McG Talks "Terminator 5"

McG is already working on the sequel to "Terminator Salvation". He dropped some hints to IESB about the possible plot details, and even name dropped Michael Bay! Great start!

Talking to IESB, the director said,

" Obviously, Michael Bay had tremendous success following Transformers, in a very short window. Sometimes people like to take time off, but I'm excited about the next installation of the story in the Terminator idea. So, for me, it's terribly exciting to get back out there and show a different face of that idea, and perhaps get out of the apocalyptic world and into a contemporary world. I think the audience is going to be very excited about our way in."

That sounds like the next movie will abandon the constant post apocalyptic setting of Salvation and perhaps move into the more familiar time travel territory of the first two movies.

Meanwhile, McG's also busily listening to critics of the last movie and still blaming some of the backlash on his name!

"I listen to everything. It's interesting because a lot of people don't like me, but a lot of people just don't like my name. I can't take that too seriously because that's been my name my whole life. It's not something that I prescribed myself. You take your lumps, if they don't like it, and you enjoy it a lot more when they do. We've all been on every side of that, and what can you do, but figure out what you did right and what you did wrong, look at it a little more closely, study the people that you look up to, and continue to evolve as a storyteller."

"Terminator Salvation" was pretty good I thought. Could have been better but hopefully that's where McG is heading with the next one. Just as long as we don't have any Terminators humping anything we should be fine!

Rorschach01
8/9/2009
iesb.net

DISCLAIMER: This posting was submitted by a user of the site not from Comic Book Movie editorial staff. All users have acknowledged and agreed that the submission of their content is in compliance with our Terms of Use. For removal of copyrighted material, please contact us HERE.

Related News

Joss Whedon Throws His Name In The Hat For The Troubled Terminator Franchise!

Terminator Franchise to be auctioned

Moon Bloodgood's Topless Scene from Terminator: Salvation

This Is How Terminator Should Have Ended!

Terminator Franchise For Sale....Again!

62 Comments

	Hell yeah, im in main! Damn im always under you aint i ROR lol! ; D Sweet T5 would be killer with McG!!! LEEE777 - 8/9/2009, 12:39 PM
	TERMINATOR SALVATION KICKED ASS!!!!! UNLIKE GI JOE! Ozymandias - 8/9/2009, 12:43 PM
	OZY HUSH lol! Heh heh, come on dude be a JOE! ; ) Yeah i loved TERMINATOR SALVATION, oh an a certain WORTHINGTON was in it! I still want, like many a ROBOCOP VS TERMINATOR!!! Now that would be the Ultimate, but since HOLLYWOOD gone back to BS reeboot/remake stage we'll never see them now! Also wanted friggin' FREDDY VS JASON 2 coff coff with coff ASH! ; ) Still prob will never happen now because ppl are supporting these remakes! LEEE777 - 8/9/2009, 12:55 PM
	@LEEE777:I want a ALIEN VS PREDATOR 3 but theyre making Predators which will be awesome!Also I think it was time to remake Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm St. No offense but FREDDY VS JASON SUCKED! Ozymandias - 8/9/2009, 1:07 PM
	how the [frick] does skynet not win when they have the T-1000? you know they didnt only make one. why send it back in time, an army of 100 of those could never be beat. chucksome12391 - 8/9/2009, 1:10 PM
	@chucksome they had to be covert op and stealthy because if they ripple the future they might disrupt something like skynet never being followed through... Hahahah Super dweeby moment right there hey ror I love the whole terminator series it's legit SdProphet - 8/9/2009, 1:23 PM
	The reason the T-1000's did nothing for Skynet in the war is because right when Skynet started making them, The Humans won the war. Skynet sending just the 1 T-1000 back in time was their last hope. It failed, ultimately leading to humanity's victory. Kind of like how Skynet was just starting the T-800's in T4. They had a factory, but John only faught one, because the others were still being built. Hanzogamer - 8/9/2009, 2:02 PM
	seriously though, what sort of goddamn douchebag calls themself McG He is a rubbish director and the Terminator Franchise deserves better. SoulAllFlush - 8/9/2009, 2:04 PM
	G.I JOE was great TERMINATER SAL. was great and this article is great..greatness all around peterparker420 - 8/9/2009, 2:10 PM
	I GREATLY concur!!! ; ) LEEE777 - 8/9/2009, 2:18 PM
	Mc G is a talentless director who should not be allowed to make films...terminator salvation was mediocre at best...if your over the age of 16 and like this film, consider yourself to be mediocre aswell. felix - 8/9/2009, 2:33 PM
	Well LEEE you do like Jo lol :) teabag - 8/9/2009, 2:57 PM
	If they do another time travel story I'm out. Why can't they just stay in The future and finish the war. Why do they need to go back. It's stupid. Like gijoe. superdog - 8/9/2009, 3:39 PM
	Superdog @ What do you think of the movie with ERIC BANA, Time Travelers wife???? ; D Seriously though, id prefer a bigger and more EPIC machines vs humans, with a Epic battle in the future, an not bother with Time Travel till T6 or something! LEEE777 - 8/9/2009, 3:45 PM
	i am just glad we get another film. awesome. grif - 8/9/2009, 3:50 PM
	I didn't like Salvation all that much. I thought Bale sucked as JC. Best part of that movie was Worthington. I do hope this franchise does not get ruined as 1 and 2 are by far the best in the franchise so far. spideysweb - 8/9/2009, 4:28 PM
	Lee77@ that movie looks interesting. Maybe too Luvy duvy though. But I'm with U 100% on terminator. Just have the future war. Quite screwing around with time travel. superdog - 8/9/2009, 4:38 PM
	I loved T4, it was possibly tied with T2 for my favorite in the franchise. But, as it's been said before, Worthington was the best part of that movie, and they killed off his character, so...I can't see too much I have to look forward to in the fifth one. I did love McG as director though, so I'll be glad if he comes back to do the 5th installment. I think Bale did pretty ok with Connor. He could've done better, but it was fine the way it was. But once again, too much romance in my action movie. Blech. (and if this is coming from a girl you know it's true. ^_^) Phoenix9109 - 8/9/2009, 4:43 PM
	I liked Terminator Salvation. I had a lot of fun watching that movie. But I tend to dig post-apocalyptic wastelands and robots and weird time travel scenarios. The ending was a little weak. They could have left out the John Connor voiceover... the Marcus Wright voiceover was enough. Still, I'm looking forward to more McG-directed Terminator movies. I thought the feel was just right. I could be wrong but I think the 'Arnold' Terminator in T:2 said that the T-1000 was a prototype model. I'm not sure Marcus Wright is dead. The one at the end was a replacement model... toward the end, after Marcus woke in the Skynet facility (completely 'healed' and wearing scrubs), there was a shot of him looking at his original body on a table, with the body still wearing his clothes. So there might be another Marcus Wright out there. sethasa - 8/9/2009, 4:44 PM
	Hmmm, I don't remember the multiple Marcus part, but it's been awhile since I saw it. Phoenix9109 - 8/9/2009, 4:51 PM
	True. But i think they'll abondon that story line. It sounds likenthierndoing time travel again which will suck superdog - 8/9/2009, 4:52 PM
	A time travel story will only work if helps facilitate the original set of cicumstances from the first movie. I'm hoping to see more Reese. Based on the pregnant Kate, I figure there's a fatherhood sub-angle somewhere around the corner. I'm also hoping McG explains how the T-1000 or T-X made it through the time field without being encased in organic material... both models only mimic the outer appearance of skin. I don't buy that something inherently metal can be 'organic' even if it is programmable liquid. sethasa - 8/9/2009, 4:58 PM
	i'd think that another time travel movie could work. let's see it from the terminators perspective instead. that could kick ass. i think it would make an interesting "episode" to this epic story. KEROSENE - 8/9/2009, 5:20 PM
	Time travel will suck. It's too confusing already and if you add another layer it wil just be too much. superdog - 8/9/2009, 5:52 PM
	the time travel isnt something i wanna see cuz i rather the war be finished in the apocalyptic future but they just may have to do this arc to tie up the kyle reese storyline etc...maybe they do both the time travel and the war's end in t5...please us all...i hope Anil Rickly - 8/9/2009, 6:06 PM
	In fairness, time travel was the back bone of the original(and best) movie and its sequel. I don't want to see constant back and forth so its confusing, but someone should travel at some stage, be it back or forward. Anyway, we pretty much know already that Connor will be heading back. Salvation was good but without some time travel in the next movie its just going to be more of the same. Apocalyptic explosions/man vs machines. Its been done. Next one needs a fresh idea..or at least a rehash of the classic ones! Rorschach01 - 8/9/2009, 6:19 PM
	chuchsome, The T-1000 was "an ADVANCED PROTOTYPE." There were not any others produced yet at that point, although some comic book storylines suggest that there was one other. (See the scene in T2 where Arnold & Eddie Furlong were on the Harley and T-800 is explaining what the T-1000 is to John.) And Ror, you gotta be careful what you wish for in saying that the "next one needs a fresh idea." You should hear some of the HORRIBLE ideas that McG has had thus far. For starters, he wants to have Skynet send HKs-- machines that are NOT covered in living tissue and therefore wouldn't be able to travel back in time according to the theory in the series-- back to a "pre-Judgment Day 2010"-- that's right-- "PRE-Judgment Day," even though Judgment Day has already happened in BOTH timelines by then (original timeline: August 29th, 1997, secondary timeline: 2004). So basically he is F*ing up the ENTIRE set of truths that we knew from the first two movies. And those are only 2 examples of many. No joke here-- I should be hired to sit with him and point out his flaws in his ideas as he comes up with them. MetalHead** - 8/9/2009, 7:10 PM
	Oh yeah, I forgot one of the most important HORRIBLE ideas of McG's-- he wants to also send John Connor back to 2010 to attempt tp "galvanize the world's armies" to prepare for war against Skynet. Uh... NEWS FLASH: Judgment Day had already come and gone by 2010!!! Why wouldn't McG AT LEAST plan to send John to 1996 or 2003?!? I don't even think McG has seen the first 2 movies. MetalHead - 8/9/2009, 7:15 PM
	I don't think he's seen anything other than his crack pipe in years superdog - 8/9/2009, 7:44 PM
	I definitely hope to see more of Kyle Reese, and I do hope they stay IN the "apocolyptic world" and OUT of the "contemporary world". The first two were good and I definitely liked them, but they weren't anything I'd "fanboy" over. The third one was less than mediocre. So, to be honest, I won't be too upset if they do "[frick] up the entire set of truths" form the first movies. It's a time-travel genre movie series. Time-travel tends to change the past, as well as the future, so why does this past have to stay the same? Phoenix9109 - 8/9/2009, 8:18 PM
	Phoenix, I'm not even getting into this with you cause clearly you know very little about the series. MetalHead - 8/9/2009, 8:26 PM
	I really liked Terminator Salvation, it wasnt a patch on the original two movies but it was a million times better and more serious than T3 which I bascally treated like a comedy and I was satisfied with the movie as a comedy but not as a serious movie. But the cast were very good especially Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin and in between all his grumbling, Christian Bale was great as John Connor (again better than Nick "Im so emo, I dont wanna be the future leader of mankind, bla bla" Stahl). And Moon Bloodgood, mmmmmm lol But I enjoyed that movie and I see that as the end of the Terminator franchise because all future sequels are going to suck because they WONT BE SET IN THE FUTURE! Im [frick]ing sick of all this time travel crap! The Terminator timeline is already messed up as it is. Dont be sending back more bloody Terminators to pre-Judgement Day. That is what the brilliant original trilogy was for! Well if idiot McG does not change his mind and set the movie completely in the future, I will not be going to see it! My idea is (now I know it isnt the best) that in between TS (2018) and T5 (maybe 2028), the resistance all over the world have been tracking down T-800 factories and stopping production of the T-800s. Skynet have been fighting back as much as it can but they are failing to stop the resistance from destroying their ultimate weapons. The movie begins with the Resistance destroying the last t-800 factory that they know off. But, however, Skynet has learnt how to evade humanity and has built a group of t-800s in secret and they start infiltrating different camps belonging to humanity. When the resistance learn of the t-800's activation, they strive to find a way to reprogram the t-800s to obey them, meaning humanity will be safe from them and they can use the t-800s to fight back against Skynet. They go into battle against the t-800s and attempt to capture one so they can learn how to reprogram it. To make a long story short, they succeed and destroy the secret t-800 factory meaning they only have to fight the remaining t-800s. T6 (set in 2029) should actually start off with the final battle that was described in T1. After his camp got attacked by a Terminator (as seen in T1), Kyle Resse hooks up with John's main group of soldiers after his commanding officer, Perry (mentioned in T1) was killed. John knows its time to send Kyle back to 1984 and the re-programmed Arnie to 1995 after John and the rest of the resistance have finally defeated Skynet's control over the world. They attack the defence grid with re-programmed t-800's help and defeat Skynet. Cue emotional goodbye between John and Kyle and along with the re-programmed Arnie, they jump back to 1984 and 1995. However the movie is not over, part of Skynet survives, jumps to a different location and begins to put its emergency plan into action of sending a small group of t-1000s or t-x's ((developed from the prototype Robert Patrick sent to 1995 and they were originally designed to fight re-programmed t-800s as Arnie said in T3 but of course it was too late as Skynet was defeated)) back to the day after Judgement Day so humanity will not be ready to fight such advanced machines meaning Skynet will win in 2004 and not accidently avert its own creation by going back any earlier. John and his most trusted soldiers finally destroy the central AI of Skynet. However, John and his team have to jump to 2004, chasing the t-1000s that already went through. Cue the very final battle, the T-1000s are defeated and John Connor dies. One soldier survives from John Connor's team and goes into hiding straightaway to prevent altering the future and in 2029, he comes to Kate Connor and tells her their mission in 2004 was a success and John died bravely fighting the machines. Kate and John's kids go on to lead humanity into a new better future where there will never be another Terminator movie made ever again! dancingmonkey08 - 8/9/2009, 8:40 PM
	i loved T4!! not alot of people like it tho...FCK them! redskullrevenge* - 8/9/2009, 9:31 PM
	T4 was the shit movie of the summer. I have been holding that in til I saw GI Joe, now that I have, Terminator was by far the worst movie of the summer. People complain about some physics issues like sinking ice in GI Joe, Wolverine deflecting optic blasts, and other flaws of the summer movies, but Terminator Salvation was just one long chain of unreasonable acts after another.It was one of those movies I spent half of it rolling my eyes and burrying my head in my hands at the awkward nature of its many [frick]ups. I seriously hope this franchise is left alone forever, or until James Cameron wants to return to it. And for the record, Sam Worthington was forgettable at best in this movie and the man-crush some people on this site demonstrate for him is disturbing. TheMyth - 8/9/2009, 9:51 PM
	@ HANZO..where did you get all this information from? Scorpioxfactor - 8/10/2009, 3:06 AM
	T4 WAS AWESOME!!!! DRAGONBALLS was the sh!tty movie of the SUMMER! LEEE777 - 8/10/2009, 6:23 AM
	no more time travel. thats all they did in the first 3...time travel. they should make it an epic war story type movie. the time traveling is what made the terminator movies ridiculous, even since the original. machines send terminator back in time to kill saraha connor, so she doesn't give birth to john. humans send reese back to kill said terminator. while back in time, reese sleeps with sarah, gets her preggers, therefore bringing john into the world. so basically, if the machines REALLY didn't want john to be born, they should have just never sent back a terminator to begin with. the machines caused him to be born in the first place, AND THEY KNEW REESE WAS HIS FATHER!!! this whole franchise has been silly since the beginning...and people complain about plot holes, lol, this entire series was based on one giant plot hole, lol. CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 6:40 AM
	I see I cant read this sight with the spoilers spread in titles that have nothing to do with it. T4 was good, I do think his name messed up more than the movie itself. Its times like these when I hate the internet BBS boards. I remember back in the days when all you could do is read about movies coming out and not bash the hell out of them b4 you even see a trailer. ok im steping off my soap box now. vonstallin - 8/10/2009, 6:43 AM
	Sorry TheMyth, T4 may have had glaring plot holes and a few dodgy script patches but i wouldn't even put it in the same dungeon as GI Joke! McG at least attempted to make a solid action movie and dragged decent to good to great(Anton Yelchin) performances from his cast. The special effects were absolutely top notch and the action scenes were exiting and well choreographed. Joe was the complete opposite of everything i just said. Rorschach01 - 8/10/2009, 7:54 AM
	corndog@ right on man. ror@ right on man. it may have had some plots holes but it made up for it with the rest of the stuff you mention. gijoe was lacking in every department superdog - 8/10/2009, 8:29 AM
	@ ror i gotta agree, i actually liked T4... but the special effects blew Joe away, hell, everything in T4 blew Joe away. Gi Joe really should have been on the syfy channel CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 8:51 AM
	that would be giving it too much credit. it was even worse than ice spiders. a syfy classic superdog - 8/10/2009, 9:04 AM
	@ superdog LOL!! i don't know man, its hard to beat Mansquito!!! CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 10:25 AM
	McG showed that he is a very good director of action, and not in the chaotic, meaningless way that Bay directs it. T4 had some obvious short comings but overall it was a good action movie with some original scenes in it. Anyone who thinks GI Joe was better needs help. I would love to see a T5, but a story with a little more complexity and a little less yelling from Christian would be nice. Ryguy88 - 8/10/2009, 10:28 AM
	CorndogBurglar, There is way more to the plot than you are seeing. You say "if the machines REALLY didn't want John to be born, they should have just never sent back a terminator to begin with." PROBLEM WITH THAT: if Skynet doesn't send a Terminator back, then SKYNET isn't created either. Skynet knows that its only chance at existing is doing this, even though it knows (in 2029) that in doing so, it will fail. But at least it can do so and ATTEPMT to change things along the way, as opposed to giving up all together. You are missing the ultimate irony: -After losing in the future, Skynet sends a terminator back to defeat its enemy in the past. Doing so causes itself to be created (by the T-800 being defeated at Cyberdyne Systems and Cyberdyne employees then finding the remains-- the Neural Net Processor and the arm). -The Resistance sends a soldier back to 1984 to protect the mother of the leader of their resistance and doing so allows their savior to be born (since Kyle becomes the father). -NEITHER would exist had each side not sent the other back through time. Thus, the ultimate irony is created. It's the old "what came first: the chicken or the egg?" debate and we then have... AN APOCALYPSE CREATED! The "theory" in time travel is that if an event contradicts itself, it results in an apocalypse. Isn't that EXACTLY what happens as a result of the time travel? So basically, you have overlooked the entire irony of the story: if neither Kyle NOR the first T-800 went back from 2029 to 1984, the ENTIRE STORY never happens. (This irony was created intentionally, by the way.) MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 11:06 AM
	@metalhead i think i just went cross-eyed, lol. i see what you're saying, but at the same time, if what your saying is right (and it does make sense, i completely understand what your saying) then how did skynet ever become skynet to begin with?? in order for skynet to exist in the future to send a terminator back, that means that they HAD to be created before a terminator ever came back in time. if time just went on like normal, then, no terminator would have been sent back, which means cyberdyne never would have gotten the parts, and skynet never would have been made, meaning there would be no skynet in the future to create a terminator to send. also meaning that john connor would never have been born. with all do respect i think maybe your missing the point of the movies, and that is destiny. no matter what anyone does, you can't change destiny. at least thats what T3 taught us... CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 11:21 AM
	Sigh...I gotta agree with most on here, PLEASE do not go back to the past again....two classics have already been made in this franchise using that plot device, and I can guarantee they won't be topped by doing it again. Also, I remember watching those scenes of the future war in the first two terminator movies as a kid and being excited for the franchise to get to that point, so we could see some real robot/resistance action. I think T4 delivered it in spades, and didn't really get a lot of people's criticisms about the movie being too action oriented and no character development, etc. If you've seen the other movies, and know this one takes place in a horrific, chaotic future where mankind is hunted relentlessly, shouldn't you expect constant action? I thought the movie captured the frantic nature of being a human in that future very well. Also, I didn't think the action got in the way of developing the new characters...I was a fan of Worthington's performance especially, and Yelchin was excellent as well. Regardless of what any of us thought of T4 though, I definitely think taking this franchise out of its future setting at this point is a big mistake. Refine your contribution to the franchise, McG, don't revamp the whole thing already!!! Chimichanga - 8/10/2009, 11:49 AM
	CorndogBurglar, First off, disregard anything stated in T3 because James Cameron didn't write it. I read an off-the-record and top-secret interview with James Cameron that was only allowed to come out recently due to the fact that T3 and TS have already come out and it had Cameron's ideas for T3 and they are INSANE! It makes me sad to know of these ideas and that they will never get to happen. Anyway... Like I said, that's the irony which creates the apocalypse-- NEITHER John's existance nor Skynet's is possible without both time travel instances. So what is referred to by time-travel theorists as a casual loop is created. No events can correctly occur due to the fact that one must come first in all examples, and yet none can correctly occur in order in this the timeline. Example: Skynet can't exist without sending the T-800 back to 1984. Skynet, in essence, is responsible for its own creation. John can't exist without sending his father back to 1984 to conceive him. He also, in essense, is responsible for his own existance. These are BOTH paradoxes (I just noticed that I was accidentally using the word "apocalypse" in the previous post and I meant to say "paradox.") Therefore, the loop-- which exists between the 1984 (when the time-travelers arrived) to 2029 (when the time-travelers departed) is a stretch of 45 years of a paradox. Once the loop ends (2030), all can return to normal. This is VERY confusing, I know. But trust me-- your points are valid but are also intentional. If it is not looked into deeply, it is very easy to see as a "plot hole." (Side note: T3 did create MANY plot holes but the first 2 did not.) Any more questions and I will gladly explain. MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 11:56 AM
	As far as how all of this relates to TS... T3 basically destroyed the entire timeline in which T1 & T2 exist in, to the point where the first 2 films are not even possible anymore according to the events in T3. That being said, TS exists in a timeline that is different from that of T1 & T2 also, and therefore the "truths" of the first 2 films might as well be thrown out the window. Basically if they aren't rebooting T3 to fix the major plot holes, McG might as well AT LEAST work on making a cool movie if it can't be accurate to the timeline of the first 2 films. MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 12:14 PM
	@ metalhead well thats about the best explanation i've ever gotten! and it does make a little more sense when you say paradox and not apocalypse. but its still shady to me, i mean, none of this could happen without skynet sending back a terminator. thats the beginning of everything. if skynet didn't exist, then it COULD NOT send anything back, because it doesn't exist to create anything. in order for john connor and skynet to exist in the future, at some point a terminator would have to have just appeared in our time to jump start it all, and of course thats impossible, because there is no skynet in the future. this is of course assuming that there is no form of divine intervention going on...am i saying this sensibly lol?? i know its a confusing topic, lol. i'm just looking at things from a natural perspective, that being, you can't have something in the future, if it was never created in the past. CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 12:22 PM
	Yes, CorndogBurglar, you just correctly stated the scenario. And THAT is why it is a paradox-- because NONE OF IT is actually possible due to the fact that neither Skynet NOR John could exist in the future without creating themselves by altering the past. And both of these entities did this intentionally. Both John AND Skynet knew that they were creating themselves and that is a paradox. This was James Cameron's intention all along-- to make each responible for their own creation and therefore making BOTH of their existences impossible. This creates the paradox and this is the reason for the apocalyptic world. Your line perfectly sums up the reasoning for the paradox-- which Cameron intentionally created-- "you can't have something in the future, if it was never created in the past." Hence the paradox and hence the ultimate irony. MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 12:28 PM
	SOunds good to me jst cant wait to see what else happens..salvaton was awesome warmachine88 - 8/10/2009, 12:28 PM
	You see, before Cameron left and the writers of T3 hacked the story to pieces to try to capitalize on using Arnold to sell it before it was too late (Arnold was running for office so they needed to make the movie ASAP and they had already sufferend one major setback time-wise due to Arnold being in a motorcycle crash), Cameron had a huge plan all layed out for it. And man, it was awesome. I have constantly thought about what T3 SHOULD HAVE been since 1991 after T2 came out. And some of my ideas were actually the same as Cameron's. But he took everything to the next level (that's why he is who he is) and it was mind-blowing. The problem with his version is that it didn't include Arnold or time-travel-- and rightfully so-- and therefore the studios weren't thrilled. If anyone is a die-hard Terminator fan, you should honestly feel a sadness knowing that Cameron's version of T3 would have been F*ing amazing and would have been exactly what it should have been. MetalHead** - 8/10/2009, 12:33 PM
	@ metalhead this is why i'm not such a huge terminator fan, i like them as good action movies, (didn't even mind T3 all that much, its easily the worst one, but still). so i guess my question would then be, did john and skynet just "appear" one day in the future?? it just seems like a huge plot hole to me. even if cameron got to write them all, he would have HAD to explain how both john and skynet came to be. and the only explanation would be that they just appeared. how can i find what cameron had planned out? is there a good terminator site for this kind of thing? but good conversation man! i appreciate the long explanations you've given me though, i've never talked to a die hard terminator fan about it. CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 12:59 PM
	First off, there is a HUGE Terminator site that is awesome. www.terminatorfiles.com. I'm on there under the same screen name (MetalHead). I'm not sure if there's one particular link to Cameron's idea but if you ask around, you'll find it. If I have time later maybe I'll post some of it on here. But the people on there are some of the most knowledgable Terminator fans in the world. It's an awesome site. As for John "disappearing," that is a theory that time travel theorists refer to as the "Back to the Future" theory and most don't use it. Instead they believe that whatever happens becomes concrete and instead the timeline changes. And there can be several timelines. Basically, John AND Skynet were destined to fail at changing the future by altering the past. Also, the only way that Cameron would have needed to address the altered future... would be IF he altered the future. You see, in his future, nothing changes. As soon as Kyle & T-800 arrived in 1984, Judgment Day was occuring on August 29th, 1997 NO MATTER WHAT. IF Cameron planned to have the Resistance or Skynet win in the past in T3, THEN he would have needed to explain this because then the future that Kyle & T-800 came from would not have existed anymore. But Cameron's intention was to (a) acknowledge that as of May of 1984, the timeline was altered and (b) show the events that occured between 1984 and 2029, creating the new future that the 2 time travelers created. As for John & Skynet just "appearing one day in the future"-- no and the reason is because the groundwork was layed down for their existence in 1984. I personally believe a theory that is the ultimate irony to the story... A recurring theme to the series is that "the future is not yet set and there is no fate but what we make for ourselves." This is what John believes, what he tells Kyle and what Kyle tells Sarah in 1984. Sarah then passes this on to John and the cycle forever continues between the 3 of them. HOWEVER, my belief is that although those 3 believe that to be true, it actually is not. My belief is that NO MATTER WHAT happened in Kyle's life, he was destined to end up at the time-displacment equipment at that exact moment in 2029 and was destined to arrive in 1984 at that exact moment. The same is true for John being at the time-displacment equipment at that moment in 2029 to send Kyle back. The same is also true that Sarah was going to defeat the T-800 at Cyberdyne Systems at that exact moment no matter what. So basically, although they believe "the future is not yet set," even more ultimate irony to them is that it is. MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 1:16 PM
	Also, in Cameron's version of T3 he intended to have Sarah & John both realize that they could not have stopped Judgment Day from coming on August 29th, 1997, no matter what they did. MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 1:21 PM
	@ metalhead right on man, i'll check out that site, and thanks for enlightening me! seriously, i've always loved the terminator movies for being great action flicks, but i always thought it ended there, good action. CorndogBurglar - 8/10/2009, 4:26 PM
	SHOOT I LIKED IT..THE MOTOTERMINATORS WERE COOL..NEXT THING THERE WILL BE TERMINATOR DOGS..CAR TERMINATORS...I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A TERMINATOR CENTAUR..UPPER BODY OF A TERMINATOR...WITH THE LOWER HALF, TANK TREADS GUNSMITH - 8/10/2009, 4:45 PM
	@ MetalHead: I've seen all four of the movies several times each, what more is there to know? Unless you wanna count the tv show, or some comic book series I don't know of. Phoenix9109 - 8/10/2009, 5:14 PM
	Phoenix, My point was that you clearly only watched the movies but didn't put much thought into them. The reason I personally think that the first 2 are brilliant is because they are so much more than just what you see on film. And before I even get into that, think of the brilliant ideas of where Cameron took his characters between the events of T1 & T2. It would have been so easy for him to have just had T2 start with Sarah cooking dinner for John in their apartment when a Terminator shows up. Instead he got inside each character's head. Sarah became obsessed with stopping this future, got involved with anyone who she could learn combat and weapons from. She was deemed insane. She was put in a mental hospital. She lost her son and he was put in a foster home. This is such an underrated aspect of the film. They really were EXACTLY the right paths that each character should have gone down. Now, on to the brilliance of the concept... Cameron left so much open for thought that you could literally spend an eternity thinking about where things go from there at any point in any of the first 2 films. Everything from the time travel aspect, the future world, the machines and their technology, the questions of how far Skynet's abilities reach, the whole loop theory, etc., etc., etc. It's not a movie like The Dark Knight, for example-- which I loved-- where the only significant aspects of the story are shown in the movie. The Terminator series created its own entire universe. This is why I love the first 2 films. The Matrix did this as well and that is why I LOVED The Animatrix-- because it shows you all sorts of aspects to this world created by the writers that there wasn't time to dive into in the 3 movies. I would love a Terminator DVD done in the style of The Animatrix to explore all the aspects that you may not consider just by watching the movie. Short stories that could show a day in the life of a human in the post-apocalyptic world; stories showing different units of the Resistance other than John's & Kyle's; a story showing the gangs which live in the streets of this future world where many humans fend for themselves and are actually cannibals (I'm not making this stuff up-- it's in the books); the story of the rise of Cyberdyne Systems, etc., etc., etc. There is SOOOO much to be expored in this universe that James Cameron created. I love The Dark Knight, don't get me wrong. But Cameron's vision of the Terminator series is genius and so much deeper than many other movies, and much deeper than many realize. MetalHead - 8/10/2009, 8:22 PM
	@ metalhead that would be amazing! i loved the animatrix. didn't really care for the actual movies all the much, they weren't bad, but they weren't great either, except maybe the first one. but a terminator animated film in that vein would be awesome! those are good ideas, you have there man. CorndogBurglar - 8/11/2009, 7:34 AM
	Metalhead That would be an awesome idea for an Animatrix-type Terminator short movies. The Animatrix was awesomely done especially the Second Renaissance. They are doing a Halo animated shorts in the style of the Animatrix too. It looks pretty good. Oh and I dont know if this will ever come about but there is supposedly a Terminator animated series coming. Heres the link to a page about it: http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Termination dancingmonkey08 - 8/11/2009, 6:17 PM

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.