|
Post by Deep Art Frummy on Oct 7, 2008 22:45:33 GMT -5
Naw, it's not just that. I wasn't too fond of her being all "teeny" and what not. I still have an infatuation with her, but it's in an opposite way. I think the truth to how dark she really is kinda makes it uneasy to see her now. I guess a lot of kudos should go to Summer's acting ability for making her so morbid in AFP.
|
|
|
Post by Big Brother on Oct 8, 2008 2:19:21 GMT -5
All right, who on the writing staff is a fan of the French Foreign Legion? www.badassoftheweek.com/danjou.html (Warning, some vulgar language) A demon hand, indeed. And the writers missed a chance when they put Judgement Day on April 22, 2011, rather than April 30th, which after all is Cameron Day.
|
|
t101
Major
Posts: 716
|
Post by t101 on Oct 8, 2008 6:42:15 GMT -5
Her shady behavior has been talked about for ages. Why she lies, why she kept the chip, the Coltan bar, etc. So I wouldn't say people were ever missing it.
I don't think the infatuation with her is fading. It's just that the character is in a complicated phase with a decidedly dark turn. There is less positive chemistry between her and other characters. Aside from the premier they hardly interact at all.
There hasn't been much of her. And 'Allison from Palmdale' is understandably sinister because it tells her Skynet story and much less of what she's up to now.
|
|
|
Post by rove3 on Oct 8, 2008 14:25:51 GMT -5
Look this going to sound just a tad jaded & cynical but the main thing that has changed between the two seasons aside from the obvious dodgy chip/self awareness arc is that the novelty of having a young woman playing a teenage girl Bot has worn off to a large extent. There's simply no denying the fact that a large part of the appeal of the series to young males was the Summer Glau factor. A brief skim over various boards and the type of threads that are constantly posted (with monotoneous regularity) proves this. Now like all infatuations the one with Cameron has faded, as is to be expected. All your seeing now is the character of Cameron more clearly without the distraction of some teenage boy fantasy about Lovebots clouding the picture. If you go back to the first series and watch again you'll clearly see that Cameron for whatever reason has always had something akin to a hidden agenda, it's not something that the writers have suddenly thrown into the last few episodes, it's been there from the start. I'm a heterosexual woman and I LOVE Cameron. She is still my favorite character. Something is up with her and I have no idea which way she is headed. For example, was she watching John from the trees and intentionally not intervening b/c she wanted to see how John would handle himself, or was she staying out of the fight with the idea that John would be terminated by the other terminator? She could later claim she didn't get there in time and Sarah would place all her blame on Derek for not keeping John safe. We just don't know what her intentions are at this point. I'm certainly hoping that she doesn't end up being bad but I'm interested in how it will all play out. One things for sure though, if Cameron ends up being the big death then I have significantly less interest in staying on as a viewer.
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Oct 8, 2008 22:38:17 GMT -5
Again, I think we're reading WAY too much into the one second shot of Cameron in the woods.
Also remember that this is how Josh likes us to be! ;D
I think since this episode was about Derek and John, having Cameron whip into action in the crucial moment was simply not going to happen. She was told to go help them fight the Terminator, and she got there too late to do anything useful.
Which of course establishes John as not necessarily needing her. And that indeed might prove to be a threat to her in her thinking. That part I might grant was part of the necessity of showing her in the woods, as opposed to just having her show up later. (As an aside, we didn't even see how she got there or back.)
If you assume, as I do, that she came back to the past on her own initiative and was not sent by future John, and if you assume that she sees present John as much HER protector as the reverse, then any hint that he doesn't like or need her is a direct threat to her existence.
That was the pivotal moment in episode one - with John about to terminate her, she lost it completely.
And of course, Derek is a major threat because he hates and fears her - and may know something about her that she doesn't want anyone, especially John, to know. I still think had Sarah not come into the room at that moment, that pillow would have been used to smother Derek, not comfort him.
And I think one thing Derek knows about her is that she killed Allison Young - who maybe was important to either Derek or John or both. That was perhaps one reason why he recognized her as "metal" the minute he saw her in John's HQ. That and whatever happened in the interrogation house.
Cameron is not "evil" and she's not working for Skynet and probably not for any other "faction" of Terminators or humans, but she will do whatever it takes to insure her survival - just like everyone else on the show and in this world.
How John and Sarah can deal with and somehow temper the determination and hidden agenda of a "rogue" Terminator makes for an interesting side story. At least I hope that's where Josh might take it, rather than sacrificing Cameron for some other story concept.
|
|
traitorsgate
Sergeant
This is Cam. She's trained for an Off-World kick murder squad. Talk about Beauty and the Beast.
Posts: 264
|
Post by traitorsgate on Oct 9, 2008 0:24:00 GMT -5
No look, Cameron probably took one look at that T-888 and thought to herself - "Frack me, he's huge, I think I'll sit back and leave this one to Derek and his big gun."
|
|
|
Post by richardstevenhack on Oct 9, 2008 6:37:25 GMT -5
Dude was the biggest, ugliest Terminator we've seen yet, that's for sure! It would be traumatic meeting him knowing he was a human!
On viewing the scene of Cameron in the woods again, I decided that the real point of that scene was: 1) to show she actually got there since she had been sent by Sarah, and 2) to connect to the last line Sarah read from "The Wizard of Oz" which occurs just before we cut to Bedell and then left to Cameron:
"Being at last free to do as she chose, Dorothy ran, no longer a prisoner in this strange land."
I think that was a hint of why Cameron is here in the present.
|
|
|
Post by aceplace57 on Oct 16, 2008 21:54:32 GMT -5
Cameron was arrested & booked for the first time. That means her fingerprints and mug shot were taken. I guess that means she actually has fingerprints. I wonder if Cameron could change her prints by sanding them off and letting them regenerate? Do you think they'd change or come back the same? I've heard stories about big time criminals using acid to remove their prints. But, they got permanent scarring and that did change the prints to a certain degree.
|
|
|
Post by potomac79 on Oct 17, 2008 1:44:10 GMT -5
I think the thing that is a little unsettling is that we simply don't know Cameron, now.
We don't know if she was telling Allison the truth and she was part of those who didn't think exterminating the Humans was a good idea, or if she's simply another Skynet drone.
We don't know if John sent Cameron back or if she came on her own. If she came on her own, was it because her John died and she wanted to get young-John better prepared?
We don't know if Cameron after the S&D explosion and fix is more-or-less the same Cameron now.
We don't know if Cameron is sufficiently sentient to be classified as being "alive".
We don't know if Cameron has true feelings for John, or is simply programmatically attached to him.
We don't know to what extent Cameron is acting on her own. Clearly she is at least a little (e.g. dancing).
We don't know if Allison was actually real and not a figment of Cameron's imagination. If Allison was real, we don't know how much of Allison is in Cameron.
We don't know if Cameron's memory was ever wiped (e.g. memories of Allison) and then reprogrammed.
Did the events in S&D (and since) change Cameron...give her the cyborg equivalent of faith? She now seems more introspective and personally fearful. Did being in terminator mode scare her beyond simply wanting to protect John?
...and so on.
Last season, Cameron was Aunt Bobbi...a lot like Uncle Bob, but a little more advanced with the adaptation and social graces. This season, she carries A LOT of question marks. It's unsettling. It creates an ambivalence.
Me. I'm just going to be totally fannish and side with Cameron (what can I say...Summer Glau fan, I have to...I'm compelled to...side with Cameron). I just hope some of the questions about her get answered. It would be great if she'd confide something with John, who seems to be the only one still willing to stand with her. I'm not saying that she should say she loves him or anything--even if true this is definitely not the time--but share something about why future John didn't destroy her or something, or even her fear of hurting him. Yeah, it's a bit of a shipper thing, but I think more of a reward for the audience thing. Even though it's only the second season, some corroborated (via Derek) info would help the audience connect (or choose sides) with the character more.
CJ
|
|
|
Post by chrisimo on Oct 23, 2008 2:16:24 GMT -5
Actually, IIRC, what we're told is that Catherine Weaver is looking for a computer that can a make a choice, which is different. Different how? You mean she may be wrong? She isn't, she's only trying to make sure things happen the way we already know they do. Her point is about AI, it has meaning withing the terminator universe. Machines in Terminator are capable of free will as is obvious from the very premise of the story. Besides, it's her explanation for why the turk is so valuable. Her speech is about the turk and AI. No, Terminators are not capable of free will. They are programmed and able to do things their own way to ensure their goal is reached. But they don't have a free will. Cameron (and maybe Catherine) may be the first ones to show some kind of free will. And perhaps the "we want peace" faction have a free will, too, if they exist at all.
|
|
t101
Major
Posts: 716
|
Post by t101 on Oct 23, 2008 3:14:36 GMT -5
"No, Terminators are not capable of free will. They are programmed and able to do things their own way to ensure their goal is reached. But they don't have a free will. Cameron (and maybe Catherine) may be the first ones to show some kind of free will. And perhaps the "we want peace" faction have a free will, too, if they exist at all."
You are contradicting yourself. Can't have both, either they are or the aren't. I said machines are capable of free will, they are, as it's clearly proven with Skynet. No reason the terminators aren't capable either.
|
|
|
Post by vicheron on Oct 23, 2008 3:55:42 GMT -5
It all depends on how you define free will. Not having the capacity to do something does not necessarily mean a lack of free will. A blind man cannot choose to see the world because he does not have the physical ability to see, just as I cannot choose to fly like Superman because I do not gain special powers from yellow sunlight. However, most people would argue that we both have free will because we can do anything that we are capable of doing. Cameron and the Terminators may in fact be incapable of performing certain actions because of certain physical limitations in their chip, similar to someone who has had brain damage, however as long as they can do anything that is within their ability then they should be considered to have free will.
|
|
|
Post by chrisimo on Oct 23, 2008 4:55:31 GMT -5
"No, Terminators are not capable of free will. They are programmed and able to do things their own way to ensure their goal is reached. But they don't have a free will. Cameron (and maybe Catherine) may be the first ones to show some kind of free will. And perhaps the "we want peace" faction have a free will, too, if they exist at all." You are contradicting yourself. Can't have both, either they are or the aren't. I said machines are capable of free will, they are, as it's clearly proven with Skynet. No reason the terminators aren't capable either. No, I don't. Skynet was designed to be special. The creators didn't forsee that it will develop a will of its own though. Skynet creates the Terminators without the ability to choose what they want to do (otherwise some of them might not want to work for Skynet). They don't have a free will, just their programming. Cameron seems special. Maybe she doesn't have a free will either but there are indications that she does. Maybe Skynet wanted her to experience humanness to better fight us and that backfired just the way that Skynets advanced design backfired on us humans. Skynet didn't foresee that her abilities will lead her to develop a will of her own. Of course, all that is speculation, but we know the following: - All Machines follow Skynets will, they do not do anything else until captured and reprogrammed - Cameron and the T850 in T3 are the first ones to override their own programming. But did they overwrite it on their own or was it the reprogramming done by FutureJohn that took over? Consider this: If the machines had a will of their own, how come that all of them follow Skynets will? Humans surely don't work that way.
|
|
|
Post by chrisimo on Oct 23, 2008 5:09:39 GMT -5
It all depends on how you define free will. Not having the capacity to do something does not necessarily mean a lack of free will. A blind man cannot choose to see the world because he does not have the physical ability to see, just as I cannot choose to fly like Superman because I do not gain special powers from yellow sunlight. However, most people would argue that we both have free will because we can do anything that we are capable of doing. Cameron and the Terminators may in fact be incapable of performing certain actions because of certain physical limitations in their chip, similar to someone who has had brain damage, however as long as they can do anything that is within their ability then they should be considered to have free will. The difference is that you can WANT to fly and a blind person can WANT to see but your wishes will not be granted, whereas a terminator can not WANT to save humans unless programmed to do so. Free will is the ability to choose what you WANT to do, not what you CAN do.
|
|
|
Post by vicheron on Oct 23, 2008 5:15:12 GMT -5
It all depends on how you define free will. Not having the capacity to do something does not necessarily mean a lack of free will. A blind man cannot choose to see the world because he does not have the physical ability to see, just as I cannot choose to fly like Superman because I do not gain special powers from yellow sunlight. However, most people would argue that we both have free will because we can do anything that we are capable of doing. Cameron and the Terminators may in fact be incapable of performing certain actions because of certain physical limitations in their chip, similar to someone who has had brain damage, however as long as they can do anything that is within their ability then they should be considered to have free will. The difference is that you can WANT to fly and a blind person can WANT to see but your wishes will not be granted, whereas a terminator can not WANT to save humans unless programmed to do so. Want is irrelevant, it's just a matter of what someone is capable of doing. The same thing goes for things that I don't want. I don't want to spontaneously blow up for no reason and it won't happen not because I don't want it to happen but because there's nothing in my physiology that allows for that to be possible.
|
|