The Terminator

Or it could be that the time travel theory in The Terminator is flawed because it thinks people traveling from the future to the past can interact with people and living things in the past. Everyone knows the past is lifeless. If you even tried to drink a carbonated beverage in the past, it would taste awful because it is completely flat. Also, the past is eaten up by large spinning mouths full of razor blade teeth.

Basically, you’re fucked if you time travel to the past. Unless you have a plane that can fly you back out of the rift in space-time you flew through in the first place.

How will we get back without Piers to stay awake and pilot us home while lowering the air pressure so we survive in our sleep?

We just grab the person whose ancestry is closest to England. It’s the only fair way.

This should be how we celebrate next Fuck England week.

The only way to explain it is it’s fiction: a lie. It doesn’t have to make perfect logical sense, it just has to tell a story.

I HATE timetravel.*

Note the lack of quotation marks.

*Except in Chrono Trigger. Then it’s a-okay.

I say we just run with that before somebody’s brain implodes.

Because I should have said it first time out:

Wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey. :smiley:

Nice King reference! This thread just got me thinking about 12 Monkeys as well.

Heh, I thought that was a Langoliers reference. Haven’t seen or read that in quite some time. That was some fucked-up stuff right there.

We’ve got an infinite loop and the only solution is moar TIME KOMPRESSION!!!

But at least he isn’t his own grandfather, or both of his hermaphrodite parents.

Originally Posted by Some Kind of Incredibly Awesome Dude
Of course I’m also willing to accept the possibility of Solid Snake creating a TIME PARADOX!!! (a possibility that could easily be proven to exist if only someone less lazy than I could find something that connects Kyle Reese to Solid Snake somehow).

You have failed me yet again! Wikipedia!

The lie must be consistent though.

It doesn’t, though, it’s just nicer if it is. The most important thing about it is the story it tells.

I agree with Rigmarole. If something is fiction, then there must be emphasis placed on making the world consistent. Otherwise anything can happen in it and things get either boring or look very poor planned. I think something people need to focus more on when making up stories or using other methods of expression is not being super creative but rather being able to manage the miniature world you create into something coherent and understandable (not necessarily to everyone, but at least to someone).

That said I don’t know much about this Terminator business. Some of the descriptions said so far seem to make sense. All I know is that the first movie had some bad ass music in it. So 80’s synth Industrialesque.

I agree absolutely the work is much better as a work if the world is consistent. Sometimes it just isn’t though.

Well, I have a question that could be answered. In the series both humans and the reprogrammed Terminators will fight the Skynet Terminators with conventional weapons. Why bother when they’re bulletproof?

Because you can’t carry smelting factories with you. Plus they go great with kickass biker shades. B(

Also, what else are they going to use? There aren’t in plasma blasters or anything, so they really just have normal small arms. In Terminator 2, Sarah Connor had a nice stockpile of small arms, so the series isn’t straying from anything that wasn’t established in the movies. Also, there are some weapons that do have an impact on the Terminators (mostly the higher caliber weapons). Also, most of the Terminators haven’t varied too much from the model that the Govenator was, and he was destroyed by a pipe bomb in the first one. It also goes well with the over all story of John Connor teaching the humans how to fight against the machines. Plus, some small arms are powerful enough to destroy the terminators (such as a .50 cal sniper rifle like used in the episode where John and Derek are at the military school). Cameron has destroyed a lot of terminators with her strength, somewhat like in Terminator 3. Besides, even bulletproof things can only take so many hits.

I get the ‘lack of anything else’ thing but it seems a waste when all they do is keep walking towards you. The .50 cal doesn’t stop them. Derek even said it just slows it down.

The only scene where bullets made any difference was the church in Mexico where they had to shoot it non-stop for about 5 minutes. And that was only after they cornered it.

Cameron is a Terminator herself. She knows about the weaknesses and how to exploit them.

Actually, in the one with at the military school, Derek blows a Terminators head off with a .50 cal sniper rifle. Also, what I mean with Cameron is that she has the physical strength to fight them. A person wouldn’t do well going toe to toe with one, but she can since she’s on equal footing. How is it a waste though if the weapons do work after awhile and do slow them down? Isn’t it better to at least damage it or slow it down than to just keep running? Also, as shown in the first terminator, they do have vulnerable parts (such as being destroyed by one pipe bomb), so small arms can hit the vulnerable parts and . Also, .50 cals are extremely effective and can damage even tanks and actually destroy most armored vehicles. It is sort of like Terminator 2 when the Governator’s terminator is almost destroyed by having a rod rammed through him the the other terminator. Despite the Terminator being strong, a rod at a low velocity almost destroyed him. A .50 cal is basically like a small rod at an extremely high velocity.