Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Terminator two had a plot such that making a sequel necessarily creates a plothole. It was a neat, tidy self-referential loop... which renders the whole plot irrelevant.
Terminator 1 is the neat, tidy self-referential loop. Terminator 2 had the "screw destiny" message and ended on a high note (Skynet was never created, Judgement Day was averted, John Connor grows up to become a politician and fights his battles with words instead of bullets, Sarah Connor has a grandkid, everything is fine).
"The future is not set" was part of Reese's message in The Terminator, and the villain's entire plan hinged on the idea that changing the future is possible. I don't think Terminator 2 invented the idea that maybe we can screw destiny, or that The Terminator required an unchangeable timeline.
I nonetheless find The Terminator probably a better movie overall, or at least, one that has a more powerful, emotionally resonant ending that Terminator 2's turn toward the saccharine, but there was at least a little groundwork.
Reese isn't the guy to ask, he's the pawn of the guy who actually has a holistic view of time travel, a reverse Isaac sent to his death by his son as a sacrifice.
Connor's actions in the film heavily imply he believes time is a flat circle, correctly. That's why he can blow up the machine and feel secure he won't need to send Reese any reinforcements.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link