the first "Terminator" makes NO sence

The amount of time between when the Terminator goes through and when Reese goes through doesnt matter, as they arrive at the same point in the past at the same time.

 

For years I thought it was a perfect closed loop (the first film) but now I don't.) Think about it. The terminator goes through.. into the PAST, so and if he goes through first, everything from 1984 to the year he went in has changed. Kyle might not have been near the machine in whatever new timeline had been created, simply going through a minute later wouldn't have helped.

 

Hi....since I've ahd about 14 beers tonight I have no problem telling the OP that he spelled the word "sense" wrong!!!!!!!!!

 

As I said in my last post, the timeline we see in the movie was already a well-established perpetual loop. The events that lead up to that loop are completely unknown, but they no longer matter. The terminator's actions in the past had no impact on this loop whatsoever; it was a result of it, not the creation thereof. Just like Reese's jaunt to the past. It was completely self-sustaining due to the original -- and utterly unknown -- events that lead to its initial creation. Events that were likely totally different from what we see in the movie.

 

By going back, the Terminator actually establishes the timeline that leads to Kyle Reese being sent back. No Terminator, no need to send Kyle to save Sarah.

You're only half right. Yes, the Terminator changes the past, but in a way that creates the chain of events we're all familiar with. How this doesn't make "sence" to you is your problem.

 

"Oh, no. I've gone cross-eyed." - Austin Powers, from Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me

 

Me Head Hurt...

 

Actually, the Terminator killing Sarah Connor would negate Skynet's future reasons for sending the Terminator to 1984 at all.

So really, nothing could've happened.

 

in the original timeline, Sarah gives birth to a boy named John, the father is the guy who stood her upon the night of the Terminators arrival, he makes it up to her the next day, the original John Connor joins the Marines and is on a flight back to the states when JD happens

 

The original Terminator is a closed timelike curve, a time loop, always leading back to the same place and unchanging. This loop exists not because of the actions of any individual or individuals, but due to a quirk in Minkowski space.

One important consequence of the closed timelike curve is that it negates causality. Some things happen just because they happen. There is no need for a cause. Or, more accurately, there is no need for an outside cause. Things can cause themselves. There is no need for an original timeline.

The T2 confirms nothing. It's all left up to the viewer. The actions of Sarah and John and Uncle Bob may have been successful, or they may have been futile endeavors that were were always destined to happen. I prefer to thing that they were futile.

What screws things up is T3, TSCC, and TS. They all present a changed timeline, ut not one that was changed enough to matter.

 

The problem is that Terminator 2 gave Judgment Day a date. If they hadn't specified 1997, then they still could have made Terminator 3 in 2003 without having to present an altered timeline and the T-800's explanation that, "Judgment Day is inevitable." For that matter, other than Judgment Day happening after 1997, there's nothing necessarily alternate about the Terminator Salvation timeline either.

But then, the 1st 2 films on their own can still form a closed loop if you ignore Terminator 3 and Terminator Salvation. (And considering the quality of those latter 2 movies, that may be for the best. I miss James Cameron.)

Personally, I reject any theory that John Connor was ever born in any prior timeline where he was not fathered by Kyle Reese. It's impossible for the T-800 in the 1st movie to ever travel back in time to a timeline in which Kyle Reese didn't follow him because John Connor would never have existed without Kyle Reese traveling back in time, so the T-800 would never have been sent on a mission to kill Sarah Connor. It's your standard pre-destination paradox. It's the same reason why Dave Lister is his own father on Red Dwarf.

 

I think only a few of you get my point. Kyle couldn't follow the Terminator through time for a similar reason that Doc and Marty couldn't go to 2015 to get the book.

 

I never thought there was any other timeline than what the film showed. It was an absolutely closed loop. A perfect paradox. It *always* happened.

 

^But Back to the Future & The Terminator follow 2 different theories of time travel. Back to the Future is a grandfather paradox. The Terminator is a predestination paradox. Marty McFly was able to go back in time and threaten his own existence by changing the timeline. The T-800 couldn't change jack shit. Anything it did in the past would create, not alter, the present that it came from.

Now, if we were to apply the timetravel logic of The Terminator to Back to the Future, Part II, then Back to the Future, Part II would have played out very differently. In that case, when Marty & Doc returned to 1985, it would have been the 1985 that they recognized, not the bizarro world where Biff is a millionaire, because, in 1985, Marty & Doc in the future had already gone back to 1955 to prevent Biff from giving the sports almanac to himself. They also could have gone back to the same 2015 that they recognized, although they would be incapable of doing anything to stop Biff from stealing the time machine and going back into the past because it had already happened.

The real question RE The Terminator is, if changing the past is impossible, then why did Skynet bother to build a time machine in the first place? I figure it's because it's impossible to know which kind of time travel logic you're dealing with until you actually try it. Until then, it's just guessing. Skynet was hoping that they were dealing with Back to the Future timetravel logic but turned out to be wrong.

 

Um James Cameron himself proposed that theory of John Connor in the original timeline not being Kyle Reese's son in an extra feature on the T2 DVD set. It was on the Ultimate Edition from the early 2000s if memory serves.

Here's something to really make your head explode:

Spoiler: Contains a spoiler for Terminator Salvation

The Terminator destroyed by John and Marcus at the end of the film was originally intended to be the actual T-800 sent back to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor.

 

^Eh. Sometimes directors don't even understand their own movies.

 

Your posts in this thread have been fantastic, Checkmate. Thank you.

By the way, it is the very elegance of the first movie which makes the sequels such affronts.

 

True, but it makes sense for their to have been a reality where Connor wasn't the son of Kyle Reese

 

Nah, something had to trigger it at one point. Once it was created, it became self-sustaining, but it didn't "always happen," and it's not guaranteed to always happen either. Future events (relative to us) can break the loop just as easily as it was created.

It's actually one of the perks of this particular franchise. They can destroy all their old stories on a whim and tell a completely different story in the process, and it would all be fine and dandy.

 

Okies, only taking the first movie into account, before you had to factor in alternate timelines, we all agreee that it was intended to be a mindfucking closed loop?

Good.

Is skynet a moron?

I propose that the Terminator was not sent back to kill Sarah Connor, but it was sent back to die in a particular and precise manner as to seed it's own creation.

if such a theory was true, would they trust fate to propell Kyle's backstepped destiny or would they hypnotise the hell out of him inso as to how he chose to fight the terminator and the terminator is equally programmed to what degree and quality it is allowed to fight back that the humans it is chasing do not accidentally catch a lucky shot, expire prematurely and fail to create Skynet.

Which would mean that... Losing the war to John Connor was probably a Ropeadope, if it wasn't outright brainwashing and never actually happened as part of it's self germinating mating dance.

Do flowers really actually enjoy Bees loking for nectar?