My Terminator 3 Rant
If someone already posted this, then I apologize for sounding so reduntant. Ahem. That being said, I'd like to say something about the logics of Terminator 3 taking place. Look at it from a common sense point of view. There could have indeed been extra parts and extra data stored else where, besides the Cyberdyne building that both the Conors, the T-800 and Dyson blew up. Remember, Dyson wasn't told everything. To quote him, after a young man asked him where the scraps from the terminator came from he said something along the lines of "Ya know, I asked them that very same question once myself. You know what they told me? "Don't ask'." This is clear evidence that he was kept in the dark about alot of things. We also know that Cyberdyne was working for the USAF, so the USAF could have had data that Cyberdyne researched or researched their own data. Now as for how Terminator 3 could've taken place despite it being "all over" in Terminator 2. It was Sara, John and the T-800 that assumed that it would all be over and SKYNET wouldn't exist if they destroyed all the evidence. Sara and John are only human and therefore capable of making mistakes, therefore their assumption that SKYNET would never be built be destroying the right arm and CPU chip is subject to error, but what of the T-800's assumption? At the time he followed Sara and John's assumption of altering the future by destroying the evidence, he was pretty banged up by the T-1000. He took two blows to the head and it is obvious his CPU took some damage, since his motor functions were impaired in his legs. With his damaged CPU, he probably couldn't calculate as well as he could before, therefore it is likly to say that he calculated the wrong probability in assuming that the future would be altered in the sense of SKYNET never being created if he allowed himself to be lowered into the steal. That make sense? It better. Now as for Terminator 3 being made only to rake in "big bucks". Well, what the ****ing hell do you think they made the first two Terminator films for, anyways? Their health? I adore James Cameron's work, but I think it was dipshit of him to try and kill his work off in Terminator 2 and I'm quite glad to see the franchise carry on. It doesn't make much sense to me to see all these dipshit hardcore fans/virgins say that Terminator 3 was a failure in their eyes. True, it was a different director, but at least it didnt' suffer the "Batman Curse", in which they changed both the director and actor who plays the main character in the third movie. As for the T-X Vs. a T-1000, it's obvious the T-X has the advantage. Yes, the T-1000 is made of liquid metal/mimetic poly alloy, but the T-X has built in thermal weapons that would give the T-1000 a run for its money. All it took was molten steal to terminate the T-1000. And since the T-1000 is already liquid at room temperature, it would have a lower vaporization temperature than a solid object. The result? Enstead of that plasma cannon, it's possible the T-X could melt away the T-1000 using only it's flame thrower.