PDA

View Full Version : Terminator TV Show - "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" - "SPOILERS FOR ALL EPISODES"



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Doze
May 18th, 2007, 09:36 AM
WOW! A new Terminator show? I cant wait!

Link: http://www.syfyportal.com/news423661.html

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 18th, 2007, 10:18 AM
It's owned by FOX so chances are it will suffer the same fate as Firefly and Drive. I do hope it's good though considering Summer Glau (River Tam from Firefly) is up to play a terminator aiding John Conner in it.

Acolyte Of Bli'l'ab
May 18th, 2007, 12:44 PM
Sounds like a load of crap to me, and pointless at that. The whole premise sounds utterly pointless, and 15 yr old terminator schoolmates ? jeez...it sounds more like smallville, Terminator should be dark and nasty.

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 18th, 2007, 04:45 PM
I think it sounds interesting, and should be worth checking out. I'll be definately watching the first episode to see what it's like.

Missster.Freeman
May 18th, 2007, 06:51 PM
I'm not too sure if I like the premise for this show now after reading that news article. Surely John Connor must be well fed up with Terminators constantly popping back to either kill or protect him by now? I might check out the first episode, if only for the sake of curiosity.

the fifth man
May 18th, 2007, 07:52 PM
I might check out the first episode, if only for the sake of curiosity.

Same here. I'm just not too sure about this one.

parisindy
May 18th, 2007, 08:24 PM
i liked the movies i would be willing to give this a try :)

Sci-Fi
May 18th, 2007, 10:24 PM
Be awhile before it airs...early 2008 if the reports are accurate.

Starxgate
May 19th, 2007, 01:57 PM
Here is the trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc7mzoqHahU

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 19th, 2007, 02:07 PM
HOLY CRAP THAT LOOKS GOOD.

Yes, that was all one sentence. And yes I will definitely watching that.

Summer was naked near the end of the trailer - HARRAH FOR TERMINATORS!:) :) :) :) :D

Starxgate
May 19th, 2007, 02:17 PM
Clip 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57C-I2rMHWg&eurl

Clip 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e716AmUiatE&eurl

Clip 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcmdF-C9-Hg&eurl

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 19th, 2007, 02:25 PM
^already greened you.

Holy crap, they're better be background music though in the actual ep itself. It looks well good though - I wanna see Summer kick some futuristic ass!! (I know she did that in Firefly but they weren't Terminators).

It makes you wonder why the machines sent back a normal terminator to kill Sarah and John though...

And that's the lady who plays Queen Gorgo in 300 playing Sarah!!!!

jazz!
May 19th, 2007, 03:53 PM
Initially, I too felt that this show was going to be pretty awful - then I saw the youtuuubes:

-> Can you believe that this is a show? and not a movie - incredible cgi!

-> This may actually be a show that can live up to its hype and do Terminator 2 justice!! (?)

-> Definately doesn't look like Smallville, hehe

lunarleviathan
May 19th, 2007, 04:18 PM
Looks alright from those clips. Summer Glau is a big plus, fabulous actress. I guess we'll see. I wish it had a better title though, Terminator: <subtitle here> would suffice.:rolleyes:

Starxgate
May 19th, 2007, 04:26 PM
I feel bad for the show creators & Summer Glau. The fact that its on FOX pretty much guarantees it wont last long. Stop going to FOX for shows. They will kill it the first chance they get. FOX is a rare station that make Sci-Fi look good

Acolyte Of Bli'l'ab
May 19th, 2007, 04:50 PM
Four words spring to mind watching the trailer and clips :

Seen it all before.

more X human hero facing X terminator from the future. Again. More of the same big explosions with terminator walking out without skin. More crappy CGI that looks like a playstation game. Faking the womans voice like the other films. Seems Terminator is getting like the slasher-movie genre, in that they seem to like repeating exactly the same plot every f**king time.

I'll give the pilot a fair chance, but I have little to no hope, especially if the majority seems to think its good (then that means it usually wont be).

Missster.Freeman
May 19th, 2007, 06:38 PM
Uh... I'm not so sure now after watching those trailers. :S


Be awhile before it airs...early 2008 if the reports are accurate.That's a bit of a wait. It doesn't bode well for this show if FOX are going to let it sit on the shelf until next year.

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 20th, 2007, 10:17 AM
They should do what they did with The Sarah Jane Adventures and put the premier on this year whilst they prepare the first season to air next year.

MB.Eddie
May 20th, 2007, 12:38 PM
Those trailers look cool. Will be checking this show out. Can't hurt to give it a go :cool:

Oreo
May 20th, 2007, 04:17 PM
They should have made the show before T3. In T3 we know that she supposedly dies of cancer and he hasn't seen a T model since T2. And hell we know they fail so what's the point?

And sadly it's on Fox so it doesn't have a chance. Plus Fox is so dumb that they won't put this on after the Super Bowl.

And it was gonig to primere in the fall but Fox is smart enough to realize that all their good shows start in the spring so they delayed it. I doubt it will get a full season.

Angela V
May 20th, 2007, 11:44 PM
So this is suppose to take place BEFORE T3?

Acolyte Of Bli'l'ab
May 21st, 2007, 07:37 AM
Yes, its meant to be set inbetween T2 and T3. Pointless if you ask me, they should of done a "band of brothers" style war series set in the future IMO.

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 21st, 2007, 01:12 PM
I think it might be ignoring T3 and just starting a new story from after T2 which goes in a different direction.

Mitchell82
May 21st, 2007, 08:40 PM
Same here. I'm just not too sure about this one.

Neither am I. I actually liked the third movie and was looking more forward to the continuation of that. Seeing the world post judgement day.

Mitchell82
May 21st, 2007, 08:43 PM
Yes, its meant to be set inbetween T2 and T3. Pointless if you ask me, they should of done a "band of brothers" style war series set in the future IMO.

Well I think they are still planning on doing T4 but that may have fell through by now. I would much prefer seeing John fight for survival post judgement day, and I think Nick is a much better choice for John. recasting Sarah is a mistake too.

katTheBird
May 21st, 2007, 09:27 PM
I'll give it a go if for no other reason that I need some more interesting shows to watch that time of year. I loved Summer Glau in The Unit and from what I've seen of the trailers she should be good in this as well.

Fingers crossed anyway

Flyboy
May 22nd, 2007, 06:04 AM
Well I think they are still planning on doing T4 but that may have fell through by now. I would much prefer seeing John fight for survival post judgement day, and I think Nick is a much better choice for John. recasting Sarah is a mistake too.
I suspect some said the same about reacasting O'Neill and Jackson...

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 22nd, 2007, 08:04 PM
^has a point.

I think that it will be good but will get cancelled thanks to Fox's unique look on cancelling good shows.

Oreo
May 23rd, 2007, 07:18 AM
Well I think they are still planning on doing T4 but that may have fell through by now. I would much prefer seeing John fight for survival post judgement day, and I think Nick is a much better choice for John. recasting Sarah is a mistake too.


Nope T4 through T6 is a go. Some new company bought the rights to the movie franchise and will be making a new war triogy. it will take place several years after the end of T3.

Liam Kincaid
May 23rd, 2007, 09:28 AM
How are they doing this? I thought that it came out that The Terminator and The Matrix were stolen from Sophia Stewart? She has a website at www.sophiaoracle.com . Does she have any say in this? Will she be getting any money from the "Sarah Conner Chronicles" ? I have not read any of her novels yet ( they are currently beyond by price range ), but she has to have a better ending than the Warshowski brothers do. I was confused by the second Matrix movie, but was very hopeful that the third movie would un-confuse me, but the actual third movie dashed my hopes. The 3 Terminator movies held together a lot more than the 3 Matrix movies did. But I am a lot more intrigued by The Matrix than I am by The Terminator If Sophia Stewart (www.sophiaoracle.com ) can give me a better resolution to The Matrix than the W Brothers have , then I am all for giving her 100% rights to both movies and all sequels. If doing a "Sarah Conner Chronicles" TV series helps Sophia produce a better Matrix series, then I am for it. If it hinders her from doing so, then I am opposed. If it has no effect, then I don't care. The Terminator series was entertaining, but the first Matrix was very thought-provoking. The combination of the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies killed that effect. I would like to see a more thought-provoking continuation of the first Matrix than 2 and 3 provided. I think that maybe Sophia Stewart can fix that. If "The Sarah Conner Chronicles" help her do it, I will watch with pleasure. If they interfere with her doing that, I probably won't watch. If it doesn't matter, then I will watch if I like the pilot.

Sorry for being so wordy, but to put it more succinctly, I think Sophia Stewart ( www.sophiaoracle.com ) is telling the truth, and if she has not been included in this project then I do not think that it will actually happen. I liked the Terminator series, but I LOVED the original Matrix. How I treat any sequels to the Terminator depends on if and how those sequels effect the possibility of a better resolution to The Matrix. If it helps Sophia, I will watch. If it hurts her, I won't. If it has no bearing, then I will watch until I get bored.

Flyboy
May 23rd, 2007, 10:58 AM
How are they doing this? I thought that it came out that The Terminator and The Matrix were stolen from Sophia Stewart? She has a website at www.sophiaoracle.com . Does she have any say in this? Will she be getting any money from the "Sarah Conner Chronicles" ? I have not read any of her novels yet ( they are currently beyond by price range ), but she has to have a better ending than the Warshowski brothers do. I was confused by the second Matrix movie, but was very hopeful that the third movie would un-confuse me, but the actual third movie dashed my hopes. The 3 Terminator movies held together a lot more than the 3 Matrix movies did. But I am a lot more intrigued by The Matrix than I am by The Terminator If Sophia Stewart (www.sophiaoracle.com ) can give me a better resolution to The Matrix than the W Brothers have , then I am all for giving her 100% rights to both movies and all sequels. If doing a "Sarah Conner Chronicles" TV series helps Sophia produce a better Matrix series, then I am for it. If it hinders her from doing so, then I am opposed. If it has no effect, then I don't care. The Terminator series was entertaining, but the first Matrix was very thought-provoking. The combination of the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies killed that effect. I would like to see a more thought-provoking continuation of the first Matrix than 2 and 3 provided. I think that maybe Sophia Stewart can fix that. If "The Sarah Conner Chronicles" help her do it, I will watch with pleasure. If they interfere with her doing that, I probably won't watch. If it doesn't matter, then I will watch if I like the pilot.

Sorry for being so wordy, but to put it more succinctly, I think Sophia Stewart ( www.sophiaoracle.com ) is telling the truth, and if she has not been included in this project then I do not think that it will actually happen. I liked the Terminator series, but I LOVED the original Matrix. How I treat any sequels to the Terminator depends on if and how those sequels effect the possibility of a better resolution to The Matrix. If it helps Sophia, I will watch. If it hurts her, I won't. If it has no bearing, then I will watch until I get bored.
Oh come ON!

There's always SOMEBODY who stands up and claims their work was stolen by someone who managed to achieve something. "Larry Potter" was supposedly a book that JK Rowling ripped off... I sincerely doubt the legitimacy of this woman.

Mitchell82
May 23rd, 2007, 12:16 PM
Nope T4 through T6 is a go. Some new company bought the rights to the movie franchise and will be making a new war triogy. it will take place several years after the end of T3.

Good news. After seeing Fox's trailer for this it looks really good. I hope if it is good Fox's routine of cancelling good shows doesnt hurt it.

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 23rd, 2007, 02:21 PM
Nope T4 through T6 is a go. Some new company bought the rights to the movie franchise and will be making a new war triogy. it will take place several years after the end of T3.

....and where did you hear that?

teal'c2006
May 23rd, 2007, 03:25 PM
Is the rock going to star in t4...... Last i heard he might be in it....... I thought 3 needed more to the ending, but that's just me....... Havent heard anything about the new show on fox though, where can i find out about it.

Mitchell82
May 23rd, 2007, 06:05 PM
Is the rock going to star in t4...... Last i heard he might be in it....... I thought 3 needed more to the ending, but that's just me....... Havent heard anything about the new show on fox though, where can i find out about it.

I actully thought the ending was a fitting way to end the first trillogy and a neat way to start the "future war" movies. As to the show here is a link to the articlehttp://www.syfyportal.com/news423661.html and here is one with a trailer as well as some other footage.
http://www.syfyportal.com/news423673.html

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 24th, 2007, 02:19 AM
Where has everyone heard of a new 'war' trilogy?? I wasn't aware of such movies in production...:confused:

Dumper
May 24th, 2007, 01:14 PM
Where has everyone heard of a new 'war' trilogy?? I wasn't aware of such movies in production...:confused:

Have a look at this link.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=41436

Oreo
May 26th, 2007, 08:34 PM
Have a look at this link.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=41436

Thank you... Sheesh... I can't believe T fans didn't know this. It was even on yahoo's front page a few weeks back!

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 27th, 2007, 01:32 AM
So it's official then?

Doze
May 29th, 2007, 12:07 AM
So it's official then?Is anything official tell it hit the theater any more?

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 29th, 2007, 09:24 AM
.....



what?:sam34:

Missster.Freeman
May 29th, 2007, 09:36 AM
What Doze meant was; any 'official' news these days should be treated with scepticism until a new series/film is actually shown on the telly/theatre.

Admiral Mappalazarou
May 29th, 2007, 11:10 AM
Oh I gets it now.:cameron:

Mitchell82
May 29th, 2007, 11:51 AM
What Doze meant was; any 'official' news these days should be treated with scepticism until a new series/film is actually shown on the telly/theatre.

Wich unfortunatly is very true. The news we hear before something hits the theaters or airs on tv can be very different from what we expect.

Wallpaperman
June 5th, 2007, 06:02 PM
The links to the youtube trailers are no longer available :(
Is there another place where to watch the trailer?
I've googled it but it always links to those dead links.
Fox has apparently requested to remove them ... :S

Admiral Mappalazarou
June 5th, 2007, 09:39 PM
Damn that sucks. Stupid FOX.

parisindy
June 5th, 2007, 10:17 PM
this sounds good ...when is it suppose to air again?

Admiral Mappalazarou
June 5th, 2007, 10:56 PM
Next year I think but I'm not 100% sure, possibly winter 2007.

Whatitis
June 6th, 2007, 08:51 AM
I didn't get a chance to see the trailer because Warner pulled it off of YouTube...but this sounds like a load of crap. In the event that the television happens to be on the same channel as this show, I might sit down to watch it...that is until I find the remote.

I don't see how a spin off of these amazing movies could happen...but then again...stragner things have happened.

We'll see...until then...I'm very skeptical.

Trek_Girl42
June 6th, 2007, 11:17 AM
The links to the youtube trailers are no longer available :(
Is there another place where to watch the trailer?
I've googled it but it always links to those dead links.
Fox has apparently requested to remove them ... :S
Huh? Remove a TRAILER from Youtube? That's FREE advertising. *shakes head*

Wallpaperman
June 6th, 2007, 11:52 AM
Huh? Remove a TRAILER from Youtube? That's FREE advertising. *shakes head*
Yes and you know, now some TV channels pay to have the exclusivity to show some trailers before anyone else ...
A channel in Belgium has paid to show the pirates of the carribean trailer in exclusivity before anyone else. They even made ads to advertise .... a trailer which is an ad too! See how world evovles, we pay to advertise an advertisement!!!! :S Crazy world!

Well, anywhere else where I could have a look at that trailer?

Dumper
June 6th, 2007, 12:52 PM
I found a link to the trailer, have a good look.:)

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20ssn_the-sarah-connor-chronicles-trailer

Trek_Girl42
June 6th, 2007, 01:13 PM
Yes and you know, now some TV channels pay to have the exclusivity to show some trailers before anyone else ...
A channel in Belgium has paid to show the pirates of the carribean trailer in exclusivity before anyone else. They even made ads to advertise .... a trailer which is an ad too! See how world evovles, we pay to advertise an advertisement!!!! :S Crazy world!
Wow.....now that is pathetic. :S

Wallpaperman
June 6th, 2007, 01:22 PM
I found a link to the trailer, have a good look.:)

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20ssn_the-sarah-connor-chronicles-trailer
Looks interesting, even if I have some doubts about it and that it could destroy the franchise. But I don't think that it will fit with Terminator 3. Maybe we should forget Terminator 3 to watch this or there could be some nonsense somewhere. Or maybe is that something independant such what Smallville is to the Superman movies .....

Whatitis
June 7th, 2007, 07:14 AM
[QUOTE=Wallpaperman;6748285]there could be some nonsense somewhere. QUOTE]

yeah...the entire concept of the television show would be a good first place to look for the nonsense...

but that's just a guess.

Lonao
June 10th, 2007, 07:47 PM
I found a link to the trailer, have a good look.:)

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20ssn_the-sarah-connor-chronicles-trailer

omg dont look very good

i bet it get max 2 maybe 3 seasons

Trek_Girl42
June 11th, 2007, 12:46 AM
Heh, I finally saw Terminator 3, and really begin to wonder how this show would fit in. Too bad Nick Stahl isn't starring. :(

Doze
June 11th, 2007, 04:58 AM
Heh, I finally saw Terminator 3, and really begin to wonder how this show would fit in. Too bad Nick Stahl isn't starring. :(I'll have to go with Wallpaperman on this.


...I don't think that it will fit with Terminator 3... maybe is that something independant such what Smallville is to the Superman movies .....But Smallville only works because it started before a time that a story was told. The only thing I think they could do it forget all of the movies and go with the TV story alone.

The Ori
June 11th, 2007, 08:24 AM
I hope that the story line is good, seeing as I can only see it being a terminator just trying to find Sarah and John!!

It probbly needs a lot of promotion!

Daniel Jackson
June 12th, 2007, 08:45 PM
The Terminator
The original movie that started it all, this will always be canon.

Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Most people agree that this is supperior to the original movie, so this wall always be canon as well.

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
You could say that this is the end of the Terminator saga. You could also say that the ending makes way for a 4th movie set during the future war and either without the time travel angle or a time travel plot other than future Terminators trying to kill/protect John Connor.

The Sarah Connor Chronicles
T3 stated that nothing happened since T2. Sarah Connor died of cancer three years later after the events of T2. T3 could feature Terminators from after the events of T3 going back to a time between T2 and T3. This may lead to Sarah Connor recieving treatment for her cancer so she doesn't die. Alternatively, they may simply ignore T3, making no effort to tie the TV show into it.

Terminator 4
The fourth feature film will feature the Man vs. Machine war, but it will also tie into the TV show. If the TV show ignores T3, does that mean T4 will ignore T3?

Ultimately, I don't care if the TV show ignores T3 since they are of different mediums. I'll only be upset if T4 ignores T3, because I want to see a follow up to T3, a movie which I feel is quite good and worthy of a sequel.

Starxgate
June 13th, 2007, 09:53 AM
I came across a newish TV Trailer. Go here

http://www.avsquad1.com/

& click on "Product Reel" & The Sarah Connor Chronicles should be at the bottom click on it to view it

I guess FOX is getting ready to start advertising it

Wallpaperman
June 13th, 2007, 09:57 AM
I would have preferred to see a story taking place in the future during the war ...

Trek_Girl42
June 13th, 2007, 10:47 AM
Ultimately, I don't care if the TV show ignores T3 since they are of different mediums. I'll only be upset if T4 ignores T3, because I want to see a follow up to T3, a movie which I feel is quite good and worthy of a sequel.
I wouldn't want any future movie to ignore T3 either- I thought it was very good for a third film in a franchise, and I would definitely like to see a follow-up to it covering the war.

Doze
June 13th, 2007, 10:57 AM
I would have preferred to see a story taking place in the future during the war ...
Agreed but that's what the new movies should be.

Missster.Freeman
June 13th, 2007, 11:10 AM
I don't like the idea of the TV show rendering T3 null and void either. T3 had a great conclusion.

So it's possible the new Terminator series will do a "Stargate" and only be linked to its film more or less in name only? The new series will keep the Terminator, John Conner and Sarah Conner as its central characters as in the film trilogy, but the TV show could go off in a different direction? I really hope so and I hope T4 doesn't acknowledge the new series and keeps within the film canon.

Daniel Jackson
June 13th, 2007, 03:15 PM
So it's possible the new Terminator series will do a "Stargate" and only be linked to its film more or less in name only? The new series will keep the Terminator, John Conner and Sarah Conner as its central characters as in the film trilogy, but the TV show could go off in a different direction? I really hope so and I hope T4 doesn't acknowledge the new series and keeps within the film canon.
SG-1 is a continuation of Stargate. The only thing that was significantly changed was Ra's race being reimagined from a man-like creature to a snake-like creature to make it more TV friendly. Aside from that reimagining and some cosmetic differences, Stargate and SG-1 are in the same continuity.

STARGATE TIMELINE
1994: Stargate (movie's point of view)
1996: Stargate (SG-1's point of view)
1997-98: SG-1 Season 1
1998-99: SG-1 Season 2
1999-00: SG-1 Season 3
2000-01: SG-1 Season 4
2001-02: SG-1 Season 5
2002-03: SG-1 Season 6
2003-04: SG-1 Season 7
2004-05: SG-1 Season 8 / Atlantis Season 1
2005-06: SG-1 Season 9 / Atlantis Season 2
2006-07: SG-1 Season 10 / Atlantis Season 3
2007-08: Atlantis Season 4 / 2 SG-1 Movies

The new Terminator TV show will be a continuation of the first two Terminator movies, but it will ignore T3. You could say that the TV show is an alternate continuation. Basically, we'll have two timelines that can be followed.

TERMINATOR TIMELINE 1
The Terminator
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

TERMINATOR TIMELINE 2
The Terminator
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
The Sarah Connor Chronicles
Terminator 4

Terminator 4 will take place during the future war with ties to the TV show. In order for it to have ties to the TV show which ignores T3, that means T4 will also ignore T3. One possibility is that T4 will follow up T3 and feature a pair of Terminators go back in time to the TV show's first episode. That could be interesting. If that's the case, then the the timeline would be T1-4 and then a second timeline with T1-2 and TSCC.

Oreo
June 13th, 2007, 09:06 PM
They can easily fix this by saying it's a different universe like Daniel said (which I like the best), or a huge Voyager reset button at the end of the series.

But none of this matters because it's on Fox and will live a season if it's lucky.

Daniel Jackson
June 13th, 2007, 10:02 PM
Different timeline, not universe. Two different concepts. :daniel:

They've already pushed the big reset button by saying the 3rd movie never happened.

Trek_Girl42
June 14th, 2007, 12:09 AM
They've already pushed the big reset button by saying the 3rd movie never happened.
I hate that very idea of tossing aside T3, I really liked the third movie, it had a good story, but I'll give the series a shot anyway..... It's just too bad that they couldn't do a show which continued off of the movie, though one could suppose that getting Nick Stahl and Claire Danes would be.....tricky. ;)

So long as the next movie doesn't ignore T3 though.....I'll be happy. :) If the third movie had been brutally bad, I'd get the point of a reset, but it surprisingly wasn't.....

MB.Eddie
June 14th, 2007, 03:06 AM
I came across a newish TV Trailer. Go here

http://www.avsquad1.com/

& click on "Product Reel" & The Sarah Connor Chronicles should be at the bottom click on it to view it

I guess FOX is getting ready to start advertising it

Thanks. Good find. Thats better than the Youtube ones anyway :cameron:

Oreo
June 14th, 2007, 07:46 AM
Different timeline, not universe. Two different concepts.

Actually no, they are the same thing.

Time travel is impossible because of the grandfather parradox. So the new theory is that when you go back in time you actually start a new AU so if you kill you're grandfather in that timeline you won't be born, but you were born in a different universe anyways so all is ok. :tealc39:

EDIT - And whoever said that the TV show is a tie in for the 4th movie?

Daniel Jackson
June 14th, 2007, 10:27 AM
Actually no, they are the same thing. Time travel is impossible because of the grandfather parradox.
The grandfather paradox is flawed, because it does not factor in 4-dimensional thinking. If you go back in time to when your grandfather was a boy, you become a component of the past. If you kill him, the future will change significantly, but you will not cease to exist. Why? You are a component of the past and thus protected by any changes to the future. The future you came from has ceased to exist, because it has been replaced by the new future you created by killing your grandfather. There is only one way back. Make a video of yourself telling your younger self not to kill your grandfather, and explain the results. Maybe document the alternate future as well. Send this video back in time to when you're in the past, but before you've killed your grandfather. That way, that younger you can return to the future, thus erasing the alternate timeline and your alternate self. The video remains, because it was in the past, protected from changes to the future.


So the new theory is that when you go back in time you actually start a new AU so if you kill you're grandfather in that timeline you won't be born, but you were born in a different universe anyways so all is ok. :tealc39:
Traveling to the past does not bump you into some other reality. :S


And whoever said that the TV show is a tie in for the 4th movie?
I said that the fourth movie will have ties to the TV show. :cool:

Doze
June 14th, 2007, 10:58 AM
I said that the fourth movie will have ties to the TV show. :cool:And what rabbit did you pull that hat out of? Got link?

Daniel Jackson
June 14th, 2007, 12:49 PM
Yes, I have a link. :cameron:

The Sarah Connor Chronicles @ Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sarah_Connor_Chronicles)


Andy Vajna and James Middleton also confirmed in Variety that C2 is in "the final phases of development" of a fourth Terminator film and that the series will have a link to what's being envisioned as a new feature trilogy. "There will be a connection," Middleton said. The screenplay that was being developed by Michael Ferris and John Brancato was also a part of the Halcyon buyout.

Doze
June 14th, 2007, 02:20 PM
Yes, I have a link. :cameron:

The Sarah Connor Chronicles @ Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sarah_Connor_Chronicles)

Dude, your link has a whole in it.

This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
Any material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time.
This article has been tagged since April 2007.This is nothing more then someones idea, nothing to do with fact at this point. :)

Trek_Girl42
June 14th, 2007, 03:09 PM
Dude, your link has a whole in it.
This is nothing more then someones idea, nothing to do with fact at this point. :)
Cause it's on wikipedia so it must be true!



Really, it makes no sense- why base the future of the franchise on a television show that has yet to fly or fail? With the number of shows that get cancelled so quickly, I have trouble believing that they're going to hang the future of the franchise off this show right now. If it runs for a season and is a huge success, then yes, I could see it. But not now.

Daniel Jackson
June 14th, 2007, 03:21 PM
Dude, your link has a whole in it.
Do you mean hole? :confused: In any event, I clicked it, and it linked me to the Wikipedia page. I don't know why it doesn't work for you. :S


This is nothing more then someones idea, nothing to do with fact at this point. :)
Your quote suggests you did not even bother to read the page. :rolleyes:


Cause it's on wikipedia so it must be true!
If you two would bother clicking the link, you would see that it links to pages where the information came from. :rolleyes:


Really, it makes no sense- why base the future of the franchise on a television show that has yet to fly or fail?
I don't know. :S


With the number of shows that get cancelled so quickly, I have trouble believing that they're going to hang the future of the franchise off this show right now.
Especially after what happened to Firefly. :rolleyes:


If it runs for a season and is a huge success, then yes, I could see it. But not now.
Agreed. The production team must have a lot of faith in the TV show and FOX.

Trek_Girl42
June 16th, 2007, 03:08 PM
http://www.thefutoncritic.com/rant.aspx?id=20070614

The Futon Critic reviews the pilot! Sounds like they are making it work with the T3. :)

Daniel Jackson
June 16th, 2007, 04:41 PM
To the show's credit, the producers have found a very clever way to bottle up the events of the third "Terminator" film (in which Sarah has died of leukemia) and - once the show is finished - reopen said bottle so the series doesn't conflict with the films. And while it takes a little bit of technobabble gobbledygook to get there, the feeling established at the end of the pilot is one that's fresh, new and (thankfully) unteathered by future continuity.
That's very vague. :S It also doesn't change the fact that the show will, for now, ignore T3. :S

Oreo
June 21st, 2007, 04:53 PM
[COLOR="Blue"]Traveling to the past does not bump you into some other reality.

It does and you even admit it.

If you go back in time and kill your grandfather that shouldn't be possible because you were not born yet. You even said you become a component of the past, because of that you going back in time does send you to an AU. I can't go back to 1955 and see my grandfather and say hi because then he would remember me now. So instead when you go back in time you open up an AU so the timeline you were in doesn't get screwed up by the fact you are in the past.

Of course this whole agruement is void because a month or so ago it came out saying that time travel is immpossible.

Doze
June 25th, 2007, 08:02 AM
"The Sarah Connor Chronicles" to pick up where T2 left off
Link: http://www.terminatorfiles.com/news/2007/2007-06-23-a.htm

T4 through T6 rather fact then fiction
Link: http://www.terminatorfiles.com/news/2007/2007-06-16-d.htm

Dumper
June 25th, 2007, 12:43 PM
"The Sarah Connor Chronicles" to pick up where T2 left off
Link: http://www.terminatorfiles.com/news/2007/2007-06-23-a.htm

T4 through T6 rather fact then fiction
Link: http://www.terminatorfiles.com/news/2007/2007-06-16-d.htm


Thanks for the links. It does seem a little annoying that if i follow the series T3 never happened and the story will go off in a different direction. Yet if i follow the movies 4 to 6 T3 did happen. Lets just hope the series and movies turn out to be good.

Starxgate
June 25th, 2007, 01:03 PM
Thanks for the links. It does seem a little annoying that if i follow the series T3 never happened and the story will go off in a different direction. Yet if i follow the movies 4 to 6 T3 did happen. Lets just hope the series and movies turn out to be good.

It works for Smallville being different & on its own

Trek_Girl42
June 25th, 2007, 01:08 PM
It works for Smallville being different & on its own
Depends on your definition of "works". ;)

Doze
June 25th, 2007, 01:50 PM
Thanks for the links. It does seem a little annoying that if i follow the series T3 never happened and the story will go off in a different direction. Yet if i follow the movies 4 to 6 T3 did happen. Lets just hope the series and movies turn out to be good.Ya, when thinking up ideas for new movie/TV shows, the fraze 'and pass me another one' or 'do you want a hit' should never be used.

MB.Eddie
June 25th, 2007, 04:22 PM
Depends on your definition of "works". ;)

Well i think 7 seasons would be a success in most people's eyes...

Trek_Girl42
June 25th, 2007, 05:16 PM
Well i think 7 seasons would be a success in most people's eyes...
Though certainly not an indicator of quality..... :rolleyes:

Oreo
June 25th, 2007, 10:17 PM
Though certainly not an indicator of quality..... :rolleyes:


Certainly not, just look at SG-1 for an examble of that.

Doze
June 26th, 2007, 05:27 AM
Virgin Media buys rights to "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" from Warner Bros.
Link: http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117966929.html?categoryid=14&cs=1&query=virgin+media

Missster.Freeman
June 26th, 2007, 10:25 AM
So the series won't acknowledge T3 and T4 through to T6 will be a new trilogy? Ack! This is all too confusing. Enough to make me want to tune out altogether.

Doze
June 26th, 2007, 11:44 AM
So the series won't acknowledge T3 and T4 through to T6 will be a new trilogy? Ack! This is all too confusing. Enough to make me want to tune out altogether.It dose not say anything about the movies, so who knows. I do look at Virgin taking this over as a plus. But I don't know to much about them.

Oreo
June 26th, 2007, 01:56 PM
I don't see why they just can't ignore that one line in T3. Sarah isn't dead and there were issues between.

And if you can't understand that the show takes place after T2 and acts like a T3 movie than maybe you shouldn't be watching the show. Maybe Barney would be a better fit.

Doze
June 26th, 2007, 02:25 PM
And if you can't understand that the show takes place after T2 and acts like a T3 movie than maybe you shouldn't be watching the show. Maybe Barney would be a better fit.But if I do get it... can I still watch my Barney?

Oreo
June 27th, 2007, 08:16 AM
But if I do get it... can I still watch my Barney?

No. :-p

ARMS
June 27th, 2007, 08:23 AM
I'm dreading this show..

Doze
June 27th, 2007, 09:17 AM
No. :-p
Man... this grown up thing can really suck... :cool:

Daniel Jackson
June 27th, 2007, 12:18 PM
I'm dreading this show..
Are you kidding me? If it doesn't interest you, don't watch it.

sci-fi fanatic
June 28th, 2007, 10:11 AM
I guess this means Summer Glau is off the 4400. I'm curious what they'll do with this TV show. It's an interesting concept if they execute it right. I'll be setting up the Tivo in early 2008 and will at least give it 4-5 episodes before deciding whether to keep watching.

Oreo
June 30th, 2007, 10:52 AM
I guess this means Summer Glau is off the 4400. I'm curious what they'll do with this TV show. It's an interesting concept if they execute it right. I'll be setting up the Tivo in early 2008 and will at least give it 4-5 episodes before deciding whether to keep watching.

This show will most likely be canceled and won't cause any problems.

Plus The 4400 films at weird times, so she might be able to do both.

Easter Lily
July 2nd, 2007, 08:15 PM
Sounds intriguing... Have to say, the trailer looks good but I have some reservations about tv shows meddling around with established canon. Still, anything to make a few extra bucks hasn't stopped anyone before.

I'm happy for Summer though... that she's in something that promises to be big.

Dumper
July 19th, 2007, 12:46 PM
Terminator 4 Spawns Lawsuit

The holders of the rights to Terminator 4 have sued MGM, claiming the studio is interfering with their right to negotiate for the distribution of the planned fourth installment of the highly successful series, Variety reported.

Well i hope this doesn't mess things up for another movie.

Click on the link below for the rest of the story.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=42497

Oreo
July 19th, 2007, 05:50 PM
Oh good someone pointed it. I couldn't find the thread.

I don't understand the mess, but the movie will be delayed until this is fixxed.

Doze
July 20th, 2007, 12:32 PM
I found this also. It has a little bit more info.
'T4': Rise of the lawsuit
Link: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3i47b0c79c63aa59a5917f651b19745440?imw=Y

My head hurts now...

But maybe...
It is good that the show is to the point that they can start a lawsuit over the money.

Daniel Jackson
July 20th, 2007, 03:22 PM
So much for T4. :S At least we have three movies to enjoy, plus the upcoming TV show. :cameron:

the fifth man
July 20th, 2007, 09:44 PM
So much for T4. :S At least we have three movies to enjoy, plus the upcoming TV show. :cameron:

I just hope this show turns out to be something actually worth watching.

Daniel Jackson
July 21st, 2007, 10:14 AM
I think it will. It might take a few episodes to build an audience, but if FOX will commit to a full season, they ought to gain a large audience. :)

Oreo
July 21st, 2007, 07:28 PM
I think it will. It might take a few episodes to build an audience, but if FOX will commit to a full season, they ought to gain a large audience. :)


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The Ori
July 22nd, 2007, 12:04 PM
I've just watched the first episode of 'The Sarah Connor Chronicles'.

It was just released on the internet, so I obviously *D* it.

It's not that bad, but obviously they are going to introduce everything and everyone, but hopefully the story through out the season will be good!

But overall the first episode is good!!

Starxgate
July 22nd, 2007, 03:23 PM
I liked it but this is on FOX so I do not have any faith in FOX giving this show a chance

Trek_Girl42
July 22nd, 2007, 05:22 PM
Sounds like there's going to be some re-shooting going on


A handful of scenes in the new Terminator-offshoot series depict a school shooting, which one journalist described as ''painful to watch.'' Liguori assured that the scenes were being looked at very closely in context of what happened at Virginia Tech this spring. ''Those scenes were shot before Virginia Tech,'' he said. ''We plan on re-shooting with recognition of what happened.'' He also defended the show's aggressive tone, saying, ''[The show's] cornerstone isn't violence. It's, oddly enough, an action family drama. It's got the tone of a comic book.'' Still, he said, everyone involved was ''completely in agreement that we have to address'' the situation. There's plenty of time, too, since the show isn't likely to bow until January (to capitalize off the largely female audience of American Idol, it seems).

For anyone who has seen the pilot- is it a good idea for them to re-shoot it, or is this just paranoia on the part of Fox?




Sometimes it's a good idea to remove stuff and sometimes it isn't- I remember watching a Buffy episode (Earshot) that I had read was axed from the line-up after Columbine, well, after I watched I thought it would have been more appropriate/timely if they had aired it when it was originally supposed to, with it's message and all, my opinion anyway.

Doze
July 22nd, 2007, 06:53 PM
So should the show be called
The Sarah Connor Chronicles = TSCC
OR
The Sarah Connor Chronicles = SCC
I like SCC my self.
The reason I asked is, there is just no way that I'm putting "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" enery time.

Starxgate
July 22nd, 2007, 07:51 PM
Here is the logo they used from the episode

http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/115058/1024/115058.jpg

Skydiver
July 23rd, 2007, 01:51 PM
To your corners kids

First, download talk is forbidden here

second, even if every single person on this forum, around 30,000, watched a show, they wouldn't even add a fraction of a ratings point, so chill out on that aspect

third, just chill out. all you can do is control yourself, so control yourself and let the others be

Starxgate
July 23rd, 2007, 01:52 PM
how about you share your thoughts on how long the first season might be? :)

Very hard to say these days. The Terminator franchise does have a built in fan base. So that might help it & that might not. What FOX needs to do is advertise the **** out of it & let people know that this is first & foremost a Terminator Show. The Terminator name alone should get people interested in it. FOX just have to create awareness.

Daniel Jackson
July 23rd, 2007, 01:55 PM
If you're going to delete the recent posts on downloading, then please proceed to edit the previous posts that mention downloading the show. Any poster that claims to have seen the show might as well have said they downloaded it. Please, finish the job. Thanks. :)

By the way, I do not appreciate you deleting all of my posts. Some could have been editted, because only part of the post related to the download issue. Next time, read the entire post before clicking that delete button. Thanks. :)

Daniel Jackson
July 23rd, 2007, 01:56 PM
What FOX needs to do is advertise the **** out of it & let people know that this is first & foremost a Terminator Show. The Terminator name alone should get people interested in it. FOX just have to create awareness.
FOX is doing just that. There is talk of this new TV show all over the internet, plus there's a promo video on YouTube.

Starxgate
July 23rd, 2007, 01:58 PM
FOX is doing just that. There is talk of this new TV show all over the internet, plus there's a promo video on YouTube.

They need to do it on the air to & also they need to have the unmistakeable Terminator THEME in the commercials. Just tell the audience what the show is & it also wont help to let them know that this takes place before T3 ever happened going by the first episode it should be obvious this takes place after T2

Trek_Girl42
July 23rd, 2007, 02:15 PM
Regular promos and ads typically don't do it anymore. Advertising the **** out of something just tends to get annoying for anyone who isn't already interested. I think networks should offer up their pilots as free LEGAL downloads (I can talk about that right?) because that's how you get people interested. And yes, I say download, because streaming on their websites is problematic/doesn't really provide a very good viewing experience. You appease your audience, they'll come back.

This makes it much easier for viewers to pick their shows that they want to continue watching on TV, and it provides infinitely better word of mouth than promos. Half the shows I thought about watching in the fall I probably won't because I don't want to re-arrange my schedule to view the pilot and find that it's a load of crap- that won't get me back watching. If I could view pilots for shows at my leisure, I'd be far more likly to re-arrange my schedule for the shows I want to watch. As it is I'll consider trying one, maybe two new shows this fall, because I really don't feel like picking and choosing through the schedule. :rolleyes:

Daniel Jackson
July 23rd, 2007, 03:43 PM
They need to do it on the air to & also they need to have the unmistakeable Terminator THEME in the commercials.
I don't watch FOX, so I don't know if FOX is showing adds for the show. However, they are using the classic Terminator theme music in the adds.


Just tell the audience what the show is & it also wont help to let them know that this takes place before T3 ever happened going by the first episode it should be obvious this takes place after T2
The show is based on T2 and will ignore T3. The preview makes this quite clear. Most people are aware of T2 and will probably rewatch it to refresh their memory before diving into the TV show. I know I'll be watching T1 and T2 the week before the show premieres just for the fun of it.


Regular promos and ads typically don't do it anymore. Advertising the **** out of something just tends to get annoying for anyone who isn't already interested.
Right now, I think the most successful way to advertise a TV show is through internet advertising and word of mouth. That's how I found out about the TV show. :cameron: In this day and age, you can't just pick one way to advertise and then run it into the ground. If you're going to advertise a TV show, you need TV commercials, internet advertising, word of mouth, and perhaps have some advertisers join some random message boards with high traffic and post about the TV show as if they were just regular people. For example, "Hi, I'm new, anyone hear about TSCC?"


I think networks should offer up their pilots as free LEGAL downloads (I can talk about that right?) because that's how you get people interested. And yes, I say download, because streaming on their websites is problematic/doesn't really provide a very good viewing experience. You appease your audience, they'll come back.
Actually, this is becoming quite popular. TV shows are being aired on TV, then the episodes are hosted online at the official website where they can be viewed online via streaming video. Alternatively, you can download the episodes from iTunes. There's nothing wrong with downloading, so long as you do it legally. :cameron:


This makes it much easier for viewers to pick their shows that they want to continue watching on TV, and it provides infinitely better word of mouth than promos. Half the shows I thought about watching in the fall I probably won't because I don't want to re-arrange my schedule to view the pilot and find that it's a load of crap- that won't get me back watching. If I could view pilots for shows at my leisure, I'd be far more likly to re-arrange my schedule for the shows I want to watch. As it is I'll consider trying one, maybe two new shows this fall, because I really don't feel like picking and choosing through the schedule. :rolleyes:
When I want to get into a show, I go online and research it. If it captures my interest enough, I set time aside to watch it on TV. If I want to see the episodes more than once or twice, I buy the DVD set. Right now, the only shows currently in production that have captured my interest are Stargate: Atlantis and The Sarah Connor Chronicles. :jack:

Starxgate
July 23rd, 2007, 03:45 PM
I don't watch FOX, so I don't know if FOX is showing adds for the show. However, they are using the classic Terminator theme music in the adds.

Well FOX needs to have a good plan seeing as how in a few weeks the Fall Season Commercials should start soon

Daniel Jackson
July 23rd, 2007, 03:53 PM
TSCC Preview on YouTube (http://youtube.com/watch?v=oBRVGP7uD4s) Watch it before FOX takes it down again. I don't know why they keep yanking the preview down, because the YouTube preview for the show has generated a lot of interest. It's free advertising! :D Incase FOX takes it down again, here's the same preview at the official site: link (http://www.fox.com/fallpreview/new/sarahconnorchronicles-video.htm).

Starxgate
July 23rd, 2007, 03:57 PM
Isnt that the Comic Con Trailer ? Maybe thats why

Daniel Jackson
July 23rd, 2007, 04:05 PM
Comic con? :confused: It's the preview on their official website. :)

Oreo
July 23rd, 2007, 04:15 PM
Well FOX needs to have a good plan seeing as how in a few weeks the Fall Season Commercials should start soon

Where have you been? They started showing the fall season commericals in May.

And TSCC isn't gonig to primere until 2008. Dumb old Fox will also not be showing it behind the Super Bowl, stupid move.

Starxgate
July 23rd, 2007, 04:19 PM
Dumb old Fox will also not be showing it behind the Super Bowl

What the **** are they smoking ?

Oreo
July 23rd, 2007, 05:11 PM
What the **** are they smoking ?


I think the new drug is called Cheese, it's Coke mixed with stuff. It's all over the news.

And instead they want to show House in order to get more ad money even through TSCC would be a perfect fit.

MB.Eddie
July 23rd, 2007, 05:28 PM
Pilot wasn't too bad. Good action. A few cheesy lines, but other than that it was promising :cameron:


For anyone who has seen the pilot- is it a good idea for them to re-shoot it, or is this just paranoia on the part of Fox?

I had no problem with it, but then again that sort of thing has never happened to me. Imo it shouldn't be changed. Nothing wrong with it.

And for a 'family' show it sure had a lot of action/violence/shooting in the pilot.

the fifth man
July 23rd, 2007, 07:06 PM
Pretty cool preview, I'll give it that.

teal'c2006
July 23rd, 2007, 10:02 PM
I have sseen the clips on youtube and i must saw it looks good........ but where was the girl that plays sarah on before.

The Ori
July 24th, 2007, 06:51 AM
I think everyone is calling it SCC but I don't know I've also heard they may be changing the name from The Sarah Connor Chronicles to Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.

Also that Swarzenegger won't be making an appearence because he is too expensive and busy!!

Anyhoo, Summer Bleu, or whatever her name is is ok in it and the Heady and the guy from 'Heroes' is also pretty good all in all the Pilot was very good.

I sure hope that FOX don't mess it up!!

Oreo
July 24th, 2007, 08:49 AM
Also that Swarzenegger won't be making an appearence because he is too expensive and busy!!

Actually I think he has to do it for free because he is the governor and they have really stupid laws in CA.

Daniel Jackson
July 24th, 2007, 10:11 AM
I think everyone is calling it SCC but I don't know I've also heard they may be changing the name from The Sarah Connor Chronicles to Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.
Seems a bit long winded. The Sarah Connor Chronicles is long enough.


Also that Swarzenegger won't be making an appearence because he is too expensive and busy!!
The man is rich, if he wants to make a cameo, he'll do it for cheap or free. As for being too busy... California will not crash into chaos if the man spends one day filming some scenes for one of the episodes.


Anyhoo, Summer Bleu, or whatever her name is is ok in it and the Heady and the guy from 'Heroes' is also pretty good all in all the Pilot was very good.
Summer Glau. I agree, the cast looks great. I also like that there's only four regulars, it allows each character more screen time than if there were a larger cast.


I sure hope that FOX don't mess it up!!
Agreed.

morjana
July 24th, 2007, 12:14 PM
TV Guide Online: Terminator Sequel: Fox Makes Mid-season Noise:


From TV Guide Online:

http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Roush-Dispatch/Terminator-Sequel-Fox/800019143

(Please follow the link for the complete article.)

Roush Dispatch

Terminator Sequel: Fox Makes Mid-season Noise

With the Fox network, it's often all about the mid-season, the time when shows like American Idol and 24 come along to rescue the network from its fall doldrums. Not that it's impossible for any of Fox's September newcomers to catch on. The Kelsey Grammer/Patricia Heaton sitcom Back to You looks very commercial. The situation is admittedly tougher for the downbeat New Orleans crime drama K-Ville or the murky supernatural crime drama New Amsterdam (about an immortal detective) to buck the odds and be a factor come January. While it's possible one or both may hit its mark, you can't help but feel that they might as well be titled "Placeholder 1" and "Placeholder 2" (shades of last fall's Vanished, Justice and Standoff).

Once again, Fox is holding back one of its biggest guns (literally) for January. Easily the most anticipated show on the network's lineup is The Sarah Connor Chronicles (look for the word Terminator to be added to the title before it premieres): a high-octane, big-budget, special-effects-laden action thriller picking up roughly two years after Terminator 2 left off. It's a fugitive chase thriller pitting Sarah Connor (300's Lena Headey) and her adolescent son and future freedom fighter John (Heroes' Thomas Dekker) against those seemingly unstoppable Terminator robots from the future. (Possible spoiler alert: Helping them in their battle is an advanced-model female Terminator, played by Firefly's Summer Glau, who describes her character Cameron as "the most human Terminator so far.")

At a TCA session Monday morning, the audience was peppered with the usual sci-fi obsessives (how can I refrain from calling them geeks?), who tried desperately to figure out the show's new timeline. "As far as I'm concerned, this is T3," says executive producer/writer Josh Friedman (cowriter of the recent War of the Worlds movie). "This is the continuation of what I call, 'the Sarah Connor trilogy.' Anything that happens after T2 is fair game for us." Consulting producer James Middleton, who helped develop the T3: Rise of the Machine movie, adds: "We're taking a phrase that's very important in T2: ‘No fate but what we make.' This is a new fate for Sarah Connor, so we are creating an entirely new timeline."

**snippage**

At the moment, Fox still lists The Sarah Connor Chronicles as airing Sundays at 9 pm/ET (the old X-Files time period) on an undetermined mid-season date. As usual, though, let's see how the fall shakes out before we start worrying where the show will air and what it will displace. Suffice it to say that Fox will put all of its promotional and scheduling muscle behind this one.

Daniel Jackson
July 24th, 2007, 12:39 PM
That's cool that the TV show will ignore T3. At first, I was furious, but then I realised that this is a different medium and thus should be treated differently. The only way to do a post-T2 story is to ignore T3 which said nothing happened since T2.

If there is a T4, will it follow T3 or TSCC? I'd rather it follow T3, I want to see John Connor and Kate Brewster create the resistance. :cool:

morjana
July 24th, 2007, 01:15 PM
Blackmarket Pies Blog: The Sarah Connor Chronicles - Spoilers:

From the Blackmarket Pies blog:

http://blackmarketpies.blogspot.com/2007/07/pre-air-extravaganza-sarah-connor.html


Spoilers on The Sarah Connor Chronicles - the semi-official sequel to
Terminator 2, allowing the fans that absolutely hated Terminator 3 to
forget that it ever existed.

Daniel Jackson
July 24th, 2007, 01:30 PM
I didn't hate T3, it was a great sequel. It lacked the emotional touch of the first two movies, but it's otherwise a great addition to the Terminator saga. It's a shame they're ignoring it.

Dumper
July 24th, 2007, 01:50 PM
Here is an interview with Summer Glau about her role as a female Terminator.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=42610

Oreo
July 24th, 2007, 05:05 PM
At the rate I'm going I will get the thing to finish when the show primeres.

the fifth man
July 24th, 2007, 06:11 PM
I didn't hate T3, it was a great sequel. It lacked the emotional touch of the first two movies, but it's otherwise a great addition to the Terminator saga. It's a shame they're ignoring it.

It is a bit of a shame. I too really enjoyed T3. However, this could be pretty interesting as well. Taking a look at things if they had gone a little differently after T2.

Starxgate
July 24th, 2007, 06:27 PM
So far from what I have seen at various forums the pilot seems to be liked. It is definitely known that its leaked.

the fifth man
July 24th, 2007, 06:30 PM
So far from what I have seen at various forums the pilot seems to be liked. It is definitely known that its leaked.

Wish it would get leaked my way.;)

Aussie_86
July 25th, 2007, 06:00 AM
well, one of these 'leaked' episodes trickled my way recently, and after watching it, i gotta say, it's a lot better than i expected it to be.

It doesn't have the character depth that BSG / Heroes / Weeds does, but the pilot was fairly good, with a good twist at the end. I also thought that watching Summer Glau would remind me of Firefly, but she doesn't really look too similar to river in Firefly... she's filled out a bit more and doesn't seem as small.

Anyway... better than expected. Has a lot of potential, however i'm unsure where the show is going to go after the pilot (as it kinda sets up an ongoing storyline for the show, but doesn't give any 'examples' of this... guess episode 2 will give an example of how they're going to handle the ongoing series).

Overall, i'd give it an 8/10 to an 8.5 / 10.


Cheers
Aussie

Oreo
July 25th, 2007, 11:54 AM
For some reason I can only hear the episode and not watch it. There is something seriously wrong with my media player. :)

The Ori
July 25th, 2007, 03:45 PM
For some reason I can only hear the episode and not watch it. There is something seriously wrong with my media player. :)

I had the same problem but all I need was the DivX codec and I was able to watch it!!

Watch the pilots of The Sarah Connor Chronicles and the Bionic Woman.

The Ori
July 25th, 2007, 03:47 PM
Bionic Woman has just been leaked and in my opinion it's OK, they obviously introduce you to all the characters and the situation but I need to see a few more eps to make a definate judgement!!

But all in all it's alright!!

Trek_Girl42
July 28th, 2007, 01:57 PM
I'm sad that they're ignoring T3 as well- I really loved that film. I was expecting something mediocre after the first two amazing films, but T3 was very good. However, new media, new timeline.....I can live with it. The show looks great. :D

I just hope they can get Nick Stahl and Claire Danes back for T4 if it ever happens, they were both very good.

Daniel Jackson
July 28th, 2007, 04:17 PM
According to Wikipedia, Stahl and Danes will not return as Connor and Brewster for T4. My guess is that they want older actors for T4 since it's going to feature the Man-vs-Machine war rather than take place just a few years after T3.

I don't care if actors get recast within a film series so long as the new actor resembles the previous and plays the character more or less the same. Stahl had be convinced that he was the grown up version of Furlong's Connor character.

Trek_Girl42
July 28th, 2007, 04:40 PM
Bah- who cares what wikipedia says- it's wikipedia! :P I want those same actors back! :D

Oreo
July 28th, 2007, 08:14 PM
Those 45 minutes blew the hell out of T3 and I'm a fan of T3.

T3 had SC dy some pointless death to cancer, and were on the run for years an the FBI never got them?

The show is great! They visit plot points from T2 and it feels much more connected. Plus there is the FBI and he's not a dumbass like I thought he would be.

I made a list of things the FBI seemed to realize, they are spoilers for the pilot.

So I'm so happy that they made the FBI guy smart and not dumb him down. The house is destroyed, the bus falls over, a whole class saw the robot leg, not getting out of the bank, the damage to the bank, and then showing up on the news years later without aging and nake! I'm pretty sure in her report it says that traveling through time you are naked. That never made sense to me but whatever.

Sadly the show will be canceled and treated like **** because it's on FUx... I mean Fox.

And thanks to a nameless someone (because the mods would yell) who helped me out!

And the T4 news is supposedly right that they want to go further into the future to make the movies, and must get new actors.

g.o.d
July 29th, 2007, 09:14 AM
it was an amazing episode. I'm looking forward to see more

IcyNeko
October 6th, 2007, 09:09 PM
The only thing on the pilot worth watching... is Summer "River Tam" Glau beating people up. Like she did in Serenity. It's like River Tam came into Terminator Universe. I'm halfway expecting to see Simon.

TheGreatLordGeorge
October 6th, 2007, 09:18 PM
i have never heard of this show, could you perhaps give some background (I know who sarah conner is but know nothing of the show you are talking about)

the fifth man
October 6th, 2007, 09:49 PM
It aired already?

maneth
October 6th, 2007, 11:31 PM
Nope, not yet. But TSW (http://www.thescifiworld.net/zocalo_d_sarahconnorchronicles.htm)has a great set visit report up. I admit I was dismayed when I heard this was in the works, but reading the report I'm a lot more optimistic.

AvatarIII
October 7th, 2007, 09:29 AM
i've seen some clips on the virgin1 ad's i think it might be alright, i do quite like the terminator series, and i'm glad they are not using the t3 continuity

Nick-J
October 7th, 2007, 10:15 AM
Already seen it quite a while ago, it's about Sarah and her son (lost his name) who are running once again from a terminator, this time helped by a terminator played by Summer Glau, and as many of you might know, it happens after T2

I thought it was quite ok, but wasn't really impressed, it didn't really feel to me as terminator either, but I think I wil watch the other episodes when they come

AvatarIII
October 7th, 2007, 10:19 AM
Already seen it quite a while ago, it's about Sarah and her son (lost his name)

john, john conner

Daniel Jackson
October 7th, 2007, 12:42 PM
i have never heard of this show, could you perhaps give some background (I know who sarah conner is but know nothing of the show you are talking about)
There's this movie series called Terminator comprising of The Terminator, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, and Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. There's now going to be a TV show this January based on the movies, but only the first two. The TV show ignores the third movie for creativity's sake. However, the upcoming fourth movie will be a continuation of the third movie, not the TV show. There's basically two timelines that could be followed.

Timeline 1
The Terminator
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Terminator 4 (in development)

Timeline 2
The Terminator
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (TV show)

Nick-J
October 7th, 2007, 02:46 PM
john, john conner
ah thanks, one would think it wouldn't be to dificult to remember that name:rolleyes:

Oreo
October 7th, 2007, 04:10 PM
The show was great, but they are editing out the school shooting part which is lame.

It's really REALLY good, and will have more to do with Sky... whatever the company is called.

And I love the fact that is being made by the T3 people, like all of them, and they are throwing T3 out the window. :)

Daniel Jackson
October 7th, 2007, 07:37 PM
Isn't it ironic that we're getting TSCC, made by the T3 people, yet TSCC ignores T3? lol

AvatarIII
October 8th, 2007, 04:05 AM
The show was great, but they are editing out the school shooting part which is lame.

It's really REALLY good, and will have more to do with Sky... whatever the company is called.

And I love the fact that is being made by the T3 people, like all of them, and they are throwing T3 out the window. :)

SkyNet

anyway i guess the continuity of terminator 2 works better for a TV show, there's not much that could happen at the end of T3, as far as i remember, and anyway, does TSCC actually make the events of T3 impossible to come after the series, continuity wise?

Oreo
October 8th, 2007, 08:27 AM
does TSCC actually make the events of T3 impossible to come after the series, continuity wise?

Yes, oh yes.

The show has a completely different time line than T3. It follows T2 with every detail. In T3 Sarah Connor is dead and there hadn't been a Terminator after them since T2. In the first episode there are two Terminators, and she's obviously alive and well. :)

AvatarIII
October 8th, 2007, 08:45 AM
Yes, oh yes.

The show has a completely different time line than T3. It follows T2 with every detail. In T3 Sarah Connor is dead and there hadn't been a Terminator after them since T2. In the first episode there are two Terminators, and she's obviously alive and well. :)

fair enough, i seem to be hearing mixed reviews about this, so i'm just going to have to try it out on my own and form my own opinion, best way to do it i guess.

Daniel Jackson
October 8th, 2007, 08:49 AM
Oreo, it's not nice to give out such major spoilers without using spoiler code. :mckay:

The TV show is ignoring the third movie, Rise of the Machines, because...
In Rise of the Machines, Sarah Connor is already dead (cancer), and John Connor mentions (through narration) that nothing has happened since the events of Judgment Day (the movie). The movie ended with Judgment Day (the event). A TV show set after T3 would be post-apocolyptic, and a TV show set between T2 and T3 would have to be completely void of Terminator characters and kill off Sarah after a few years. This is why the TV show ignores the T3.
While the TV show ignores Rise of the Machines, the upcoming Terminator 4 will pick up where T3 left off, but set years later.

AvatarIII
October 8th, 2007, 09:30 AM
i don't think what oreo said was too bad of a spoiler, as long as i don't know what's going to happen at the end of the series i dont mind.

Dutch
October 8th, 2007, 09:45 AM
Cool there is gonna be a terminator serie would arnie play in it ?

Nick-J
October 8th, 2007, 10:15 AM
Cool there is gonna be a terminator serie would arnie play in it ?

no

Dutch
October 8th, 2007, 10:18 AM
Who will play the role for arnie then stalone ?

Daniel Jackson
October 8th, 2007, 10:19 AM
Dutch, Arnold Schwarzenegger will not star in The Sarah Connor Chronicles, but it is possible that he may guest star in one of the episodes, that is to say... if he's not too busy governing California. :sheppard:

Dutch
October 8th, 2007, 10:22 AM
ok i see thnx dj

Daniel Jackson
October 8th, 2007, 10:26 AM
The main cast:
Lena Headey as "Sarah Connor"
Thomas Dekker as "John Connor"
Summer Glau as "Cameron Phillips"
Richard T. Jones as "James Ellison"

The central Terminator character is a protagonist named Cameron, played by Summer Glau. Any other Terminator characters will likely be guest staring antagonists.

EarthandBeyond
October 8th, 2007, 03:09 PM
There is never will be a good Terminator movie, with out Linda Hamilton and Arnold Shwarz. - This two folks are the ones that made this movies the way they are today.
T3 wasnt all that bad. Story line was okey. But they really shouldnt have killed Sarah Connor. And Johns Connors actor, was way to old for beeing a 21-22 years old.

And yet, when you think producers of Terminators movies learned from there mistakes in T3, "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" comes out.
Theres only one thing that is worth, then bad acting in a movie industry: Complitely changing the storyline. It shows absolite, total, and undenieble lack of imagination. They are turning one of the best movie of 20th centuary in to a shifty Soap-opera.

And if you folks are planing on watching that shifty Tv-Show. Remember this line:
Wellcome to beeing a popets of a Tv-market.

Daniel Jackson
October 8th, 2007, 03:36 PM
Linda Hamilton originated and defined "Sarah Connor," and the same goes to Arnold Schwarzenegger and his "Terminator" character. However, as time progesses, I think the focus will naturally shift from Sarah Connor to John Connor. As much as I like Arnold Schwarzenegger, there are other Terminator models as seen in the two sequels and will be seen in the TV show. While T3 wasn't as good as T2, simply because T2 is hard to top, I found it to be a very good movie, equal to the original movie. Sarah Connor was in the script and would have been killed off tragically during the graveyard scene, but Linda Hamilton declined to star in the movie (she didn't want to beef up again for the part), so she was written out, having died before the movie began. John Connor could be recasted since he was just a kid in T2, but Sarah Connor... how do you recast Linda Hamilton? The TV show is different, because that's a spin-off rather than a sequel.

John Connor's age has been handled poorly in the Terminator saga. In T2, the year is 1994, and John is 10 years old, but played by a 13-year-old. In T3, the year is 2004, and John's age in T2 has been retconned to 13, making John about 23 years old. Nick Stakl was 23 when the movie is made, so the age of the actor matches up with the age of the character. I think the actor looks older due to his tough guy look and stressed out personality.

They are not turning Terminator into a sifty soap-opera. Have you ever seen The X Files? I suspect that the Terminator show will be more like that with the occasional Terminator from the future episode to provide an action-heavy episode. While the TV show ignores T3 and will be going in it's own direction, the upcoming T4 will be following T3, not the TV show. I could be wrong, but I believe that's what is happening. Anyway, the TV show is going to be about Sarah Connor, John Connor, and Cameron (the good Terminator) trying to stop Skynet from being created. James Ellison will start off as an antagonist and then possibly morph into an ally. There may be some teen agnst with John, but that's because... he's a teen. ;) Thomas Dekker is 19, playing 15-year-old John Connor. It's common practice to have youthful-looking actors to play younger characters, because the older actor will have greater acting experience. However, if the kid character is just a supporting character, then the kid may very well be played by a kid.

Oreo
October 8th, 2007, 06:04 PM
Oreo, it's not nice to give out such major spoilers without using spoiler code. :mckay:


What are you talking about? I had a very minor spoiler for T3, and if you haven't watched it by now too bad.

I also said a minor spoiler for the TV show, but nothing worse than anything else here, and if you watched the preview you would know there are two robots in the pilot.

If you don't want any spoilers at all then don't come into a forum, simple as that.


[COLOR="Blue"]Thomas Dekker is 19, playing 15-year-old John Connor. It's common practice to have youthful-looking actors to play younger characters, because the older actor will have greater acting experience. However, if the kid character is just a supporting character, then the kid may very well be played by a kid.

It's also because of child acting laws only letting them work a certain amount per day.

Daniel Jackson
October 8th, 2007, 08:25 PM
What are you talking about? I had a very minor spoiler for T3, and if you haven't watched it by now too bad.
I have seen T3, but others may not have. The two spoilers you gave out are major plot points.


I also said a minor spoiler for the TV show, but nothing worse than anything else here, and if you watched the preview you would know there are two robots in the pilot.
The TV show spoilers were fine, since the preview would have spoiled that anyway.


If you don't want any spoilers at all then don't come into a forum, simple as that.
Wow... you don't need to be so agressive, calm down. You can't expect someone to have seen every movie and TV episode that ever existed. Just use some common sense. If it's a major plot point, use spoiler code unless the thread is dedicated to the movie or TV episode.


It's also because of child acting laws only letting them work a certain amount per day.
I didn't know this applied to acting. This would also play into kids playing supporting kid characters and young adults playing staring kid characters.

Oreo
October 8th, 2007, 09:08 PM
Everyone Loves Rayman, they had 3 children, that were hardly showed, because of these laws. It's the reason why Full House used twins, easy way around the laws.

And if You haven't seen T3 yet too bad. Sorry that's the way it is. I'm really getting sick of people gonig crazy over the damnest little things. If people here had their way the topic would be "***SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!***" and everything in it would be in spoiler font.

And what I said about T3 has almost nothing to do with the movie. Sarah Connor is dead, they spent about 10 seconds on it and movied on. I have wasted more time explaining it than they do in the movie. It's not like T3 is full of twists and turns, it's the same thing as T1 and T2, it really adds nothnig to the mix. T3 will never win anything, it has no real plot until the end, which I won't spoiler butis obvious if you read this topic and thought about it.

Daniel Jackson
October 8th, 2007, 09:38 PM
Everyone Loves Rayman, they had 3 children, that were hardly showed, because of these laws. It's the reason why Full House used twins, easy way around the laws.
Wil Weaton was 16 when Star Trek: The Next Generation began in 1987, and he had a huge role. Ciroc Lofton was 12 or 13 when Star Trek: Deep Space Nine began, and he had a huge role. Would you explain this to me, please? :confused:


And if You haven't seen T3 yet too bad. Sorry that's the way it is. I'm really getting sick of people gonig crazy over the damnest little things. If people here had their way the topic would be "***SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!***" and everything in it would be in spoiler font.
You're not thinking this through logically. This thread is dedicated to the TV show, not the franchise overall. Obviously, there will be spoilers regarding the TV show and the movie that it is based on, that is a given. However, people interested in the TV show may not have seen the original or third movie, so spoilers should be used. This isn't hard to figure out. :)


And what I said about T3 has almost nothing to do with the movie. Sarah Connor is dead, they spent about 10 seconds on it and movied on. I have wasted more time explaining it than they do in the movie. It's not like T3 is full of twists and turns, it's the same thing as T1 and T2, it really adds nothnig to the mix. T3 will never win anything, it has no real plot until the end, which I won't spoiler butis obvious if you read this topic and thought about it.
If you'd read my post, you'd see that I said I've seen the movie, but others may not have. Please, read my posts more carefully, because repeating myself is annoying. Sarah Connor revealed to be dead is a major event for the audience. As for T3 being a retreat of T1/T2 and having no real plot, well... that would be your opinion, not a fact. ;) I happen to like the movie very much and found it to be full of great character moments, plot twists, and an ending I didn't expect! :D

bliv
October 9th, 2007, 10:53 PM
If they are steering clear of the T3 material then I'd be interested to see where this series takes the story. I'm sure the main action will involve running from Terminators but hopefully they can build other interesting story arcs. I'm not sure the pilot would be a great indicator of what a typical show is like. Will be interesting.

DragonGate
October 10th, 2007, 03:38 AM
[COLOR="Blue"]Wil Weaton was 16 when Star Trek: The Next Generation began in 1987, and he had a huge role. Ciroc Lofton was 12 or 13 when Star Trek: Deep Space Nine began, and he had a huge role. Would you explain this to me, please? :confused:

*peeps in from lurk*

Initially, their roles weren't all that big. Their roles got bigger later in each series when they were older.

*goes back to lurk*

Oreo
October 10th, 2007, 08:24 AM
If they are steering clear of the T3 material then I'd be interested to see where this series takes the story. I'm sure the main action will involve running from Terminators but hopefully they can build other interesting story arcs. I'm not sure the pilot would be a great indicator of what a typical show is like. Will be interesting.

The creators has a plan out for the first 4 seasons.

*Pauses for laugher at the fact a Fox sci-fi show lasting 4 seasons*

I hope they are 13 episode seasons, I think the show would be much tighter that way. But really throwing out T3 means they can do anything. Hell at the end of a season we could find out they failed and have the next season about the war. All that is known is that Skynet will have a great role in the show, which is kind of like "Robots from the future travel time" type of "DUUUHHHH!" :)

Trek_Girl42
October 10th, 2007, 08:59 AM
*peeps in from lurk*

Initially, their roles weren't all that big. Their roles got bigger later in each series when they were older.

*goes back to lurk*
Well, Ciroc Lofton did; Wil Wheaton, not so much. He left the show. :)


The creators has a plan out for the first 4 seasons.

*Pauses for laugher at the fact a Fox sci-fi show lasting 4 seasons*

I hope they are 13 episode seasons, I think the show would be much tighter that way. But really throwing out T3 means they can do anything. Hell at the end of a season we could find out they failed and have the next season about the war. All that is known is that Skynet will have a great role in the show, which is kind of like "Robots from the future travel time" type of "DUUUHHHH!" :)
I hope they decide to go with thirteen episode seasons as well- I wish that was a format that networks would embrace a little more. Some shows just aren't made for a twenty-two episode season, and some are. And I'd be more likely to watch more shows if the seasons were shorter, and staggered out a bit more.

AvatarIII
October 10th, 2007, 09:12 AM
I hope they decide to go with thirteen episode seasons as well- I wish that was a format that networks would embrace a little more. Some shows just aren't made for a twenty-two episode season, and some are. And I'd be more likely to watch more shows if the seasons were shorter, and staggered out a bit more.

i've noticed a lot of shows are cutting back to 20 ep's per season these day, like stargate obviously, but 13 eps is a fine number, BSG season 1 was fine at 13 eps, the 4400 except season 1 is 13 eps per season, and obviously DW, which does fine on 13 eps, for a start it's a money saver, and it means a network can afford to make 3 different series for the price of 2, with less risk and more to gain by trying out new stuff. the only probalem is, when a season finished you need to wait 7 extra week for the start of the next season :mad:

Trek_Girl42
October 10th, 2007, 09:21 AM
i've noticed a lot of shows are cutting back to 20 ep's per season these day, like stargate obviously, but 13 eps is a fine number, BSG season 1 was fine at 13 eps, the 4400 except season 1 is 13 eps per season, and obviously DW, which does fine on 13 eps, for a start it's a money saver, and it means a network can afford to make 3 different series for the price of 2, with less risk and more to gain by trying out new stuff. the only probalem is, when a season finished you need to wait 7 extra week for the start of the next season :mad:
That is a downside- I don't like waiting so long for Doctor Who, but then because it is so focused on making thirteen solid episodes (for the most part), it's just that much better and that makes me desperate for the new season all the more!

Plus, if networks aren't investing as much money into a single show, I think that they'd be more likely to take greater creative risks with new programs- and I really want to see them do that. I've watched enough tv to know that I don't want to watch some mediocre new show that's been done before. As a viewer, I'm looking for the shows that seem to be willing to take risks and go against the tide. "Pushing Daisies" grabbed me in that way this year. "Heroes" did it last year. Hec, if this were an accepted model a few years ago, "Firefly" might have survived.

EarthandBeyond
October 10th, 2007, 10:38 AM
The creators has a plan out for the first 4 seasons.



So let me get this Straight:
In Terminator one, it took them a couple of days to kill the Terminator.
Same story with Terminator 2.
But in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" A terminator will be chainsing them for 2-4 years?

























SOAP-OPERA!



P.S: Does anyone know what model/type of terminator are they going to use in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles"?

Daniel Jackson
October 10th, 2007, 10:38 AM
I only watch one show, Stargate: Atlantis. It's hard enough waiting for the short 20-episode seasons. I remember back when SG-1 had 22-episode seasons and Star Trek had 26-episode seasons. 13 episodes for a season is just too short. I want to see more episodes! :(

So let me get this Straight: In Terminator one, it took them a couple of days to kill the Terminator. Same story with Terminator 2. But in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" A terminator will be chainsing them for 2-4 years? SOAP-OPERA!

P.S: Does anyone know what model/type of terminator are they going to use in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles"?
I condensed your post to save space. In each Terminator movie, it took a few days to terminate the Terminator. The Sarah Connor Chronicles will not feature a Terminator chasing them for 2-4 years. Even if it did, a recurring villain does not make it a soap-opera anymore than Apophis, Anubis, Ba'al or any other recurring SG-1 villain made SG-1 a soap-opera. That said, here's a spoiler for the first episode.
In the pilot, two Terminators arive from the future. One is a protector and a main character. The other is out to get John Connor, but he is destroyed by the end of the episode.
This means that if a Terminator shows up from the future, he may last one episode, a few episodes, or become a recurring villain. Think of the Terminators being handled like the Goa'uld on SG-1. Some come and go, and some get defeated in their first episode.

Oreo
October 10th, 2007, 12:16 PM
But in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" A terminator will be chainsing them for 2-4 years?

No, like a said several times now the Terminators aren't the main badguys, Skynet (I typed in Skylap. lol) is. There are really 3 bad guys in the show, all of which are completely different. They are... minor spoilers that aren't really spoilers but some people are freaks.... ;) The Terminators, the FBI, and Skyney I think the T will be in several episodes, but not all of them.

Plus if you watch the pilot the ending changes a lot, obviously I'm not going to say what it is because it's huge! It's even too big for spoiler code. :)

morjana
October 17th, 2007, 02:01 AM
SciFi Chick: Sarah Connor Chronicles News - Premiere Date:

From the SciFi Chick blog update for Oct. 17:

http://scifichick.com/

October 17th, 2007

Sarah Connor Chronicles News

I just received an email from Josh Friedman (Creator/Executive Producer), and Sarah Connor Chronicles has a premier date: Monday, January 14 at 8pm, next to 24. [on FOX]

Here’s hoping the ideal spot will help with great ratings!

Also confirmed by Zap2It:

http://www.zap2it.com/tv/news/zap-sarahconnorchroniclespremieredate,0,2810629.story?coll=zap-news-headlines

FOX Terminates Suspense, Sets 'Sarah Connor Chronicles' Premiere

Originally scheduled for Sundays, 'Terminator' spin-off will air with '24' on Mondays

October 16, 2007

The Sarah Connor Chronicles'Judgment Day will be Jan. 14, 2008.

(Please follow the link for the complete article. Photo at the site.)

Oreo
October 17th, 2007, 07:47 AM
Will Dancing with the "Stars" be on in January?

They still should show it after the Super Bowl, it would be a huge hit. Plus the 8pm time slot is weird. They should move it to 9pm and move 24 to 8pm. But I rather have it on Monday then Sunday.

Now let's hope Fox shows as many ads for TSCC as it did with Drive.

Trek_Girl42
October 17th, 2007, 08:35 AM
SciFi Chick: Sarah Connor Chronicles News - Premiere Date:

From the SciFi Chick blog update for Oct. 17:

http://scifichick.com/

October 17th, 2007

Sarah Connor Chronicles News

I just received an email from Josh Friedman (Creator/Executive Producer), and Sarah Connor Chronicles has a premier date: Monday, January 14 at 8pm, next to 24. [on FOX]

Here’s hoping the ideal spot will help with great ratings!

Also confirmed by Zap2It:

http://www.zap2it.com/tv/news/zap-sarahconnorchroniclespremieredate,0,2810629.story?coll=zap-news-headlines

FOX Terminates Suspense, Sets 'Sarah Connor Chronicles' Premiere

Originally scheduled for Sundays, 'Terminator' spin-off will air with '24' on Mondays

October 16, 2007

The Sarah Connor Chronicles'Judgment Day will be Jan. 14, 2008.

(Please follow the link for the complete article. Photo at the site.)
Awww frak.....this probably means that there will be conflict between TSCC, 24, and Heroes, somewhere in our schedule if Global doesn't buy TSCC. :( Though 8pm might be alright.

Why does everything have to be on on Monday? Why not Thursday? Nothing ever airs on Thursday.....

Oreo
October 17th, 2007, 10:36 AM
ABC owns Thursday. Tuesday has a lot of stuff, Wednesday is pretty busy but they could fit it. Thursday it would be killed. Monday at 8pm is the best time, there is nothing else on. Chuck should be canceled by then.

Trek_Girl42
October 17th, 2007, 12:49 PM
ABC owns Thursday. Tuesday has a lot of stuff, Wednesday is pretty busy but they could fit it. Thursday it would be killed. Monday at 8pm is the best time, there is nothing else on. Chuck should be canceled by then.
Are you serious? What the frak is on on Thursday? :confused:

Oreo
October 17th, 2007, 01:46 PM
Ugly Betty, Grey's Whores.

The only places I can think of where their isn't huge shows on are Fridays (dead) and Monday at 8pm. Wednesday at 8pm works ok too.

Trek_Girl42
October 17th, 2007, 01:58 PM
Ugly Betty, Grey's Whores.

The only places I can think of where their isn't huge shows on are Fridays (dead) and Monday at 8pm. Wednesday at 8pm works ok too.Wed at 8 = no way. Pushing Daisies. Which I would then be forced to cheer on over TSCC. :D

I wouldn't think they'd be worried about Grey's Anatomy for TSCC- that's like a completely different audience.....

Oreo
October 17th, 2007, 02:55 PM
Wed at 8 = no way. Pushing Daisies. Which I would then be forced to cheer on over TSCC. :D

I wouldn't think they'd be worried about Grey's Anatomy for TSCC- that's like a completely different audience.....

Not really.

Pushing Daisy's ratings will drop, I doubt it gets picked up for a second season. PD is cute, TSCC is not. However Grey's has a lot of whores and that might get the guys attention.

Plus Fox has game show night on Thursday. Mondays are really the only place to stick TSCC, but what will happen to Prison Break?

Trek_Girl42
October 17th, 2007, 04:02 PM
http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-News-Blog/Todays-News/Foxs-Terminator-Activated/800024871

Prison Break is simply going to disappear from the schedule altogether for January through April in order to make room for TSCC.

Daniel Jackson
October 17th, 2007, 06:32 PM
Four months of TSCC? Woo-hoo! :D

Oreo
October 17th, 2007, 08:31 PM
Four months of TSCC? Woo-hoo! :D


It's on Fox, I give it four weeks tops before getting canceled. :Lol:

Plus they have only ordered 13 episodes, that's only enough for 3 months.

IcyNeko
October 17th, 2007, 08:33 PM
I saw the first episode. The acting's kinda weak. :|

Daniel Jackson
October 18th, 2007, 12:19 PM
Oreo, being on FOX does not doom it. House, 24, and Prison Break are all doing well. If TSCC does well, FOX will obviously order a full season.

IcyNeko, the acting is somewhat weak, but it will surely improve with each episode.

Oreo
October 18th, 2007, 05:48 PM
Oreo, being on FOX does not doom it. House, 24, and Prison Break are all doing well. If TSCC does well, FOX will obviously order a full season.

IcyNeko, the acting is somewhat weak, but it will surely improve with each episode.


You must not know the history of Fox.

There hasn't been a single Sci-fi show that did well, or hasn't gone to hell on Fox.

Plus House is Fox's first drama, besides soup operas, that have made it past 3 seasons.

It's doomed because it's on Fox. Fox is the worst of any networks when it comes to new shows and giving them a chance.

Trek_Girl42
October 18th, 2007, 06:50 PM
You must not know the history of Fox.

There hasn't been a single Sci-fi show that did well, or hasn't gone to hell on Fox.

Plus House is Fox's first drama, besides soup operas, that have made it past 3 seasons.

It's doomed because it's on Fox. Fox is the worst of any networks when it comes to new shows and giving them a chance.
Soup Opera! Sounds yummy!

IcyNeko
October 18th, 2007, 10:50 PM
IcyNeko, the acting is somewhat weak, but it will surely improve with each episode.[/COLOR]

I dunno, mang. The kid who plays John Connor is still essentially playing Claire Bennet's little emo friend.

And Summer Glau is still playing River Tam. Only this time, when River bleeds, she exposes circuitry beneath. Otherwise, it's still River Tam.

I'm actually surprised that Mal Reynolds hasn't walked out of a bar to drag Cameron Phillips off to Serenity. :D

Daniel Jackson
October 18th, 2007, 11:02 PM
You must not know the history of Fox.
Actually, I do. I just don't like to play psychic and declare a show cancelled before the first episode has even aired. I also like to be optimistic about a TV show with a good premise.


There hasn't been a single Sci-fi show that did well, or hasn't gone to hell on Fox.
What about The X Files, that science-fiction show that had a nine year run?


Plus House is Fox's first drama, besides soup operas, that have made it past 3 seasons.
TSCC isn't a drama, so this is irelavent. My point is, there have been several scripted dramas (a weekly one-hour show) on FOX. Here's a list including old, recent, and current shows.

Beverly Hills, 90210 (10 Seasons)
The X Files (9 Seasons)
24 (Returning for Season 7)
Melrose Place (7 Seasons)
Part of Five (6 Seasons)
House (4th Season)
The O.C. (4 Seasons)
Bones (3rd Season)

Do you still want to tell me that House is FOX's first drama to last more than three seasons? If you want to be technical, Beverly Hills, 90210 was a drama that lasted 10 seasons. :)


It's doomed because it's on Fox. Fox is the worst of any networks when it comes to new shows and giving them a chance.
Ah, so you're psychic, eh? FOX may be run by morons, but that doesn't mean the show is an automatic failure. If it were, the show's creators would have taken it to another network.


I dunno, mang. The kid who plays John Connor is still essentially playing Claire Bennet's little emo friend.
Thomas Dekker was a recurring character on Heroes, that means the actor can leave the show whenever he wants. Now that he's starring in TSCC, he will no longer be appearing on Heroes.


And Summer Glau is still playing River Tam. Only this time, when River bleeds, she exposes circuitry beneath. Otherwise, it's still River Tam. I'm actually surprised that Mal Reynolds hasn't walked out of a bar to drag Cameron Phillips off to Serenity. :D
I've seen both Firefly and the TSCC pilot. Summer Glau is not playing "River Tam" who was crazy most of the time. It seems to me that you're typecasting the actress, meaning you'll say she's playing "River Tam" regardless of what production she's in. Give her a chance!

IcyNeko
October 20th, 2007, 09:42 AM
You're really missing every damn point made.


Thomas Dekker was a recurring character on Heroes, that means the actor can leave the show whenever he wants. Now that he's starring in TSCC, he will no longer be appearing on Heroes.
And? My point was that he's still acting the same character out. I could give a damn about his acting schedule. I'm more concerned with his ability to portray someone other than Emo Zach.


I've seen both Firefly and the TSCC pilot. Summer Glau is not playing "River Tam" who was crazy most of the time. It seems to me that you're typecasting the actress, meaning you'll say she's playing "River Tam" regardless of what production she's in. Give her a chance![/COLOR]
River Tam, after Serenity, was calm, in control, and insightful. However, that's all she is. Calm. To the point of not having any emotions.

This is the same as Cameron. That's why I said she's just replying River.

That and all the martial arts and fight scenes.

So am I typecasting? Well, if you knew what the word meant, the answer would always be "NO". I'm not a director. I'm not hiring her for these roles. Way to use a word you don't really know the meaning to.

Daniel Jackson
October 20th, 2007, 10:40 AM
My point was that he's still acting the same character out. I could give a damn about his acting schedule. I'm more concerned with his ability to portray someone other than Emo Zach.
I don't watch Heroes, so no comment.


River Tam, after Serenity, was calm, in control, and insightful. However, that's all she is. Calm. To the point of not having any emotions. This is the same as Cameron. That's why I said she's just replying River. That and all the martial arts and fight scenes.
Being calm, emotionless, and a good fighter makes her River? Oh, come on. You just described each Terminator character along with countless characters from countless stories. I'm sorry, but those three qualities are not unique to River Tam.


So am I typecasting? Well, if you knew what the word meant, the answer would always be "NO". I'm not a director. I'm not hiring her for these roles. Way to use a word you don't really know the meaning to.
The word typecasting has more than one meaning. :rolleyes: Sometimes an actor is often hired by various casting directors to play the same role (a cowboy for example) again and again without being able to get work where they'd be playing drastically different roles. However, the word typecasting can also be used to mean that an actor is strongly identified with a specific character or role by the audience. You're the audience, you're saying that Summer Glau acts like "River Tam" when she's acting like a "Terminator," therefore you're typecasting her as only being capable of playing "River Tam."

morjana
October 22nd, 2007, 02:19 PM
The Sarah Connor Chronicles: Gets Big Push from Fox

From Broadcasting & Cable Today e-mail newsletter:

TODAY'S NEWS

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Sarah Connor Chronicles Gets Big Push from Fox
Fox will unveil the first 45-second trailer for midseason rookie The
Sarah Connor Chronicles during game three of the World Series as the
network ramps up a massive promotional push for its top freshman
hopeful this year.

IcyNeko
October 22nd, 2007, 02:48 PM
Being calm, emotionless, and a good fighter makes her River? Oh, come on. You just described each Terminator character along with countless characters from countless stories. I'm sorry, but those three qualities are not unique to River Tam
No, but the two are played by the same actress, whom plays them both with the same style. Hence my comparison. Nice attempt to create a straw man, sir.

Daniel Jackson
October 23rd, 2007, 08:08 AM
I'm aware it's the same actress, and of coarse it's going to be with the same style since it's the same actress!

IcyNeko
October 25th, 2007, 07:57 PM
I see now that, since you enjoyed T3, you can't understand the complexity of good acting. I shall try and make it easy for you to understand.

A good actor has the ability to assume one roll, then, in another film, assume a totally different role. This proves the actor's ability to be versitile. Failing that, a good actor can instead play his/her role epically.

For example, David Thewlis is a person I consider to be a very good actor. He played the main villain in DragonHeart, but then played Lupin (Harry Potter) and Balian's friend (Kingdom of Heaven) as friends and moral support to the protagonist. Two completely different roles, and he does well in both capacities.

Ian McKellen plays the sinister Magneto astonishingly well, yet also plays Gandalf equally well.

By assuming that an actress is going to play the same type of role each time she plays in a movie, you are doing exactly what you thought you were accusing me of doing. :P

Daniel Jackson
October 26th, 2007, 10:43 AM
I see now that, since you enjoyed T3, you can't understand the complexity of good acting. I shall try and make it easy for you to understand.
Wow. Do you practice being rude or does it come naturally? :rolleyes: Just because you think the acting in T3 is bad, that doesn't mean that it is. Opinions are relative, especially when it comes to one's opinion of an actor's acting ability in a movie or TV episode.


By assuming that an actress is going to play the same type of role each time she plays in a movie, you are doing exactly what you thought you were accusing me of doing. :P
I never made that assumption. Stop making stuff up. YOU were whining about Summer Glau's acting in The Sarah Connor Chronicles, because it was too similar to her acting in Firefly. I merely pointed out that the characters are similar in that they're both walking weapons, effectively.

IcyNeko
October 26th, 2007, 09:23 PM
I never made that assumption. Stop making stuff up. YOU were whining about Summer Glau's acting in The Sarah Connor Chronicles, because it was too similar to her acting in Firefly. I merely pointed out that the characters are similar in that they're both walking weapons, effectively.


I'm aware it's the same actress, and of coarse it's going to be with the same style since it's the same actress!

I'm aware it's the same actress, and of coarse it's going to be with the same style since it's the same actress!

I'm aware it's the same actress, and of coarse it's going to be with the same style since it's the same actress!

HURRRRRRR

Oreo
October 27th, 2007, 08:17 AM
Actually, I do. I just don't like to play psychic and declare a show cancelled before the first episode has even aired.



Do you listen to what I say? No, of course not, why would you do that.

Fox has canceled at least 2 dozen shows before they have even aired, the most famous one was Firefly, they never gave it a chance.

Beverly Hills, 90210 (10 Seasons) - Soup Opera
The X Files (9 Seasons) - Amazing, the one show they gave a chance and that was 15 years ago when they had nothnig to lose. Do you understand thnigs change?
24 (Returning for Season 7) - No comment on that trash.
Melrose Place (7 Seasons) - Soup Opera
Part of Five (6 Seasons) - Soup Opera
House (4th Season) - Ok, I was wrong, it's not the first. Wow... I was off by so much. :rolleyes:
The O.C. (4 Seasons) - Soup Opera
Bones (3rd Season) - Still needs a forth season to be added to the very small list of shows that made it past 3 seasons.

And look at that list, even if you include the Soup Operas that's 8 one hour long shows that lived to a third season 3 in the last 20 years of Fox. That's just sad.

Daniel Jackson
October 27th, 2007, 08:17 AM
Let's try to put that in context, OK?


ME
Being calm, emotionless, and a good fighter makes her River? Oh, come on. You just described each Terminator character along with countless characters from countless stories. I'm sorry, but those three qualities are not unique to River Tam.

YOU
No, but the two are played by the same actress, whom plays them both with the same style. Hence my comparison. Nice attempt to create a straw man, sir.

ME
I'm aware it's the same actress, and of coarse it's going to be with the same style since it's the same actress!
Nice try. :rolleyes:

Anyway, I'm tired of arguing with you. You're obviously just going to say the same thing again and again. You think Summer Glau is a poor actress. I get it, and I disagree. I think she is a fantastic actress and so do most people who like Firefly and got to see the pilot of this new show.

Now, back to the discussion: How long do you think the first season will last if it turns out to be a success? Just the 12 episodes, or perhaps longer?


Do you listen to what I say? No, of course not, why would you do that.
Of coarse I didn't listen, this is a message board, I read what you say. Furthermore, drop the condescending attitude. :rolleyes:


Fox has canceled at least 2 dozen shows before they have even aired, the most famous one was Firefly, they never gave it a chance.
If the show never aired, it wasn't cancelled, it was aborted. Obviously that's not going to happen to TSCC. At worst, it will get the Firefly treatment. The show did get a chance, just not much of one, because FOX is poorly administrated.

First off, it's soap opera, not soup opera. Second, what difference does the genre make? I was simply pointing out that FOX has had many successful one-hour dramas over the years. It is not amazing that The X Files was given a chance. It was a good show. However, this example may be outdated since FOX was likely under a different administration at the time. If 24 is trash, why is it that it's returning for a 7th season? I'm not saying it's mind-blowingly great television, but it's obviously good enough to stay on the air. Then there's the crime drama Bones. 3, 4, 5 seasons, I don't care. My point is, at this point, it's had a decent run.


And look at that list, even if you include the Soup Operas that's 8 one hour long shows that lived to a third season 3 in the last 20 years of Fox. That's just sad.
This from the guy who said House was the first drama to surpass three seasons. Really, do some research like I did before making such bold claims. :rolleyes:

IcyNeko
October 27th, 2007, 05:07 PM
Let's try to put that in context, OK?

Insert Daniel Jackson attempting to make himself not sound like a tool and failing miserably


Nice try. :rolleyes:

Anyway, I'm tired of arguing with you. You're obviously just going to say the same thing again and again. You think Summer Glau is a poor actress. I get it, and I disagree. I think she is a fantastic actress and so do most people who like Firefly and got to see the pilot of this new show.


Actually, what I said was that she's playing the same role the same way again, because she played Summer just like she plays Cameron.

THen you countered with "well, all Terminators are liek that so you just described everyone hur hur".

Arnold's Terminator wasn't quite like Cameron. In fact, in the extended edition, they show more emotional sides of him. There's even quite a few attempts at humor. Same thing goes for T-1000, T-X, etc. They all have the same quirks about them, but it's pretty uniform among the three.

Cameron does not behave quite like the terminators that came before her, she's a little creepy and very awkward in human interactions, as seen when she interacts with John. The only line that stays constant is "Come with me if you want to live." And frankly, that's a mix of both the director's direction, and the actor's ability to act.

Daniel Jackson
October 27th, 2007, 07:55 PM
I'm tired of arguing this. Is there another aspect of the show you'd like to discuss?

IcyNeko
October 27th, 2007, 09:45 PM
Summer's terminator isn't a T-800 series. That was a bit of a shocker.

The T-800 (T1 and T2) and the T-850 (T3) all had red vision, which is what Cromartie also had. But Cameron's model had color vision. :O

But it looked like the same OS.... so.... Maybe she's a T-875?

Daniel Jackson
October 27th, 2007, 10:32 PM
Since she's from a different future, she could still be a T-800 or T-850 with any differences simply a result of being from an alternate future. However, since she's smaller with greater personality, I would say it's likely she's a different model.

I read that there won't be any T-1000's or TX's in the show, because they could look like anyone and that would be confusing. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine didn't have this problem with it's Changeling infiltrators. :confused:

IcyNeko
October 27th, 2007, 11:41 PM
They kinda did have this problem with the CHanglings (hence why everyone spent an entire season taking blood samples).

I'd say that the T-Cameron isn't really from a different future, though. Terminator's theme is usually that two terminators are sent from the same timestream back to monkey around with time.

Daniel Jackson
October 28th, 2007, 09:39 AM
It wasn't a problem, it's called drama! The producers wanted the characters to become paranoid, wondering who was a Changeling and who's not. It made the show better. ;) There was one episode that revealed a major character had been replaced by a Changeling opperative for months! :eek:

Sarah, John, the Terminator, and Dyson blew up Cyberdyne Systems, the company that created Skynet which created the Terminators from those first two movies. This means that Cameron is from a different future, one where someone else created Skynet. John even tells Sarah that she changed the future, she just didn't change it enough, which is what happened in T3. Unlike T3, Judgment Day is still several years away, giving them time to change the future further.

IcyNeko
October 28th, 2007, 02:22 PM
Yes, but my point was that Cromartie and Cameron both came from the same future. LURN 2 REED.

Dumper
October 28th, 2007, 02:25 PM
It wasn't a problem, it's called drama! The producers wanted the characters to become paranoid, wondering who was a Changeling and who's not. It made the show better. ;) There was one episode that revealed a major character had been replaced by a Changeling opperative for months! :eek:

Sarah, John, the Terminator, and Dyson blew up Cyberdyne Systems, the company that created Skynet which created the Terminators from those first two movies. This means that Cameron is from a different future, one where someone else created Skynet. John even tells Sarah that she changed the future, she just didn't change it enough, which is what happened in T3. Unlike T3, Judgment Day is still several years away, giving them time to change the future further.


The problem i have with time travel is if the future has been changed then the events in the first movie should never have happened, even to the point where Reese (if i remember his name properly) would not of been sent back and John Conner would never have been born. I creates a paradox that always ruins time travel stories for me.

Oreo
October 28th, 2007, 03:11 PM
The problem i have with time travel is if the future has been changed then the events in the first movie should never have happened, even to the point where Reese (if i remember his name properly) would not of been sent back and John Conner would never have been born. I creates a paradox that always ruins time travel stories for me.

Wow, you over think things way way too much.

Yes most time travel is not possible, yes all time travel makes no sense at all, but it's TV.

There are three great ways to happen time travel.

1. Doctor Who - Back to the Future - You change history you then write yourself out of history. You would ask but then you couldn't change history, but how would you know.

2. Odyssey 5 - Short lived show on Sci-fi Channel now. Only your brainwaves could travel back. That way you can't go back before you are born.

3. Futurama - Be your own grandfather.

And no one, not you or me or the second smartest person in the world (I'm the first. :p) can ever understand time travel in our lifetimes. So just enjoy the ride.

Daniel Jackson
October 28th, 2007, 08:03 PM
Yes, but my point was that Cromartie and Cameron both came from the same future. LURN 2 REED.
I was going to appologize for my error, but after the lurn 2 reed comment... nevermind. :rolleyes:


The problem i have with time travel is if the future has been changed then the events in the first movie should never have happened, even to the point where Reese (if i remember his name properly) would not of been sent back and John Conner would never have been born. I creates a paradox that always ruins time travel stories for me.
The paradox can be solved if you assume that people and objects that go to the past and change the future are protected from changes to the future by being components of the past.

IcyNeko
October 29th, 2007, 09:36 AM
The paradox can be solved if you assume that people and objects that go to the past and change the future are protected from changes to the future by being components of the past.

Unfortunately, they usually don't explain a way to protect the traveler from changes. In trek, though, they sorta did... Chromoton particles would shield the traveler from the effects of time travel, hence how the USS ENterprise-E was able to travel back with the Borg Sphere and not be destroyed when the Borg assimilated Earth.

Daniel Jackson
October 29th, 2007, 10:37 AM
It's rarely explained, because it's usually assumed that if you're in the past, you're not effected by what happens to the future.

Star Trek's time travel episodes aren't consistant, but let's stick to Terminator's portrayal of time travel.

Oreo
October 29th, 2007, 01:39 PM
Unfortunately, they usually don't explain a way to protect the traveler from changes. In trek, though, they sorta did... Chromoton particles would shield the traveler from the effects of time travel, hence how the USS ENterprise-E was able to travel back with the Borg Sphere and not be destroyed when the Borg assimilated Earth.


Geek. :)

IcyNeko
October 29th, 2007, 04:40 PM
Geek. :)

And proud of it. :)

SG13-NightOps
November 18th, 2007, 10:28 PM
Ok, so I know this is on fox - and on fox, not even Cameron himself could save it (Dark Angel), but I am thinking the Writers Strike may really help TSCC. Its getting 24's slot, and like it or not, its a popular show. With a lot of other shows going into Rerun mode may also get people that would normally stick to their regulars to dip their toes into something else.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

I quite enjoyed it myself and hope that it does get a chance.

Ace
November 21st, 2007, 11:39 AM
The problem i have with time travel is if the future has been changed then the events in the first movie should never have happened, even to the point where Reese (if i remember his name properly) would not of been sent back and John Conner would never have been born. I creates a paradox that always ruins time travel stories for me.

Perhaps I'm not understanding you correctly... because what you stated above is not true. If Judgement Day still happens and the war between the machines still happens as it does in SCC then Reese is still sent back by John to protect Sarah in 1984.

The only thing that has changed is when Judgement Day will occur and according to one of the writers on the show it now happens in 2011. For SCC you have to disregard T3 completely. SCC in the minds of the writers and producers is taking the place of T3.

Ace

Daniel Jackson
November 21st, 2007, 11:43 AM
If Judgment Day is delayed from 1997 to 2011, then Reese will either never exist or exist as a completely different person. In 1984, Sarah will encounter Reese and a Terminator from a defunct future. In 1995, Sarah and John will encounter a pair of Terminators from that same defunct future, but thanks to the actions of T2, an entirely new future has been created, so all bets are off. This applies to both the TV show and T3 regardless of them being separate continuities, because they are both continuations of T2 which is where the timeline was severaly altered.

Ace
November 21st, 2007, 12:15 PM
If Judgment Day is delayed from 1997 to 2011, then Reese will either never exist or exist as a completely different person. In 1984, Sarah will encounter Reese and a Terminator from a defunct future. In 1995, Sarah and John will encounter a pair of Terminators from that same defunct future, but thanks to the actions of T2, an entirely new future has been created, so all bets are off. This applies to both the TV show and T3 regardless of them being separate continuities, because they are both continuations of T2 which is where the timeline was severaly altered.

No... the only thing will change is the date. Reese grew up after the war had begun. Obviously that will change as he will be born before the war but grow up fighting the machines until Skynet is eventually defeated. He may be older when he travels back in time but that is all that has changed.

All of the main events remain the same... the events have simply been pushed back in the time line.

Ace

Daniel Jackson
November 21st, 2007, 01:02 PM
No... the only thing will change is the date.
In Terminator 2: Judgment Day, they destroyed all of the Cyberdine Systems research, all of it. Miles Dyson died. They killed the T-1000, melted down their Terminator protector, and then melted down the remains of the original Terminator from 1984. They destroyed everything they could think of that would lead to the creation of Skynet and subsequent Terminators. For all intents and purposes, they stopped Judgment Day. However, Sarah Connor is wise enough to know that anything can happen. Then a Terminator and Cameron show up, and they're informed that they changed the future, just not enough. They did more than simply change the date, they created an entirely new future. Some things still come to pass like the creation of Skynet, Judgment Day, and the creation of Terminators. However, this is not the future that was glimpsed in T1 and T2, it is an entirely new one. Given all of these changes, there are two possibilities with Kyle Reese. He either exists completely differently or not at all. To be honest, I would like to see an episode where Kyle Reese is sent back to help the Connors and Cameron, but has no knowledge of the events of T1 nor the now defunct Cyberdine Systems.

Ace
November 21st, 2007, 01:54 PM
In Terminator 2: Judgment Day, they destroyed all of the Cyberdine Systems research, all of it. Miles Dyson died. They killed the T-1000, melted down their Terminator protector, and then melted down the remains of the original Terminator from 1984. They destroyed everything they could think of that would lead to the creation of Skynet and subsequent Terminators. For all intents and purposes, they stopped Judgment Day. However, Sarah Connor is wise enough to know that anything can happen. Then a Terminator and Cameron show up, and they're informed that they changed the future, just not enough. They did more than simply change the date, they created an entirely new future. Some things still come to pass like the creation of Skynet, Judgment Day, and the creation of Terminators. However, this is not the future that was glimpsed in T1 and T2, it is an entirely new one.

Ok yes... I can agree to that. But as you yourself have said all the main events will still take place. Skynet will be built, Judgement Day, Terminator machines,John Connor as Resistance leader, Skynet's eventual defeat. The little details will change... who knows maybe he won't have a wife that he has already met. ;) But the major stuff stays the same...


Given all of these changes, there are two possibilities with Kyle Reese. He either exists completely differently or not at all. To be honest, I would like to see an episode where Kyle Reese is sent back to help the Connors and Cameron, but has no knowledge of the events of T1 nor the now defunct Cyberdine Systems.

I don't see how you believe that these are the only possibilities...yes I suppose Reese could change completely. Not sure how he could not exist at all as John has to send him back in time. It's one of those main events...

A third possibility is the fact that Reese is exactly the same. He could be older as all of the main events have been shifted fourteen years into the future. Or maybe he could be the exact same age...as now Connor defeats the machines in less time than before. However both dates exist with the defeat of Skynet in 2029.

We don't know... at least until we have more information from the series other than just the pilot episode. Overall though the main points still exist and one of them has to be Reese being sent back through time.

Otherwise Sarah never knows about Judgement Day, doesn't have John, never learns how to fight a guerrilla war and passes the info on to John. Most importantly though she would never know the Message of "No Fate". So Reese has to exist and he doesn't need to change drastically.

Ace

Daniel Jackson
November 21st, 2007, 05:13 PM
Ok yes... I can agree to that. But as you yourself have said all the main events will still take place. Skynet will be built, Judgement Day, Terminator machines,John Connor as Resistance leader, Skynet's eventual defeat. The little details will change... who knows maybe he won't have a wife that he has already met. ;) But the major stuff stays the same...
I didn't say that all of the main events will still take place. Skynet will be built, but we don't know why this time. The Terminators will still be built by Skynet and Humanity (while creating Skynet), because Humanity creating killer robots is inevitable. We already have primitive machines that can do this today in reallity. Judgment Day occurs, because Skynet sees all of Humanity as a threat. John Connor survives Judgment Day and becomes the leader of the resistance, because that's what his whole life has been built up to. In the new future, we don't know Skynet will be defeated. We only know that a Terminator was sent back to 1999 to assasinate John Connor. Cameron was also sent back to 1999 to protect him.

Now we come to Kyle Reese... his existance is not pivital, therefore he could exist or not exist, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. The only ones who have to exist are Sarah and John Connor. Everyone else is expendable in the context of fighting Skynet or existing in alternate timelines.


I don't see how you believe that these are the only possibilities...yes I suppose Reese could change completely. Not sure how he could not exist at all as John has to send him back in time. It's one of those main events...
There are only three possibilities: Kyle Reese remains the same, the changes to the timeline result in a different Kyle Reese, or the changes to the timeline erase Kyle Reese from existance. Since the timeline was changed in 1995, before Reese was born, that guarantees that Kyle will not become the man he was in T1. He will live a different life or never be born. As for how he can not exist at all and John having to send him back to 1984... those are not main events. Those were main events of the original future, the one that was eliminated in 1995. That future will no longer come to pass. I've seen the pilot episode, and it makes it quite clear that Cameron and Cromartie are from a very different future than the one glimpsed in T1 and T2.


A third possibility is the fact that Reese is exactly the same. He could be older as all of the main events have been shifted fourteen years into the future. Or maybe he could be the exact same age...as now Connor defeats the machines in less time than before. However both dates exist with the defeat of Skynet in 2029.
Exactly the same? Impossible, since the timeline was altered in 1995. EVERYTHING that happens after that will happen differently. There could be a Kyle Reese, but not the sane as the Kyle Reese featured in T1. You say he would be exactly the same, then you say in the next sentence that he could be older... if he's older, he's not exactly the same. In T1 and T2, the Terminators are sent back from the year 2029 with the Schwarzenegger Terminators and the T-1000 being the most advanced. Then in the new TV show's new timeline, thanks to the events of T2, Terminators arrive from the year 2027, and according to the show's producers, Summer Glau plays "Cameron," the most advanced Terminator yet. This does not gel with the future presented in T1 and T2, therefore it must be a new, alternate future, cancelling out the one presented in T1 and T2.


We don't know... at least until we have more information from the series other than just the pilot episode. Overall though the main points still exist and one of them has to be Reese being sent back through time.
Kyle Reese has already gone back in time. It's already happened. It doesn't have to happen again. You're trying to force a predestination paradox into the equation. While the first movie presented a predestination paradox, the sequel broke that paradox in favor of altering the timeline. The TV show is taking this even further.


Otherwise Sarah never knows about Judgement Day, doesn't have John, never learns how to fight a guerrilla war and passes the info on to John. Most importantly though she would never know the Message of "No Fate". So Reese has to exist and he doesn't need to change drastically.
Let me present you a timeline so you can understand.

Timeline A (Predestination Paradox)
1984: The events of T1 play out.
1985: John Connor is born.
1997: Judgement Day
2029: The evil Terminator and Kyle Reese are sent back to 1984. When the timeline does not change, the T-1000 and the good Terminator are sent back in time. Consequently, this timeline ceases to exist.

Timeline B
1984: The events of T1 play out.
1985: John Connor is born.
1995: The events of T2 play out.
2011: Judgement Day
2027: Cromartie and Cameron are sent back to 1999.

Timeline C
1984: The events of T1 play out.
1985: John Connor is born.
1995: The events of T2 play out.
1999: TSCC's Pilot
2008: Sarah, John, and Cameron arrive in 2008 to prevent Skynet from being created.

Dumper
November 22nd, 2007, 01:25 PM
Let me present you a timeline so you can understand.

Timeline A (Predestination Paradox)
1984: The events of T1 play out.
1985: John Connor is born.
1997: Judgement Day
2029: The evil Terminator and Kyle Reese are sent back to 1984. When the timeline does not change, the T-1000 and the good Terminator are sent back in time. Consequently, this timeline ceases to exist.

Timeline B
1984: The events of T1 play out.
1985: John Connor is born.
1995: The events of T2 play out.
2011: Judgement Day
2027: Cromartie and Cameron are sent back to 1999.

Timeline C
1984: The events of T1 play out.
1985: John Connor is born.
1995: The events of T2 play out.
1999: TSCC's Pilot
2008: Sarah, John, and Cameron arrive in 2008 to prevent Skynet from being created.


Which leads back to my original question , because of the events of the second movie, Reese would not be sent back to 1984 as the future would be different. As Daniel Jackson says, Reese would either not exist or he would be a totally different person, now if that's the case who is the father of John Conner? Personally i just think the writers got themselves in a mess which pretty much happens with every timetravel story.

Daniel Jackson
November 22nd, 2007, 06:44 PM
The answer to your question is: Kyle Reese. The future being changed does not undo what already happened in 1984, even though that was a direct result of the future. Think of Kyle Reese and the Terminator appearing in 1984 as leftovers from a future that no longer exists.

Dumper
November 23rd, 2007, 01:10 PM
The answer to your question is: Kyle Reese. The future being changed does not undo what already happened in 1984, even though that was a direct result of the future. Think of Kyle Reese and the Terminator appearing in 1984 as leftovers from a future that no longer exists.

I'm afraid that is something i can't get my head around :S. Maybe i will have to go for an Alternate reality explanation. Where one reality still exists which has the future as Reese explained it, and by Reese going back in time he then created another reality which we have been seeing throughout.

Daniel Jackson
November 23rd, 2007, 02:32 PM
The movies feature time travel, not parallel reallities, so that doesn't apply. :S

Dumper
November 23rd, 2007, 04:12 PM
It's the time travel that caused the Alternate reality, fair enough it's not mentioned in the movies but for me it makes more sense than other explanations i can come up with.

Daniel Jackson
November 23rd, 2007, 04:37 PM
Time travel can cause an alternate reality by reshaping one that already exists. Time travel does not create a parallel universe, the two have nothing to do with each other. Using time travel to alter reality is no different than going up stream, building a dam, and then diverting the stream elsewhere. Doing so doesn't create a parallel stream, it just changes the existing one. Changing the past would have the same effect on the timeline. You can only have one timeline at a time.

Dumper
November 24th, 2007, 01:22 PM
What i mean is more than one reality can exist at the same time (it works for Stargate :), i haven't said anything about Parallel universes. One reality is the events that took place before Reese was sent back in time that reality still continues but it's not the one the movies follow. Obviously that means there could then be an unlimited amount of realities existing. I agree there can only be one timeline but numerous realities exist within that timeline. The problem is various movies and tv series have many different examples of what can happen with timetravel and there is never one that gives a completely satisfactory answer. I do disagree with your dam explanation, i feel another reality has to be created otherwise a paradox would occur.

Daniel Jackson
November 24th, 2007, 04:45 PM
What i mean is more than one reality can exist at the same time (it works for Stargate :), i haven't said anything about Parallel universes.
You just did. If you have more than one reality, that's parallel realities. That has nothing to do with time travel.


One reality is the events that took place before Reese was sent back in time that reality still continues but it's not the one the movies follow.
By this logic, Reese went to parallel reallity, not the past. That doesn't make any sense, because in the movie, he goes back in time, not to another reallity.


Obviously that means there could then be an unlimited amount of realities existing.
As I said, this has nothing to do with time travel.


I agree there can only be one timeline but numerous realities exist within that timeline.
What? That doesn't make any sense. If there's only one timeline, then all of the realities would have to be absolutely identical to be within the same timeline. That doesn't match your propose theory of going back in time to another reallity and then messing up that one. The way I see it, there can be multiple realities, but each reallity can only have one timeline at a time. In other words, if you go back in time, you're going back in time in your own universe. If you alter the timeline, the previous one ceases to exist in that it is reshaped into the new reallity. As I said, it's like going upstream and changing the stream's coarse with a dam and a new trench. This does not create a parallel stream, it simply alters the existing one.


The problem is various movies and tv series have many different examples of what can happen with timetravel and there is never one that gives a completely satisfactory answer.
I don't mind different movies and TV shows having their own take on time travel. With a movie series, it's usually consistant from one movie to the next. Unfortunately, in TV shows, due to having multiple writers and only the occasional time travel episode, the time travel logistics becomes inconsistent.


I do disagree with your dam explanation, i feel another reality has to be created otherwise a paradox would occur.
What's wrong with having a paradox?

Dumper
November 25th, 2007, 12:23 PM
I don't class an Alternate reality and a Parallel universe as exactly the same thing. I see an Alternate reality as something that was created from our own reality, and a Parallel universe was not created from our reality.

I did not mean that Reese traveled back to a Alternate reality, he went back to our/his reality in 1984 but the moment he arrived he created a new reality.

If you alter the timeline, the previous one ceases to exist in that it is reshaped into the new reality.


I see it differently, if you travel back in time and alter the timeline the original timeline still exists, if it didn't then you wouldn't of been able to travel back in the first place. But by travelling back in time you create a new reality so if you then went forward in time you would go forward in this new reality not the one you originally came from.

By creating a new reality every time you travel in time it shouldn't create a paradox like the grandfather paradox, well i hope anyway. :)

Oreo
November 26th, 2007, 01:19 PM
Parallel Universe - An alternative reality similar to this one in which a person makes different critical choices, and goes in different directions as a result.

So you are wrong.

Dumper
November 27th, 2007, 01:29 PM
Parallel Universe - An alternative reality similar to this one in which a person makes different critical choices, and goes in different directions as a result.

Parallel universe or alternate reality in science fiction and fantasy is a self-contained separate reality coexisting with our own.

So you are wrong.

Maybe you should have read the whole paragraph from Wikipedia instead of the first sentence.

It reads,

Parallel universe or alternate reality in science fiction and fantasy is a self-contained separate reality coexisting with our own. A specific group of parallel universes is called a multiverse, although this term can also be used to describe the possible parallel universes that comprise physical reality. While the terms "parallel universe" and "alternate reality" are generally synonymous and can be used interchangeably in most cases, there is sometimes an additional connotation implied with the term "alternate reality" that implies that the reality is a variant of our own. The term "parallel universe" is more general, without any connotations implying a relationship (or lack thereof) with our own universe.

I'm afraid you are wrong. ;)

Oreo
November 27th, 2007, 09:06 PM
I'm afraid you are wrong, just read my first part. :rolleyes:

daniel9
December 1st, 2007, 10:55 AM
well the first ep leaked online and it was better than i thought it'd be i cant wait to see the next ep but boo that wont be til jan

Asgard4eva
December 2nd, 2007, 11:50 AM
So the series won't acknowledge T3 and T4 through to T6 will be a new trilogy? Ack! This is all too confusing. Enough to make me want to tune out altogether.


The Terminator story is all over the place

Ace
December 2nd, 2007, 05:10 PM
In the new future, we don't know Skynet will be defeated. We only know that a Terminator was sent back to 1999 to assasinate John Connor. Cameron was also sent back to 1999 to protect him.

Why send a Terminator back in time if the Resistance does not win? If Skynet is not defeated then why bother sending a terminator across time to assassinate a leader of a resistance movement that eventually proves to be ineffectual?


Exactly the same? Impossible, since the timeline was altered in 1995. EVERYTHING that happens after that will happen differently. There could be a Kyle Reese, but not the sane as the Kyle Reese featured in T1. You say he would be exactly the same, then you say in the next sentence that he could be older... if he's older, he's not exactly the same.

Ok... I think we might have two different definitions of same/different. For I consider if Kyle goes back in time as a slightly older individual, he is still the same person with the same experiences all that has changed is his age. There is also the possibility, like I stated before, that John defeats Skynet quicker and Reese is exactly the same age with the same experiences during the war.

I understand where you are coming through with the timeline... in one aspect it makes sense. However from a stylist artistic one I think I prefer John having to send Reese back in time just as he was meant to in the 'original' Future War scene in T2 before it was cut.

Ace

P.S. Sorry I'm so late in responding