Iceshadow
Well-Known Member
After Langsta's post I'm really looking forward to this now.
That's when time-travel explanation comes and gives people headaches. Doesn't he have to exist somehow for John to send him back in time later on?I don't know how Reese can exist in this movie if he died in the first one.
I I don't know how Reese can exist in this movie if he died in the first one.
Gotcha, thanks.Nope, T3 occurs in 2004, so The Sarah Connor Chronicles skips out T3 completely, due to the time jump that takes place in the pilot.
Simple.
Reese is sent back by John Connor, where he gets Sarah pregnant with John, and then dies. This film is set in the future, but not too far in the future that it is after Reese is sent back. I did hear a rumour once that this film (and any potential sequels) will lead up to Reese being sent back and bringing the movies full circle.
That doesn't make sense. The future from which Reese is sent back must be an alternate future than the one that follows the first Terminator movie. It can't just be one big circle. There's more than one future. The John from Reese's future must have been born under different circumstances.
That doesn't make sense. The future from which Reese is sent back must be an alternate future than the one that follows the first Terminator movie. It can't just be one big circle. There's more than one future. The John from Reese's future must have been born under different circumstances.
It makes perfect sense. We are suppose to understand from the first movie that Reese is John's father.
I thought T3 was the official one and the Sarah Conner show was an alternate.
Nope.
Reese goes back in time, fathers John and dies. This creates two possible timelines. The one where Reese goes back, and one where he didn't. The films follow the universe in which Reese did go back and John was born.
and TGO, I'm not really sure which out of T3 and SCC is official canon, but I prefer SCC so I used that.
snip
TSCC is an alternate timeline, and McG has acknowledged that whatever he does with T4 he's not going to try to contradict or reproduce anything that happens in the TV show with the implication that TSCC may, can and could exist in the same timeline as T4, but it's not specified as such.So TSCC doesn't take place before T3 in one timeline together? I assumed it happened between 2 and 3 since in the show (when I saw the pilot) it was 2007 (or '08...) still a few years before T3 (which was said was in year 2011, right?)
Cameron is destroyed
Ahh, Ok. Many thanks.TSCC is an alternate timeline, and McG has acknowledged that whatever he does with T4 he's not going to try to contradict or reproduce anything that happens in the TV show with the implication that TSCC may, can and could exist in the same timeline as T4, but it's not specified as such.
As HBM points out, TSCC, by jumping between the late 90s to 2006, effectively skips T3. I think what's going unspoken is that T3 is not being paid any attention to. It may contradict things between T2, TSCC and T4 but it's not being written out. Call it "soft retcon," if you will.
Anyway, I hate it when people try to make Continuity Physics into laws instead of theories, so I think it's best not to think too hard about how one thing fits into the scheme of other things.
Also, regarding the "Reese is the father of someone who sent him back in time" business. Time travel is not supposed to make sense as a science, it's supposed to make sense as a narrative and dramatic device.
I hate how EVERY thread about Terminator devolves to discussing nothing but time travel and predestination paradoxes, et al.
How about, "Who thought Brian Austin Green could be cool?"
Terminator 3 ****ed the timeline up so much I don't even try to explain it. That's why I don't consider that movie "cannon"