This may seem like a copout, but the reality is, T1 was a standalone, enclosed time loop. Hell, according to T1, the war already ended, which you noted in another comment. Sending the T800 was a last a ditch effort. Anything after T1 continued to reinvent and reinterpret the time war in its own way.
I can see why you'd simply conclude that the T1000 was sent at the same time, but honestly, if we use T1 as reference, T2 never should have happened. And within T2 itself, it's not explained at all, so I think it's up to the viewer.
In that sense, I think it makes most sense that it happened later. The T1000 was not sent at the same time as the the time portal that the T800 and Kyle went through. A remnant of skynet must have survived despite the destruction of the defense grid, and they built another time port some time later...with the newly developed 1000 prototype.
reply
share
kuatorises (7467)
4 years ago
Reese THINKS the war ended. He says they destroyed Skynet's defense systems, not Skynet. That's how Cameron got away with it.
Them being sent at the same time doesn't add up. Why not just them them both to the same location? The T1000 could not have been stopped without the aid of a terminator, which Sarah didn't have in 84. The more likely situation is the T1000 - a more advanced model - was created as a result of the first failed mission.
reply
share
acidraindrop (3055)
4 years ago
Well as I stated earlier, I think it makes the most sense that the t1000 was sent later, through a different portal. I gave one reason. You just gave one. There's a few others. (I misread your original post. I thought you were a proponent of the same-time theory.)
But again, I'm only doing this to humor your question. T1 is very much designed as a time loop. According to T1, you cannot change the past; this was the whole point of the movie. That was the twist. Cameron didn't get away with anything. It's just a retcon.
With everything after T1, you need to just work within each continuity's own specific logic in how they've chosen to redefine how time travel works. And with T2, they didn't really bother explaining anything at all lol But even though we agree that the t1000 was sent later, even your own reason doesn't hold water. Because even if the t1000 is sent later, why can't they send that back to 84? That's why it ultimately is a disservice to the terminator films/show if you try and apply too much logic to it, because it really doesn't make sense at the end of the day.
reply
share
kuatorises (7467)
4 years ago
It's not a retcon. We never see Skynet get destroyed. Reese never sees it get destroyed. He has no idea what happened after he left - and the fact that we get a T2 tells us the war isn't over; and we agree the T1000 was sent later meaning it wasn't either. We only know what Reese tells us, but Reese doesn't know what happens after he leaves. He also has no idea he is John's dad too. Reese isn't a completely reliable source.
This deleted scene also gives us an idea Cameron was at the very least thinking of a sequel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYkBSFKCDog
reply
share
wearsalan (5554)
4 years ago
I always thought that the T1000 (only one as it is a prototype) was sent first to 1995. Instantly Skynet knew it had failed so it sent a T101 (Arnie) to 1984 to kill Sarah, but Skynet was beaten before it knew the outcome. The resistance then find the time displacement machine and look at its' last entry. John then sends Reese to combat the T101 in 1984. After Reese has gone to 1984 John tells them to check the time displacement machine for any other activity and it shows that another Terminator has been sent to kill John as a boy so they send another T101 to fight the T1000 in1995.
As you say, Reese knew nothing of this as he'd already left for 1984.
reply
share
peter_t_2k3 (1053)
2 years ago
This logically makes the most sense and explains why there are terminators in 2 time zones. Not sure about the 3rd but Cameron didn't write it
reply
share
acidraindrop (3055)
4 years ago
I'll concede on the exact point on whether or not Skynet was defeated. You're right; Reese is not a reliable source. The guy is crazy.
But I still argue that T1 as a film is designed around a bootstrap paradox. It's a time loop. The fact that the loop doesn't exist in T2 IS a retcon. I wasn't referring to Skynet's survival as a retcon actually. edit: Actually, I was. I lost track of the multiple threads we were discussing here. lol
This position remains the same even if Skynet was not defeated. The deleted scene actually boosts the time loop interpretation. Kyle Reece is always the father of John Connor as established by the gas station scene. Skynet is always the source of Skynet now established by the factory deleted scene. You don't need the timeline-changing events of T2 for any of this to work. As someone else nicely phrased it, the concept of changing the past was BOLTED onto to the franchise.
Perhaps he did have the idea of a sequel, but it is possible to have a sequel like T2 without the timeline changing. edit2 (in which case, as we both agree, the T1000 most likely must have been sent later. But again, illogical upon scrutiny because why send the t1000 to a different time?)
reply
share
kuatorises (7467)
4 years ago
I'm not debating whether it's a paradox or not. I know it is. I know Kyle was always his father and Skynet created itself through it's own creation (the first T800) - that's what makes it a paradox.
"But again, illogical upon scrutiny because why send the t1000 to a different time?)"
Because the T1000 wasn't created yet. It's 2029 and Skynet sends the T-800 back to 84. The mission fails. After failing it went back to the drawing board, so to speak. I don't know if it's weeks, months or years later, but it created a new prototype. It sent it to Connor's next known location. And I am starting to think that perhaps in the meantime it learned of how it was created and knew the events of 84 had to happen - and a T1000 would interfere with that. Reese has to succeed. That first terminator has to fail or Skynet isn't created. I just realized that and am starting to lean that direction.
reply
share
acidraindrop (3055)
4 years ago
"It sent it to Connor's next known location."
No, but that's the thing. Why send it to his next known location. Why wouldn't the T-1000 have been sent to 1984?
"Because the T1000 wasn't created yet."
This doesn't make any sense. It doesn't matter if the t1000 is created in 2029 or 3029 lol. You can send it to whatever time you want; it's time travel!
reply
share
kuatorises (7467)
4 years ago
"Why wouldn't the T-1000 have been sent to 1984?"
"This doesn't make any sense. It doesn't matter if the t1000 is created in 2029 or 3029 lol. You can send it to whatever time you want; it's time travel!"
I answered this already:
"And I am starting to think that perhaps in the meantime it learned of how it was created and knew the events of 84 had to happen - and a T1000 would interfere with that. Reese has to succeed. That first terminator has to fail or Skynet isn't created. I just realized that and am starting to lean that direction."
reply
share
Bercilak (300)
4 years ago
It's not a cop out; your answer is the correct answer. After "The Terminator" achieved enough of a cult following, some studio exec realized that there was an opportunity to make a lot of money with a sequel and they bolted "T2" onto the original story when the original story was, as you say, over. That's it. The declining quality and increasingly convoluted storylines in the sequels is evidence of that. Shit, the fact that this thread even exists is proof of that.
reply
share
acidraindrop (3055)
4 years ago
lol yeah, but I think it's still fair to humor OP and the topic. With every book or movie or art or whatever, the viewer's free to interpret, reasonably, however they wish. I think it's fair to try and discuss these things, pulling whatever justification you can find.
It's just THIS particular question, I don't think it makes sense to discuss too deeply (your phrasing of "bolted" is perfect lol). But like, I'd totally be open to discussing other absurd time-travel conundrums that the sequels created.
reply
share
kuatorises (7467)
4 years ago
It's a little bit of a copout. You come to a message board to TALK about things. Not be told a discussion isn't possible. That being said, he answered, so it didn't really copout.
"The declining quality and increasingly convoluted storylines in the sequels is evidence of that. Shit, the fact that this thread even exists is proof of that."
We're talking about the second movie, dingus.
reply
share
Bercilak (300)
4 years ago
So was I. And there's no need to engage in name calling when you get your panties in a bunch. Douchebag.
reply
share
kuatorises (7467)
4 years ago
You: Stop calling me names!
Also you: You're douchebag.
You: Proceeds to tell ME that I am the one who got his panties in a bunch.
Also you: Threw a temper tantrum over being called a dingus.
In addition to saying completely moronic things like "declining quality" when describing one of the most revered movies of all time, you're an extremely big hypocrite. Everything you've said in this conversation is completely baseless.
reply
share
[deleted]
4 years ago
You just defended the later terminator movies, dude. Shame on you!
reply
share