"George W Harris" <gharrus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:ugmpq31nvl29otk1obbrn0c1ov4jmus1cb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 15:40:24 -0500, "KalElFan" <kalelfan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> :"George W Harris" <gharrus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> :news:gannq3t7ubout7jc8al2jgt1mmikrtcib2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> :
> :> The only consistent interpretation of the first movie is of one
> :> unaltered timeline.
> :
> :It was easy for the first movie to preserve that interpretation. It
> :was basically a simple time loop with no need to change anything
> :along the way. At this point, the Terminator story as a whole, or
> :the franchise, can no longer be interpreted that way.
>
> Unfortunately, the first movie can't be interpreted
> any other way, so there is no consistent interpretation of
> the story as a whole (even excluding T3).
This so obviously doesn't follow that I must be missing what you're
trying to say. We agree the first movie is a simple time loop. That
doesn't preclude subsequent movies or TV series from introducing
changes, or additional attempts that successfully alter the past.
Why do you think ANY interpretation of the first movie precludes
revised interpretations after we see more? Factually, logically, it
can't. It's akin to trying to prove a negative.
|
