Terminator: Salvation Discuss/Grade <Spoilers>

[archeryguy1701]

I do not recall that. It is possible because he is signed for multiple films.

Marcus could be seen on one of the beds in the Skynet VLA though.

I'm not positive on this, but for one reason or another, I have it in my mind that after Marcus smashes Skynet's "face", he jumps down off the platform, and he looks over and sees his beate up body that he came to the complex with. But it's been weeks since I've seen it, so I wouldn't be shocked if i was wrong.

 

[Roshi]

Again, the T-X had the data. The T-X, in T3, uploaded its database into Skynet. That was partially why Skynet is more advanced in the T4 timeline.

Ok, so how did the TX have the knowledge of Kyle Reese's existence? It's impossible.

 

[Captain Craig]

^^^
Knew that question was coming. At least its directed at the right BBS'er.


Worldwide Salvation has made $205million now.
It also had a smaller than expected weekend to weekend drop at the US box. Hope it stabilizes some and shows some late legs to help itself out.

 

[Mr Light]

Ok, so how did the TX have the knowledge of Kyle Reese's existence? It's impossible.

Since the T-X came from after Connor defeated Skynet (if I recall T3 correctly), I'm sure at that point there were very few secrets when it came to John Connor.

 

[nx1701g]

Ok, so how did the TX have the knowledge of Kyle Reese's existence? It's impossible.

Since the T-X came from after Connor defeated Skynet (if I recall T3 correctly), I'm sure at that point there were very few secrets when it came to John Connor.

Actually Skynet had not yet been defeated. In no Terminator media has Skynet officially been defeated (Cameron himself also confirmed that in The Terminator Skynet was not destroyed with the loss of SAC-NORAD). Skynet has been operational until at least 2041 during which Connor and the last remaining humans invaded the last Skynet base. They shut down Skynet in the story but the last pages have the Terminators reactivating.

As for the T-X, the novelization and behind the scenes information from T3 had it that Skynet had deduced John Connor's parentage from FBI documents it had access to from when it was connected to the military servers. It had calculated a statistically significant likelihood that Kyle Reese was John's father due to temporal incursions. It didn't know for sure, but the information was passed on.

 

[Saul]

Ok, so how did the TX have the knowledge of Kyle Reese's existence? It's impossible.

Since the T-X came from after Connor defeated Skynet (if I recall T3 correctly), I'm sure at that point there were very few secrets when it came to John Connor.

Actually Skynet had not yet been defeated. In no Terminator media has Skynet officially been defeated.

Isn't the whole reason why they sent Terminators back through time was because skynet had lost and this was the last ditch effort.

This is what Reese says in the first Terminator Movie.

...it had no choice. The defensive grid was smashed. We'd taken the
mainframes...We'd won. Taking out Connor then would make no
difference. Skynet had to wipe out his entire existence.

If I recall correctly,
didn't Marcus look down on another copy of his body when he was
escaping from Skynet's main computer room?

Really? Can anyone
confirm this?

He might be back for sequels then.

I think so. There was definitely at least one copy in the pit in the first scene .

But is that a copy? Because it had seemed to me it was the same Marcus
who was awoken after the bomb went off and he came out of the pit and
took the clothes of one of the resistance fighters there.

 

[nx1701g]

Since the T-X came from after Connor defeated Skynet (if I recall T3 correctly), I'm sure at that point there were very few secrets when it came to John Connor.

Actually Skynet had not yet been defeated. In no Terminator media has Skynet officially been defeated.

Isn't the whole reason why they sent Terminators back through time was because skynet had lost and this was the last ditch effort.

This is what Reese says in the first Terminator Movie.

I am aware of what Reese says in the first film. It was retconned for the following film (T2) and Terminator 3 that Connor had lied to Reese. The Skynet Defense Grids were smashed, that is correct, but Skynet has backup nodes that activate in the event of failure of the primary node. If you destroyed SAC-NORAD, for example, an auxiliary node would activate elsewhere - say LA since that was where the battle happened in T2. By T3 Skynet was back at CRS HQ as of 2032 according to the novelization and the script. We know from T4 that Skynet had moved to San Francisco between JD and 2018.

Theoretically Skynet could live forever by activating an alternative node but, as I said, so far the only time we've seen Skynet destroyed is in 2041 but the Terminators reactivate at the end.

 

[3D Master]

Actually Skynet had not yet been defeated. In no Terminator media has Skynet officially been defeated.

Isn't the whole reason why they sent Terminators back through time was because skynet had lost and this was the last ditch effort.

This is what Reese says in the first Terminator Movie.

I am aware of what Reese says in the first film. It was retconned for the following film (T2) and Terminator 3 that Connor had lied to Reese. The Skynet Defense Grids were smashed, that is correct, but Skynet has backup nodes that activate in the event of failure of the primary node. If you destroyed SAC-NORAD, for example, an auxiliary node would activate elsewhere - say LA since that was where the battle happened in T2. By T3 Skynet was back at CRS HQ as of 2032 according to the novelization and the script. We know from T4 that Skynet had moved to San Francisco between JD and 2018.

Except that in the unfilmed scene for T2; both the T-800 and the T-1000 were sent back in time at the same time. And John Connor lying is just wrong. I always assumed they thought they had destroyed all Skynet cores; but Skynet built itself backup they never knew about. So they were simply mistaken about having Skynet entirely. Of course, Skynet would still be severely weakened hunted down and soon after finished off - which would have prompted it to send the T-X.

Theoretically Skynet could live forever by activating an alternative node but, as I said, so far the only time we've seen Skynet destroyed is in 2041 but the Terminators reactivate at the end.

Uh, no. Not theoretically nor practically. Once all cores are destroyed, Skynet is "dead". If there are no more cores for it to migrate to, then once they hit the last one, Skynet has nowhere to go.

And we haven't seen 2041 anywhere. The only future dates I have ever seen are 2018 (T4), 2027 (which changed to 2029 for video releases) in The Terminator, and 2029 in T2. In T3 Arnie says he's from 2032, so you might assume the short glimps of the future war at the beginning of the movie is 2032, but since no date is given we don't actually know for sure.

 

[nx1701g]

Isn't the whole reason why they sent Terminators back through time was because skynet had lost and this was the last ditch effort.

This is what Reese says in the first Terminator Movie.

I am aware of what Reese says in the first film. It was retconned for the following film (T2) and Terminator 3 that Connor had lied to Reese. The Skynet Defense Grids were smashed, that is correct, but Skynet has backup nodes that activate in the event of failure of the primary node. If you destroyed SAC-NORAD, for example, an auxiliary node would activate elsewhere - say LA since that was where the battle happened in T2. By T3 Skynet was back at CRS HQ as of 2032 according to the novelization and the script. We know from T4 that Skynet had moved to San Francisco between JD and 2018.

Except that in the unfilmed scene for T2; both the T-800 and the T-1000 were sent back in time at the same time. And John Connor lying is just wrong. I always assumed they thought they had destroyed all Skynet cores; but Skynet built itself backup they never knew about. So they were simply mistaken about having Skynet entirely. Of course, Skynet would still be severely weakened hunted down and soon after finished off - which would have prompted it to send the T-X.

Your assumption is incorrect if you include the novels and what Cameron has said in later interviews regarding the series. Actually it has been expanded upon in the tie in comics and Cameron's words led to the direct development of a story called One Shot and a character named Ellis Ruggles. I will concede that the other is true - because I know the scene was planned - but Cameron has changed things about the series before. 2027/2029 for example for T1 (as you said). T2 3-D being a direct leadin to HIS Terminator 3 (listen to the behind the scenes information about the development of the attraction and he mentions he's planning T-3).

Theoretically Skynet could live forever by activating an alternative node but, as I said, so far the only time we've seen Skynet destroyed is in 2041 but the Terminators reactivate at the end.

Uh, no. Not theoretically nor practically. Once all cores are destroyed, Skynet is "dead". If there are no more cores for it to migrate to, then once they hit the last one, Skynet has nowhere to go.

Considering that there are cores in orbit (from the novels, comics, and T3's novelization) and on the ocean floor the chances of destroying Skynet are nearly impossible with current technology available to the Resistance.

And we haven't seen 2041 anywhere. The only future dates I have ever seen are 2018 (T4), 2027 (which changed to 2029 for video releases) in The Terminator, and 2029 in T2. In T3 Arnie says he's from 2032, so you might assume the short glimps of the future war at the beginning of the movie is 2032, but since no date is given we don't actually know for sure.

As I said 2041 has been seen in the comics and the novels - which were included in the analysis. We have not seen Skynet completely destroyed in ANY of the films and T3 does not count because the film clearly states John Connor is killed by Skynet so what is assumed to be the destruction fo Skynet in the beginning is an imagining. The Burning Earth is the furthest they have gone and Skynet is not destroyed in it. The Central Core is and the Terminators reactivate. That is the furthest we have seen in the series. In the films technically the furthest we have gone is 2029, but the T-850 does claim to be from 2032. The novelization of T3 goes to 2033.

 

[nx1701g]

Article regarding rumored London location.

 

[Snaploud]

Article regarding rumored London location.

*reads the website*

So...it sounds like McG has already decided to make Salvation worthless (rather than move on with a continuing trilogy)...You might as well give it to a different director...

 

[3D Master]

I am aware of what Reese says in the first film. It was retconned for the following film (T2) and Terminator 3 that Connor had lied to Reese. The Skynet Defense Grids were smashed, that is correct, but Skynet has backup nodes that activate in the event of failure of the primary node. If you destroyed SAC-NORAD, for example, an auxiliary node would activate elsewhere - say LA since that was where the battle happened in T2. By T3 Skynet was back at CRS HQ as of 2032 according to the novelization and the script. We know from T4 that Skynet had moved to San Francisco between JD and 2018.

Except that in the unfilmed scene for T2; both the T-800 and the T-1000 were sent back in time at the same time. And John Connor lying is just wrong. I always assumed they thought they had destroyed all Skynet cores; but Skynet built itself backup they never knew about. So they were simply mistaken about having Skynet entirely. Of course, Skynet would still be severely weakened hunted down and soon after finished off - which would have prompted it to send the T-X.

Your assumption is incorrect if you include the novels and what Cameron has said in later interviews regarding the series. Actually it has been expanded upon in the tie in comics and Cameron's words led to the direct development of a story called One Shot and a character named Ellis Ruggles. I will concede that the other is true - because I know the scene was planned - but Cameron has changed things about the series before. 2027/2029 for example for T1 (as you said). T2 3-D being a direct leadin to HIS Terminator 3 (listen to the behind the scenes information about the development of the attraction and he mentions he's planning T-3).

I don't give a rat's ass about any novels, and anything JC says later on is not important. A fully scripted and planned to be filmed sequence though; that fits perfectly with the entire series, and explains why Skynet never sent the T-1000 one day before the first T-800; is something I'd take over any novel or JC ramblings.

Uh, no. Not theoretically nor practically. Once all cores are destroyed, Skynet is "dead". If there are no more cores for it to migrate to, then once they hit the last one, Skynet has nowhere to go.

Considering that there are cores in orbit (from the novels, comics, and T3's novelization) and on the ocean floor the chances of destroying Skynet are nearly impossible with current technology available to the Resistance.

I couldn't care less about any novels. Besides which, the ocean floor makes no sense, and a core in orbit can be shot down; all they have to do is build a missile once Earth-based Skynet cores are gone. Still; even if, Skynet being immortal still doesn't hold theoretically - all you have to do is destroy all cores, no matter how difficult it is, and Skynet is dead.

And we haven't seen 2041 anywhere. The only future dates I have ever seen are 2018 (T4), 2027 (which changed to 2029 for video releases) in The Terminator, and 2029 in T2. In T3 Arnie says he's from 2032, so you might assume the short glimps of the future war at the beginning of the movie is 2032, but since no date is given we don't actually know for sure.

As I said 2041 has been seen in the comics and the novels - which were included in the analysis. We have not seen Skynet completely destroyed in ANY of the films and T3 does not count because the film clearly states John Connor is killed by Skynet so what is assumed to be the destruction fo Skynet in the beginning is an imagining. The Burning Earth is the furthest they have gone and Skynet is not destroyed in it. The Central Core is and the Terminators reactivate. That is the furthest we have seen in the series. In the films technically the furthest we have gone is 2029, but the T-850 does claim to be from 2032. The novelization of T3 goes to 2033.

Couldn't care less about novels. Whatever I've heard about them seems they have even less to do with the movies that the Star Wars EU.

Article regarding rumored London location.

*reads the website*

So...it sounds like McG has already decided to make Salvation worthless (rather than move on with a continuing trilogy)...You might as well give it to a different director...

Indeed. AngryJoe nicely sums up why it stinks:

http://www.thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/bt/aj/ajs/7430-angryjoet5

I'm rather hoping McG realizes it too after we all raise a stink and he changes his mind.

 

[Saul]

I'm with 3-d Master on this one. There are lots of Novels, comics, video games on Terminator. But I am really only interested in what is actually filmed or at least scripted to be filmed and what is on screen is what I use as the argument above.

 

[nx1701g]

I don't give a rat's ass about any novels, and anything JC says later on is not important. A fully scripted and planned to be filmed sequence though; that fits perfectly with the entire series, and explains why Skynet never sent the T-1000 one day before the first T-800; is something I'd take over any novel or JC ramblings.

Yeah but guess what: NEVER SEEN BY ANYONE and immediately made noncanon by Terminator 3. Guess what: it no longer counts. Sorry.

My argument still stands, however, Skynet has not been destroyed in ANY of the incarnations (except for the future coda of T2). T3 immediately invalidates what happened in T2 and the supposed end of Skynet (including the coda). The future war scenes in T3 were imaginings by the then 20 something Connor and were not what happened. John Connor is killed by Skynet - which actually was scripted to be shown and was partially filmed. The ocean nodes come from the script of T3, so since they were in a planned scene, I guess by your logic that makes them official. The Skynet nodes beneath the surface of the ocean make a lot of sense because they couldn't be reached by the Resistance and could, theoretically, operate for an indefinite time.

From now on why don't you read what I post prior to responding to me? Namely because I include that 2041 was seen in the EU of Terminator earlier in the thread and that it wasn't really canon. BTW you really should pay more attention to the Terminator EU because, back in September, Brancato and Ferris said in an interview article on Terminator Files that events from the comics and the novels would be revisited in the films they're writing and some of those ideas would be incorporated. For example: Resistance HQ being on a submarine is one that they borrowed from the Terminator comics. The character of Serena is named in honor of the character of Serena Burns from the T2: Infiltrator novel series. Marcus Wright and his model line are similar to the I-950 and the TS-300. The Aerostats are based on HK-Recons.

 

[Uncle Tobias]

I assumed Skynet would be eventually defeated no matter how many backup nodes it had, by blowing up all its factories and machinery.

 

[nx1701g]

I assumed Skynet would be eventually defeated no matter how many backup nodes it had, by blowing up all its factories and machinery.

I could see that possibility, but remember (from Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles) Skynet has based and real estate in the oceans.

 

[3D Master]

I don't give a rat's ass about any novels, and anything JC says later on is not important. A fully scripted and planned to be filmed sequence though; that fits perfectly with the entire series, and explains why Skynet never sent the T-1000 one day before the first T-800; is something I'd take over any novel or JC ramblings.

Yeah but guess what: NEVER SEEN BY ANYONE and immediately made noncanon by Terminator 3. Guess what: it no longer counts. Sorry.

Uh... exactly how does Terminator 3 make that scene non-canon? T3 says absolutely nothing about when the T-800 and the T-1000 were sent back.

My argument still stands, however, Skynet has not been destroyed in ANY of the incarnations (except for the future coda of T2).

No, it was destroyed in T1, and it was destroyed in T2. Whether or not later films show Skynet somehow survived, is besides the point.

The Skynet nodes beneath the surface of the ocean make a lot of sense because they couldn't be reached by the Resistance and could, theoretically, operate for an indefinite time.

If Skynet can reach it, so can the Resistance. It'll just take a while. And it still doesn't matter; Skynet is not effectively or theoretically unkillable. It's all a matter of taking it out, one factory, one Terminator, one core at a time and making sure it doesn't get to build new ones.

From now on why don't you read what I post prior to responding to me?

I did.

Namely because I include that 2041 was seen in the EU of Terminator earlier in the thread and that it wasn't really canon.

This sentence does not compute.

BTW you really should pay more attention to the Terminator EU because, back in September, Brancato and Ferris said in an interview article on Terminator Files that events from the comics and the novels would be revisited in the films they're writing and some of those ideas would be incorporated. For example: Resistance HQ being on a submarine is one that they borrowed from the Terminator comics. The character of Serena is named in honor of the character of Serena Burns from the T2: Infiltrator novel series. Marcus Wright and his model line are similar to the I-950 and the TS-300. The Aerostats are based on HK-Recons.

There is absolutely no reason to pay attention to the Terminator novels and comics. If the movie can't tell a coherent story without reading all supplemental stories, they wrote and filmed a bad movie that isn't worth watching anyway.

 

[nx1701g]

Uh... exactly how does Terminator 3 make that scene non-canon? T3 says absolutely nothing about when the T-800 and the T-1000 were sent back.

I meant it makes the Skynet is defeated part as noncanon.

No, it was destroyed in T1, and it was destroyed in T2. Whether or not later films show Skynet somehow survived, is besides the point.

Not really because, as said, Skynet wasn't destroyed if it comes back.

If Skynet can reach it, so can the Resistance. It'll just take a while. And it still doesn't matter; Skynet is not effectively or theoretically unkillable. It's all a matter of taking it out, one factory, one Terminator, one core at a time and making sure it doesn't get to build new ones.

Yes I'm certain that a rag tag group of survivors will be capable of reaching the ocean floor and taking out the factories and all the real estate in plenty of time to prevent Skynet from making a counter attack using nuclear bombs it has in reserve or some other doomsday weapon. I guess that, if the rumors are true, about the next film with Skynet being able to transport inorganic material through time that the war may truly never end. Skynet will just move itself to a new time. Personally I don't like the idea of metal itself being transportable, but if they go ahead with it I guess it's true.

Namely because I include that 2041 was seen in the EU of Terminator earlier in the thread and that it wasn't really canon.

This sentence does not compute.

I said earlier in the thread that 2041 was the furthest seen in any of the terminator franchise and mentioned that its from a novel on a prior page of this thread.

There is absolutely no reason to pay attention to the Terminator novels and comics. If the movie can't tell a coherent story without reading all supplemental stories, they wrote and filmed a bad movie that isn't worth watching anyway.

Then you're really, really, really going to hate the new franchise if they are going to continue to reference events from the novels, comics, and game media.

 

[Saul]

I assumed Skynet would be eventually defeated no matter how many backup nodes it had, by blowing up all its factories and machinery.

I could see that possibility, but remember (from Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles) Skynet has based and real estate in the oceans.

But TSCC isn't in continuity with the movies so this argument isn't valid.

 

[nx1701g]

I assumed Skynet would be eventually defeated no matter how many backup nodes it had, by blowing up all its factories and machinery.

I could see that possibility, but remember (from Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles) Skynet has based and real estate in the oceans.

But TSCC isn't in continuity with the movies so this argument isn't valid.

Destruction is more possible in TSCC because they're not introducing that metal itself can transport though time. In reality if metal can transport in the film series as of the next film then the war really is unwinnable because Skynet can just transport to a new time period and reactivate itself there. In TSCC at least the Resistance would have a better chance of winning.

I have a feeling that the proposed storyline of T5 is really going to be the end of the franchise moreso than this film could be.