# Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles - "Pilot" - 01/13/2008



## gulfwarvet (Mar 7, 2007)

so who's ready?


----------



## bdowell (Mar 4, 2003)

Bring it on and please don't let it suck (like the 'new' Bionic Woman as an example)


----------



## jjsanders281 (Dec 18, 2006)

Ya its here and the audio is completely out of sync!! Damn Directv!!!


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

After looking forward to this since the upfronts in June, I'm really disappointed in this show or at least the pilot. I thought it would be different, different how, I'm not sure, but I'll stick with it for a few more episodes and see how it shakes out.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

I watched it and thought it was a very good show. I will keep watching it.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

So what did everyone think?

I thought this was pretty faithful to the story told in Terminator 2, and the leads were well-cast.

I wonder just how "different" Cameron is ... she seems to have feelings for John, and she can eat too!


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

I thought they did a great job with this. It is a show that I will keep watching.


----------



## wakajawaka (Sep 27, 2006)

I thought it was pretty cool. One of the things that made the Terminator series great was the RELENTLESSNESS of the Terminator, which they did quite well in this show. Plus having a pretty female protector Terminator doesn't hurt (Summer Glau rocked in Firefly, glad to see her on TV again). So she can eat, she may be "fully functional", good news for John.  And they have a great actress for Sarah, rugged but vulnerable. Look forward to the show tomorrow.


----------



## wakajawaka (Sep 27, 2006)

jjsanders281 said:


> Ya its here and the audio is completely out of sync!! Damn Directv!!!


My audio was in perfect sync, doubt it was directv's fault.


----------



## waynebtx (Dec 24, 2006)

jjsanders281 said:


> Ya its here and the audio is completely out of sync!! Damn Directv!!!


My audio was in perfect sync. Throught it was good .


----------



## kocuba (Dec 29, 2006)

jjsanders281 said:


> Ya its here and the audio is completely out of sync!! Damn Directv!!!


Haven't watched but recorded it. But when I was watchingthe 4th quarter of Cowboys/Giants the audio was also out of sync. Where in OH are you. Maybe it was a local thing...

Also just remebered tha when I turned the TV back on after it was done taping Family Guy was out of Sync also. Gonna check the channel again and compare it with OTA.


----------



## petergaryr (Nov 22, 2006)

Not a bad start.


----------



## petergaryr (Nov 22, 2006)

For a TV budget, the SFX weren't all that bad. While I liked the pilot, and have things set as a series link, I'm wondering how this story can be sustained as a series without getting repetitive. However, I woun't pre-judge. The pilot was good enough to make me come back for more.


----------



## gulfwarvet (Mar 7, 2007)

kocuba said:


> Haven't watched but recorded it. But when I was watchingthe 4th quarter of Cowboys/Giants the audio was also out of sync. Where in OH are you. Maybe it was a local thing...
> 
> Also just remebered tha when I turned the TV back on after it was done taping Family Guy was out of Sync also. Gonna check the channel again and compare it with OTA.


same here, i have it recorded but haven't had the chance to watch it just yet.

i'm in central Ohio and will post if i had any sync issue's


----------



## tfederov (Nov 18, 2005)

I'm going to give it a couple more episodes before I decide one way or the other.


----------



## tfederov (Nov 18, 2005)

I'm going to give it a couple more episodes before I decide one way or the other.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Loved it, great show. Luckily with the writers strike Fox really can't cancel it after 4 episodes or something.


----------



## gulfwarvet (Mar 7, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> Loved it, great show. *Luckily with the writers strike Fox really can't cancel it after 4 episodes or something*.


at least we hope that will be the case


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

(1) 
I thought the show would have sucked without Arnold... I was wrong... it was pretty good (or perhaps I'm just a sucker for anything related to the Terminator movies, no matter how different)

(2)
what model was the girl robot anyway? she never answered John's qustion at the gas station.... :sure: 
(2) will John somehow fall in love with the girl robot?(assuming she's anatomically correct, just like Data from Star Trek: TNG, who had a thing with Tasha Yar)


(3) what would Sigmund Freud say about Sarah showing cleavage to his son, and also being completely naked with him in the highway scene?

(4) 
it didn't have as many coomercials as I had expected... is this a good sign or bad sign?

(5)
what was the weapon that Sarah used in the bank vault scene? nuclear? :eek2:


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Just finished watching.

Started slow ... ended great ... series link for sure ...


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

bluemoose said:


> (5)
> what was the weapon that Sarah used in the bank vault scene? nuclear? :eek2:


The weapon had an isotope that woud turn red to indicate the gun could be fired.

Here's one thing I'm curious about: What happened to all of the time-travel equipment in the bank vault? Was it left behind?

Also, when they arrived in 2007, it looks like the FBI agent missed seeing the "streakers" news story, but Sarah's ex-fiance from 8 years earlier spotted it. Trouble or not?

I think that the FBI agent will turn out to become an ally of the Connors - he has 19 witnesses who saw a robotic leg, so how much more "proof" is he going to need before starting to believe that Sarah is telling the truth about robots from the future?


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Okay so, I saw the premier even after I made a ton of fun of the concept. And, even though I didn't want to like it, I did. It was fun. It was another "terminator" complete with "terminator Babe" and the obligatory 20-something playing a 15 year-old (I CAN'T STAND THAT! -- if you want to use a 20 year-old actor, make the frickin' character 20 years old!)

The action was pretty good, though as with the movies, Sarah should be dead by now with all the injuries and whatever from all the attacks.

The guy who plays the Terminator does not try to be Arnold. He plays it straight.

I had a problem with the terminator babe when we first meet her but don't know she's a terminator yet. It has to do with the whole personality thing. It is an inconsistancy that just bugged me the rest of the episode.

The story line for the continuing series is another one of those where, unless the series is a medium success, we will never see a satisfactory conclusion. That is a turn-off for me. If the series is a flop, the series will be canceled and the end of this story will never be revealed. If the story is a big hit, then the networks will make the story stretch to the ends of the Earth and the conclusion of the thread will never be revealed. Only if it is a mild success will we see it Sarah and son along with Terminator Babe actually do complete what they set out to do.

As always with time-travel stories you have the inevitable quandry. But Star Trek taught me to forget about little things like logic when dealing with these things. You have to have a very strong suspension of disbelief to enjoy this show. I do and I did. We will see what tomorrow brings. 

See ya
Tony


----------



## waynebtx (Dec 24, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> So what did everyone think?
> 
> I thought this was pretty faithful to the story told in Terminator 2, and the leads were well-cast.
> 
> I wonder just how "different" Cameron is ... she seems to have feelings for John, and she can eat too!


I got that too she did show feelings for john the eating was a good touch.


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> Here's one thing I'm curious about: What happened to all of the time-travel equipment in the bank vault? Was it left behind?


If I were the engineer who was sent back to build it, I would definitely included some sort of self-destruct mechanism. If the time-machine and the weapon were left behind, someone could have found it and build something evil with it... (just like when Cyberdyne found the chip left behind by the original Terminator) 

On the other hand, if I were the writer, I would probably leave the time machine behind so the new Terminator can use it to follow them to 2007....


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

If I had to guess, I would imagine the time machine was a one-use deal... and it self-destructs in the process of sending them off. Probably also booby-trapped to avoid use by the wrong people.

In the Terminator-verse, this is the first time anyone went forward in time. Intriguing in a strange way. In the original movie, the guy who was sent back to protect Sarah (and fathered John) said it was a "one-way trip"... as would assume it also was for the Arnoldator who was sent back as well.

Either something else has changed (perhaps the delay of Skynet taking over for years later than original has also resulted in more powerful technology in the future).

The only drawback I see for this show... is without an evil Terminator from the future to battle, what will they do on a given episode? And if they fight a badguy robot every episode that wears thin too. I would like this to continue to be a good show, but also hope they don't just drag it out if it does well in the ratings.

I like all the actors in all the roles so far. Sarah is good (liked her in "300" also), as is John. Good-girl-Terminator works, with a touch of mystery, and the badguy is badass too. Also like the FBI guy (I liked him from "Judging Amy").


----------



## dfergie (Feb 28, 2003)

Same Bad Govt. guy waiting though... I love the Summerator


----------



## dfergie (Feb 28, 2003)

Dup threads should be merged with this http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=115886 Lol


----------



## chris0 (Jun 25, 2007)

HDMe said:


> If I had to guess, I would imagine the time machine was a one-use deal... and it self-destructs in the process of sending them off. Probably also booby-trapped to avoid use by the wrong people.


Well, they transported to a different time but the same place. The went from the bank to a freeway. Maybe there _was_ a booby trap and it's why the bank isn't there anymore.



HDMe said:


> In the Terminator-verse, this is the first time anyone went forward in time. Intriguing in a strange way. In the original movie, the guy who was sent back to protect Sarah (and fathered John) said it was a "one-way trip"... as would assume it also was for the Arnoldator who was sent back as well.


The machine allows one to travel but the machine stays put. Reese didn't have another machine but our new gang did.

I like that they jumped to our present. When I first saw that it was set in 1999 I was disappointed. I also like the idea of possibly having more goodies spread around that were constructed in the past by people from the future and are ready for use in the present. It allows for all kinds of cool stuff.


----------



## mhendrixsr (Nov 17, 2007)

I've anticipated this series since initially advertised and I like it a lot so far. Its been awhile since an hour went that fast watching something on network TV. I was initially troubled by the new Sarah... just couldn't quite buy her as John's Mom. But, it's probably as believable as Summer and John being in high school. As said above... sometimes you just have to forget the logic and enjoy the ride. Its great seeing Summer again... we need more of this kind of stuff on network TV.


----------



## frederic1943 (Dec 2, 2006)

They may have led to the creation of SkyNet. At the end of Terminator 2 they had destroyed everything that used the chips from the future. But when Sarah used the weapon it blew apart the terminator's torso leaving his arms, legs and head damaged but intact. Of course if it can escape it will have 8 years to repair itself.
The weapon was destroyed along with everything else in the time bubble that was not encased in flesh which would have included the time machine itself. That's why Resse said in the first Terminator that it was a one way trip. You have to build a new machine every time you use one. 

Summer is definitely cuter than Arnold.:lol: :lol:


----------



## frederic1943 (Dec 2, 2006)

bluemoose said:


> (2) will John somehow fall in love with the girl robot?(assuming she's anatomically correct, just like Data from Star Trek: TNG, who had a thing with Tasha Yar)


If she and John do get it on I hope shes not a back scratcher. She'd rip his spine out!:lol: :eek2: :lol:


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

gulfwarvet said:


> merging these to threads would be fine with me as well. i was originally going to list this as you suggested (which is fine), just at the time my daughter was wanting daddies attention so i just typed something real quick. (sorry)
> 
> however i would also like to add this after or before your suggested tittle (if this would be OK?)
> 
> ...


I guess maybe the threads shouds stay separate, seeing as how you do want tit to be a thread for the entire series. Eventually the thread I started for the Pilot episode will fall off the front page.

I'm a fan of individual threads, with each thread discussing each episode (this is from my TiVo Community days ) and tend to avoid threads where one thread is supposed to cover the entire series. My reason for this is I am often behind, and if I have two or more episodes backlogged, I can't read the "series thread" because it could have spoilers, since it covers multiple episodes and posts coud be in any order. With episode-specific threads, I can just catch up on the threads as I go along catching-up on the actual episodes ...


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

mhendrixsr said:


> I've anticipated this series since initially advertised and I like it a lot so far. Its been awhile since an hour went that fast watching something on network TV. I was initially troubled by the new Sarah... just couldn't quite buy her as John's Mom. But, it's probably as believable as Summer and John being in high school. As said above... sometimes you just have to forget the logic and enjoy the ride. Its great seeing Summer again... we need more of this kind of stuff on network TV.


I totally accept the actress as the mother - it just works for me. I think the actress has the Linda Hamilton vibe down perfectly! I can't remember where I read this, but she expressed some concern aboout taking on the L.H. role, because it was quite iconic and there would be comparisons. I don't think this actress in the TV series has anything to worry about ...


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

I would give the show an 8 or so. I was looking forward to it.

The problem will be in sustaining it as a series. How can episode #37 be anything more than "evil robot tries to kill John, misses". 

The whole time travel forward deal was just to keep internet sites from posting nit-picks about not yet invented stuff. And while we are at that, the cop cars at the beginning of the show were current Crown Vics. They got a slight redesign in 98, and it is unlikely that every car in a small town fleet would be the new model just the next year.

I liked the "inside joke" double references like "Come with me, if you want to live". Look for "I'll be back" a lot.


----------



## thxultra (Feb 1, 2005)

I was hppy with the pilet but also don't see how they are going to sustain this seris. The show has a lot of potential. The part were they went to present time was very interesting. I also liked ow they said they teleported someone back to build the gun because it wouldn't have made sense otherwise.


----------



## sean10780 (Oct 16, 2007)

I was very happy with the Pilot episode as well and will be watching the second half of the premiere tonight. I am also concerned with this series not being able to stay new instead of repeating the same things over and over. I guess we'll just have to see what happens. 

Anyone know how many episodes there are?


----------



## bigmac94 (Aug 18, 2006)

wakajawaka said:


> My audio was in perfect sync, doubt it was directv's fault.


 Did not have audio at all,truely bummed!
waited for some time thinking it would fix itself,however it did not.
reading lips is not my thing,and the sound did not come back after a remote restart. However the sound came back when the show was over.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

mhayes70 said:


> I watched it and thought it was a very good show. I will keep watching it.


+1


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Some things to think about...

As they were transported in time, it looked like everything in the vault was being blown up from the weapon being fired and the terminator exploding. The weapon probably disintegrated as Sarah was holding it when she was tranported (like all their clothes).

I find it a little convenient (unfortunate) that as soon as they show up in the future, they get their faces on the news so even though they think no one knows they are there, everyone knows it now. Of course, in 1999 cell phone video did not exist, so Sarah would not have known she was being recorded as she stood there like a deer in headlights.

They had a lot of safety deposit boxes rented. I wonder who was paying the rent on those for the last 36 years? 

As for resolution of the show, I read that it is supposed to lead into another Terminator movie in 2009.

- Merg


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Upon tuning in to this show's beginning, I was reminded of one thing: I really miss _24_, which would have premiered last night. Damn those striking writers!


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Upon tuning in to this show's beginning, I was reminded of one thing: I really miss _24_, which would have premiered last night. Damn those striking writers!


I agree. I am having 24 withdrawl's!!


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

The show was AWESOME.....24 where are you.....Monday on Fox would have been the best night on tv with the this, 24, and Prison Break when it does come back for its short run of new shows before they run out as well.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Upon tuning in to this show's beginning, I was reminded of one thing: I really miss _24_, which would have premiered last night. Damn those striking writers!


Mee too! But based on last night episode this appears to be a good substitute.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

My apologies for the odd treatment of this thread :grin:. Let's keep threads episode centric so that folks who may not be caught up can find the right thread to visit without thread of spoilers .

I've changed the title of this thread to reflect that.

Cheers.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

I enjoyed the first half. I hope the second is as good. I thought I recognized the Protector (if thats what she is called) from "Serenity"


----------



## sean10780 (Oct 16, 2007)

I miss 24 as well. I was thinking while I was watching this last night that we should be watching 24 instead of this. But if we can't 24, this along with prison break are pretty good subs.


----------



## Button Pusher (Jan 19, 2007)

I enjoyed it. I will keep watching.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

mhayes70 said:


> I agree. I am having 24 withdrawl's!!


I hear ya, especially with this season's storyline of _24_. I was really looking forward to seing how _domestic_ terrorists got control of our Air Traffic Control system and wreaked havoc and death. Looks like we'll have to wait until the fall or next January to find out.


----------



## sean10780 (Oct 16, 2007)

Lord Vader said:


> I hear ya, especially with this season's storyline of _24_. I was really looking forward to seing how _domestic_ terrorists got control of our Air Traffic Control system and wreaked havoc and death. Looks like we'll have to wait until the fall or next January to find out.


Yeah or whenever the strike ends. I wonder if they were going to make Tony a bad guy or not.

Anyway back to topic. Boy is that Cameron a real cutie compared to Arnold.


----------



## thxultra (Feb 1, 2005)

I would have missed 24 but aftre last season I'm happy to take a break from it. Maybe this will give them a chance to come up with some new ideas for 24. Terminator was interesting and the part with them on the news wasn't far fetched. cell phone cameras do exist now as well as red light cameras and they line the expressways with cameras. keep in mind they were naked in 2007 not 1999.


----------



## heathramos (Dec 19, 2005)

I liked the show as well, along at first I had trouble with the Sarah Conner character (I think Sarah is a little too butch for that skirt she was wearing in the beginning but I guess it was just a dream).

As for the series...

I am wondering if the series will concentrate more on unraveling who created skynet and how to stop it as opposed to just battling a new Terminator all the time.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

heathramos said:


> As for the series...
> 
> I am wondering if the series will concentrate more on unraveling who created skynet and how to stop it as opposed to just battling a new Terminator all the time.


That's how I think it will play out. John's ultimate mission is to lead the rebellion against SkyNet, but he convinced Sarah to never let SkyNet even become a realization. To me, this becomes the focus of the series now - the new mission, if you will.

And they'll know they've succeeded when in the series finale, just after Sarah kills someone or destroys some building, John and Cameron are about to finally express their love and ... Cameron disappears. You see, Sarah caused SkyNet to disappear, so there was no war, there were no Terminators and no robots... and no time travel, so Cameron was ... never there.



( I was serious about the first part, at least.)


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

thxultra said:


> I would have missed 24 but aftre last season I'm happy to take a break from it. Maybe this will give them a chance to come up with some new ideas for 24. Terminator was interesting and the part with them on the news wasn't far fetched. cell phone cameras do exist now as well as red light cameras and they line the expressways with cameras. keep in mind they were naked in 2007 not 1999.


Right. I was just saying that if Sarah had known of the existance of cell phone cameras/videos, she probably would not have just stood there that long.

- Merg


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

The Merg said:


> Right. I was just saying that if Sarah had known of the existance of cell phone cameras/videos, she probably would not have just stood there that long.
> 
> - Merg


But then again she is from the future when these things surely had to exist in some form so why wouldnt she know about them....not like she was built in 1999 to help them get to now.....as RS likes to say we'll find out "After the Break"


----------



## chris0 (Jun 25, 2007)

Anybody have a link to that cell phone footage? I think I'd like to see that. 

Did anybody else notice the body stockings they were wearing when running down the hill at the end? Kinda reminded me of George Costanza.


----------



## mhendrixsr (Nov 17, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> I totally accept the actress as the mother - it just works for me. I think the actress has the Linda Hamilton vibe down perfectly! I can't remember where I read this, but she expressed some concern aboout taking on the L.H. role, because it was quite iconic and there would be comparisons. I don't think this actress in the TV series has anything to worry about ...


I think my first thought was that Lena Headey (Sarah) just looked too young to be John's Mom. Once I got used to that idea I remembered an LA Times article where Lena was quoted as having doubts about playing this role. Worried that she'd always be compared to L.H. who has become a bit of an icon especially to the legions of fans and some of the female empowerment groups. Linda did look pretty buff in Terminator2 and ready to take on the T-1000 cyborg. Lena was described in the article as "healthy looking and attractive but not exactly Ms. Olympia". Headey's response was that "the film had the luxury of more money and more time"... "its a TV show..."

Overall I thought they did a great job with this one and Lena certainly did duplicate Sarah's determination. And, the HD video and audio was great at my location. Hopefully this one will not suffer the same fate as Bionic Woman.


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

how many episodes are they planning to do? (or how many episodes has
Fox agreed to pay for?)

alos, does the writers guild strike affect this show at all?

Thanks!


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

Add mine to the voices of those who enjoyed but am somewhat skeptical they'll be able to keep it interesting enough to maintain itself as a series. I mean will they be running every ep from terminators? That could get old fast. And if they decide not to have terminators showing up very often there's the chance of it getting too slow and boring. I'm not saying it can't be done right but it's easy to see how it could go wrong pretty quickly. Like I said I basically enjoyed it but I did have one little nitpick with last nights ep. The scene at the bank the terminator walks right in front of the police, through a window and then to the vault and you're trying to tell me that no one tries to shoot it?! Sure it might've looked rather intimidating but when faced w/ something intimidating and you have a big gun i'd say the instict is to shoot!! Not that it would've done any good, but the cops didn't know that. But anyway yeah i'll keep watching.


----------



## 1964 (Jul 30, 2007)

I also enjoyed the pilot. Just something to keep people intrested in the franchise until Christian Bale takes over as John Connor in T4.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

bluemoose said:


> how many episodes are they planning to do? (or how many episodes has
> Fox agreed to pay for?)
> 
> alos, does the writers guild strike affect this show at all?
> ...


1) 10 (maybe 12)

2) Yes. The show was originally supposed to come in September (the date shown on the sign at the end of the episode) but it was delayed so Fox would have something to show now that wasn't "American Idol". 

See ya
Tony


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

I think Summer Glau is a great young actress. She was great on Firefly, and is perfect for this show. Her ability to not show any emotion is great acting. What you would expect from a machine. But for the story to evolve, I am sure she will start showing a little more emotion towards John.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

1964 said:


> I also enjoyed the pilot. Just something to keep people intrested in the franchise until Christian Bale takes over as John Connor in T4.


I enjoyed Christian Bale in "Equilibrium" and "Batman Begins" I think he is a great choice for the role of John Conner.


----------



## JM Anthony (Nov 16, 2003)

Definitely off to a good start and worth a watch for the rest of the run. Nice complementary cast, decent story line, and good special effects. Yeah, I miss "24", but life's tough, chew harder.

John


----------



## TomH (Jun 11, 2005)

TNGTony said:


> The story line for the continuing series is another one of those where, unless the series is a medium success, we will never see a satisfactory conclusion. That is a turn-off for me. If the series is a flop, the series will be canceled and the end of this story will never be revealed. If the story is a big hit, then the networks will make the story stretch to the ends of the Earth and the conclusion of the thread will never be revealed. Only if it is a mild success will we see it Sarah and son along with Terminator Babe actually do complete what they set out to do.


What kind of a conclusion are you expecting? The end of the story has already been revealed. In 2011 the robots set off the holocost, John Conner leads a resistant movement against the robots, the robots send a terminator back in time to kill John Conners mother Sarah, John sends Kyle Reese back to protect Sarah.

These are simply the stories leading up to that conclusion. What exactly are you expecting? A different ending?


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Don't forget "The future is not set, there is no fate but what we make for ourselves." Those words were uttered by John Connor in T2 (and previously, I think by his biological dad).

Every time they act to change the future, the future changes. Whether it's a quantum universe shift with an alternate reality or the other future is destroyed or whatever technobabble explanation, every time they do something that alters the terminator's "history" they know less and less about what is happening in the future.

BTW this is why time travel stories can sometimes SUCK. You can make your own reality whenever you wish. Logic sometimes is held captive to dramatic license.

For example: in the first Terminator movie, the instant the cyborgs sent Arnold back to kill Sarah Connor, wouldn't they know they failed? Or at least the cyborgs in the alternate time line created? So they would send another Terminator to the same moment in time to help the first terminator. And again and again and again and again until you have an army of termiators? If logic is to be followed, John Connor would never have been conceived. Why not send a terminator back to kill Sarah's mother before SHE was born? Or her great grand-parent? So yes, I want to see this series to its conclusion where they succeed or fail just in time for the next movie. Sothing other than an abrupt dangling cancelation. 

BTW, T1 made it sound like the time travel thingy was super-difficult and very traumatic for a human. In T1 the soldier barely made it through alive! They made is sound like it was a one-time or two time thing. But the series has made it plain that it is common place and there is a complete temporal war. There are no rules in a temporal war. Anything goes!

Even in the second episode we had yet another "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure" moment. And from the sound of it, these moments will be a weekly thing.

But the second episode was good. Quite enjoyable

BTW full episodes are now on Fox.Com

See ya
Tony


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

TNGTony said:


> Even in the second episode we had yet another "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure" moment. And from the sound of it, these moments will be a weekly thing.
> 
> But the second episode was good. Quite enjoyable
> 
> ...


The second episode discussion thread: Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles- "Gnothi Seauton" 1-14-2008


----------



## jkane (Oct 12, 2007)

It reminded me of the old Hulk series in the 70's. They have to run to a new town every week and beat up bad guys then move on. If they do that, I'll watch it regularly. But ... I think they won't.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

jodyguercio said:


> But then again she is from the future when these things surely had to exist in some form so why wouldnt she know about them....not like she was built in 1999 to help them get to now.....as RS likes to say we'll find out "After the Break"


Sarah wasn't built. She's the mother. Summer Glau is the Terminator (I forgot her character name).

- Merg


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

The Merg said:


> Sarah wasn't built. She's the mother. Summer Glau is the Terminator (I forgot her character name).
> 
> - Merg


Sorry I switched it....Cameron (Summer's character) would know about cell phones and all the other techno stuff so why she let her stand there that long is all I was saying. 2nd episode on the Tivo waiting to be watched.....


----------



## frederic1943 (Dec 2, 2006)

jodyguercio said:


> Sorry I switched it....Cameron (Summer's character) would know about cell phones and all the other techno stuff so why she let her stand there that long is all I was saying. 2nd episode on the Tivo waiting to be watched.....


Cameron comes from 2029, all cell phones were sort of blown up in 2011. Reception would have been really bad in the midst of an atomic holocaust. The techno level in 2029 is geared towards stuff that can kill, not communicate.:lol:
I was surprised she just stood there. Somebody aiming a mechanical device at a terminator should be viewed as a threat.


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

lwilli201 said:


> I think Summer Glau is a great young actress. She was great on Firefly, and is perfect for this show. Her ability to not show any emotion is great acting. What you would expect from a machine. But for the story to evolve, I am sure she will start showing a little more emotion towards John.


Agree wholeheartedly... great young (and sexy) actress. After her Firefly character, who would have thought?

As to emotion, you might want to replay the episode. There are a number of instances where she shows just that. It's one of the first things that caught my attention when I watched the show. In fact, so much so, that I'm of the opinion that their relationship is destined to be more than what we might ordinarilly expected. Just a hunch, mind you.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Finally got around to watching the pilot. 

Not completely satisfied. I don't know that I like the casting. Lena Headey looks too young, Summer Glau looks too old. I liked the trick of having the sub sneak the gun in, using his leg, but it wouldn't have fooled a metal detector so what's the point? 

Also the part of my mind that would focus on temporal paradoxes is just going to have to skip this show, there are too many. 

I'll try the other two episodes I have recorded, we'll see.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Stu, not all schools _*have*_ metal detectors. Mine does, for example, even though it's in an area and environment that needs them.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Stu, not all schools _*have*_ metal detectors. Mine does, for example, even though it's in an area and environment that needs them.


Oh that's right I live in Southern California.

So, if you will indulge me in a geeky point of order, if there was no metal detector, and if you could infer no bag searches either, what was the point of hiding the gun in the leg then? Other than coolness of course.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

IIRC, he wasn't wearing a coat or jacket in which he could hide the gun, and considering it was a semi-automatic and rather sizable, he needed to hide it.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I guess the point is, if this is going to be quality show that has appeal to the highly geeky, it would help to have its own internal logic. Occam's Razor usually works... and in this case it would have made more sense for the sub to bring a briefcase. Not as dramatic but now you've got a terminator walking around with a big gash in his leg. It was never really established how quickly that model regenerates. 

I had the same issue with T2 where Arnold cuts half his arm off when simply slicing it to show the inside would have made sense. However, at least there you could argue that he knew his journey was almost over and he would have no need for subterfuge.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Stuart Sweet said:


> So, if you will indulge me in a geeky point of order, if there was no metal detector, and if you could infer no bag searches either, what was the point of hiding the gun in the leg then? Other than coolness of course.


I assumed it was in his leg, under the skin, so as to allow it to come back in time with him. They've said (although not 100% consistent with this "rule") that anything other than human tissue gets destroyed in the time travel... which is why everyone always comes through naked, and without weapons. But if a terminator hid one in his body somewhere, under the skin, then there you go!

As for the metal-detector-evasion theory... that would be semi-pointless since his entire body (as did Cameron's) would set off the detector anyway... so evasion from detection wouldn't be the sole motivator.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

While we are on that subject, is there a sensible reason why a terminator can come back through time when nothing else made of metal can?


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

The terminator is encased in human skin. That was the original explanation.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Does that mean you can send back a howitzer if you stuff it inside a fairly large fellow? Why wouldn't the human part transport and the skeleton fail? 

I know I'm nitpicking, just indulge me and give me some reasonable science.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Does that mean you can send back a howitzer if you stuff it inside a fairly large fellow? Why wouldn't the human part transport and the skeleton fail?
> 
> I know I'm nitpicking, just indulge me and give me some reasonable science.


In the context of this conversation this line just kills me. :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Glad I can be of some amusement 

People have actually written whole books on how you can have warp speed, transporters, light sabers, etc. I just thought it would be fun to speculate on the rules wherein you could transport metal objects encased in flesh but not ones that are not. 

What if you had a ball bearing in your mouth but your mouth was open? Would it transport?

What about your metal fillings? Do they transport? Sucks if they don't. 

Can you hold something in your hand as long as your whole hand closes around it?


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

I love the show.... so far...

However, I do think the storyline is a Freudian nightmare...


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Glad I can be of some amusement
> 
> People have actually written whole books on how you can have warp speed, transporters, light sabers, etc. I just thought it would be fun to speculate on the rules wherein you could transport metal objects encased in flesh but not ones that are not.
> 
> ...


I need to wear glasses to see... if I follow John and Sarah back in time, 
my glasses will no doubt be missing upon arrival.... making me blind as 
a bat.... perhaps I should remember to get Lasik eye surgery before 
my next time travel... 

Captain Hook should also probably not attempt time travel....


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

Captain Hook should also probably not attempt time travel.... 

Or at least he better hope Peter Pan isnt right there when he lands so to speak, man that would be messy


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

bluemoose said:


> I need to wear glasses to see... if I follow John and Sarah back in time,
> my glasses will no doubt be missing upon arrival.... making me blind as
> a bat.... perhaps I should remember to get Lasik eye surgery before
> my next time travel...
> ...


And if you wear contacts I suppose you better close your eyes.


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

jodyguercio said:


> Captain Hook should also probably not attempt time travel....
> 
> Or at least he better hope Peter Pan isnt right there when he lands so to speak, man that would be messy


"messy" !!!??? (oh, no, I must have a dirty mind...    )

I can just picture Captain Hook and Peter Pan both naked when they 
emerge from time travel... :eek2:


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

...Uh, thanks for that visual.


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> ...Uh, thanks for that visual.


Now throw Tink and Mr Smee in there and see what ya get :eek2:


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

jodyguercio said:


> Now throw Tink and Mr Smee in there and see what ya get :eek2:


a bad 1970's porn movie?


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Does that mean you can send back a howitzer if you stuff it inside a fairly large fellow? Why wouldn't the human part transport and the skeleton fail?
> 
> I know I'm nitpicking, just indulge me and give me some reasonable science.


 Reasonable? They're time travellin' ro-botz from the future - reason ain't even on the table for discussion! :lol:


----------



## bluemoose (Dec 7, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> Reasonable? They're time travellin' ro-botz from the future - reason ain't even on the table for discussion! :lol:


too bad this show isn't on cable(HBO, for example)....  I can just
picture many hot & steamy scenes between John and the girl robot...
or even Sarah and the hot girl robot.... they wouldn't even have to
cover up anything after the emerge from time travel... no clothes 
and everything.... 

the possibilities are endless....


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The whole "reasonable science" thing has to go out the window really... but they should at least be consistent within their own universe of rules.

In other words... time travel is ok as long as they establish the how/why of it and stick to that.

But if it was just about metal... then your blood couldn't go back in time with you either. It is interesting why there is such a device within the plot that prohibits anything not flesh-encased. I wonder what the original rationale for that was in the script? There must have been a reason for the original writers to put that limitation in there. I wonder what they were trying to accomplish, storywise I mean.


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

bluemoose said:


> a bad 1970's porn movie?


Exactly :lol:


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

HDMe said:


> The whole "reasonable science" thing has to go out the window really... but they should at least be consistent within their own universe of rules.
> 
> In other words... time travel is ok as long as they establish the how/why of it and stick to that.
> 
> But if it was just about metal... then your blood couldn't go back in time with you either. It is interesting why there is such a device within the plot that prohibits anything not flesh-encased. I wonder what the original rationale for that was in the script? There must have been a reason for the original writers to put that limitation in there. I wonder what they were trying to accomplish, storywise I mean.


Could be the inventer of the time machine did not want technology to be moved in time, only bodies. A workaround to this limitation was to encase the technology (the robots) in skin.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

lwilli201 said:


> Could be the inventer of the time machine did not want technology to be moved in time, only bodies. A workaround to this limitation was to encase the technology (the robots) in skin.


I'll have to go back and watch the first movie again... because I can't remember if they say who invented the machine. My memory says Ahnold was sent back to kill Sarah, then the resistance sent Kyle Reese back to protect her... which implies that perhaps the machines invented the technology and the resistance usurped it. Otherwise, if humans invented time travel, it seems they would have gone back to destroy Skynet before the terminators went back... and it would also explain the need for flesh covering.

If terminators/skynet invented the technology, it seems strange to have a flesh requirement when they were all about getting rid of flesh.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

HDMe said:


> I'll have to go back and watch the first movie again... because I can't remember if they say who invented the machine. My memory says Ahnold was sent back to kill Sarah, then the resistance sent Kyle Reese back to protect her... which implies that perhaps the machines invented the technology and the resistance usurped it. Otherwise, if humans invented time travel, it seems they would have gone back to destroy Skynet before the terminators went back... and it would also explain the need for flesh covering.
> 
> If terminators/skynet invented the technology, it seems strange to have a flesh requirement when they were all about getting rid of flesh.


I would have to go back also to see who invented the time machine. You are correct that if the terminators invented the time machine the flesh requirement would be strange.


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

If I remember the movie correctly, Skynet built it because the resistance was getting close to killing it and they sent Kyle back after Ahnold had already gone through so I dont know why the flesh requirement either


----------



## frederic1943 (Dec 2, 2006)

From the script: REESE...it had no choice. The defensive grid was smashed. We'd taken the mainframes... We'd won. Taking out Connor then would make no difference. Skynet had to wipe out his entire existence. We captured the lab complex. Found the...whatever it was called...the time-displacement equipment. The Terminator had already gone through. They sent two of us to intercept, then zeroed the whole place. Sumner didn't make it.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> Reasonable? They're time travellin' ro-botz from the future - reason ain't even on the table for discussion! :lol:


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

HDMe said:


> The whole "reasonable science" thing has to go out the window really... but they should at least be consistent within their own universe of rules.
> 
> In other words... time travel is ok as long as they establish the how/why of it and stick to that.
> 
> But if it was just about metal... then your blood couldn't go back in time with you either. It is interesting why there is such a device within the plot that prohibits anything not flesh-encased. I wonder what the original rationale for that was in the script? There must have been a reason for the original writers to put that limitation in there. I wonder what they were trying to accomplish, storywise I mean.


Probably budget and technology. Back in the original move it would not have been cost effective to have a robot instead of an actor. Funny, today the CGI would probably be cheaper. :lol:


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

Sirshagg said:


> Probably budget and technology. Back in the original move it would not have been cost effective to have a robot instead of an actor. Funny, today the CGI would probably be cheaper. :lol:


want to talk budget, the original terminator was in mono and not stereo, to save $10,000.


----------

