on the Second movie... John, Sara and the Terminator go and try to save the future world by destroying the chip and the hand that started it all.... didnt that mean that they prevented the war in the future? If there was no war.. John didnt need to send his father-to-be to the past to get her mother pregnant (oh.. and save her from the first terminator) THEREFORE John Connor couldnt exist...SO (think Back to the Future here) - shouldnt have he dissapear in the moment they changed the future by destroying terminator???????? - gimme some intelligent answers please (I havent seen the third movie, if there's the answer let me know)
2006-06-13 06:53:00 · 4 answers · asked by Gabba 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
By changing the present (or past) it doesn't necessarily change the outcome in the future. Watch or read "The Time Machine" by HG Wells and that will explain it more. I would suggest reading it.
Some things are just inevitable and will occur regardless of how we act or react to situations at any time.
I read that you remembered in T2 the hand and chip were saved. As they studied these items, things could start to be set in motion by the machines that may occur in the future. Now, assume that we run out of fossil fuels and the sun dims, but life still exists. Without electricity or fuel that doesn't mean that we won't have the technology to go to war or destroy ourselves.
I guess that's why in showbiz they call it creative licensing. They can leave any door open to make more.
2006-06-13 07:10:54 · answer #1 · answered by tragolimia69 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
firstly its a sci fi film, a little can be stretching the truth, for it to work.
second, no one has done time travel, how do we know what`ll happen,
3rd - my response would be that once the terminator had travelled back to the 90`s he was in the time line, and that dimension, he wouldnt disappear, as the world would implode, so he just stays being as he is, even though he never becomes invented.
also in the 3rd film the robots are still invented, it was inevitable that they would be - like the chicken and egg - they had to be invented originally for a terminator to be sent back, and to lose his arm and chip, for humans to see a new technology method.But no matter what happens, technology will progress and the machines would still be invented.
In a nut shell : it didnt matter that the chip and arm were destroyed because technology will progress and become more advanced, meaning the machines get invented and made no matter what.i hope theres T-4 set half in past and half in the "war" world
2006-06-13 14:05:10 · answer #2 · answered by t3rm3y 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Terminator says that by doing what they did (in Terminator 2) they just postponed the future not deleted it, as he said is his own words over and over: "judgement day is inevitable". Besides, you're basing your reference in Back to the Future (another movie). Do we know for sure that once we alter the past, we are changing the future? The truth is that none of us knows what will happen if we change the past because that has not been done.
2006-06-13 14:17:50 · answer #3 · answered by zumi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the war had to exist for the need to destroy the chip to exist -some part of the continuum has to have multiple realities - ummmm I thought I had put this to rest in my mind - i will have to rewatch #2 and #3 and see if I can sort it out
2006-06-13 14:04:13 · answer #4 · answered by Norman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋