Hot answers tagged

57

The T-1000 had past experience of trying to imitate Janelle (John's foster parent). It tried to pretend it was her when John rang to warn them. But it took the wrong tone with John & he knew something was off. So that attempt failed, and it got to confirm that when it checked the dog's name. That, added to the damage it had sustained, probably ...


32

A possible reason is raised in a deleted scene: The T-1000's mimicking skills are compromised after freezing, melting and cohering again. From the IMDB FAQ: The T-1000's decreasing efficacy is explained in a few scenes cut from the theatrical version of the film but are able to be viewed as part of the director's cut or on most versions of the DVD as a ...


20

First, the Motion Picture Association of America's (MPAA) film-rating system is voluntary and not enforced by law. Still, most theaters in the United States enforce the ratings and don't let children under 17 into R-rated films without a parent or legal guardian. So it's really up to a child actor's parents whether or not they're allowed to see an R-rated ...


18

The T-1000 only seems to be able to emulate the voices of people that it's heard speaking. Up to that point in the theatrical version of the film, the only contact between Sarah and the T-1000 has been at the barrel of a gun which means that until Sarah says "F*ck you", he's not heard her before and therefore can't replicate her voice. On top of that, I ...


18

It neutralises the user codes in the building, there would still be master codes etc. Otherwise how would the police move around in the building, what if there was a fire etc. It is this master code that John cracked. As for the ATM working differerntly: What John appeared to have was a brute force number generator (perhaps with a little optimising AI), ...


14

From the Script: [...] [...] NEUTRALIZED CODES: Miles Dyson says "[The alarm] neutralizes the codes throughout the building". My guess: I think it would make sense that there is some sort of emergency or master code that does not get neutralized, so security (and/or the big boss) can still open doors. So maybe John Connor cracks ...


11

It can reproduce her voice mechanically, but cannot figure out the proper tone and content to coax her son out of hiding. However, it is apparently intelligent enough to know that it can't do this... and instead attempts to force her to do it. The funny thing is, given what we learn in the movie, I don't believe she has any better idea how to do it than the ...


11

Dyson is threatening to blow up the building with an improvised dead man's switch. If the police try to disarm him, he's guaranteed to drop the weight and set off the explosives. They have no chance of success in disarming him. He is giving them a chance of getting out of the building by telling them he doesn't know how much longer he can hold the weight. ...


10

All answers thus far are in-universe, however I think there is another not-insignificant answer: The scene suited the portrayal of the T-1000 as a sadist, despite his nature making him presumably incapable of such a thing. He's been menacing people for the whole of the movie prior to this scene, and capping it off by forcing Sarah to help him endorses his ...


10

I stumbled upon this recent question about Terminator 2, in particular about the scene where Miles Dyson dies after having been wounded lethally and trying to buy time for the others by detonating a grenade. He warns the upcoming SWAT team that the grenade will go off shortly and they run away. You are implying in the question that there was a moral ...


8

I always assumed SWAT didn't die -- that Dyson was able to hold the detonator long enough for SWAT to get to safety. If it's true that the scene-cutting didn't allow enough time elapse for the SWAT escape, I have to think this was an editing decision made for visual effect -- not to indicate that the SWAT guys were killed. Killing SWAT would not add value ...


7

TL;DR: Terminator 1 appeared to follow the predestination ideology, where going back in time meant that John Connor and Kyle Reese fulfilled their roles, rather than changing anything. Terminator 2 played much more with the idea of both fate and free will. By exercising free will, the future was changed. Of course it can be argued that intent is ...


6

I always assumed it was because the T-1000 was not yet able to emulate Sarah because it had not yet sampled her "by physical contact". This is backed up by the fact that, after having made contact with her, it then does emulate her a few scenes later.


5

The movie doesn't say, but the official Randall Frakes novelisation indicates that Skynet was "smashed" in the second timeline some time after John's 45th birthday. Sadly, he lowered the binoculars, revealing forty-five-year-old features made severe by constant stress. The left side of his face was heavily scarred. Yet he was still an impressive man, ...


5

Terminator 2 grossed $204,843,345 in its domestic market and $315,000,000 in foreign markets. (source: BoxOfficeMojo). Terminator 2 is widely regarded as one of the best sci-fi films of all time (source: my knowledge of sci-fi films and fans). With these two facts in mind, I think it's safe to conclude that nothing spoiled the movie. To the contrary, the ...


5

Terminator 1: 2029 to 1984 Terminator 2: 2029 to 1994/95 There is slight confusion in year Terminator 2 takes place in, Per IMDB: The first Terminator film takes place in May 1984. According to information provided at the beginning of the movie, it is now 1995, since John was born on 28 February 1985 and is currently 10 years old. If that's the ...


4

IMDB's common cast/crew search indicates a number of people who were involved in one or both of the original two films and the most recent: Arnold Schwarzenegger (obviously) and Joel Kramer - Stunt Dept Ethan Van der Ryn - Sound Dept Carl Miller - Visual Effects Harry Lu - Stunts Martin J. Gibbons - Art Department Robert Misetich - Art Department ...


3

This is not a true answer so much as it is a guideline for what an answer should be. It's my best attempt at an answer, but there's a gaping hole in the Salvation change. I'm also not sure if the list of discrepancies I address is complete or not. I've relisted it as an answer instead of being part of the question at the community's request. The Terminator ...


3

Yes, he watched the movie when it was released. You can see him at the Los Angeles premiere here.


3

Okay so I'm having to answer my own question on the same day I posted it so that this question doesn't get closed as off-topic "opinion-based". I don't like having to do this but I feel I have a solid question here. According to jamescamerononline.com "We've got a story worked out but it hasn't gone beyond the talk stage" - James Cameron on Terminator 2 in ...


2

The situation that they were in was that he was clearly dying and struggling to hold the weight up. He was resigned to dying there. Therefore it is unlikely that they could reason with him before he tripped the explosive either intentionally or not. Hence they have two choices which are either attempt to take the detonator off him and make the IED safe ...


2

See this trailer for Judgement Day: Go to position 1:00. Terminator actually tells John Connor that he was sent 35 years from today. It's there in the movie: "You did. Thirty years from now you reprogrammed me to be your protector here, in this time." T2 happens in 1995. So plus 35 is 2030.


1

The point of the first movie was simply to prevent Skynet from making a change to the past by killing Sarah before John was born. I doubt Skynet realized that Kyle Reese was actually John's father, and that by sending the T-800 back, it was in fact, setting in motion the very events it was attempting to prevent. (Or it may have understood that fact and been ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible