|
Post by Ronnie on Sept 10, 2008 23:43:08 GMT -5
Did they say that? Really? Hmmm...I assumed it was John that killed Sarkissian. Well, you know those writers...they're tricky like that. Little devils. I still think John killed the guy. I mean, I could see it going the other way.... John sees his mother kill someone, something he couldn't prevent. This coming after the little chat at the park with Uncle Derek about Sarah "having a pure heart", etc. So, it would've been traumatizing to watch his pure-heart mother kill a man right in front of him...and we don't know how she would have killed him. Snap of the neck? Garrotting? Snuffication (oh, I love made up words)? All the above? Well, whatever it was, it would've had to have been pretty disturbing. John's at least seen a classmate jump off the side of a building, and not-Sarkissian was shot two inches from his face by Derek (and they go out for ice cream later!). I agree with Erika and k8ie. Throughout the whole episode, Sarah was desperate to get through to John, and we would've seen Sarah acting way more freaked than usual. Well, I guess she was acting pretty wired-up, but it was for different reasons (i.e. - Cameron was hunting them). Besides, you'd think it'd be the other way around if Sarah had killed Sarkissian; that John would be trying to reach out to his mother to comfort her, not Sarah to John. As a side note, was that little girl in the s1 finale Sarkissian's? I figured it was, but I don't think it was confirmed or anything. If that's really the case, then John would have killed her father...something that would tear him up even more inside. ACTUALLY, after Derek shot the fake Sarkissian, Sarah was hugging the little girl thinking she was fatherless, but then she said her daddy was in the Internet Cafe. The guy at the counter was later revealed to be the REAL Sarkissian. So yes, it looks like John/Sarah also happened to take away a little girl's father...
|
|
|
Post by jen22 on Sept 10, 2008 23:57:51 GMT -5
I'm not trying to be insensitive but I think that little girl is better off without that kind of father. Now I know parents can be more than one thing. They can be assasins by night but very loving parents during the day. Still eventually it will catch up to them and put their loved ones in the crossfire. Or worse they will actually see what their parents really do. That is therapy waiting to happen. Not that being there while Derek shot the guy didn't traumatize the girl enough. Poor thing. And I still hate Derek for that. He doesn't value human life. Like a Terminator.
His 'everyone will die anyway so what does it matter who I kill or whose life I ruin' attitude always keeps me from liking him. Then why is he there fighting with the Connors in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by Derek Reese on Sept 11, 2008 0:00:48 GMT -5
One of the things I'm most gratified by in the responses to the episode I've seen online is that, whatever happened in the attic and whoever killed Sarkissian, people recognize that it's a big deal and a major trauma for John and Sarah. I was really worried that we've seen people kill other people enough in television land to expect characters to simply shrug it off and move on. So again, it's good to see the audience recognize that killing a human being, even when justified or necessary, is a horrible, horrible thing. (ah, but Derek doesn't think so, I can see some of you replying. Again, stay tuned. We'll have more to say about Derek and his attitudes toward taking life in future episodes.) Actually glad to see the reactions finally appearing in general. It seems like a passing thought in general, when it comes down to action movies or series. I think more anything its crucial to John's own development.
|
|
|
Post by Ronnie on Sept 11, 2008 0:07:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Derek Reese on Sept 11, 2008 0:08:26 GMT -5
That's definitely a plus for the ratings.
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Sept 11, 2008 2:42:19 GMT -5
First post here. Let me try to explain my "Grand Unified Theory of TSCC".
To my mind, the most important fact we learned in Season One was that Cameron does not obey the orders of either John or Sarah. Think about that. Would John Connor have sent back a completely uncontrolled Terminator? I think not.
Now think about this: Cameron was shown in the "D&D" episode to have access to the time travel room. And in the pilot, we saw that she knows how to operate the time travel mechanism (leaving aside how they managed to get that into a bank without anybody noticing, and minus the dozen jet engines for the power, which is a major goof!)
Conclusion: Future John did NOT sent Cameron back to the present. She came on her own initiative for her own agenda.
Monday night that agenda was revealed: she doesn't want to be terminated.
Think about it. John Connor is destined to beat Skynet. Probably Cameron figured that out in the future. And what would be HER future once the humans have won? Deactivation - tossed on the scrap heap - burned to nothing with thermite.
I think she reasoned that end result out - and refused to go along with it. She decided the best way to survive would be to go back in time and learn to be human and help Connor stop Skynet, perhaps making herself indispensable to him. At the very least, she needed the Connors to help her blend in and survive in the present. She might even have feelings for John. But her primary motivation is pure survival - like any other sentient entity (but unlike most Terminators who don't have any survival reflex except to the degree necessary to complete their mission.)
That's why in this first episode, when it was plain she was going to be terminated, she in essence and to the degree her programming permitted "freaked". She has been trying to seduce John Connor all through the first season. Remember the scene in "Vic's Chip" where she said, "She [Barbara] would not be the first human fooled by a machine." Then the camera cut to her looking at John, as if to say, "Yeah, that would be you, numbnuts!"
She played on that when trapped between the trucks. She knew John had some feelings for her. Whether she reciprocates or not is hard to tell. But she NEEDS John Connor to survive. She needs him to keep her alive. That's why she has to protect him - not because he programmed her to (although he probably did) but because she has to. If he dies, Skynet wins and she becomes superfluous and just another Skynet robot. If he wins, she dies - unless she can seduce him into sparing her.
In this first episode, she succeeded - partially.
The one statement she made which screws up my theory is when she told Sarah not to allow John to bring her back again if she goes bad again. But there may be other interpretations of that remark. Maybe she feels that if she becomes just another robotic Terminator, she might as well be dead.
Of course, I could be utterly wrong about all of the above!
Other impressions of the first episode:
I'm surprised they brought Sarkissian on for two episodes and killed him off. Will we ever learn any of the back story on him? Who is this guy Walsh and how did he get the Turk? Did he buy it from Sarkissian? What was the connection between the fake Sarkissian and the real one? Who WAS Sarkissian? I suppose all this could just be dropped due to the reboot of the show, but it seems pretty abrupt.
How did Weaver know who to buy the Turk from?
In the promos for the next episode, we see Weaver asking Agent Ellison to "find another one" - i.e., another Terminator? How does Weaver explain to Ellison how she knows about all this? How does Ellison end up working for her as was suggested in the pre-season interviews knowing this?
By the way, according to an interview I saw today, Weaver is actually a model T-1001. Josh tried to minimize the importance of the extra digit on her model number, but Shirley Manson claimed it meant she had more abilities than even the T-1000 of T-2. Josh also confirmed that they introduced the fact of her being a Terminator precisely when they wanted to.
I saw the poster that showed a T-1000 and was surprised that they would introduce such a powerful model into the show, since a T-1000 would presumably make mincemeat of Cameron. But it did jibe with a concept I had for the T-3 movie (before it came out) that the best way for Skynet to insure its creation would be to come back in time itself and take over the company building it. I'd say Josh is thinking along those lines, too. We may yet find out that Catherine Weaver is actually Skynet - or some version of Skynet - sent back for exactly that purpose. And once John beats her, it would explain how he could beat Skynet in the future - because he'd already done it in the past.
By the way, the next episode promo shows Cameron isn't quite "fixed" yet! John says "Your chip is still screwed up" and Cameron pushed him away saying in what appears to be a challenging or angry tone, "How would you fix me?"
Well, that should be enough to ruminate on until next week.
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Sept 11, 2008 3:53:35 GMT -5
Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. Did anybody notice that when John replaced the chip, and Sarah pushed Derek back and then confronted John - that John was STILL pointing his gun AT HIS MOTHER?!
Think about that. Either he knew the gun was empty and there was no threat to Sarah (or himself when he handed the gun to Cameron) - or he was willing to threaten his mother in order to ensure that Cameron was reactivated.
And look at the facial expressions of Derek, Sarah and Charley after he tossed the flare - they were actually scared of him. That was the first time we really see John Connor the savior of mankind come out - a guy who will do absolutely anything necessary to win. A guy who will even forego the morality of his mother if necessary. As in the "Heavy Metal" episode, he goes "off the reservation." As Cameron put it in that episode, "the John I know...does these things."
|
|
|
Post by rove3 on Sept 11, 2008 10:58:53 GMT -5
I think that both Cameron and John were in-action examples of Catherine's "cross against the light" metaphor. Maybe that's part of what separates a the great leaders from the good or adequate ones.
|
|
|
Post by Deep Art Frummy on Sept 11, 2008 11:26:11 GMT -5
Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. Did anybody notice that when John replaced the chip, and Sarah pushed Derek back and then confronted John - that John was STILL pointing his gun AT HIS MOTHER?! Think about that. Either he knew the gun was empty and there was no threat to Sarah (or himself when he handed the gun to Cameron) - or he was willing to threaten his mother in order to ensure that Cameron was reactivated. And look at the facial expressions of Derek, Sarah and Charley after he tossed the flare - they were actually scared of him. That was the first time we really see John Connor the savior of mankind come out - a guy who will do absolutely anything necessary to win. A guy who will even forego the morality of his mother if necessary. As in the "Heavy Metal" episode, he goes "off the reservation." As Cameron put it in that episode, "the John I know...does these things." Agreed. That scene was awesome. It really set the foundation for John's eventual leadership.
|
|
cyadon
Major
A Random Sci-Fi Geek
Posts: 612
|
Post by cyadon on Sept 11, 2008 11:55:07 GMT -5
In regards to why John points a gun at his mother (and Derek -- I don't think he was going for threatening Charley):
I think Sarah killed Sarkissian. I think she choked him to death with her bonds in front of John.
It also explains later why Sarah seems so desperately to want to talk to John about the events in the Connor attic, but he wants nothing to do with it. It's also why, I think, he takes such a confrontational stand with Cameron across the thermite car from Sarah and Derek. /They/ may be willing to take a life, but he isn't. Not yet.
And the only reason I can see someone willing to draw a weapon on their parent like he did was in defense of life, which I believe he thinks Cameron is at this point.
|
|
|
Post by aceplace57 on Sept 11, 2008 11:55:15 GMT -5
I can't help but wonder what storyline they planned for Sarkissian. He seemed like an interesting character, that had a large criminal organization and resources. The writers strike sure messed things up. I'm surprised they didn't keep him around. Team Connor needs a variety of villains to complicate their life. At some point the military and FBI will be after them too.
|
|
t101
Major
Posts: 716
|
Post by t101 on Sept 11, 2008 12:35:48 GMT -5
It's also why, I think, he takes such a confrontational stand with Cameron across the thermite car from Sarah and Derek. /They/ may be willing to take a life, but he isn't. Not yet. That's a very good point. I see John getting a lot of flak for saving Cameron. But it goes beyond his emotional bond to her, after whatever happened he is just not in a state of mind to make that sacrifice. His mind just can't accept the rationale for doing that, because he hasn't come to terms with it.
|
|
rossbondreturns
Corporal
Summer 08 Wallpaper Challenge Winner!
Posts: 1,617
|
Post by rossbondreturns on Sept 11, 2008 12:38:05 GMT -5
In regards to why John points a gun at his mother (and Derek -- I don't think he was going for threatening Charley): I think Sarah killed Sarkissian. I think she choked him to death with her bonds in front of John. It also explains later why Sarah seems so desperately to want to talk to John about the events in the Connor attic, but he wants nothing to do with it. It's also why, I think, he takes such a confrontational stand with Cameron across the thermite car from Sarah and Derek. /They/ may be willing to take a life, but he isn't. Not yet. And the only reason I can see someone willing to draw a weapon on their parent like he did was in defense of life, which I believe he thinks Cameron is at this point. I disagree about you stating that Sarah killed Sarkissian and that is why John aims his gun at Sarah. John Killed Sarkissian: I vote for a Kick to the head, smashing tackle to the ground and with Sarkissians arms pinned to his sides smashing of Sarkissians noggin into the attic floor until he stops moving. The Reason John aims his gun at Sarah is because he want's Derek to back off first of all that's who it's aimed at first. He want's to be the only one that Cameron is focused upon especially if cameron does resume going nuts. Also Now that he's killed someone he's not going about to let another person, an ally he sent back (Sorry don't believe the she sent herself back theory)- get killed for no damned reason. So he makes a stand and Derek and Sarah realize uh oh...the transformation has begun. It's even worse for Derek who was almost 100 percent certain moments ago that he was finally done with pesky Cameron. And whatever knowledge of him in the future the she knows...that he doesn't want anyone...especially John to figure out.
|
|
|
Post by jeck on Sept 11, 2008 14:48:39 GMT -5
Hi all. I'm not much for speculating and theorizing and stuff though I find all your opinions intersting, the ones I've read anyway... but I just have to ask one thing that's entirely off your already ongoing thread here. Sorry... But does anyone feel like the 'Promise' exchange was the override? Not Cameron doing it herself but John maybe programming that knowing that his younger self would know to say that? Just thought of that and I'm not entirely sure if anyone else saw it that way?
|
|
cyadon
Major
A Random Sci-Fi Geek
Posts: 612
|
Post by cyadon on Sept 11, 2008 14:59:08 GMT -5
Hi all. I'm not much for speculating and theorizing and stuff though I find all your opinions intersting, the ones I've read anyway... but I just have to ask one thing that's entirely off your already ongoing thread here. Sorry... But does anyone feel like the 'Promise' exchange was the override? Not Cameron doing it herself but John maybe programming that knowing that his younger self would know to say that? Just thought of that and I'm not entirely sure if anyone else saw it that way? Personally, I didn't get that vibe. I felt it was based on earlier foreshadowing by Catherine about a computer that could cross against the light. That Cameron did just that and broke her terminate rule and overrode it.
|
|