLED APE! APE HAS KILLED APE! APE HAS KILLED APE!

Damn you Cornelius and Dr. Zera. Damn you all to hell!

 

[Positively Kanyon]

Just be cynical like me and expect everything to be shit.

I'll try my best... All this time travel talk is starting to do my head in!

 

[atticus Chaos]

Nick C is saying over at his blog that WB considers the franchise (tv show, movies) completely dead. They're not even considering another film at this point. Since he's amassed a very good track in a short amount of time (he had the Bryan Fuller exit from heroes news before anyone else, and was saying dollhouse was renewed for a second season when every critic insisted it was finished) I'm inclined to believe him.

 

[Mattdotcom]

I thought its performance overseas would save it.

 

[ZGangsta]

Yeah, so far it's made 200 million overseas, putting its total over 323 million (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=terminatorsalvation.htm). I'd be inclined to believe that there will be a sequel to this.

 

[atticus Chaos]

Yeah, so far it's made 200 million overseas, putting its total over 323 million (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=terminatorsalvation.htm). I'd be inclined to believe that there will be a sequel to this.

Isn't there some sort of deal that ensures WB don't profit from the overseas numbers? I remember reading (on here, I think) that that was why domestic gross was particularly important for this film.

And it cost 200 million to make, so it would have had to make double that to break even. Superman returns is similar. It did well, but not enough when the budget was considered, and now WB are looking to reboot it again (which, hey, at least means no more Kate Bosworth.)

 

[Sabre]

Yeah, so far it's made 200 million overseas, putting its total over 323 million (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=terminatorsalvation.htm). I'd be inclined to believe that there will be a sequel to this.

When Salvation got announced, it was announced as a 3 part deal.

 

[luke-o]

I believe the title was "OMG They are making Terimnator 4!... And 5.... And 6..." on the dirty boards.

 

[DrVenkman PhD]

Well Attica did say that Nick Cannon's blog had a good track record of being right, so we'll wait and see.

 

[atticus Chaos]

I think the (relative) failure of the tv show and the fourth movie is, at least, partly down to the absence of Arnold Schwarzenegger. The only true mark out moment in salvation was when he showed up. They had other problems as well (Josh Friedman's writing, McG as a director) but they missed Schwarzenegger. Yeah, he's a crap actor but he has a ton of screen presence and charisma, and the whole franchise was built around him showing up and being a badass.

 

[vivisectvi]

This is true, but there is really no way around it since he's getting old, is in government and is also like 5' tall nowadays.

But yeah, I'd wager that the majority of core Terminator fans are Arnie fans and those numbers don't really convert if he's not involved.