Terminator Thread

[Andrew NDB Shot Caller Find all posts View Profile Close Andrew NDB]

http://www.mania.com/56125.html

Producer James Middleton (the same producer behind the upcoming Sarah Connor Chronicles) has announced that The Halcyon Company is prepping TERMINATOR 4 for a 2009 release. Pre-production for the fourth installment in the film will begin in October by the same writing team as T3: Rise of the Machines, scribes Michael Ferris and John D. Brancato.

This movie is expected to launch a new trilogy of the Terminator franchise.

The characters John Connor and Kate Brewster are in the current script for T4 but the film will center on a new hero which is influenced by John Connor's leadership in the war against the machines. It is not known by Middleton whether Nick Stahl and Claire Danes will reprise their roles at this point.

Production begins next month and expect TERMINATOR 4 to hit theaters sometime in 2009.

[Parrylakks Neko Samurai Find all posts View Profile Close Parrylakks]

Its gotta be about Kyle Reese.

[Andrew NDB Shot Caller Find all posts View Profile Close Andrew NDB]

Its gotta be about Kyle Reese.

That's my first thought. Though it does say "new hero"... Kyle was already the hero in T1.

[Big Daddy Dave Skywalker Moisture Farmer Find all posts View Profile Close Big Daddy Dave Skywalker]

Maybe the story picks up right AFTER Kyle goes to the past to save Sarah? That's where the uncharted territory really begins. It would make sense to start a new trilogy there anyway. We know what we need to know UP to that point. After that, they can add new characters and do all sorts of stuff.

[Parrylakks Neko Samurai Find all posts View Profile Close Parrylakks]

Maybe the story picks up right AFTER Kyle goes to the past to save Sarah? That's where the uncharted territory really begins. It would make sense to start a new trilogy there anyway. We know what we need to know UP to that point. After that, they can add new characters and do all sorts of stuff.

If you go that way the uncharted area really begins after John's death.

[Andrew NDB Shot Caller Find all posts View Profile Close Andrew NDB]

My thoughts on the Terminator chronology:

Way I see it, everything beyond the ending of T3 is pretty much uncharted territory... we're in a new timeline now.

The events of the timeline can't be rectified into a singular timeline. T2 changed the timeline, and T3 changed it again. What we have is a bunch of alternate timelines being created every time the movies mess with the future again.

In the first timeline, SkyNET went live in 1997 via CyberDyne Systems, nukes and countermeasures exchanged with Russia, Judgement Day. Kyle Reese is sent back in 2029 by John Connor.

In the second timeline, Judgement Day is averted, postponed until 2004 where it goes via Cyber Research Systems/CRS (instead of CyberDyne, destroyed in 1994/95 in T2). In 2032, John is killed by a T-850 just after he and his top lieutenants score a triumphant victory over SkyNET.

In the third timeline in the aftermath of T3, Judgement Day really did happen in 2004 via CRS, John may or may not still be killed by a T-850 in 2032 (probably not, since he would certainly see it coming this time), but now all of his top lieutenants are dead (killed by the T-X in 2004).

It's not clear if John sending Kyle back in time to meet his mother still goes on schedule in 2029 in either of the latter timelines (it's possibly everything that happened in 2029 just got bumped to 2032, happening more or less the same).

What we DO know is that even if John, now, in the current third timeline, sends Kyle Reese back to 1984 to meet his mother, it wouldn't play out exactly as it did in T1. Kyle would tell her Judgement Day happens in 2004, not 1997; Kyle would tell her Arnie is a Cyber Research Systems T-800, Model 101, not CyberDyne, etc., etc..

Further corrupting the issue would be this : In this new timeline, the T-800 in T2 would tell Sarah Connor that Miles Bennet Dyson was NOT responsible for the creation of SkyNET (and in 2004 rather than 1997) but rather Robert Brewster, and CyberDyne systems was NOT responsible but rather Cyber Research Systems. So Sarah would go after CRS in T2 instead of CyberDyne, meanwhile CyberDyne would STILL have the arm and chip from T1, even in an altered timeline. So, Sarah blows up CRS instead of CyberDyne in T2 (in this new timeline), meanwhile CyberDyne goes on to launch SkyNet on schedule in 1997 potentially!

As such, it's really almost easier to rectify if John does NOTHING in this new timeline -- doesn't send Kyle back, only watches his back for T-850s in 2032. I don't believe time travel is such that if John doesn't send Kyle back he'll just vanish in the present... what we have here is alternate timelines, branches if you will, each one with different events.

An endless loops of 1997 => 2004 => 1997 => 2004 => 1997 and on and on. It actually works if you really think about it.

[Lord Malvolio Corps Honor Guard Find all posts View Profile Close Lord Malvolio]

Wow, you just blew my mind! I am amazed you thought this hard about it! But time travel is so full of paradoxes, it makes one head hurt trying to keep up.

And honestly, I would rather the new trilogy all take place in the war torn future where we are already fightng the machines. Enough of the "Send a Terminator back to kill young John Conner/Sarah Conner" jazz. We get it, they stop them, but let's see WHY John was such a high prized target already!

[Andrew NDB Shot Caller Find all posts View Profile Close Andrew NDB]

Wow, you just blew my mind! I am amazed you thought this hard about it! But time travel is so full of paradoxes, it makes one head hurt trying to keep up.

Yet it does kind of make a delightfully twisted sort of sense, if you really spend the time to plot it out.

And honestly, I would rather the new trilogy all take place in the war torn future where we are already fightng the machines. Enough of the "Send a Terminator back to kill young John Conner/Sarah Conner" jazz. We get it, they stop them, but let's see WHY John was such a high prized target already!

Totally. People say (not totally without merit) that a lot of T3's basis is sort of a semi-remake of T2 (another Arnie-Terminator sent to the present protect John against another new, experimental Terminator)... to do so again in T4 would just be jumping the shark.

[Guest Close genesistorm]

Great news!!
Let's hope this one's better than # 3(And I did like # 3, I just felt # 2 was too hard to overcome.. it's just too powerful!)

[Big Daddy Dave Skywalker Moisture Farmer Find all posts View Profile Close Big Daddy Dave Skywalker]

I like your disection Andrew. I agree with it, as I've always been a nitpicker about time travel movies, and the rules they follow. I'm from the school of thought time travel movies work best when they just fail at changing history, or become the unwitting cause of history happening as originally intended. For instance, say you go back in time to save JFK from being assassinated, and you succeed. After that, why would you go back in time when history got to that point? You wouldn't because you'd never have a reason, so history would revert back to JFK being killed. I prefer the type of story where the hero fails at saving JFK, or ends up being the gunman on the grassy knoll, so to speak.

As for the timeline of Terminator, I say they need to send Kyle Reese back to save Sarah in 2029 no matter what. There are obviously plenty of glitches caused just from how many movies changed history and all that. I'd just start the movie soon after Kyle goes back, or John is killed. Hell, you could even start the movie with John being killed, and go from there. And I'd just be vague about how history played out to avoid any NEW continuity errors.

Plus, the movie needs something else going for it to make it more than just a sci-fi flick. The first 2 Terminator movies have layers of depth and storytelling that the third one simply doesn't. For instance, there's the dichotomy in T2 where Sarah essentially becomes a Terminator herself when she goes to assassinate Miles. It raises the old ethical question of would it be right to go back in time and kill Hitler as a baby in his crib. But here, you could argue Sarah is doing the exact same thing the machines are doing, killing an innocent person before they've done anything to protect THEIR preferred version of history.

T3, while being a very entertaining movie, doesn't have any of this depth or moral questions that the first 2 movies have. I just hope that whatever they do for a new trilogy gets back to the qualityof the first two, and has enough gas to sustain three movies.

[Guest Close genesistorm]

I like your disection Andrew. I agree with it, as I've always been a nitpicker about time travel movies, and the rules they follow. I'm from the school of thought time travel movies work best when they just fail at changing history, or become the unwitting cause of history happening as originally intended. For instance, say you go back in time to save JFK from being assassinated, and you succeed. After that, why would you go back in time when history got to that point? You wouldn't because you'd never have a reason, so history would revert back to JFK being killed. I prefer the type of story where the hero fails at saving JFK, or ends up being the gunman on the grassy knoll, so to speak.

As for the timeline of Terminator, I say they need to send Kyle Reese back to save Sarah in 2029 no matter what. There are obviously plenty of glitches caused just from how many movies changed history and all that. I'd just start the movie soon after Kyle goes back, or John is killed. Hell, you could even start the movie with John being killed, and go from there. And I'd just be vague about how history played out to avoid any NEW continuity errors.

Plus, the movie needs something else going for it to make it more than just a sci-fi flick. The first 2 Terminator movies have layers of depth and storytelling that the third one simply doesn't. For instance, there's the dichotomy in T2 where Sarah essentially becomes a Terminator herself when she goes to assassinate Miles. It raises the old ethical question of would it be right to go back in time and kill Hitler as a baby in his crib. But here, you could argue Sarah is doing the exact same thing the machines are doing, killing an innocent person before they've done anything to protect THEIR preferred version of history.

T3, while being a very entertaining movie, doesn't have any of this depth or moral questions that the first 2 movies have. I just hope that whatever they do for a new trilogy gets back to the qualityof the first two, and has enough gas to sustain three movies.

I agree with you Dave, I also prefer time travel stories where going back just helps the future come true, where the hero can't change it..
Also, I agree with your analysis of the 3 T. movies..

[Superlantern mmmm Beer! Find all posts View Profile Close Superlantern]

My brain hurts .... to overcome those loops kyle reese was born after the war began... John could have told him that judgement day happens in 1997 even though we knows it 04... same goes for T2 arnold was programed with infortmation by John conner. He could have been programmed to tell him the same thing including the dyson info, inorder to best preserve the timeline, knowing the potential paradox of time travel.

[Guest Close GLC2814.4]

Yes, I second the "brain-hurt" comment.

[Maverick_GL Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Maverick_GL]

In all honesty, the only Terminator movie I need or even want to watch is the first one. Why?

- The only movie with a palatable sense of desperation. There was nothing Kyle and Sarah could do besides run. Yeah he had guns and stuff, but in the end nothing worked. You really had a feeling of "holy shit, there is nothing they can do, they can run, but not forever. This machine will not and cannot be stopped. Its only a matter of time until it catches them". Sarah was completely dependent on this guy from the future. And he was completely dependent on his skills and training, and the meager weapons of the time period.
It was only blind luck that they ended up in that factory in the end.
- It ended. And the ending was good. Total loop, with the kid taking her picture at the end. That movie in and of itself was complete.
- T2, while a cool action movie, completely lacked the feeling of desperation. I mean yeah T-1000 was powerful, but at least they had a T-800 that could hold his ground for the most part.

I feel that T2 and T3 were decent movies, but neither of them held a candle to the first. However thats how I feel about most movies, the original is more often than not the best. With some exceptions (Star Wars, Batman1+2, Indiana Jones, x-men, LOTR)

[Andrew NDB Shot Caller Find all posts View Profile Close Andrew NDB]

It's now titled "Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins" and is being fast-tracked.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/071010i.php

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34388