"William George Ferguson" <wmgfrgsn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:gskmq3dr1mtmaekbib0m3089p4lu5vfbm4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:34:48 -0500, "KalElFan" <kalelfan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>>[crossposts from rec.arts.tv altered]
>>
>>"MikeM" <MichaelMLGPR@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:e8574b71-6c03-4da3-bd18-f0e4fed1a9d3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>> ... If Sarah Conner loses, her son is killed by a
>>> Terminator and the series -- not to mention the world she and her
>>> buddies inhabit -- is gone. But if she succeeds, and somehow manages
>>> to stop the construction of the intelligent supercomputer known as
>>> Skynet, then...
>>>
>>> ... the protector won't be assembled
>>
>>Not necessarily. The two writing constraints that the show now has,
>>in terms of the time travel element, can be described as:
>>
>> (i) the human protector from the first movie (John Connor's father),
>> must go back to circa 1982 and conceive John. The Terminator
>> must also go back to be the nemesis back then; and
>>
>> (ii) the subsequent terminator and machine protector from T2,
>> and the current terminators and protector (Cameron) depicted in
>> this series, must likewise go back (unless the series somehow
>> changes its own history by doubling back on itself; let's assume
>> they don't do that).
>
> Actually, these aren't required. The show seems to take the position
that
> changing the future doesn't retroactively change the past, and once a
> future person/object travels to the past, it is part of that past.
Thus,
> if changes made after Reese arrives in the past cause Reese to not
travel
> to the past in the changed future, the Reese that did travel to the past
> was still there in the past. Similarly, if Cameron's intervention leads
> to her not being built in the future, the Cameron in the past still
> exists. The change doesn't retroactively make her go poof.
By definition that would suggest infinite alternate universes as jojo said
in another response to you. On the "plus" side it would leave open the
possibility of following up on the Terminator 3 universe, which would
still exist and hasn't been skipped over. Also on the "plus" side, the
Terminator 4 movie universe can be considered the same universe as
Terminator 3, or yet another different one, leaving more storytelling
scope.
But on the massive downside, it makes every Terminator incarnation
at best a Sliders-type world, none of which we have any particular
reason to care about, including this series or the upcoming movie.
Why would this TV series have gone through hoops to reconcile itself
to Terminator 3 (by skipping ahead), and have yet to contradict the
first two movies as far as I know, if it was taking the position you say
it "seems" to be taking? What actual evidence is there that it *IS* or
*HAS* taken that position, as opposed to "seems" to?
|
