TERMINATOR: Linda Hamilton Is Done With Sarah Connor; Thinks It's Time For The Franchise To End

TERMINATOR: Linda Hamilton Is Done With Sarah Connor; Thinks It's Time For The Franchise To End

Linda Hamilton has confirmed she played Sarah Connor for the final time in Terminator: Dark Fate and admits to being confused by the decision to once again relaunch the long-running sci-fi franchise...

News
By JoshWilding - Feb 22, 2024 04:02 AM EST
Filed Under: Terminator
Source: SFFGazette.com

After helming Deadpool, Tim Miller quickly became one of Hollywood's most in-demand filmmakers. When creative differences with Ryan Reynolds led to the filmmaker walking away from Fox's planned sequel, he set about rebooting the Terminator franchise alongside James Cameron, welcome news after the disaster that was Terminator Genisys.

Cameron gave that movie his seal of approval in a featurette, sharing comments he's since admitted regretting due to what a colossal mess it ended up being. 

While Dark Fate received positive reviews from fans and critics alike, it didn't make the necessary impact at the box office. With only $62 million in North America and $261 million worldwide, the blockbuster was deemed a flop and put the iconic franchise back on the shelf.

Cameron, who helmed Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day, has previously shared his hopes to do something new with the franchise, and revealed last year that he'd started writing a reboot which he's put on hold due to the real-life rise of A.I. 

Arnold Schwarzenegger has previously said he's "done" with the franchise, noting that "I got the message loud and clear that the world wants to move on with a different theme when it comes to The Terminator." 

Now, Sarah Connor actress Linda Hamilton has shared similar sentiments in an interview with Business Insider (via SFFGazette.com), confirming she too has no interest in returning to the sci-fi series. 

"I'm done. I'm done. I have nothing more to say. The story's been told, and it's been done to death," she said, echoing Arnie's 2023 remarks. "Why anybody would relaunch it is a mystery to me. But I know our Hollywood world is built on relaunches right now."

As for the character's legacy, Hamilton added, "I truly feel like, and felt like, Sarah Connor is not an icon. She's a woman in hell. She makes some really bad choices. She's not a good mother, she's a good fighter!"

"So you sort of try to parse the details out and go 'Well, they respect her strength and her power, and I did create a warrior, but she's very imperfect. She's an imperfect person.' So it was hard to sort of come to terms with all that and then just go, 'Okay, I can accept it,' because I've heard it now for so many years, people actually treat me like I saved the future."

"If you could see how utterly hapless I am during my life and my daily life!" she concluded. "But it's pretty cute, and I have no complaints, it's delightful."

Hamilton first played Connor in 1984's Terminator and reprised the role in T2: Judgement Day seven years later. She then bid "Hasta la vista" to the franchise before agreeing to return alongside Schwarzenegger in 2019's Terminator: Dark Fate.

Let us know your hopes for the Terminator franchise in the comments section below.

TERMINATOR: DARK FATE Director Admits Killing John Connor Was One Of The Movie's Biggest Mistakes
Related:

TERMINATOR: DARK FATE Director Admits Killing John Connor Was One Of The Movie's Biggest Mistakes
TERMINATOR: DARK FATE Producer James Cameron Explains What He Thinks Went Wrong With Tim Miller's Sequel
Recommended For You:

TERMINATOR: DARK FATE Producer James Cameron Explains What He Thinks Went Wrong With Tim Miller's Sequel

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Do you have what it takes to write for us?
Want to contribute?
Beer85
Beer85 - 2/22/2024, 4:46 AM
The first 2 movies are the only real ones. That fan-fictiony Sarah Connor TV show was somewhat enjoyable. Stop ruining good movies Hollywood.
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/22/2024, 9:55 AM
@Beer85 - I would fight for T-3 until my grave. You are correct; the first two are gold (tho, I felt the 2nd one dragged on a bit too long).
I loved T-3. The aftermath of destroying skynet, John's life off the grid, the freaking car-chase-big-crane-truck was awesome; beat the hell outta Matrix 2's highway scene, and the ending was so heart-breaking with John and Cate in the bunker realizing they are there to survive, not beat the enemy. It was also fast paced and got to the point.

Yeah, it had it's goofy moments, but I still loved it.

T-4: Complete, boring garbage.
T-5: Stupidest story ever, too many goofy moments, horrible casting for Kyle, and turning John into a terminator was just purely a sh1t idea.

T-6: I actually really liked Dark Fate. Mostly, I just loved Sarah had to work with the Terminator that killed her son.

Just my opinions.
JayBarrick
JayBarrick - 2/22/2024, 4:52 AM
She is right, but also wrong.

Sarah Connor isn't perfect, it's flawed.

But that's exactly why she is an icon. It's a fleshed out character, has deph, has moral issues, has internal growth.

And yes, Terminator is a burned out franchise, any new installment would really need to let go of nostalgia and bring something new to the table. Sadly, Hollywood is not famous for being brave and inventive nowadays.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/22/2024, 6:29 AM
@JayBarrick - I don't know why no one has stepped up and said, "Hey! You know that awesome scene in T2 that shows the humans balls deep in a battle against the machines? Let's make THAT!"

I could picture a trilogy of the future war very easily, and still tie it into the original 2 movies.

The first movie could be about them sending John Conner back to stop the Terminator from killing Sarah. But we see it from THEIR point of view. Meaning we never see any flashbacks or scenes from the past. Because we already saw that in T1. Instead we see the humans send Kyle Reese back and continue fighting their war. Halfway through they learn Reese died in the past but saved Sara. Then the machines send back the T1000 and the humans send back their own T800.

When they learn that both Reese and the T800 completed their missions in the past, but nothing changed for them in the future, the movie ends with them realizing that nothing they do in the past will prevent Judgement Day from happening. John Conner realizes that Sara's "No fate" comment is BS, and that the human race is destined to be thrown into this machine war, no matter what.

But that also means that John Conner actually is the savior of humankind that they talk about in the original 2 movies. Stopping his birth or him being allowed to live and become this great general isnthe entire reason the machines sent terminators to the past to begin with.

So, while John and the people in the future may not realize it, the audience knows the humans have a fighting chance.

The next two movies would continue with just the humans vs machines in that dark, war-torn setting with humanity eventually winning.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/22/2024, 6:30 AM
@CorndogBurglar - *the first movie would show the humans in the future sending Kyle Reese back. Not John Conner lol. That's what I meant.
KennKathleen
KennKathleen - 2/22/2024, 7:25 AM
@CorndogBurglar -
JustAWaffle
JustAWaffle - 2/22/2024, 4:54 AM
We all think the franchise should end. The first two still outweigh everything that came after (though T3 was a serviceable sequel to finish the story, and Salvation was a fun “what if” kind of movie).

But I think it’s the mystique of the AI war of the future that draws more fear and intrigue by not showing too much of it.
FireandBlood
FireandBlood - 2/22/2024, 5:04 AM
Cameron ended the story at the 2. The rest don’t count.
Feralwookiee
Feralwookiee - 2/22/2024, 5:11 AM
@FireandBlood - Yes sir.
Same goes for the Alien movies for me. Only the first 2 count and I ignore the rest.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/22/2024, 9:12 AM
@FireandBlood - As far as quality, I totally agree. But I do think T3 has its place on the story, even if it wasn't done particularly well.

The first two movies focused on saving John Conner, which they did. But the 3rd movie was the one that had them actively trying to stop Judgement Day as a whole. And they thought they did. Except Judgement Day still happened.

It's actually kind of an important chapter when you look at it like that. It proves that no matter what they do in the past, the future is always going to be the human/machine war.

And we kind of already knew that because the the machines were already in the future before they were even created in the past. So the entire franchise is based on a time Paradox. But T3 settles that once and for all by showing that nothing can be done to stop Judgement Day.

I just wish T3 wasn't such a bad movie lol.
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/22/2024, 9:57 AM
@FireandBlood - see my comment above.
Radders
Radders - 2/23/2024, 8:48 AM
@CorndogBurglar - The first one isn't so much of a paradox, its predestination time travel - The T1000 and Kyle always went back John was always born, the war always happened and Skynet was beaten.

Its T2 that messes it all up :)
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/23/2024, 4:41 PM
@Radders - Not really. In T1 the humans send Kyle Reese back in time to protect Sarah Conner, because is she will give birth to John Conner. Kyle Reese sleeps with her and gets her pregnant. She is pregnant with John Conner.

It's 100% a time Paradox because John Conner couldn't have existed in the future without Kylr Reese going back in time and getting Sarah pregnant.

Both John and Kyle Reese exist in the future BEFORE Kyle goes back in time. And we know it's before Kyle goes back because he dies in the past and doesn't return to the future. So John Conner existing at the same time as Kyle Reese in the future is definitely a Paradox.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/23/2024, 4:44 PM
@Radders - It's really no different than Skynet existing in the future even though it had to send a Terminator back in time in order to come into existence.
NitPicker
NitPicker - 2/26/2024, 7:48 PM
@CorndogBurglar - Forgive me for such a late reply.

There are no paradoxes with Kyle Reese/John Connor In The Terminator (the first movie). There might possibly be a paradox with Skynet, but there are no paradoxes with Kyle Reese/John Connor. Unless you want to consider time travel itself a paradox.

Kyle Reese gets sent to the past, but he is still a homo sapien. He was born in the year 2004, but when he traveled to the year 1984, I'm sure he still functioned the same way any other homo sapien has. He still needed to eat, drink and breathe.

If Kyle Reese eats a hotdog in the year 1984, he will eventually have to take a dump. If the movie had shown him eating a hotdog and taking dump, no one would have said that was a paradox.

"That poop wouldn't have existed if Kyle Reese didn't travel to the past. That's a paradox"

I've never seen/heard that type of comment.

This applies to everything Kyle Reese does though. When Kyle Reese shoots a gun. When Kyle Reese makes a bomb. When Kyle Reese drives a car and consumes the fuel. No one mentions paradoxes.

This should also apply to sexual intercourse. In the same way that Kyle Reese has to take a dump after eating, Kyle Reese will still get a woman pregnant if he ejaculates into her. Kyle Reese is still a male homo sapien.

If Kyle Reese had sexual intercourse with JANE DOE (NOT Sarah Connor), no one would call that a paradox.
If JANE DOE (NOT Sarah Connor) gave birth to JOHN DOE (Not John Connor), no one would call that a paradox.
If JOHN DOE (NOT John Connor) became the manager of Burger King, no one would call that a paradox.

People only mention paradoxes when Kyle Reese does something that causes John Connor to exist. I don't understand why.

People are looking at things through hindsight. Ford Motor Company is a successful business. Ford Motor Company owes a lot of it's success to the assembly line. But no one would say the assembly line is a paradox. Why not?

You can't definitively say that Henry Ford didn't travel back in time.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/27/2024, 12:28 AM
@NitPicker - The paradox isn't Kyle Reese alone. John Conner and Kyle Reese existing in the future at the same time is the paradox. Because Kyle Reese dies in the past and never goes back to the future. So it should be impossible for them to both exist in the future at the same time because John Conner can't exist in the future without Kyle Reese going back in time and sleeping with Sarah Conner.

If it was someone other than Kyle Reese that slept with Sarah back in the 80's and got her pregnant, and then that person survived to live long enough to see John grow up and be in the future war with him, then no, it wouldn't be a paradox.

But the fact that Kyle Reese and John Conner are both in the future together and pretty close in age (I'm assuming), before Kyle Reese goes back in time to get Sarah pregnant is 100% a paradox.

It's like Skynet existing in the future before the past is changed. The only reason Skynet rises to power is because they sent a Terminator back and the people in the past salvaged the microchip and hand of that Terminator after it got destroyed in T1. But how could Skynet exist in the future if it relied on itself to send a Terminator back to the past? It's changing history in order to make itself come into existence, but it already existed in the future before it changed the past.

This is exactly what happened with John Conner. The very fact that Kyle Reese and John Conner exist in the future at the same time means that John Conner would have had to be born BEFORE Kyle Reese went back to the past. Because again, Kyle Reese never makes it back to the future. He dies in the past. So there is no way John can exist in the future before Kyle Reese goes to the past and gets Sarah pregnant. A paradox is the only way that can happen. If Kyle Reese had made it back to the future alive, then it would be different.
NitPicker
NitPicker - 2/27/2024, 2:25 AM
@CorndogBurglar -

The characters in The Terminator (the first movie) don't have free will. There is a strict timeline. There can be no deviation from the timeline. There was no change in history. This is why Terminator 2 is a piece of garbage. It completely shat on the whole concept of The Terminator.

Kyle Reese appears in the year 1984 and remains a homo sapien. He still needs to breathe, exhale CO2. He still needs to drink water, urinate. He can still get a woman pregnant. If he dies after getting a woman pregnant, the woman will remain pregnant. The woman will still give birth to a child.

If the child became the manager of Burger King or if Sarah Connor was on birth control, no one would mention anything about paradoxes.

If Kyle Reese can eat a hotdog in 1984 and take a dump, then he should also be able to get Sarah Connor pregnant. His sexual organs still work after he gets sent to 1984. If Kyle Reese had been sent to the year 1884 he would still be able to get a woman pregnant. If he had only traveled back to a week in the past he would still be able to get a woman pregnant. No one would mention anything about paradoxes.

In the future, John Connor gave Kyle Reese a picture of Sarah Connor. The same picture that was taken AFTER Kyle impregnated her. There was no change.

There is no paradox. Unless you consider time travel itself a paradox.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/27/2024, 7:40 AM
@NitPicker - Thats exactly what a paradox is though. Something existing in the future that wasn't created in the past.

The Paradox is John Conner and Kyle Reese existing in the future at the same time. Because that isn't possible. In order for John to be born, Kyle Reese has to go back in the past and get Sarah pregnant. If Kyle then returned to the future, then no, it wouldn't be a paradox. But the fact that Kyle dies in the past, and never has the chance to return to the future means that Kyle Reese and John Conner CANNOT exist in the future together unless there is a time Paradox.

Before the time travel happens, there should be no John Conner in the future until Kyle Reese goes back and gets Sarah pregnant. This would cause John's birth and he would then be present in the future. But Kyle would not be able to be there because he died in the past. That is 100% a paradox.
NitPicker
NitPicker - 2/27/2024, 11:14 AM
@CorndogBurglar - Kyle Reese also created bombs in the past. No one ever considers his bombs to be a paradox. Kyle used one of his bombs to destroy the truck that the T-800 was driving. No one ever considers the destruction of the truck to be a paradox.

I don't see why Kyle needs to go back to the future in order for Sarah to legitimately remain pregnant and give birth to John.

If you are going to accept that John can travel to the past, you also have to accept that he can do things and cause things to happen in the past.
NitPicker
NitPicker - 2/27/2024, 11:26 AM
@CorndogBurglar - Maybe this will help

The Big Bang > The formation of the Sun > The formation of the Solar System > The formation of Earth > Life on Earth > The Greek Empire > Medieval Europe > The USA > (1964) Sarah Connor is born > (1984) Kyle Reese is removed from the year 20XX and placed in the year 1984 > (1984) Sarah and Kyle have sex, Sarah gets pregnant > (1984) Kyle dies, Sarah remains pregnant > (1985) Sarah gives birth to John > (2004) Kyle Reese is born, John Connor is still alive > (20XX) John sends Kyle to the year 1984

The only issue with this timeline is the time travel itself. Other than that, there is no paradox.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 2/27/2024, 8:59 PM
@NitPicker - So, before I respond I want you to understand that for this entire conversation, I'm not trying to be difficult or stubborn or incredulous. I'm not just hand-waving away what you're saying. I'm honestly taking the things you are saying and thinking them over. So much so that I just delete two comments and re-wrote as this one lol. Because after thinking more about what you said, I still have an issue with your stance. But I want you to know that I have honestly considered everything you said and I've enjoyed this conversation, even if we don't agree. I'm a giant need and love these kinds of talks.

And the thing is, I'm not even saying you aren't making sense. You ARE making sense. But I'm not sure I can say you're right. I'm also not sure I can say you're wrong either.

But here's where I keep getting hung up. John Conner's entire existence (his birth) 100% relies on his future self making a decision to send back Kyle Reese. That is a textbook example of a predertermined/time loop Paradox.

The future John Conner CANNOT exist until he makes the decision to send back Kyle Reese. His future self caused himself to be born. That is a paradox.

Just like Skynet could not exist in the future before they sent the original Terminator to the past. They also had a hand in their own creation. Again, that is a paradox. It should not be possible.
NitPicker
NitPicker - 2/28/2024, 9:39 AM
@CorndogBurglar - Everything is cool. I read your previous comments before you deleted them. I wanted to let you think about it some more before I responded.

I think the major reason people can't get a clear view of what happened in the movie is because people think the characters have free will. None of the characters have free will. The characters believe that they have free will, but they don't. I think John might be aware that there is no free will.

The timeline cannot be changed. Skynet sent a Terminator to the past in hopes of changing the future. John sent Kyle to the past to protect Sarah. Even with two beings traveling through time there was no change to the timeline.

In the future, Kyle was looking at a photograph of Sarah. In 1984, we see that same photograph being taken. The photograph was taken in 1984 after time travelers supposedly changed the timeline. There was no change. There can be no change.

No one is deciding to do anything. John didn't decide to send Kyle to the past. He has no free will. The timeline is just playing out the way it is supposed to (time travel shenanigans included).

People like to call it a predetermination paradox, but there is nothing paradoxical about what happened in the movie. All of it is consistent.

John sent Kyle to the past because that's what happened. There is no paradox. The only way there would be a paradox is if John somehow *decided* to NOT send Kyle to the past.
Mugens
Mugens - 2/22/2024, 6:02 AM
The only way I would ever look forward to another Terminator movie is if James Cameron himself came back to write and helm it, and even then I would be a bit wary. Other than that, let it go.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 2/22/2024, 6:27 AM
The reboot will be creatively overseen by Skynet.

AI actors, script, marketing, production design, etc. etc. etc.

It's only fair that they let AI do it instead of humans. It's AI DEI.
Batmangina
Batmangina - 2/22/2024, 7:14 AM
T2 closed the loop just fine.

Rise of the Machines wasn't bad at all - just kinda unnecessary.

The TV show was surprisingly decent.

Everything else eats bagfuls of dicks.
Twenty23Three
Twenty23Three - 2/22/2024, 7:19 AM
It was done for a long time, then she appeared in the most creatively bankrupt and boring film of the lot.
Repian
Repian - 2/22/2024, 7:44 AM
The Terminator reboot should address the hours leading up to Judgment Day.

Isolated, far from this technological world, Sarah Connor lives with her son John in a Neo-Luddite community located in a forest. She is a fugitive accused of terrorism. Anna Torv to play Sarah.


When the FBI raids the Neo-Luddite community, Sarah and John escape. They are chased by an agent. She is played by Gwendoline Christie. She has a neurological implant and she is in contact with the A.I. defense (Skynet) through the neurodevice. Skynet controls the agent because she does not disobey the A.I.'s orders. Because of the neuroimplant, Skynet manipulates her brain, eliminating the sensation of pain and fatigue. She is unstoppable.
TheloniousJay
TheloniousJay - 2/22/2024, 8:03 AM
I'm in the minority that would like to see another Terminator film being made. However, where can they go with it now? How can they get us to care about a new group of actors/characters so that we can let go of Arnold and Linda? Unless there's a REALLY good idea, or James Cameron comes back to direct, I don't see the franchise returning for a couple decades.
philinterrupted
philinterrupted - 2/22/2024, 8:13 AM
I can’t think of anything new that a rebooted terminator franchise would bring.

Linda is right. It’s time to put the dog down.
dragon316
dragon316 - 2/22/2024, 8:14 AM
Should have ended with terminator two
CAPTAINPINKEYE
CAPTAINPINKEYE - 2/22/2024, 8:22 AM
If there is one thing that capitalism has taught us is that if there’s money to be made then they’ll keep making them. Star Wars is the perfect example. Jurassic Park, Transformers.
Toecutter
Toecutter - 2/22/2024, 8:22 AM
Terminator 2 was the last one—end of story.
Forthas
Forthas - 2/22/2024, 8:36 AM
If they are going to reboot the franchise, I think that they should go back and forth between the past and the future. they could add some twsit to it, like maybe there is a human behind Skynet and he is the one who actually decides to send Kyle Reese back in time.
Timerider
Timerider - 2/22/2024, 9:26 AM
I think it needs a reboot.

First film: Start with the war in the future, think of it like Saving Private Ryan, but it’s John Connor looking for Kyle Reese. John saves Kyle Reese from being killed.

Second film: 2 years later…This film is about learning who Kyle is and John Connor’s relationship with his dad. We see him complete missions like a special forces soldier would. Kyle Reese sees a lot of soldiers die, male and female. The end of this movie he receives the infamous Sarah Connor picture. John tells him, she’s my mother.

Third film: 1 year later…New Terminators arrive, these have real skin, sweat, bad breath, everything. John asks for a volunteer, one where he won’t return from, it’s a death sentence, and he tells his men that. One man steps up, it’s Kyle Reese, the man who saved his life in the first film. John tells Reese that the mission is in the past and his target is to find his mother and protect her.

The film is dark, figuratively and literally. It can be made into a series or films. The world it’s set in is exactly like James Cameron’s first Terminator film in the future flashbacks scenes. It’s bloody, it’s disgusting, not made for children to watch. These Terminators pull arms and heads off with ease.

If you remember in Cameron’s first film, the Terminator punches that punk in the stomach and leaves a hole. You need to bring that horror element back to the series. In Aliens, he brought that same horror element to that movie as well. That horror element was not there in the sequels that followed in the Terminator franchise after T2.
Izaizaiza
Izaizaiza - 2/22/2024, 10:05 AM
Time to move on. The movie was so fresh when it came out in 1984. Then they broke new effects ground with Terminator 2. After that, its been all downhill.
zeon00
zeon00 - 2/22/2024, 10:11 AM
While Dark Fate received positive reviews from fans and critics alike. No!! Fans don’t like it
harryba11zack
harryba11zack - 2/22/2024, 1:31 PM
@zeon00 - He knows, Joshy boy normally uses sh1t talk like this to get more plp to comment on his articles.
LeonNova
LeonNova - 2/22/2024, 2:27 PM
It’s okay to just let things be over.
KNIGHT3OOO
KNIGHT3OOO - 2/22/2024, 7:31 PM
Honestly she is right. 1 - 4 are the perfect time-loop they were going for to begin with. Telling a cohesive story that made perfect sense. Everything after with all the alternate timelines were garbage no matter how good the action was. It was truly mindless and only spoiled the franchises integrity to the core.

They in truth had the potential to explore life after Judgement Day in the ruined future Kyle Reese came from, but instead vouched for more silly truck chases in modern day L.A. that go no where.

Most people including the film makers of 5 and 6 never got the point of TERMINATOR to begin with, and it shows. And it hurts.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

Related Headlines
Latest Headlines

Hot Headlines Hot Headlines

Sci-Fi & Fantasy

Anime & Manga

Gaming

Horror

Cartoons & Animated Features

Action Movies & TV

Pro Wrestling & MMA News
View Recorder