Time Travel, Paradoxes, TSCC 2.5 Spoilers and You

[k8ie]

There's been a lot of discussion about the potential paradox of having Kyle Reese wandering around TSCC's contemporary timeline. Feel free to discuss here in as much spoilery & speculative depth as you please.

Please remember to keep your comments contructive and polite.

Thank you.

[Alexis]

Is it as crazy as it sounds having Kyle Reese back?

I know it’s easier to think he’s one more of Sarah’s crazy hallucinations. But, what if he really came back?

Is it logically possible?

Is it an internal contradiction to the main plot of the whole Terminator franchise?

I think that I have some reasons to conclude that Kyle’s presence into TSCC time-line wouldn't be a contradiction at all, and it’s all about the time-traveling rules.

Hypothesis:

I’ve been thinking about Derek's theory on the different futures which are not related one another: Any change made by a time-traveler would create an entire new future which excludes the previous one.

In other words, the one who travels to the future and changes something, creates a "time-line breach" that modifies everything that happens from that moment on (that’s the reason why a time-traveler would never be able to come back to his, her or its original future, just because the future he, she or it knew already does not exist anymore since he, she or it changed it completely and created a new one).

Kyle time-traveled, changed the future and died. That’s a fact established on T1. We’re not discussing those facts.

What I think we should discuss here is the following:

- There certainly are 2 Kyles and 2 Dereks:


A- The mature Kyle who time-traveled to 1984 and died protecting Sarah AND the little Kyle (the 5 years old boy we saw playing with the young Derek on What He Beheld) who might end up surviving if the Judgment Day was stopped OR experiencing radically different future events and even having different missions if Derek and the Connor Team (or any other) made some capital changes on the future we know so far.

B- The mature Derek who time-traveled to 2007 (who may potentially change a lot of things along with the Connor Team) AND the young Derek who was teaching little Kyle how to play baseball.

Now, as the Kyle who dies in T1 and the Derek we know here are NOT the same Kyle and Derek that we saw playing at the park, and we know these younger Kyle and Derek are going to live through a complete different future (because their ‘alter-egos’, T1’s Kyle and the Derek we know, were in charge of changing it forever in their respective missions), we can perfectly dare to say that the Kyle we saw on the preview of The Good Wound might be the little 5 years old boy grown up and sent back with a completely different mission this time.

Since Cameron, Derek, Jesse and Riley (and maybe other possible new characters from the future who we might get to know on february) came back and made (or will make) some important changes, there might be a big chance that the 5 years old little Kyle we saw on What He Beheld could have grown up and experienced a totally different future in which maybe it’s not even necessary that John sends him back to 1984 (Has anybody thought for a second about the possibility of John Connor being removed of his leadership position? That would make unnecessary for Skynet to send a T-800 to kill Sarah Connor in 1984).

Perhaps in this new future, John Connor has different plans for his father and maybe those plans involve sending him back on a new mission. Destination: 2007 (Maybe Kyle’s new mission is related with keeping John Connor’s leadership intact by stopping some events from happening).

Some people might ask me: “How is it possible that John Connor exist if Kyle wasn’t sent back to 1984?” My answer is simple: Time-traveler’s changes only affects the future events, not the past events, which implies that the T1’s Kyle is still John Connor’s father (Probably, the little Kyle grown up will be just one of Connor’s best soldiers, the favorite one for obvious reasons, but probably Connor wouldn’t dare to tell this version of Kyle what happened with his ‘alter ego’ in 1984... ) It’s just something too complicated to be explained while trying to survive from killer machines attacks ).

I know. It’s a mess and you may think I’m as crazy as Sarah or even more But if you think of it carefully, maybe several times like I did, and you do it attending to the time-travel logical rules, it doesn’t seem too crazy after all… In fact, it wouldn’t be violating any rules of the internal logic in the Terminator plot, but it would be actually making a confirmation of those rules.

Greetings! And thank you for reading!!

[wb5]

Regarding the conflict between the "one timeline" (with associated time loop, the future making the past and changes in the past changing the future) and "different timelines":
I think only the different timelines can make sense and thus the one timeline stuff is best either not used, or at least the timetravel aspects of the show are best not focused on if this approach is chosen for thematic reasons.

Reasons why I prefer the multiple timelines approach:
-if there is only one timeline, that forms a sort of loop with Connor only existing because of Skynet deciding to kill him before he gets born (which is what actually ends up getting him born at all). But what starts the loop? If Connor is not born, then he cannot become leader of the resistance, thus Skynet has no reason to kill him, in the present or in the past. So he does not send a Terminator back and Kyle doesn't get send back as well as a response, so no Connor, no loop and no Terminator movies. With the multiple timelines, this does become possible by assuming that John Connor was always the leader of the resistance and Sarah was always his mother, but Kyle is not his father when Skynet comes around for the first time. Connor is close to defeating Skynet, so it sends a Terminator to eliminate him before he is born; the result is a changed Connor (with a different father) and a changed Skynet (due to the hand and CPU of the Terminator getting in Cyberdyne's hands), with some things changed but roughly the same endresult (and more people and Terminators getting send back, with diminishing returns for both sides).

-If there is only one timeline with a closed loop, characters could actually "wink out of existence", as John Connor for example, would only exist because Skynet existed and sent back that first T800. Multiple timelines avoids that problem, people instead go back to their own past but start influencing events and create a new timeline, with some changes, as a result. The advantage is that people would remember their "future" (as past events, from their POV), but the new future from their POV isn't fixed; their own actions can change it again, hopefully for the better. Their own future/past still exists, but it forms its own timeline that the timetravelling character is no longer part of; in their own timeline, they go missing and disappear forever, in their new timeline they spring out of thin air and then they keep influencing that line. They would also serve as a gauge for the characters in the timeline they jumped to, how much their particular timeline has changed as a result of changes made by those characters. For example, Cameron dropping in TSCC John's and Cameron's timeline let them know that events in T2 (where the samen Sarah and John changed the future through their actions) had changed the date of judgment day but not prevented it, creating the timeline Cameron (and possibly Derek) came from. Cameron then started influencing events, with the timejump for example, so the future changed once more, with a new timeline being created different from the one Cameron came from (possibly Jesse and the bloody wall guy coming from this line).
So, characters would attempt to change the future, and if another traveller from the (now altered) future comes through, they may get a chance to see what effect, if any, they had.

[vicheron]

There are only two logical solutions to time travel, parallel universes and predestination paradox. Either they create an new entirely new universe when they time travel or everything is predestined and time travel fulfills that destiny. Look up the Novikov self-consistency principle.

[allergygal]

I need to think more about about this Kyle theory before I can respond to it, but in the meantime, I'll throw in a link to a time travel post I did on my LJ recently. It deals with the new timeline/universe concept and probably lends itself to Kyle being able to arrive in 2008.

Back later with thoughts on your Kyle theory, alexis.

[Alexis]

Dec 19, 2008 18:19:18 GMT -5 vicheron said:

There are only two logical solutions to time travel, parallel universes and predestination paradox. Either they create an new entirely new universe when they time travel or everything is predestined and time travel fulfills that destiny. Look up the Novikov self-consistency principle.

That's totally right as regards 2 valid hypothesis about the possibility of time travel in actual life. But we're talking about the internal logic of the Terminator Franchise's general plot.

Fiction always has a connection with reality at some point, but not always follows the same rules. Most of time, there are fictional rules that creates a whole internal logic inside a fictional world that may even contradict the real ones

Dec 19, 2008 19:07:49 GMT -5 allergygal said:

I need to think more about about this Kyle theory before I can respond to it, but in the meantime, I'll throw in a link to a time travel post I did on my LJ recently. It deals with the new timeline/universe concept and probably lends itself to Kyle being able to arrive in 2008.

Back later with thoughts on your Kyle theory, alexis.

Great!! Thanks for the link! I'll read it carefully so that we can put things in common and analyze the differences!

I really love doing this kind of things!! ;D

[richardstevenhack]

The multiple time lines idea solves some problems, as Wb5 says, but it causes others.

If you send somebody back to change your past, then your current self has to change because of that change. So now you don't even know what you did in the past and therefore you can't know what to do to change it. Or you have two different selves in two different time lines and neither one knows whether the change actually worked or something else happened that caused the current situation each one is in.

Sorry, but time travel simply makes no sense whatsoever. Which is why if you want a time travel story to make ANY sense, you have to minimize the concepts as much as possible.

And the obvious problem with the predestination concept is that it makes hash of the entire story concept, since the concept was about changing the future which was not set. How and who tried to change the future is irrelevant. The concept was about changing the future. If everything is predestined except one little thing - whether Sarah lives or dies - then that's simply a major inconsistency with the whole concept of predestination.

Sorry, that just does not work, either.

Time loops make no sense, multiple time lines make no sense, and predestination (except in the sense that obviously by the "end of time" if such a thing exists, everything that happened will have happened in exactly the way it did happen) all make no sense.

You really have to let go of trying to think of this stuff rationally and instead consider it from the point of view of does it help the story to make any sense or make the story more entertaining.

Most of the time it doesn't. Time travel should be used strictly to set up a situation in which the characters have to resolve a conflict without relying on time travel "logic".

T-1 did that fairly well. The premise was simple: one Terminator comes back, one Resistance fighter comes back, that's the end of the time travel. The rest of the story is a straight action adventure in how to stop a killer robot from killing someone. Very simple.

T-2 - the same, except they added the rational possibility of getting rid of said killer robots once and for all by stopping Skynet and Judgment Day from ever happening.

Fine - all that works to set up a story and then allow the action to commence.

T-3 went off the rails by a) establishing that John Connor is a whiny loser, and b) establishing that Judgment Day is inevitable, therefore T-1 and T-2 are rendered moot.

The series has blown the the whole franchise wide open, and must inevitably jump the shark by doing so, unless the writers learn to reign in their desire for "cool", complications, and confusion.

Right now, the TSCC writers are like a really evil Dungeons and Dragons dungeon master who just wants to screw with this players. Believe me, I've been in that situation and it's unpleasant for the players. It's ego-boo on the part of the creators and will inevitably generate resistance and dislike from the viewers. And I know another fan personally who is already afflicted with the same irritation I have, and I've read other fans comments who are in the same boat.

If the viewers start thinking that they're being messed with and confused for no reason or just because the writers don't know what they're doing, the show is history. And I've seen a number of comments in show reviews indicating that's becoming the case. So far it doesn't look fatal but it depends on how things develop from here on out.

The writers need to stop being defensive about this and pay attention.

[Alexis]

Dec 19, 2008 19:07:49 GMT -5 allergygal said:

I need to think more about about this Kyle theory before I can respond to it, but in the meantime, I'll throw in a link to a time travel post I did on my LJ recently. It deals with the new timeline/universe concept and probably lends itself to Kyle being able to arrive in 2008.

Back later with thoughts on your Kyle theory, alexis.

It's 1 am here in Buenos Aires and I already feel a bit sleepy, but before going to bed I'd like to drop some thoughts on your LJ post. Just to start with: I think it's totally AWESOME!! Yeah! I can't believe how many similarities there are between our hypothesis. Despite we are working on different examples, I think that the general ideas are almost the same, don't you think?

So, it was really interesting and surprising to read, compare and find many common thoughts between them

For example:

When you say: “(…)in the terminator universe, a new timeline is not created until something significant has happened (as a result of the time traveler's presence) that causes a chain reaction of events that alters the future's previous path.”

I totally agree with you on that

“(…)not every time jumper actually creates a new timeline.”

Yep, I’m with you again

“She [Jesse] and Derek clearly share some memories, but they also have different memories because the future was altered. Well, if her future was different then she could not have come from the same timeline that he did. She came from the new timeline created when Andy Goode was found dead (or Barbara or whatever event it was that created the new future).”

Yeah!! Couldn’t agree more on this

“This Jesse never actually knew our Derek. And our Derek never knew her. She knew the young Derek who's now just a kid in the current 2007 timeline. It's technically the same Derek, but since his future is changed to some extent, he won't end up the exact same person as our Derek — he won't ever know Billy Wisher, for example. Likewise, Jesse's not the exact same person our Derek once knew either. This Jesse is also just a kid someplace in 2007 who will grow up in a future that's different from the one in which she knew our Derek.”

Wow!!! Yeah!! That’s exactly what I meant to say in my hypothesis about the 2 Dereks and the 2 Kyles!!!

“(…) I don't really see timelines as being these rigid lines fanning out away from each other. I think they're more like spiraling paths that intertwine and can even intersect. If Derek and Jesse share identical memories of any specific event, for example, that could be a segment where their different timelines actually overlapped. Of course, that also means it would theoretically be possible for someone to jump from one timeline to another. But in order to do that, they'd have to actually know where and when those timelines intersect and I can't think how that would be possible."

Just fascinating!!! I love the “spiraling paths” part of your hypothesis. The intersection points between different timelines might be the reason why people experience a “déjà vu” (if we brought this hypothesis to the real life, of course) as a distortion in the time-space continuity caused by the intersection of two different timelines ;D (Think I'm going too far? Everything's possible... "The truth is out there" or inside... You may think I'm crazy, lol ).

Anyway, as I said before, I love this kind of things!

[vicheron]

It is ridiculous to suggest that predestination paradox can't work or can't be entertaining. Look at "Twelve Monkeys," it's one big predestination paradox. It's still a great movie. It made logical sense. It was critically acclaimed and very entertaining. Of course, applying it to a television show won't be easy since it would take a very long time to fully resolve and require the writers have the basic story of the entire show planned out from the beginning. There is also a great potential for the viewers to misinterpret the basic themes of the show since it would require them to have some exposure to people like Albert Camus, Erich Fromm, Rollo May, etc.

[allergygal]

I've given some thought to the your theory about whether or not Kyle could actually time travel to 2008. And yes, I agree that he could. As you noticed, we seem to share the same theory on time travel.

Even though future!Kyle was sent back to 1984 to save Sarah, events have been altered, so we're in a different timeline. The little boy Kyle we've seen in our current timeline could grow up and be sent to 2008 instead of 1984. And of course, if that happens, he won't know Sarah because he won't be the same version of Kyle that spent time with her in 1984. I think that was basically Josh Friedman's original plan for the show — have alternate Kyle arrive (not Derek). He got talked out of it, though, and the character of Derek Reese was created.

John could have come to the conclusion that his very existence proves Kyle fathered him and saved Sarah's life in 1984 in an alternate timeline (ie - he doesn't need to send him to 1984 because some a different version of John already did in another timeline). It feels like a pretty big risk even if theoretically it makes sense, though. If John was wrong (and there aren't multiple timelines) his existence could be erased. But it's definitely a possibility that's in play.

The biggest problem I see with Kyle showing up in 2008, doesn't have to do with time travel, it has to do with messing with the Sarah/Kyle story. If they bring in a Kyle that doesn't know her, it would be heartbreaking. She's loved him for more than 16 years and if she actually got a chance to see him again and he didn't even know who she was, I think it would be pretty devastating.

[Alexis]

Oh, I found very interesting what you said about the possibility of Josh Friedman first intentions to include Kyle from the beginning instead of Derek.

I can perfectly imagine that and I think Josh changed his mind because he thought it was something very risky (or at least precipitated) to do in the very first season. So, Derek might have been a kind of testing to know how the audience would react to the possibility of having such a huge character as Kyle Reese back.

Even I could dare to say that the flashbacks with Derek might have served Josh as a perfect excuse in order to introduce to us the actor who was chosen to play the role of Kyle (I mean, this might have been Josh's big plan from the beginning!)

I'm not telling that Derek's character is superfluous, but I'm suggesting that there might be more behind... Some really BIGGER plans!!

Derek, obviously, is an important character in the development of the plot AND also he might be the key of all this. He might be the character who "prepares" the audience to see Kyle in action again. That would be a master move, don't you think?

Dec 20, 2008 16:41:15 GMT -5 allergygal said:

John could have come to the conclusion that his very existence proves Kyle fathered him and saved Sarah's life in 1984 in an alternate timeline (ie - he doesn't need to send him to 1984 because some a different version of John already did in another timeline). It feels like a pretty big risk even if theoretically it makes sense, though. If John was wrong (and there aren't multiple timelines) his existence could be erased. But it's definitely a possibility that's in play.

I agree with you about the risk of John’s existence being erased by not sending Kyle back to 1984. That’s why I imagined the possibility of John being replaced as the leader of the resistance (maybe as a consequence of Jesse’s actions or whatever happened) and Kyle being sent back to 2007 to stop those events and ensure John Connor’s leadership If in this hypothetical new future John Connor is not anymore the leader of the resistance, then Skynet will not send back a T-800 to kill Sarah because her son won’t be seen as a threat anymore (of course, if Kyle’s mission was successful and Connor ensures his leadership in the future again, then Connor will have to send back the 5 years old grown up Kyle –who’s not yet the Good Wound Kyle- to 1984, just because Connor would be a threat to Skynet again since he recovered his status of leader of the resistance).

Dec 20, 2008 16:41:15 GMT -5 allergygal said:

The biggest problem I see with Kyle showing up in 2008, doesn't have to do with time travel, it has to do with messing with the Sarah/Kyle story. If they bring in a Kyle that doesn't know her, it would be heartbreaking. She's loved him for more than 16 years and if she actually got a chance to see him again and he didn't even know who she was, I think it would be pretty devastating.

Yeah, I think so. It would be definitely devastating for the poor Sarah… But, if T1’s Kyle fell in love with Sarah, there is a huge possibility that we see this Good Wound’s Kyle falling in love with Sarah too (while taking care of his mission, of course) That would be nice to see ;D

[wb5]

Dec 19, 2008 23:07:24 GMT -5 vicheron said:

It is ridiculous to suggest that predestination paradox can't work or can't be entertaining. Look at "Twelve Monkeys," it's one big predestination paradox. It's still a great movie. It made logical sense. It was critically acclaimed and very entertaining.

I've never seen 12 monkeys so can't comment on that, but Skynet wanting to stop a John Connor, who doesn't exist and is thus not the leader of any resistance, by killing him before he is born can never make logical sense. Don't get me wrong, T1 and T2 (and as far as I am concerned, even T3 to a slightly lesser extent) are great movies and at least the first 2 are critically acclaimed, but that doesn't mean their version of predestination paradox (if implied at all - T2 said "no fate but what we make", no predestination there) would make logical sense. It doesn't, something has to start the loop but nothing can. A loop doesn't just spring out of nowhere, not outside Hollywood at least. It has to be entered first.

Babylon 5 is another example: critically acclaimed, entertaining, sure, but its predestination paradox made no logical sense either.


Richardstevenhack;

If you send somebody back to change your past, then your current self has to change because of that change. So now you don't even know what you did in the past and therefore you can't know what to do to change it. Or you have two different selves in two different time lines and neither one knows whether the change actually worked or something else happened that caused the current situation each one is in.

The person who jumps back himself doesn't change, in the multiple lines version. He or she knows what he did in the past (but all or some of that past is now the future, actually, in the new timeline), allthough the effect of changes has to be guessed. Derek guessed that killing Andy Goode in the present would change things for the better (so did future Andy, apparently, going by his nod to Derek before Derek went back in time). It doesn't look like it accomplished what Derek hoped, though.

You can get 2 different selves in the timeline though, as has happened exactly with Derek: he has met himself. This is logically consistent with the multiple lines idea. I wouldn't say it "makes sense" exactly, but at least it could be internally consistent. One timeline always has that problem of how the loop could possibly be started when there is nothing to start it in the first place.

[vicheron]

Let's put things in perspective here. Regardless of how time travel works, it's just a framework within which certain ideas are explored. One of the most prominent aspects of the series is the examination of human nature. The question is, does it really matter if the future is predestined? Will the Connors behave any differently if they learn that they can't change the future? Are they going to just lay down their arms and give up if the creation of Skynet can't be stopped? Just because there is predestination does not mean they're not willing to fight it.

It's a theme that has been explored countless times in stories and myths throughout human history. It's about how people react when faced with the inevitable. Some people succumb to it. Some are willing to accept it. Others try to escape from it and a few try to fight it. Obviously, when it comes to stories, the ones about people who give up and succumb to the inevitable are not the most interesting so those rarely show up.

In the end, these types of stories are allegories for how people react to the immutable factors in life. There are limitations that we can never overcome by virtue of the fact that we are human and mortal. Someone who is 4 feet tall and anemic will never be in the NBA. A Buddhist will never bring peace to the entire world. No one can escape death. It's all a matter of how you deal with your limitations. That's what these stories are about. The predestination paradox is just a plot device used to explore these ideas.

[allergygal]

Dec 20, 2008 18:28:48 GMT -5 Alexis said:

I agree with you about the risk of John’s existence being erased by not sending Kyle back to 1984. That’s why I imagined the possibility of John being replaced as the leader of the resistance (maybe as a consequence of Jesse’s actions or whatever happened) and Kyle being sent back to 2007 to stop those events and ensure John Connor’s leadership If in this hypothetical new future John Connor is not anymore the leader of the resistance, then Skynet will not send back a T-800 to kill Sarah because her son won’t be seen as a threat anymore (of course, if Kyle’s mission was successful and Connor ensures his leadership in the future again, then Connor will have to send back the 5 years old grown up Kyle –who’s not yet the Good Wound Kyle- to 1984, just because Connor would be a threat to Skynet again since he recovered his status of leader of the resistance).

I tend to think the Terminator stories operate with sort of a blend of multi-verse/single-verse theory. There is no fate, so the future is changeable. There doesn't have to be a judgement day, there doesn't have to be a war and John doesn't have to be the leader. But if there is a judgement day and a war against machines, then John does have to lead it in order for mankind to survive. That's his destiny unless they can prevent the war. And that fits well with your scenario.

You've throw out a really interesting idea. The possibilities are so wide open that it makes my brain hurt. In a timeline where John isn't the leader of the resistance, Skynet would have no need to send a terminator to kill Sarah in 1984 and John would have no need to send Kyle. But that's really kind of irrelevant because if John isn't the leader, he's probably not the guy deciding who gets sent where anyway. And if John had never been the leader in this timeline, no one in the future would know any different. So I think for any sort of "OMG John's not the leader anymore" drama to play out, there would have to be a situation where John had been the leader but was killed or overthrown by another faction.

That sets up the need for a future fighter to come back and warn the Connors of bad stuff happening that they need to try to head off. Jesse's group (I don't think she's working alone) would be my first choice for that. But I don't think she's done enough of anything yet to cause big trouble in the future. She's clearly trying to affect future!John, but whatever her plan is, it's still in the works. And since the previews seem to indicate Kyle showing up in the very next episode (we're assuming for real in these scenarios), I wouldn't expect there to be any bad news about future!John yet for him to be the bearer of.

Even if we go with future!John being killed or replaced because of actions by someone other than Jesse in 2008, why would Kyle show up at a hospital where Sarah is? You'd think he'd show up at the Connor house to find Sarah and John (I think we have to assume John doesn't know where Sarah is at this point in time). I think I have to vote against Kyle showing up to warn about future!John's leadership being toast. I still really like that idea, but I think it would have to play out later.

Dec 20, 2008 18:28:48 GMT -5 Alexis said:

Dec 20, 2008 16:41:15 GMT -5 allergygal said:

The biggest problem I see with Kyle showing up in 2008, doesn't have to do with time travel, it has to do with messing with the Sarah/Kyle story. If they bring in a Kyle that doesn't know her, it would be heartbreaking. She's loved him for more than 16 years and if she actually got a chance to see him again and he didn't even know who she was, I think it would be pretty devastating.

Yeah, I think so. It would be definitely devastating for the poor Sarah… But, if T1’s Kyle fell in love with Sarah, there is a huge possibility that we see this Good Wound’s Kyle falling in love with Sarah too (while taking care of his mission, of course) That would be nice to see ;D

Eh. It's not the same. Sarah's not the innocent girl she was in 1984. She's older, she's hard, she's kind of crazy and she already knows the whole story. Maybe this Kyle would still have fallen in love with her photo, but I don't see Sarah falling for him. She's in love with the memory of 1984 Kyle, not a version of Kyle who doesn't know her. But if they do go that way with it and Kyle really is there... we better at least get one hell of a kiss out of it before he dies again. Actually, even if he's a dream we better get that or I'll have to break out the torches and pitchforks. ;D

[richardstevenhack]

It's very clear from the promo that the Kyle being sent back to 2008 has never met Sarah because he uses the stock phrase "Come with me if you want to live" which he would not need to do because Sarah already knows that.

So clearly he's a version of Kyle who has never met Sarah.

But Kyle was ALREADY in love with Sarah BEFORE he was sent back. He said so in T-1: 'I came back for you, Sarah."

So this version is probably already in love with Sarah as well. The problem for him is that this Sarah is different from the one in the picture John gave him. But OTOH, the good thing for him is that THIS Sarah is more like the one he actually imagined: the tough warrior who trained John Connor, not the more innocent girl he actually ended up sleeping with in T-1. So he's even more likely to be in love with modern day Sarah.

Sarah, OTOH, is going to be utterly screwed up. This Kyle is presumably the same guy sent back in T-1 in terms of his character and personality, so she's going to immediately recognize him and respond to him like she did in T-1. But she herself has changed. Everything is so utterly different for her over the last sixteen years that she's going to find it hard to accept herself being his lover.

John's reaction is going to be major, as will Derek's. How Cameron will react is unclear, as is how Kyle will react to Cameron.

However, in the promo, we still see that view from the air as something recedes from them - which I'm betting is Kyle Reese either going to his original destiny in T-1 or returning to the future, or going somewhere else in that Drone. That drone just might turn out to be a mobile time machine.

So I think Kyle isn't going to be around for too long.

I don't have a problem with it, though. Since I'm ignoring all the time travel abuse, it wouldn't bother me to see Kyle joining Derek on the team. As I've been saying, the Connors need some help. Hopefully Kyle brings somebody along with him.

And I agree that if you buy the multiple time line crap (which I don't as a valid concept, but it's acceptable as a plot line IF you adhere to it consistently), then sure, this Kyle could be completely different than the one in T-1 in terms of where he's supposed to end up.

Really, it doesn't change the dynamic of the show much. Kyle is no different than Derek, in essence. He's just another Resistance fighter from the future, as far as the overall plot goes. The only difference he makes is in the dynamic and characterization of Sarah. If he snaps her out of her paranoia and insanity and gets her back on track, that will be a good thing for the overall plot line.

If, on the other hand, he becomes another way for the writers to drag out the show without ever moving it along because they really don't know what the plot IS - which I suspect is what's happening - then he will be a bad addition.

And "12 Monkeys", which I saw but don't clearly remember, is irrelevant to Terminator. It was well done. Terminator is having problems. I never said predestination can't be used to be entertaining. I said it makes no sense which is true no matter how entertaining it is. that movie was also pretty limited in what was predestined, just like T-1 and T-2. The Terminator series, again, is trying to do Grand Central Station in time travel and multiple paradoxes and that's a recipe for jumping the shark.

I'm not going to bother to discuss this time travel stuff any more. Either the show jumps the shark or it doesn't. Either it bores me to tears or it doesn't. We'll see. Right now, there's enough interesting stuff going on to keep me watching. As long as they don't screw up Cameron, I'll probably ignore anything I think is just stupid.