|
Post by aceplace57 on Jan 25, 2009 20:48:41 GMT -5
I took "someone leaves him" as Sarah getting locked up (again). That's the only way they'll ever break Sarah's commitment to John. Killing Sarah off would be a huge, huge mistake for the series and the Franchise. The people working on Terminator Salvation don't want Sarah splattered all over the floor or going through Chemo a few months before their multi-million $$ movie opens. Even saying she died was a big mistake in T3.
I hope this is all misdirection. If not, then I'd have to assume TPTB know there won't be a S3. They're burning too many bridges to shatter the cast this way.
|
|
|
Post by gothamite66 on Jan 25, 2009 21:25:56 GMT -5
I took "someone leaves him" as Sarah getting locked up (again). That's the only way they'll ever break Sarah's commitment to John. Killing Sarah off would be a huge, huge mistake for the series and the Franchise. The people working on Terminator Salvation don't want Sarah splattered all over the floor or going through Chemo a few months before their multi-million $$ movie opens. Even saying she died was a big mistake in T3. I hope this is all misdirection. If not, then I'd have to assume TPTB know there won't be a S3. They're burning too many bridges to shatter the cast this way. I totally agree with you about Sarah leaving and the circumstances behind her leaving. I think Sarah is the one who leaves but I don't think she will leaves willingly. It just seems to much out of character for her to leave on her own accord.
|
|
|
Post by samuel95 on Jan 25, 2009 22:34:31 GMT -5
Totally in character for Sarah to leave John in order to protect him. Riley needs to die--so I can see Leven on another show in a decent role. Lastly, Cameron's chip isn't right so . . .
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Jan 25, 2009 22:43:23 GMT -5
As I posted in the other thread, none of it makes any sense.
What is the end goal here of stripping John of all the major characters except Derek?
As I mentioned in the other thread, this begins to sound like more of the meme that to develop the story, you have to torture your characters - instead of simply making their antagonists bigger and the conflict bigger.
And that turns the show into a soap opera instead of a sci-fi action show.
The fans moaned about how much the characters were split up during the first 13. So now it's going to be even worse?
Are the writers TRYING to get this show killed? Are they going to "double-down" on all the mistakes they made in the first 13?
After my initial positive reaction to Tom's comments about the back nine dumping the stand alone episodes and the "Terminator of the Week" stuff and how his character gets smarter, now I'm back to being concerned that the show is just going to jump the shark in the back nine.
|
|
|
Post by hobs202 on Jan 25, 2009 22:50:35 GMT -5
As I posted in the other thread, none of it makes any sense. What is the end goal here of stripping John of all the major characters except Derek? As I mentioned in the other thread, this begins to sound like more of the meme that to develop the story, you have to torture your characters - instead of simply making their antagonists bigger and the conflict bigger. And that turns the show into a soap opera instead of a sci-fi action show. The fans moaned about how much the characters were split up during the first 13. So now it's going to be even worse? Are the writers TRYING to get this show killed? Are they going to "double-down" on all the mistakes they made in the first 13? After my initial positive reaction to Tom's comments about the back nine dumping the stand alone episodes and the "Terminator of the Week" stuff and how his character gets smarter, now I'm back to being concerned that the show is just going to jump the shark in the back nine. Again, we don't know if any of this is true or not. You can't make these kinds of conclusions when you have this little information. Also do you think John is going to be separated from Sarah and Cameron PERMANENTLY? Obviously the answer is "no." I could think of a dozen different ways in which John gets separated from Sarah that doesn't involve degrading their relationship. This scenario is EASY to imagine. I don't get why people limit themselves to thinking that it's going to be degrading. Honestly you guys...
|
|
|
Post by hobs202 on Jan 25, 2009 22:52:02 GMT -5
I took "someone leaves him" as Sarah getting locked up (again). That's the only way they'll ever break Sarah's commitment to John. Killing Sarah off would be a huge, huge mistake for the series and the Franchise. The people working on Terminator Salvation don't want Sarah splattered all over the floor or going through Chemo a few months before their multi-million $$ movie opens. Even saying she died was a big mistake in T3. I hope this is all misdirection. If not, then I'd have to assume TPTB know there won't be a S3. They're burning too many bridges to shatter the cast this way. I totally agree with you about Sarah leaving and the circumstances behind her leaving. I think Sarah is the one who leaves but I don't think she will leaves willingly. It just seems to much out of character for her to leave on her own accord. Maybe she gets infected with some contagious disease. THAT'S a good reason for John to keep his distance from her.
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Jan 27, 2009 0:43:59 GMT -5
The possibility of Sarah and/or Cameron being separated from John permanently arises from Tom's statements. First of all, if either Sarah or Cameron die, that's pretty much it. Second, Tom said that as a result of the events in the back nine, if they get a third season, it will "look like a whole new show."
Obviously we don't know. But when Tom says he's stripped of all three of the women in his life, you have to get a little concerned when he adds that it will look like an "all new show". Putting those two statements together pretty much says "radical revamp".
Sure, it could be typical Tom hyperbole, like his "big fight" that turned into a five-second thing. But it concerns me if the producers have decided the only way to boost ratings is to radically revamp the show. Producers do that stuff - usually to a bad end.
If you can think of a dozen ways Sarah AND Cameron AND Riley get separated from John that doesn't degrade the show, let's hear them. Off the top of my head, I can't.
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Jan 27, 2009 1:28:10 GMT -5
The possibility of Sarah and/or Cameron being separated from John permanently arises from Tom's statements. First of all, if either Sarah or Cameron die, that's pretty much it. Second, Tom said that as a result of the events in the back nine, if they get a third season, it will "look like a whole new show." Obviously we don't know. But when Tom says he's stripped of all three of the women in his life, you have to get a little concerned when he adds that it will look like an "all new show". Putting those two statements together pretty much says "radical revamp". Sure, it could be typical Tom hyperbole, like his "big fight" that turned into a five-second thing. But it concerns me if the producers have decided the only way to boost ratings is to radically revamp the show. Producers do that stuff - usually to a bad end. If you can think of a dozen ways Sarah AND Cameron AND Riley get separated from John that doesn't degrade the show, let's hear them. Off the top of my head, I can't. Just because the season ends with John being without Sarah, Cameron and Riley and the next season begins that way doesn't mean it'll stay that way. We've had too much splintering of the cast this season already. I think continuing down that path would be a mistake. We'd end up with all our main characters in different storylines. Bleh. No matter who leaves/betrays/dies, I expect Sarah and Cameron and John to all be united at some point early in season 3.
|
|
|
Post by hobs202 on Jan 27, 2009 11:45:28 GMT -5
If you can think of a dozen ways Sarah AND Cameron AND Riley get separated from John that doesn't degrade the show, let's hear them. Off the top of my head, I can't. That's cause you're not using your imagination. I'll pitch a few: -Big explosion. John gets separated from the rest of the family. -Massive traffic crash. John gets separated from family. -Sarah gets infected with a highly contagious disease. John HAS to stay away from her. -Someone is after Sarah so she sends John away to keep him out of the crossfire. -Sarah is led to believe that John has been killed. -Sarah leaves John at home and goes to the grocery story. Only one cash register is working.
|
|
|
Post by gothamite66 on Jan 27, 2009 11:55:44 GMT -5
That's cause you're not using your imagination. I'll pitch a few: -Sarah leaves John at home and goes to the grocery story. Only one cash register is working. I hate when that happens. There are numerous situations that could cause Sarah to be separated from John, I couldn't even begin to list them. I don't believe she is going to want to leave him willingly, the situation will demand that she leaves. Like Allergygal, I believe that any separation will be resolved early in season three.
|
|
|
Post by jaquio on Jan 27, 2009 13:01:04 GMT -5
Just because the season ends with John being without Sarah, Cameron and Riley and the next season begins that way doesn't mean it'll stay that way. We've had too much splintering of the cast this season already. I think continuing down that path would be a mistake. We'd end up with all our main characters in different storylines. Bleh. No matter who leaves/betrays/dies, I expect Sarah and Cameron and John to all be united at some point early in season 3. im all for that. just as long as john and riley never see each other again because shes dead (evil laugh)
|
|
|
Post by allergygal on Jan 27, 2009 13:17:24 GMT -5
-Sarah leaves John at home and goes to the grocery story. Only one cash register is working. LOL. *karma* for making me laugh. Yeah, the "John is left with no women in his life" thing could actually be that misleading. Just because the season ends with John being without Sarah, Cameron and Riley and the next season begins that way doesn't mean it'll stay that way. We've had too much splintering of the cast this season already. I think continuing down that path would be a mistake. We'd end up with all our main characters in different storylines. Bleh. No matter who leaves/betrays/dies, I expect Sarah and Cameron and John to all be united at some point early in season 3. im all for that. just as long as john and riley never see each other again because shes dead (evil laugh) Notice I didn't include Riley in the getting-back-together in season 3 Riley will probably die. But if she doesn't, I guess she'll be back with John soon into season 3 too. There'd be no point in having her on the show otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Jan 27, 2009 21:41:05 GMT -5
Fine, if we assume John's "he has no women" means for one or two or three episodes.
That obviously was not his implication, however, when he says "all new show".
He said explicitly, "they are on their own and he is on his own" in the videos.
That implies multiple plot lines. And like allergygal says, that's a big mistake.
|
|
schmacky
Major
"Make yourself useful."
Posts: 522
|
Post by schmacky on Jan 27, 2009 22:15:53 GMT -5
Fine, if we assume John's "he has no women" means for one or two or three episodes. That obviously was not his implication, however, when he says "all new show". He said explicitly, "they are on their own and he is on his own" in the videos. That implies multiple plot lines. And like allergygal says, that's a big mistake. What you need to understand about Tom's statement is that when it comes down to it, he sure as crap doesn't have a clue what S3 will encompass. Josh has a laid out idea of what S3 is about but that can always change and therefore make Tom's statements pointless. But, let's say Josh continues with whatever he has planned.. it could be that Tom just perceived it a certain way. Or, we're all not thinking outside the box. Wouldn't you say that S2 is like a whole new show when compared with S1? It could be just a few different dynamics and it makes it all different. Maybe they won't be on the defense in S3 and always defending people but maybe they'll accept J-Day and prepare for it? That would make it seem like a different show. So many different ways to take what he said other than everyone splits off on their own...
|
|
|
Post by hobs202 on Jan 28, 2009 0:31:12 GMT -5
Fine, if we assume John's "he has no women" means for one or two or three episodes. That obviously was not his implication, however, when he says "all new show". He said explicitly, "they are on their own and he is on his own" in the videos. That implies multiple plot lines. And like allergygal says, that's a big mistake. When someone says "it's going to be a totally new show" it typically means they're more or less maintaining status quo. I learned that after BSG resolved the New Caprica storyline in just three episodes into Season 3.
|
|