Whedonesque Mobile : Comments on 15175 : (SPOILER) USA Today Gives "Sarah Connor Chronicles" 3 1/2 out of 4 stars.

Nice review! Thanks for link :)
-As much as the show recalls the movies, it also recalls some of the best work ever done in the genre for TV: the Buffy universe of Joss Whedon.
-As she did on Firefly, Glau puts an amusing, enigmatic spin on her character,..

chazman | January 11, 16:37 CET

Fine, fine! I'll watch on-air! Ruin my efforts to go DVD-only for everything on Fox. Geez, this better be as good as I was feeling it would be last summer and with every bit of buzz since.

Had completely forgotten that it was debuting soon (holidays do that, and not watching TV lately--aside from a little bit on DVD, Arrested Development). I think I'm gonna have to have a Terminator marathon this week. At least the first and second, the third is only if I have time for it.

Kris | January 11, 17:19 CET

Wastching the second one will improve the show for you, I think. It's not necessary, but elements of the plot are referenced.

And oh, Summer is wonderful in it. There's a scene in the second episode I predict will become the most popular tagline and/or avatar on the Internet this year.

C. A. Bridges | January 11, 17:37 CET

There's a nice bit with Summer as Cameron when Lena Headey's Sarah gets angry and Cameron subtly but visibly back-tracks when she realises what caused it. You can almost see her quickly reweighting edges in her neural net, really good blink-and-you'll-miss-it bit of acting IMO - hope it made it into the re-jigged pilot - that highlights that Cameron is a slightly different, slightly more empathetic sort of Terminator.

Looking forward to this.

Saje | January 11, 17:49 CET

I have only seen the 1st episode so far, it was..meh. Ok. Summer was good.

As mentioned above, I have been told by others that the second episode really gets the show moving. I'll be tuning in to find out!

Muggi | January 11, 17:56 CET

The first ep establishes the characters and the dangers. The second ep sets the tone, adds in something that people who have seen the 3rd movie will be wondering about, and gives everyone a chance to show that they have a brain. I love characters that actually do smart things...

C. A. Bridges | January 11, 18:11 CET

Very mixed reviews of this show, critics either seem to love it or hate it.

Simon | January 11, 18:22 CET

Heh, the terminator's name is Cameron? Cute. Good thing [insert your favorite inappropriately named director] didn't direct the first two movies.

Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner | January 11, 18:36 CET

Most reviews I've seen have been 2 and a 1/2 star-ish

chazman | January 11, 18:41 CET

Most reviews I've seen have been 2 and a 1/2 star-ish

That's about where i would place the pilot ep.

Muggi | January 11, 19:03 CET

I'm really, really looking forward to this, despite it being on FOX. Unfortunately the pilot airs right after the NFC Division Championships which all but guarantees it will end up getting cut off...

Haunt | January 11, 19:26 CET

I'm really looking forward to this as well.I heard it basically ignores Terminator 3 but I wonder if it will tie-in to the upcoming fourth Terminator film.

Buffyfantic | January 11, 19:51 CET

I wasn't planning on liking this when I watched the pilot. I'm only a so-so fan of the Terminator movies, mainly because I can't get passed the idea that the entire franchise falls apart in the first movie because of the fact a time paradox exists that cannot possibly be explained away. I mean, how does it happen that a guy can be born and grow up into a future where he is responsible for sending his own father back in time? How does that work?

My time paradoxy type issues aside, another reason I wasn't planning on liking the show was simply because this season has already given me three shows that look to be favourites of mine for a good while to come (Burn Notice, Chuck and Moonlight) so I didn't really want another new series to watch.

All that said, because of my absolute adoration of Summer Glau I felt I should at least give the pilot a look. Unfortunately, I kinda loved it. I'm looking forward to seeing the new version of the pilot as well but I'm already intending to give this series at least the first season to see if it lives up to it's potential.

An explanation for the "sending your own father back in time" time paradox wouldn't be unwelcome, either. ;)

RockManic | January 11, 19:55 CET

Buffyfantic, as I understand it the series diverges from the movies after T2. The show will follow one timeline and the movies, from the third onwards, follow another. I presume the timelines diverge because of the introduction of the Cameron Terminator, but that is just my personal guess.

RockManic | January 11, 19:58 CET

An explanation for the "sending your own father back in time" time paradox wouldn't be unwelcome, either. ;)

Amongst all the possible time streams, there exist a set of imaginary time streams. Imaginary time streams are solely caused by time paradoxes, but yet are as real as the square root of -1. So, other than the fact that it can't possibly happen, it follows the other rules for stories, including appropriate suspension of disbelief requirements. So, go enjoy it and thank me later. ;-)

[ edited by jclemens on 2008-01-11 18:04 ]

jclemens | January 11, 20:58 CET

Buffyfantic, as I understand it the series diverges from the movies after T2. The show will follow one timeline and the movies, from the third onwards, follow another. I presume the timelines diverge because of the introduction of the Cameron Terminator, but that is just my personal guess.
RokkWyld | January 11, 16:58 CET

That actually sounds like a cool idea to do it that way.A little bit like the DC Comics Multiverse.

Buffyfantic | January 11, 22:07 CET

I got my Sarah Connor Chronicles free poster in the mail today, but I was sad to see that it was crushed during delivery. It's a very cool poster, though.

Beth5507 | January 11, 22:35 CET

Yeah, Buffyfantic, I'm kinda glad that they have decided to use the obvious benefits of the time travel element of Terminator in a way that allows the show and the movies to work as individual stories and yet still both be official continuations of the original movie and it's sequel.

And thanks, jclemens. I think... ;)

RockManic | January 11, 22:41 CET

Terminator 3 and Terminator Salvation are the 'official' continuations of T1 and T2.

The Dark Shape | January 12, 00:18 CET

So, are all discussions about Terminator going to involve nitpicking time paradoxes? Can't people go with alternative timeline as an explanation and deal with it? I hope people can develop a healthy sense of suspension of disbelief and just enjoy this show like I intend to.

I'm asking for too much, aren't I?

TamaraC | January 12, 00:52 CET

I suppose that depends on how you want to look at the situation, The Dark Shape. Both versions of the story will share a common history up until the end of the events of Terminator 2 and both versions are sanctioned by the owners of the franchise, as far as I'm aware.

It's a similar things to the Stargate franchise, I guess. If Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich had ever managed to get their planned movie sequels made then they would have followed a very different story to the one the series told. However, both could be seen as officially continuing the story of the first movie. In the case of Highlander, the second movie tells a very different version of events compared to the way the television series chose to go, yet both consider the events of the first movie as part of their canon and both are considered official by those that own the franchise.

The only difference here is that due to the nature of the story and the idea that sending Cameron back in time to a point before Terminator 3 could create a new timeline to the one that developed in the third movie, both can not only be official but can co-exist without really contradicting each other.

RockManic | January 12, 00:55 CET

Just got my free poster in the mail. It rocks! I wasn't expecting it to be full poster size but it is. Love it. Love my Terminator River Girl.

theMidnighter | January 12, 00:59 CET

TamaraC, I would love to explain the Terminator paradox away with an alternate timeline theory, but then you have to assume that the whole idea of sending his father back to save his mother was futile because if it created alternate timelines instead of manipulating the existing one then nothing in the original future would ever have been changed and then the basic premise of the franchise entirely falls apart.

Don't even get me started on the fact that old Biff shouldn't have been able to travel forward to his original future once he had set the new timeline into action in Back to the Future 2! ;)

RockManic | January 12, 01:02 CET

Mary McNamara of the L.A. Times liked just it fine, and Summer got this:

"With her kick-boxer-fit form, lovely face and owl-like gaze, Glau, who played River in Joss Whedon's 'Firefly, is one terrific robot."

Which, ya know, ain't hay.

And McNamara had this to say about the time travelly issues:

"Trying to figure out how all this works, time- and space-continuum-wise, will give you a headache -- why can't someone from the future just come back and explain how exactly John was able to survive? -- so it's best just to accept the whole conceit on its own terms.'

And of course, this:

"There's time travel (which, it is now generally agreed upon, requires nudity)..."

... which I didn't know, but then, I'm so out of the techno-loop these days...

QuoterGal | January 12, 01:16 CET

"so it's best just to accept the whole conceit on its own terms."

This.

Thank you, QuoterGal. You always come through.

TamaraC | January 12, 02:05 CET

I got my Sarah Connor Chronicles free poster in the mail today, but I was sad to see that it was crushed during delivery. It's a very cool poster, though.

Received mine as well today, not in the best condition. Is it bad form to iron a poster?

chazman | January 12, 02:27 CET

The only difference here is that due to the nature of the story and the idea that sending Cameron back in time to a point before Terminator 3 could create a new timeline to the one that developed in the third movie, both can not only be official but can co-exist without really contradicting each other.

Does Cameron going back in time have any impact on the fact that the show starts in 1999, when Terminator 3 clearly shows Sarah died in '97? Or the fact that Judgment Day is said to be in 2011, when in T3 it's July 2004?

(or the fact that Sarah Connor Chronicles' timeline puts T2 about a month before Judgment Day... and that it's been two years but John is somehow 15...)

Etc.

[ edited by The Dark Shape on 2008-01-11 23:51 ]

The Dark Shape | January 12, 02:49 CET

chazman, beth5507, theMidnighter Yep, got mine, too. And yep - smushed. Which...the box doesn't look all that damaged, and I didn't really pay attention to if the box crunch corresponded w/the poster scrunch, but...

DANG! GIANT poster! Beautiful. I got the "battle-damaged" Cameron - I'm gonna see about getting some frames from Walmart tomorrow for this & my Serenity lobby poster. One for each bedroom door. ;-)

Now, to decide which goes where - in my bedroom I have an awesome poster called Hollywood Diner - Marilyn, Elvis, James Dean & Marlon Brando in a soda-fountain/diner, and my photo ops from MCB of me & Tony & Amber.

But in the other bedroom, my "studio/office," I have my Buffy action figures.

Hmm....

Way looking forward to the series.

Ooh! Thought! Dollhouse/T:SCC crossover???

ShadowQuest | January 12, 03:48 CET

Does the existence of Duncan MacLeod in the series explain how the Immortals can go from being aliens from Zeist to what they are shown to be in The Source? Not in the slightest but both stories are still seen as official.

As you point out with the examples above, the details don't seem to add up to my theory about the presence of Cameron alone being the reason the timeline is different for the show, but then that was simply a theory and it's more than possible that Cameron is only a result of the changes in the timeline, rather than the cause (which would seem to go back to before Sarah died of cancer, as you say). It's still very possible to use the time travel element as a reason to take both versions as "official" though, once the exact details are hammered out on the show.

RockManic | January 12, 03:53 CET

Does the existence of Duncan MacLeod in the series explain how the Immortals can go from being aliens from Zeist to what they are shown to be in The Source? Not in the slightest but both stories are still seen as official.

Are any versions of Highlander considered official? They've contradicted themselves since the beginning. Highlander 2 says the Immortals are from another planet, clearly against the first. Highlander 3 ignores 2. The Series kind of picks up after the first film, but not really -- after all, Connor is clearly the last Immortal and wins the Prize. But not anymore.

Highlander: Endgame follows that line, but Connor is killed before he can put up a shield and... etc. Do I really have to bring up The Source? You can see anything Highlander-wise official as you see fit, sits none of it goes together.

And not to be too elitist, but Terminator is of a slightly higher class than Highlander, which was never particularly great to begin with.

The Dark Shape | January 12, 04:13 CET

Buffy The Vampire Slayer, the TV series, makes little sense in terms of Buffy The Vampire Slayer the motion picture.

My answer to this: if the show is any good, I do not give a shit if it doesn't match movie logic.

gossi | January 12, 04:23 CET

gossi, FTW.

TamaraC | January 12, 04:43 CET

Oddly enough, I JUST got my promo poster in the mail this afternoon... coincidence, or awesome timing?

*shrugs*

UnderTheDark | January 12, 09:45 CET

I also got my poster in the mail today...a little damaged, but not much.

I got dangling torso Summer, and as gorgeous as it (and she) looks, I ain't hangin' it up until I watch the show and if I dig it.

UnpluggedCrazy | January 12, 12:08 CET

Buffy The Vampire Slayer, the TV series, makes little sense in terms of Buffy The Vampire Slayer the motion picture.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Series is not a continuation of Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Produced Movie.

The Dark Shape | January 12, 13:07 CET

The thing is, none of the films make any sense from a physics perspective (AFA We K). BFD and SFW I say, the narrative requires them to be able to travel back and affect their own time-line so that's what they do - accepting that is the first and most fundamental stage of suspending disbelief in the Terminator universe, so it goes.

Guess what, insect-like creatures can't get as big as the Alien hive mother either (because cross-section rises with the square of the radius whereas volume rises with the cube), modern jet fighters never, ever dogfight as depicted in 'Top-Gun' and werewolves in London (American or otherwise) don't exist - again, it's simply required that you believe these things for the films to work. It's called fiction for a reason, y'know ? ;)

Saje | January 12, 14:00 CET

And in this foreign concept called 'fiction,' there should be something dubbed 'consistency' -- something The Sarah Connor Chronicles doesn't have with the first two movies, even though it shamelessly wants to be Terminator 2: The Next Story.

The Dark Shape | January 12, 14:57 CET

Yeah but my point is, the films are already inconsistent, even with themselves (which, to me, is much more serious than inconsistency with another, separate, project).

If you accept the films as they are (and I do) then surely it's not a problem to accept the series i.e. given time-travel in a single universe and given that paradoxes can apparently occur and don't tear apart space-time, isn't anything possible ?

(and there is no 'Highlander 2' BTW The Dark Shape ;)

Saje | January 12, 15:14 CET

I got my poster a few days ago. It's perfect. Maybe it didn't have to go as far.
My daughters and I are huge Sarah Connor (the character) fans, so I got the one with her crouching, holding a gun. Ii will go next to my Linda Hamilton poster, if I like the show.
And just like Highlander 2, Terminator 3 doesn't exist.
Unlike Highlander 2, I heard enough about T3 so I didn't even go see it.

Xane | January 12, 18:52 CET

And in this foreign concept called 'fiction,' there should be something dubbed 'consistency' -- something The Sarah Connor Chronicles doesn't have with the first two movies, even though it shamelessly wants to be Terminator 2: The Next Story.

Why not? I've seen the first two, I thought it picked up after the second movie pretty well. What's the contradiction? Yes, it doesn't match the third, but we knew that going in and frankly I prefer this one so far.

C. A. Bridges | January 12, 19:17 CET

See, I always thought the whole point of the original Terminator movie (besides creating a love story with a whole lot of explosions) was the paradox. It was not something to be explained away. It was something to embrace and let make your brain twist into knots. That was the idea. IMO, it was one of the things that made the movie so successful.

Movies and TV series are two totally different fish. They may be related but they are by necessity, different. Movies are supposed to have an ending. When they don't, many people feel cheated. TV series need to have an ongoing story that will not end for at least a few years. TV series taken from movies need to make adjustments in the story to be successful. All the successful ones do it. MASH is another example.

As far as Highlander, I enjoyed the original movie and really enjoyed the TV series. I sometimes think I saw in the TV series the possibility for what I later found in BtVS. That said, there are very few movies, books or plays that I have started and not finished. Highlander 2 is one of the few.

I do find it one of those eternal questions to contemplate, however, why they have not seemed to be able to make an even passable Highlander film sequel when they managed to put out some really good television...that even had some internal consistency and everything. ;-)

newcj | January 12, 19:31 CET

I was in the theatre when I saw Highlander 2, and though I didn't walk it, I immediately recognized it as perhaps the worst sequel ever made.

Horrible. What a mess.

It didn't keep me from enjoying the TV series though. Even more than the first movie.

Xane | January 12, 19:49 CET

See, I always thought the whole point of the original Terminator movie (besides creating a love story with a whole lot of explosions) was the paradox. It was not something to be explained away.

Yeah, sort of. I think viewers are meant to get a kind of "Ah!" moment and frisson when we find out who Reese is, that's its story purpose.

Like most things it's down to individual lines. For some I guess the paradox may make it impossible to suspend disbelief but for me it's no harder to accept than e.g. the transporters in 'Star Trek' or The Force or River's psychic powers.

The reason some have trouble with it is of course that paradoxes just cannot happen in the really real world. If you have an apparent paradox then your explanation is wrong, plain and simple, by definition reality can't have impossible things happening (which isn't to say seemingly impossible things can't happen).

(and I also don't see any huge internal inconsistencies between the first two films and the pre-air pilot - given the givens ;) - and even Terminator 3's claim that Sarah died in 1997 despite the show starting in 1999 is extremely simple to fan-wank away - because we know for instance that at least Cameron's talked about "engineer" has been back to 1963, if they've made changes to the world's past, even subtle ones, it's no hardship to think one of them might've had a minor knock-on effect that ended up somehow affecting Connor's health, even if it just postponed her leukaemia)

Saje | January 12, 20:52 CET

January 11 2008