|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 11:45:29 GMT -5
yes yes in the novel just like how Jaws 4 was just a voodoo curse! Remember in t2 all they said was that Dyson was the man chiefly responsible for skynet's design or whatever it was, they never said he built it nor did they say he lived long enough to see it built. Remember they had to sign 'it' out, meaning the tech was going places. Its not much of a stretch to do the Guyver solution... "I destroyed Kronos!" "No you destroyed Kronos, LA. There is still Kronos, International" T3 actually killed off characters who were stated as being in the future but still died in the past Yes, T3 killed the Lieutenants... Sarah should have been there or at the very least died of metal poisoning due to be stabbed by the T-1000. What was that about Jaws 4? Voodoo curse? The novel about Jaws 4 tried to explain that all the BS that went on in the movie was because of a voodoo curse T-X killing off the Lts does in fact damage the timeline with them dead, she would never have been programmed to go back and kill them. Thus the paradox. Again while T1 and T2 still have stupid time travel physics they are still the self fulfilling destiny |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 11:53:41 GMT -5
Yes, T3 killed the Lieutenants... Sarah should have been there or at the very least died of metal poisoning due to be stabbed by the T-1000. What was that about Jaws 4? Voodoo curse? The novel about Jaws 4 tried to explain that all the BS that went on in the movie was because of a voodoo curse T-X killing off the Lts does in fact damage the timeline with them dead, she would never have been programmed to go back and kill them. Thus the paradox. Again while T1 and T2 still have stupid time travel physics they are still the self fulfilling destiny No, she is just sent back to kill the current list of Lieutenants, there can always be a different batch, however you can only have one Sarah, one John, One Skynet. The Lieutenants were just an after thought in case they couldn't get to John. The timeline was slightly altered by them leaving the T-800 in that factory, killing off Dyson alone also would have been a minor change, destroying Cyberdyne was the big change compunded byy destroying both Terminators. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 11:56:48 GMT -5
The novel about Jaws 4 tried to explain that all the BS that went on in the movie was because of a voodoo curse T-X killing off the Lts does in fact damage the timeline with them dead, she would never have been programmed to go back and kill them. Thus the paradox. Again while T1 and T2 still have stupid time travel physics they are still the self fulfilling destiny No, she is just sent back to kill the current list of Lieutenants, there can always be a different batch, however you can only have one Sarah, one John, One Skynet. The Lieutenants were just an after thought in case they couldn't get to John. The timeline was slightly altered by them leaving the T-800 in that factory, killing off Dyson alone also would have been a minor change, destroying Cyberdyne was the big change compunded byy destroying both Terminators. You still don't get the paradox |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 12:00:22 GMT -5
No, she is just sent back to kill the current list of Lieutenants, there can always be a different batch, however you can only have one Sarah, one John, One Skynet. The Lieutenants were just an after thought in case they couldn't get to John. The timeline was slightly altered by them leaving the T-800 in that factory, killing off Dyson alone also would have been a minor change, destroying Cyberdyne was the big change compunded byy destroying both Terminators. You still don't get the paradox The paradox is both John and Skynet need to exist for the other to be there and they keep trying to destroy each other in the future thus causing the loop in T1 where they preserve the future. T2 was trying to alter the future so Skynet doesn't exist and so the war doesn't happen, which would mean John does not exist. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 12:04:53 GMT -5
You still don't get the paradox The paradox is both John and Skynet need to exist for the other to be there and they keep trying to destroy each other in the future thus causing the loop in T1 where they preserve the future. T2 was trying to alter the future so Skynet doesn't exist and so the war doesn't happen, which would mean John does not exist. but they didn't destroy skynet they only hope that they changed the future. The T-X succeeding in killing targets in the past creates a paradox because it actually did change the future. |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 12:06:25 GMT -5
The paradox is both John and Skynet need to exist for the other to be there and they keep trying to destroy each other in the future thus causing the loop in T1 where they preserve the future. T2 was trying to alter the future so Skynet doesn't exist and so the war doesn't happen, which would mean John does not exist. but they didn't destroy skynet they only hope that they changed the future. The T-X succeeding in killing targets in the past creates a paradox because it actually did change the future. No, going by the movie they did in fact destroy Skynet |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 12:07:36 GMT -5
but they didn't destroy skynet they only hope that they changed the future. The T-X succeeding in killing targets in the past creates a paradox because it actually did change the future. No, going by the movie they did in fact destroy Skynet No they didn't the course of action they under took only gave them the possibility that they prevented Skynet's creation BIG difference |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 12:16:09 GMT -5
No, going by the movie they did in fact destroy Skynet No they didn't the course of action they under took only gave them the possibility that they prevented Skynet's creation BIG difference No, that's the conclusion the viewer can come to, but is not what is stated in the movie. Sarah set out to put an end to Skynet. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 12:22:30 GMT -5
No they didn't the course of action they under took only gave them the possibility that they prevented Skynet's creation BIG difference No, that's the conclusion the viewer can come to, but is not what is stated in the movie. Sarah set out to put an end to Skynet. Okay then show me the scene where Skynet, who hasn't been created yet, gets destroyed in in T2. |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 12:26:45 GMT -5
No, that's the conclusion the viewer can come to, but is not what is stated in the movie. Sarah set out to put an end to Skynet. Okay then show me the scene where Skynet, who hasn't been created yet, gets destroyed in in T2. He is being created in Cyberdyne. They destroy the building he is being created in. . . . according to Cameron fanboys anyways. A logical person would take note that such a major project wouldn't be isolated to just one building. Some sort of back up had to be somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 12:29:12 GMT -5
Okay then show me the scene where Skynet, who hasn't been created yet, gets destroyed in in T2. He is being created in Cyberdyne. They destroy the building he is being created in. . . . according to Cameron fanboys anyways. A logical person would take note that such a major project wouldn't be isolated to just one building. Some sort of back up had to be somewhere else. ah ha so you are inferring that but its never actually stated in the movie. And I already mentioned that logical explanation  |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 12:36:52 GMT -5
He is being created in Cyberdyne. They destroy the building he is being created in. . . . according to Cameron fanboys anyways. A logical person would take note that such a major project wouldn't be isolated to just one building. Some sort of back up had to be somewhere else. ah ha so you are inferring that but its never actually stated in the movie. And I already mentioned that logical explanation Ah ha what? Sarah: "How do we destroy Skynet?" Terminator: You do this this and this. Clear cut. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 12:44:35 GMT -5
ah ha so you are inferring that but its never actually stated in the movie. And I already mentioned that logical explanation Ah ha what? Sarah: "How do we destroy Skynet?" Terminator: You do this this and this. Clear cut. Again show me the scene where Skynet is destroyed A possible chance at Skynet not being created is very different from them destroying it |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 12:52:32 GMT -5
Ah ha what? Sarah: "How do we destroy Skynet?" Terminator: You do this this and this. Clear cut. Again show me the scene where Skynet is destroyed A possible chance at Skynet not being created is very different from them destroying it A possible chance? According to the robot from the future that is how Skynet was created, do you not go to the Terminator boards and argue with these fanboys? |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 12:54:24 GMT -5
Again show me the scene where Skynet is destroyed A possible chance at Skynet not being created is very different from them destroying it A possible chance? According to the robot from the future that is how Skynet was created, do you not go to the Terminator boards and argue with these fanboys? no go listen to the dialogue again It is even stated Dyson didn't do it alone |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 13:01:57 GMT -5
A possible chance? According to the robot from the future that is how Skynet was created, do you not go to the Terminator boards and argue with these fanboys? no go listen to the dialogue again It is even stated Dyson didn't do it alone To quote the fanboys, "They desroyed Skynet in T2." Clearly, this can't be argued against. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 13:02:49 GMT -5
no go listen to the dialogue again It is even stated Dyson didn't do it alone To quote the fanboys, "They desroyed Skynet in T2." Clearly, this can't be argued against. Well if you are now suddenly agreeing with the fanboys at least now you acknowledge T3 sucks bbsy has seen the light |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 13:06:13 GMT -5
To quote the fanboys, "They desroyed Skynet in T2." Clearly, this can't be argued against. Well if you are now suddenly agreeing with the fanboys at least now you acknowledge T3 sucks bbsy has seen the light Suddenly? Didn't I say all along you were correct? The only thing we ever disagreed upon was if T3 or T2 ruined the continuity of the series. How we started discussing the horrible arguments of the fanboys is beyond me though, LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 13:09:15 GMT -5
Well if you are now suddenly agreeing with the fanboys at least now you acknowledge T3 sucks bbsy has seen the light Suddenly? Didn't I say all along you were correct? The only thing we ever disagreed upon was if T3 or T2 ruined the continuity of the series. How we started discussing the horrible arguments of the fanboys is beyond me though, LOL. bbsy acknowledges that T3 sucks! |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 13:16:32 GMT -5
Suddenly? Didn't I say all along you were correct? The only thing we ever disagreed upon was if T3 or T2 ruined the continuity of the series. How we started discussing the horrible arguments of the fanboys is beyond me though, LOL. bbsy acknowledges that T3 sucks! Besides the fact that I never said it sucks, the other funny part is I never said it was great either. All I ever said is that I didn't hate it and that it was better than T1, both comments are true. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 13:32:48 GMT -5
bbsy acknowledges that T3 sucks! Besides the fact that I never said it sucks, the other funny part is I never said it was great either. All I ever said is that I didn't hate it and that it was better than T1, both comments are true. bbsy is trying to back track after agreeing that T3 sucks! |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 13:38:57 GMT -5
Besides the fact that I never said it sucks, the other funny part is I never said it was great either. All I ever said is that I didn't hate it and that it was better than T1, both comments are true. bbsy is trying to back track after agreeing that T3 sucks! Show me where I said it sucks?  |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 19:45:45 GMT -5
bbsy is trying to back track after agreeing that T3 sucks! Show me where I said it sucks? well right there for starters |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 20:16:24 GMT -5
Show me where I said it sucks? well right there for starters Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. . . |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 3, 2010 21:09:51 GMT -5
well right there for starters Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. . . Yes I thought T3 sucked as well |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 3, 2010 21:21:55 GMT -5
Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. . . Yes I thought T3 sucked as well I knew you didn't think that. |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 4, 2010 5:45:29 GMT -5
Yes I thought T3 sucked as well I knew you didn't think that. But then you would be wrong as T3 sucked |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 4, 2010 9:08:47 GMT -5
I knew you didn't think that. But then you would be wrong as T3 sucked Can't go back now. . . Then again, you liked Dark City. . .  |
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 4, 2010 11:28:17 GMT -5
But then you would be wrong as T3 sucked Can't go back now. . . Then again, you liked Dark City. . . I like 3/4 of Dark City or maybe just 2/3 either way it didn't end well. Kinda like X-Men 2 really |
|
|
|
Post by b_Pooly on Jul 4, 2010 12:10:42 GMT -5
Can't go back now. . . Then again, you liked Dark City. . . I like 3/4 of Dark City or maybe just 2/3 either way it didn't end well. Kinda like X-Men 2 really What was wrong with X-Men 2? Besides the fact, the ending lead to the horrible X3? |
|
