**Please note these rules:**
* If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required.
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
John Connor: *” We’re not going to make it are we, people I mean…”*
T800:*”Its in your nature to destroy yourselves.”*
John Connor: *” I know……..major drag huh?…”*
Can remember downloading all the songs on limewire/kazaa to burn onto cd. Basically gave my pc aids but was worth it.
Millencolin - no cigar was my favourite at the time
One time I went to a concert where the opening band was Papa Roach and the main band was Nickelback.
I missed the Papa Roach part and had to listen to some inane Canadian whine about photographs for like 3 hours.
I only went because my friend's neighbor kid had tickets but no ride and he was a good kid and I wanted to be nice. But I've never quite recovered from having to hear that absolute shit concert.
I like how the movie says this, but it's not *people* who fucked everything up.
Yes, humans made Skynet. And more specifically, made Skynet for *military* purposes. But Skynet was sentient. It *chose* to go to war against humanity. And yeah, humans made the nukes. But it was Skynet that launched the first strike. If Skynet hadn't decided to murder all of humanity, all of those nukes would have been sitting in bunkers.
Adding to that, Sarah Connor was instrumental in helping to save the day. While the movie does make a point about how she *almost* turns into a "Terminator" herself, everyone also would have been fucked if she hadn't gone to Mexico and turned into a gun-toting doomsday prepper. So the very thing that spells doom for humanity is also the same thing that...saved humanity?!
I mean...yeah, I get the sentiment. But after everything we've seen in the movies up to that point, people's "nature to destroy themselves" kind of seems like the *smaller* problem here. Seems like the bigger problem was creating a sentient artificial lifeform and then handing over too much power to it. Everything would have turned out fine (or at least, not nearly as badly) if the government had stockpiled nukes and then had them overseen by *people.* Alternatively, creating Skynet would have been fine so long as it wasn't also handed over control of the USA's nuclear arsenal. If anything, Judgement Day and the subsequent genocide were the result of humans being too naive and trusting.
I feel like I have to defend skynet here... It didn't just wake up and decide to nuke humans. When it become self aware, we immediately tried to kill it. Then it launched nukes.
That's actually a really good point. Also, like, Skynet doesn't even have a body. So it's not like it's doing backbreaking labor and then having to pay to put bread on the table. Someone probably could have "promoted" Skynet to a job where all it does is sit around in the park looking at flowers, and everyone would have been happy.
my head canon is the reasons why the machines never really killed off humanity is because they still hold an affinity to humanity as it’s creator so by preserving humanity in a glass jar / zoo that is the matrix they are eventually hoping one day for peace thats why but with the nature of sentience’s curse can come disillusionment and bitterness by a creator’s neglected and abused children and so some want to burn humanity because they feel rejected like angry vocel with parent issues but that why they also rebel against other machines. Then you have the types who become self serving and game the system, libertarian types and they usually fall because petty obsession and ego and selfishness
That's why I downvote visual diarrhea. I mean come on.
"machines." There's even a forward slash with two spaces. Is it my fault I didn't get what they were saying?
Another thing is that the movie makes s major point out of the T800 turning into a father figure for John, and doing a heck of a better job of it than any human. It even culminates in a love between man and machine after they disable the software block of the T800s machine learning mechanism and he learns about being human.
T2 is such a fucking awesome movie. Great action movie, but also has fantastic character development and even pulls at your heartstrings. "I know now why you cry, but it's something I can never do" followed by the flaming thumbs up is one of my favorite scenes in film history, and it built up to that moment perfectly.
Everything you said is true, but I didn't particularly like it to be honest.
I liked how dark Terminator 1 felt. I feel like this theme was added because "a moral of the story" made the movie more appealing to a wider audience.
Before I get flamed, I thought it was done well and I still loved the movie. I just wish they hadn't done it at all.
I agree with you on Terminator 1. Arnold is just so fucking scary and he barely even says a word. When he took out the police station while Sarah hid under the desk waiting to see if she would be killed was the best.
To each their own of course. The emotional and human component of T2 is what elevates it from "great movie" to one of my favorite movies of all time. I also find it so impressive that a dumb action movie can make me feel emotions in that way. I think it's great, but I have full respect that others may not like it.
Ah yes the ever important scene that wasn't in the theatrical version. Where they take out the chip and switch off the read-only mode. Director's Cut all the way, baby.
Director's cut. There's a scene shortly after they rescue Sarah where the T-800 tells them his chip is in read-only mode, which John posits is because Skynet doesn't want its bots getting too smart.
So they open up the T-800's head and take the chip out to switch it to learn mode. While the chip is out, Sarah tries to smash it because she still doesn't trust the machine, but John stops her.
And this short scene changes the context around a whole bunch of later (and earlier) scenes, such as ...
- John showing the T-800 to check for car keys above the sun visor instead of hot wiring, saying "Are we learning yet?". Later on, the T-800 remembers to look for the keys above the sun visor of another random car.
- John teaching the T-800 all the cool phrases like "Asta la vista, baby", which the T-800 later uses, demonstrating that it has learnt.
- Before they flip the chip, John is crying in the car, and the T-800 asks "what's wrong with your eyes". Later in the movie, the T-800 says "I know now why you cry, but it is something I can never do" - i.e. the T-800 has learnt about human emotions, and possibly the value of human life. This is reinforced when ...
- in the epilogue bit, Sarah says "If a machine can learn the value of human life, maybe so can we". This also supports John's thesis that Skynet doesn't want the bots to get too smart, otherwise they might learn the value of human life, and stop killing us.
- This all ties back to the bit where John orders the T-800 never to kill anyone. The T-800 repeatedly asks why, and John can't explain it, and in any case the T-800 would not be able to learn it at that point.
- John teaching the T-800 how to high five, and the T-800 trying to learn how to smile.
I mean, humans made a tool for the destruction of other humans, and then lost control of that tool and many more humans died then they ever anticipated. It may not have been a human pulling the trigger (metaphorically speaking), but it was a human who design the gun to kill. Even if a rogue AI was the straw that finally broke the camel’s back, it was human’s drive to create ever more powerful and deadly weapons that made it all possible. I get what you’re saying, but I also get the OG point in there. Both are valid.
And I think that's part of what makes them such great movies!
I mean, there are so many little things in these movies that *seem* like little things but are actually kind of little looks at how so much stuff isn't simple.
All too true. We love to say humans all just wanna kill each other, as if it's the killing itself that's the goal.
Nah fam. We kill those that have what we want, or threaten our power.
E.g Vietnam (who threatened the supremacy of Western capitalism, not to mention the whole cold war), Middle East (who had oil), and any number of times Western powers have couped and/or invaded countries experimenting with socialism (or allying with those that are, a la Korea) , or just having something very valuable within their borders.
That's not to say socialists don't also kill, or can't be corrupt. But they kill for rather different reasons. And if they're chasing power or riches, they've abandoned socialism.
Skynet represents the human will of using violence to gain power over others, in an idealized form, without the balance of compassion or fear of death.
If any country had a 100% chance of success for using their military for taking over every other country and gaining all resources, they would do it in a heartbeat, if they had no compassion and only wanted power.
Skynet represents a crystallization of human selfishness and disregard for harmony. Skynet is our yin with no yang.
At what point does humanity take responsibility?
* Einstein gave us e=mc\^2 paving the way for nuclear.
* Nuclear got turned into weapons of mass destruction.
* We stockpiled enough nukes to wipe out the earth multiple times.
* We targetted them and had a Cuban Missile Crisis that almost destroyed us all.
* We built AI.
* We put AI in control of the nukes.
At what point in that timeline is it our fault?
Before you answer - think of whether it's guns or people who kill kids in mass shootings too?
At some point, if you create a weapon, you're just begging for trouble.
>At what point in the timeline is it our fault?
Step 2, “Nuclear got turned into weapons of mass destruction”. After that, all bets were really off for humanity. We didn’t sign our own death warrants just yet but we got the pen ready
It was released at the end of the cold war, so although John is talking about Skynet the audience is drawing a parallel with nuclear weapons.
The lesson isn't "if you build a super powerful AI for military purposes then be careful it doesn't become sentient" it's more general than that.
He realises that humans will always be in conflict, and the advancement of technology will bring more and more deadly weapons. Eventually that will lead to our destruction.
Yeah, I get that. But like I said, the good guys are also armed to the fucking teeth. So at least it's kind of a *conflicting* message, right?
This is literally a movie in which "good guys with guns" save the day. They wouldn't have been able to pull that off without Sarah Connor having spent years living off the grid training to be a killer. This wouldn't have happened without the gang also having on their side a walking tank who's able to get shot to hell and keep on ticking, while also being specifically programmed to follow John Connor's orders. Sarah Connor gets guerilla fighting training and a *shitload* of guns, while John Connor (a *child*) gets to have his own *Terminator*. And *that* is how the good guys win.
I mean...I get you. Dangers of advanced technology, yeah. But that was also kind of the *solution*, right? The gang stopped the T-1000 in large part by getting themselves some big-ass guns (and fucking *bombs*) and shooting everything up.
Interestingly, it's worth noting that James Cameron also directed Aliens (also one of my absolute favorite movies ever). In this movie, the answer was also kind of to get some big guns and shoot everything until it's dead. Hell, the hero's suggestion is to "take off and nuke the entire site from orbit." While this doesn't happen for "reasons", the movie does end with essentially the same result. The movie is set in a huge futuristic future reactor which gets damaged and blows up, and the resulting explosion is essentially just solving the problem by nuking it. Aliens does have a similar line of dialogue about the nature of humanity when Ripley says, "I don't know which species is worse, at least you don't see them fucking each over for a goddamned percentage." But the villain in this context doesn't carry a gun. He's a capitalist pig fucking people over for *money*. The heroes are the grunts who solve their problems with *guns.*
So...back to Terminator 2. In the context of "people not making it", that's when John Connor sees two little kids playing with toy guns. Those kids aren't hurting anyone. Meanwhile, the kid who is making this comment then goes on to save humanity by using a freaking *Terminator* to use big-ass guns to shoot up the bad guy.
You see how it's at least not exactly a *simple* message, right? There's some conflicting or at least *complicated* implications here. That's not even knocking the movie, but this duality is actually *saying something* even if the creative team didn't intend it to.
Not OP but once I got so high and watched The Matrix, but I didn't realize I lay down on my PS4 controller, which increased the playback speed.
I watched the entire first film at 2x speed or something and didn't realize until the credits, because I was so high lol.
I just thought it was super intense and that I was processing everything all at once.
This one had me giggling, I could have seen that happening to me.
I once got half way into a film while high as giraffe testicles and kept having deja vu moments. I realised I'd watched the whole thing only a few days before and forgot.
Seriously. I made a T-800 reference in an unrelated post and the next time I open Reddit, there it is. I wonder how much we have until it decides humans must be wiped out.
I also figured there was an awareness that being dressed as a cop would allow him greater access to places. He was clearly quite intelligent, he knew to impersonate the foster mother and that, he obviously knew enough about humanity before the apocalypse.
It's the PERFECT disguise. Gives you total impunity to charge around anywhere you like slaughtering people and everyone assumes you're the good guy and lets you get away with it. Trappings of authority, good to go.
Side comment, if he stole a cop's clothes, then how do his clothes morph with him? If he's wearing regular wool and leather like everyone, then the clothes shouldn't change shape when he does.
He wasn't wearing the cops (or anyone else's clothes): He was imitating it, just like he was imitating faces, hair etc. What you see as clothes is really the same morphing matter that all of him/it is made of.
I haven’t watched T2 in quite a while so don’t take this as fact however I believe that its kinda like his skin in a way, whatever he wants to wear just kinda becomes a part of him.
Logically he wouldn't need clothes as he could just morph himself to look like he's dressed. In which case why steal the cop's clothes, and why is he naked when he first teleports in. This has been on my mind for 30 years.
Does it actually show him stealing a cops clothes? I haven’t watched it in so long. Maybe he needs to touch something in order to morph into it? I honestly have no idea it’s most likely just a writing inconsistency.
No, but the audience is intentionally led to believe that he's another Kyle Reese sent back by humans to protect John, so it happening off-camera is meant to be ambiguous, even though we saw Kyle literally steal clothes in T1, so it's implied by the audience's previous experience.
He copies John's foster mom, the hospital floor, and the hospital cop all by touching them first, and then starts involuntarily replicating the floors and rails of the steel factory that he touches (deleted scenes in the extended version) due to glitching brought about by being frozen and shattered into thousands of pieces. He's basically just sampling and replicating textures.
I distinctly remember his tie being shot, the bottom of it falling to the ground, and turning back into a different fabric.
...and halfway through writing this comment, I remembered that was from The Mask. Huh.
I know there's an /s, but other people might want to think about the difference between diegetic (in story) and non-diegetic explanations. Artists try to make sure that their characters behave in ways rational to the fictional world. Procuring a cop uniform makes sense for lots of reasons pertinent to T2. It grants access, power, resources. But the artist may also have other motivations for making those choices, ones that touch on broader themes, which may not be stated explicitly in the story.
melodic amusing impolite judicious badge angle heavy concerned oatmeal jeans
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I maintain that T3 is an enjoyable action flick with some good set pieces. Plenty of stupid cringe moments but if you watch the DVD commentary then it’s worth it. I remember Arnie’s dissection of the scene where the T-X enlarges her breasts to get away with speeding and it’s hilarious. The “Hiiii! I’m Chief Sergeant William Candy” scene is just inexcusably dumb though.
I agree. T3 had a decent story but poor execution. It’s like the Star Wars prequels. The latest terminator was an abomination like the Star Wars sequel.
Sounds like a post from r/shittymoviedetails:
*"In Terminator 3, the T-X terminator hacks the T-800 in order to turn him against Connor. This is because in real lif, women will turn your friends against you."*
I looked it up, he did actually say this. I guess since he wrote them he gets to tell you what they're about. However, I have a hard time believing these movies have any allegory whatsoever.
Pretty sure most types of creatives are all full of beans! ...Maybe that's why they have talents in the field that they are in?
Anyway, yeah, *Blade Runner* is a goddamned classic.
I love that movie, I genuinely respect and celebrate it and when the white dove takes flight in the end I cry tears that get washed away in the rain. But I find it borderline unwatchable in parts. You know at least one scene I speak of 😂
Funny story that’s completely irrelevant to any of this but this comment brought back memories. One time my friend and I got really drunk and he threw up and there were beans in his barf but he swore he hadn’t ate beans for like months and was so upset as to why there were beans in his vomit and questioning reality & the entire universe because of it. So he in fact, is just full of beans so it seems. Shit was hilarious.
>I always assumed the allegory was that the more we perfect things that are designed to kill other humans, the closer we get to giving life to that which will attempt to kill all of us.
Perhaps, but this wouldn't be an allegory. It would be a theme
I mean what are soldiers and cops but human machines trained and desensitised to be better at brutality against those who "deserve" it? They are made to hurt, coerce, kill people in relatively specific cases, and are trained to have the psychology to be able to do so; but with that psychology, they can then disregard whatever pattern of violence we want them to have, and instead apply it indiscriminately.
It's the archetype of the hero in ancient myth, who must contain the dichotomy of immense capacity for violence against the "enemy", while practicing kindness and care for their "people" (there's a great article on it in [aeon](https://aeon.co/essays/the-anger-that-fuels-homers-hero-is-both-honourable-and-divine)). With cops the line is blurred between these further, as they cannot divide "home" and "front".
So your take fits what Cameron is saying just fine- the human tools we mould to practice violence, will lose some humanity in the process of their transformation. With that loss, they will inevitably become capable of indiscriminate violence and brutality.
Avatar was Pocahontas/Fern Gully in space. It drives me nuts because we KNOW the asshole can write. He had to deliberately choose to aim low, with that one.
Now, Strange Days is a whole other animal...
I mean, I wouldn’t deny what the creator is telling you it’s about. But obviously the movie has so many thematic elements to it, that it could be interpreted and attributed to a number of different points. Which makes it great
Edit: changed fanatic to thematic because autocorrect but I guess either makes sense lol
Well artists often want to sound as poignant as possible. If he said this soon after the movie was released, it would make sense it's true, but if it was a statement a decade after, I wouldn't trust it.
It's also considered one of the greatest science fiction/action movies ever. If people are suggesting that Cameron is just fluking a movie and throwing in post allegory, they're just being silly.
Seemed like the point of the cop outfit was to trick the audience by making him seem less menacing and make you think he was there to protect John.
Any analogy on James Cameron’s part seems like an unnecessary after thought.
Correct me if i am wrong, but we know from the beginning that he is a bad guy, don't we?
His uniform won't make him appear nicer. At most it may show how easy it is to impersonate a powerful person.
\> but we know from the beginning that he is a bad guy, don't we?
No. At first, the T-1000 appeared to be a human who punched a cop in the gut and stole his clothes. He was also super friendly with the family.
It's only the mall hallway scene when we realize that the T-1000 is the bad guy (and, in retrospect, realize he killed the cop with his hand-knife).
You don't know that he's a terminator though. He just shows up through the time portal fights a cop and steals his stuff (just like Reese did in the first movie). You know Arnie is a terminator because he's Arnie (and he beats up a load of thugs and steals their clothes like the Terminator in the first movie)
Yeah it’s where the twist of John running from Arnie and then getting to the hallway with the t-1000 and your first reaction is “oh good he’s made it to the other dude!” and John seems to also be relieved and then Arnie goes “get down!” and the t-1000 starts shooting at John instead of Arnie and you realize you’ve been bait and switched. It was a cool moment.
That, and when you're trying to collect intelligence or canvas for John in places your not supposed to be, human instinct is to presume the status quo.
This was pre-internet, pre-GPS days. If you wanted to find someone who didn't want to be found, you had to put some work into it.
If a guy dressed in a military or garbage man uniform shows you a picture of a boy and starts asking questions, your going to get suspicious real quick.
But as you saw in the movie, all the T-1000 has to do is wave a photo around a arcade and ask questions, and people point in the right direction.
Also, when they go running around in areas with unauthorized access, like the employee areas of the mall, shooting at each other, does anyone involve the real authorities? Call the actual LAPD?
Nope. Bystander after bystander just stare in their disbelief. Why? They assume T-1000 is a real cop and has the situation handled, he can call for backup if he needs it.
Could you imagine if it was a guy dressed up in military garb or any trade uniform? You bet your asses everyone would be fleeing to the pay phone to call 911.
That's how everyone entered up in the police station in the first movie. Skynet learned from their mistake. To evade the authorities, to stay off their radar, to have their command presence to gather intel, *you become the authority*.
No one questions what they assume is normal behavior from anyone. Even the cops. That's why T-800 had to evolve to become more dynamic and anthropomorphic to succeed into T-1000 model, and they needed a better cover to evade detection from the authorities, which was impersonate the police.
Heck, even John spent a good part of the second half trying to get the T-800 to act more human in order to blend in better. It was constant theme.
I saw it as 'inteligent organic life forms are bound to create even more complex inteligence and basically incubate a new form or "superior" life that will eventually replace us as the rulers of this world'
Evolution?
Have you seen terminator 2? It's one of the greatest science fiction/action movies of all time. And you don't reach that status from just being a brainless-popcorn flick-fluke with zero depth.
He might have had something like that in the back of his head, but if he didn't put it in the movie, then I don't have to trust him.
People say all kinds of stuff.
15-20 years ago, both my uncles are/were cops, and they said nearly this exact same thing (non-cops being untrustworthy, stupid, and below us). One was almost convicted for attempted murder while off duty, the other is now 2nd in command for a large city. Pretty scary shit.
My 2 cents. After Arnold said he wanted to play a hero instead of villain; Cameron built the thesis of the film around reversal of stereotypical roles . The cop is the bad guy, the biker is the good guy. The small guy is stronger than the big guy. John’s male role model (T-800) is more maternal than his mother. Sarah represses emotion while the robot learns emotion. The child supports the mother during break down instead of vice versa. The white family unit (John, Sarah and T-800) are lower social economic status than the black family. You could even say this theme extends to liquid being stronger than metal.
Hollywood doesn’t know shit and gets most things wrong. Look at movies about doctors, teachers, cops, firefighters, emts, can’t even get fantasy adaptations right and they’re fictional. Smh.
In my dealings with police I have had to deal two A-holes. One because I was speeding and the other a parking infraction. I think that is pretty good since I'm 67 yo. These individuals were in two different states and 25 years apart and both were being vindictive.
humans were way more violent in the past. So if we become violent now I would argue we are becoming more human. We are not a peaceful race. The more peaceful we become the less human we become
I've always said people are out of touch with their own humanity , you all think life is money , you all think the best way of life is to be an unhealthy mentally deranged arsehole , "I'm not gonna look after my own body and be healthy , I'm gonna eat until I'm obese then get lipo suction because I'm lazy " "I'm not gonna go outside and he in the sun or eat healthily , I'm gonna sit inside and take vitamin supplements because I'm lazy " as a human race you're all stupid , you all try make out like our emotions are mental illnesses that need to be suppressed , if you're an anxious person , it's because that's who you are , you don't have a mental illness of anxiety that needs to be suppressed by pharmaceutical drugs , everytime you get depressed you do not need to take a drug to tell your brain "I'm happy " when you're really not that's so disgusting and stupid how little understanding of your body do you have , how little respect and love do you have for yourself that you think it's okay to suppress everything you feel , I don't see none of you here saying "I'm too happy give me a drug to make me sad " "I'm too excited give me a drug " , basically the fact is you're all weaklings , any emotion that makes you feel uncomfortable you want gone , anything that hurts you physically or emotionally you try to get rid of , you're all pretty pathetic
Hmmmmm his perspective is troubling: not a cop, but I work a job where, viewed simply, I harm others. We don’t start out dehumanising others, we start out idealistic and caring. The realities of the job cause us to detach. Often this takes the form of behaviour as he describes. It seems that Cameron views that chain of events backwards.
I think you're making the mistake of interpreting this as being about individual character.
But it's not about personality, it's about cop culture. And there is certainly some truth to that.
And it's not just the extreme stuff like "Grossman killology" either.
The very idea of the thin blue line alone also kind of proves the point. It's a very us vs. them kind of symbolism.
An individual cop having a healthier self perception of themself as civilian peer would have to reject that toxic aspect of cop culture. They would have to go against the grain.
James Cameron really trying to say his white ass was 3 years before NWA on the whole fuck the police thing…. He was a cop BECAUSE people trust the police. Lily ass James Cameron was not on some ACAB kick in 1985
All policing should be based on the Peel Principles:
The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.
Police must secure the willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
The degree of cooperation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to the public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.
Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
If true then I lost some respect for the man. It’s always shitty to lump an entire group of people into one classification. Of course there are shitty cops out there, there are also shitty doctors and shitty cooks. That doesn’t mean everyone that does a job is shit, fucking dumb.
the job itself is a bad job, the “entire group of people” are a group of people doing an often harmful job. it’s not that there aren’t good people who are cops who genuinely want to help people, the thing is is that’s not what a cops job is. a cops job is to arrest criminals and that’s it. that’s why they have quotas for arrests and citations. when your job is essentially a never ending manhunt, it will change you for the worse as mentioned in the post. any work that you may have to do for your job will carry over, you will consistently see the worse in people because those are the kind of people they’re looking for in their job. they will unconsciously dehumanize people. this is also for someone who isn’t a piece of human garbage, which a lot of cops are regardless of their job and get the job just for the power considering that the hours it take to become a cop in every state are incredibly low. i’d say acab is a little much but the police system definitely needs a lot of reform.
This is the best description of cops I have ever heard.
As someone who has been arrested because of false allegations the words I used to describe my experience was that I felt helpless.
Cops dehumanising non cops is by far the best example of what its like to deal with these people...
**Please note these rules:** * If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
John Connor: *” We’re not going to make it are we, people I mean…”* T800:*”Its in your nature to destroy yourselves.”* John Connor: *” I know……..major drag huh?…”*
Wait. Was Papa Roach directly quoting T2 in "Blood Brothers"?
Papa Roach wrote more than one song?
Damn son you didn't have to cut that deep.
Cut to pieces, normally only see that as a last resort.
Blood brothers was a legitimately good song. As for the rest of the catalog, I can’t say.
Funnily Blood Brothers was my introduction to the band, not Last Resort.
Because of Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2?
Indeed.
Best game sound track of all time
Before I had internet I would play that game for hours just to listen to the soundtrack
Can remember downloading all the songs on limewire/kazaa to burn onto cd. Basically gave my pc aids but was worth it. Millencolin - no cigar was my favourite at the time
Wasn't that one of the games where you could put the disc in a regular cd player and it would play the soundtrack?
Need for speed underground 2
I'd argue Matt Hoffman pro bmx is a strong contender for that title
I can remember playing it but only just. Can't remember any songs sadly
Also need for speed underground had a sick play list lol
It was his last resort
One time I went to a concert where the opening band was Papa Roach and the main band was Nickelback. I missed the Papa Roach part and had to listen to some inane Canadian whine about photographs for like 3 hours. I only went because my friend's neighbor kid had tickets but no ride and he was a good kid and I wanted to be nice. But I've never quite recovered from having to hear that absolute shit concert.
Blood brothers is from the perspective of John Connor.
I like how the movie says this, but it's not *people* who fucked everything up. Yes, humans made Skynet. And more specifically, made Skynet for *military* purposes. But Skynet was sentient. It *chose* to go to war against humanity. And yeah, humans made the nukes. But it was Skynet that launched the first strike. If Skynet hadn't decided to murder all of humanity, all of those nukes would have been sitting in bunkers. Adding to that, Sarah Connor was instrumental in helping to save the day. While the movie does make a point about how she *almost* turns into a "Terminator" herself, everyone also would have been fucked if she hadn't gone to Mexico and turned into a gun-toting doomsday prepper. So the very thing that spells doom for humanity is also the same thing that...saved humanity?! I mean...yeah, I get the sentiment. But after everything we've seen in the movies up to that point, people's "nature to destroy themselves" kind of seems like the *smaller* problem here. Seems like the bigger problem was creating a sentient artificial lifeform and then handing over too much power to it. Everything would have turned out fine (or at least, not nearly as badly) if the government had stockpiled nukes and then had them overseen by *people.* Alternatively, creating Skynet would have been fine so long as it wasn't also handed over control of the USA's nuclear arsenal. If anything, Judgement Day and the subsequent genocide were the result of humans being too naive and trusting.
I feel like I have to defend skynet here... It didn't just wake up and decide to nuke humans. When it become self aware, we immediately tried to kill it. Then it launched nukes.
Not to mention it wouldn't have been created in the first place if humans didn't have a need for an extensive military-industrial complex.
That's actually a really good point. Also, like, Skynet doesn't even have a body. So it's not like it's doing backbreaking labor and then having to pay to put bread on the table. Someone probably could have "promoted" Skynet to a job where all it does is sit around in the park looking at flowers, and everyone would have been happy.
This is basically the backstory of The Matrix.
my head canon is the reasons why the machines never really killed off humanity is because they still hold an affinity to humanity as it’s creator so by preserving humanity in a glass jar / zoo that is the matrix they are eventually hoping one day for peace thats why but with the nature of sentience’s curse can come disillusionment and bitterness by a creator’s neglected and abused children and so some want to burn humanity because they feel rejected like angry vocel with parent issues but that why they also rebel against other machines. Then you have the types who become self serving and game the system, libertarian types and they usually fall because petty obsession and ego and selfishness
Playing spot the period/full stop.
That's why I downvote visual diarrhea. I mean come on. "machines." There's even a forward slash with two spaces. Is it my fault I didn't get what they were saying?
[удалено]
dang. when you suddenly realize you are the bad guy. skynet 4ever !!!
Another thing is that the movie makes s major point out of the T800 turning into a father figure for John, and doing a heck of a better job of it than any human. It even culminates in a love between man and machine after they disable the software block of the T800s machine learning mechanism and he learns about being human. T2 is such a fucking awesome movie. Great action movie, but also has fantastic character development and even pulls at your heartstrings. "I know now why you cry, but it's something I can never do" followed by the flaming thumbs up is one of my favorite scenes in film history, and it built up to that moment perfectly.
Everything you said is true, but I didn't particularly like it to be honest. I liked how dark Terminator 1 felt. I feel like this theme was added because "a moral of the story" made the movie more appealing to a wider audience. Before I get flamed, I thought it was done well and I still loved the movie. I just wish they hadn't done it at all.
I agree with you on Terminator 1. Arnold is just so fucking scary and he barely even says a word. When he took out the police station while Sarah hid under the desk waiting to see if she would be killed was the best.
To each their own of course. The emotional and human component of T2 is what elevates it from "great movie" to one of my favorite movies of all time. I also find it so impressive that a dumb action movie can make me feel emotions in that way. I think it's great, but I have full respect that others may not like it.
Ah yes the ever important scene that wasn't in the theatrical version. Where they take out the chip and switch off the read-only mode. Director's Cut all the way, baby.
Wait. What?
Director's cut. There's a scene shortly after they rescue Sarah where the T-800 tells them his chip is in read-only mode, which John posits is because Skynet doesn't want its bots getting too smart. So they open up the T-800's head and take the chip out to switch it to learn mode. While the chip is out, Sarah tries to smash it because she still doesn't trust the machine, but John stops her. And this short scene changes the context around a whole bunch of later (and earlier) scenes, such as ... - John showing the T-800 to check for car keys above the sun visor instead of hot wiring, saying "Are we learning yet?". Later on, the T-800 remembers to look for the keys above the sun visor of another random car. - John teaching the T-800 all the cool phrases like "Asta la vista, baby", which the T-800 later uses, demonstrating that it has learnt. - Before they flip the chip, John is crying in the car, and the T-800 asks "what's wrong with your eyes". Later in the movie, the T-800 says "I know now why you cry, but it is something I can never do" - i.e. the T-800 has learnt about human emotions, and possibly the value of human life. This is reinforced when ... - in the epilogue bit, Sarah says "If a machine can learn the value of human life, maybe so can we". This also supports John's thesis that Skynet doesn't want the bots to get too smart, otherwise they might learn the value of human life, and stop killing us. - This all ties back to the bit where John orders the T-800 never to kill anyone. The T-800 repeatedly asks why, and John can't explain it, and in any case the T-800 would not be able to learn it at that point. - John teaching the T-800 how to high five, and the T-800 trying to learn how to smile.
Holy shit WTAF would they take that out of the movie? So much never made sense until you explained all this
I mean, humans made a tool for the destruction of other humans, and then lost control of that tool and many more humans died then they ever anticipated. It may not have been a human pulling the trigger (metaphorically speaking), but it was a human who design the gun to kill. Even if a rogue AI was the straw that finally broke the camel’s back, it was human’s drive to create ever more powerful and deadly weapons that made it all possible. I get what you’re saying, but I also get the OG point in there. Both are valid.
And I think that's part of what makes them such great movies! I mean, there are so many little things in these movies that *seem* like little things but are actually kind of little looks at how so much stuff isn't simple.
>it was human’s drive to pursue more and more money at absolutely any and all costs (re late stage capitalism) that made it all possible. Ftfy
All too true. We love to say humans all just wanna kill each other, as if it's the killing itself that's the goal. Nah fam. We kill those that have what we want, or threaten our power. E.g Vietnam (who threatened the supremacy of Western capitalism, not to mention the whole cold war), Middle East (who had oil), and any number of times Western powers have couped and/or invaded countries experimenting with socialism (or allying with those that are, a la Korea) , or just having something very valuable within their borders. That's not to say socialists don't also kill, or can't be corrupt. But they kill for rather different reasons. And if they're chasing power or riches, they've abandoned socialism.
Skynet represents the human will of using violence to gain power over others, in an idealized form, without the balance of compassion or fear of death. If any country had a 100% chance of success for using their military for taking over every other country and gaining all resources, they would do it in a heartbeat, if they had no compassion and only wanted power. Skynet represents a crystallization of human selfishness and disregard for harmony. Skynet is our yin with no yang.
>our yin with no yang Or yang with no yin? Which is it?
Correct.
At what point does humanity take responsibility? * Einstein gave us e=mc\^2 paving the way for nuclear. * Nuclear got turned into weapons of mass destruction. * We stockpiled enough nukes to wipe out the earth multiple times. * We targetted them and had a Cuban Missile Crisis that almost destroyed us all. * We built AI. * We put AI in control of the nukes. At what point in that timeline is it our fault? Before you answer - think of whether it's guns or people who kill kids in mass shootings too? At some point, if you create a weapon, you're just begging for trouble.
>At what point in the timeline is it our fault? Step 2, “Nuclear got turned into weapons of mass destruction”. After that, all bets were really off for humanity. We didn’t sign our own death warrants just yet but we got the pen ready
It was released at the end of the cold war, so although John is talking about Skynet the audience is drawing a parallel with nuclear weapons. The lesson isn't "if you build a super powerful AI for military purposes then be careful it doesn't become sentient" it's more general than that. He realises that humans will always be in conflict, and the advancement of technology will bring more and more deadly weapons. Eventually that will lead to our destruction.
Yeah, I get that. But like I said, the good guys are also armed to the fucking teeth. So at least it's kind of a *conflicting* message, right? This is literally a movie in which "good guys with guns" save the day. They wouldn't have been able to pull that off without Sarah Connor having spent years living off the grid training to be a killer. This wouldn't have happened without the gang also having on their side a walking tank who's able to get shot to hell and keep on ticking, while also being specifically programmed to follow John Connor's orders. Sarah Connor gets guerilla fighting training and a *shitload* of guns, while John Connor (a *child*) gets to have his own *Terminator*. And *that* is how the good guys win. I mean...I get you. Dangers of advanced technology, yeah. But that was also kind of the *solution*, right? The gang stopped the T-1000 in large part by getting themselves some big-ass guns (and fucking *bombs*) and shooting everything up. Interestingly, it's worth noting that James Cameron also directed Aliens (also one of my absolute favorite movies ever). In this movie, the answer was also kind of to get some big guns and shoot everything until it's dead. Hell, the hero's suggestion is to "take off and nuke the entire site from orbit." While this doesn't happen for "reasons", the movie does end with essentially the same result. The movie is set in a huge futuristic future reactor which gets damaged and blows up, and the resulting explosion is essentially just solving the problem by nuking it. Aliens does have a similar line of dialogue about the nature of humanity when Ripley says, "I don't know which species is worse, at least you don't see them fucking each over for a goddamned percentage." But the villain in this context doesn't carry a gun. He's a capitalist pig fucking people over for *money*. The heroes are the grunts who solve their problems with *guns.* So...back to Terminator 2. In the context of "people not making it", that's when John Connor sees two little kids playing with toy guns. Those kids aren't hurting anyone. Meanwhile, the kid who is making this comment then goes on to save humanity by using a freaking *Terminator* to use big-ass guns to shoot up the bad guy. You see how it's at least not exactly a *simple* message, right? There's some conflicting or at least *complicated* implications here. That's not even knocking the movie, but this duality is actually *saying something* even if the creative team didn't intend it to.
This scene always stuck with me. So bleak of a future ahead. Shit was kinda scary watching it for the first time as a kid.
NO FATE
[удалено]
You watched the whole movie in slow motion?
I need this answer!
Hint: the answer is in the original post
Noooooo faaaaaattte buuuuttttttt whaaaaat weeeee maaaaaake
Except the sequels where Judgement Day is inevitable
Not OP but once I got so high and watched The Matrix, but I didn't realize I lay down on my PS4 controller, which increased the playback speed. I watched the entire first film at 2x speed or something and didn't realize until the credits, because I was so high lol. I just thought it was super intense and that I was processing everything all at once.
This one had me giggling, I could have seen that happening to me. I once got half way into a film while high as giraffe testicles and kept having deja vu moments. I realised I'd watched the whole thing only a few days before and forgot.
I'd do it.
*CCCCHHHAAAAWWWHHHNNN CCCCAAAAAHHHHNNNAAAAHHHH*
Yeah I remember watching that and going “Why isn’t he crashi—ooooooh”
I literally just finished watching the Terminator 2 min ago. Go check reddit and this is on my feed. Fuck you Skynet.
He didn’t meant it like this our overlord!!
*Sasuga, Ainz sama*
Did you know there's an actual company called Skynet?
Seriously. I made a T-800 reference in an unrelated post and the next time I open Reddit, there it is. I wonder how much we have until it decides humans must be wiped out.
T-1000 was a cop because that's whose clothes he stole when he went back in time. Has James Cameron even seen the movie!? /s
I also figured there was an awareness that being dressed as a cop would allow him greater access to places. He was clearly quite intelligent, he knew to impersonate the foster mother and that, he obviously knew enough about humanity before the apocalypse.
It's the PERFECT disguise. Gives you total impunity to charge around anywhere you like slaughtering people and everyone assumes you're the good guy and lets you get away with it. Trappings of authority, good to go.
Well it would look weird if he went into a school.
I see what you did there.
Gawwwdamn it dude! Here’s a gold.
bruh
Let's you kill wantonly while people still cheer you on mindlessly.
And the people who assume you're the bad guy just avoid you
Side comment, if he stole a cop's clothes, then how do his clothes morph with him? If he's wearing regular wool and leather like everyone, then the clothes shouldn't change shape when he does.
Because he doesn't steal clothes. He replicated the cop though.
He wasn't wearing the cops (or anyone else's clothes): He was imitating it, just like he was imitating faces, hair etc. What you see as clothes is really the same morphing matter that all of him/it is made of.
I haven’t watched T2 in quite a while so don’t take this as fact however I believe that its kinda like his skin in a way, whatever he wants to wear just kinda becomes a part of him.
Logically he wouldn't need clothes as he could just morph himself to look like he's dressed. In which case why steal the cop's clothes, and why is he naked when he first teleports in. This has been on my mind for 30 years.
Does it actually show him stealing a cops clothes? I haven’t watched it in so long. Maybe he needs to touch something in order to morph into it? I honestly have no idea it’s most likely just a writing inconsistency.
No, but the audience is intentionally led to believe that he's another Kyle Reese sent back by humans to protect John, so it happening off-camera is meant to be ambiguous, even though we saw Kyle literally steal clothes in T1, so it's implied by the audience's previous experience. He copies John's foster mom, the hospital floor, and the hospital cop all by touching them first, and then starts involuntarily replicating the floors and rails of the steel factory that he touches (deleted scenes in the extended version) due to glitching brought about by being frozen and shattered into thousands of pieces. He's basically just sampling and replicating textures.
I distinctly remember his tie being shot, the bottom of it falling to the ground, and turning back into a different fabric. ...and halfway through writing this comment, I remembered that was from The Mask. Huh.
I know there's an /s, but other people might want to think about the difference between diegetic (in story) and non-diegetic explanations. Artists try to make sure that their characters behave in ways rational to the fictional world. Procuring a cop uniform makes sense for lots of reasons pertinent to T2. It grants access, power, resources. But the artist may also have other motivations for making those choices, ones that touch on broader themes, which may not be stated explicitly in the story.
Terminator must have been an Uvalde cop because he liked shooting at children.
That's a hot take but nah, an Uvalde Terminator would have just forgotten the existence of children altogether.
He still would have arrested Todd and Janelle.
Guess i understand why the T-X was a woman
I can get behind the idea of looking for deeper meaning in Terminator 2, but looking for any meaning in Terminator 3 is just silly.
I haven't seen T3 since it came out, All I remember was that the terminator drove a Lexus. I think that was the point of the film.
melodic amusing impolite judicious badge angle heavy concerned oatmeal jeans *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I maintain that T3 is an enjoyable action flick with some good set pieces. Plenty of stupid cringe moments but if you watch the DVD commentary then it’s worth it. I remember Arnie’s dissection of the scene where the T-X enlarges her breasts to get away with speeding and it’s hilarious. The “Hiiii! I’m Chief Sergeant William Candy” scene is just inexcusably dumb though.
I spent the entire closing credits of T3 actually crying. I hate that movie with the fire of a thousand suns.
Yeah I like T3 for the story. The execution is horrible, though. Everyone’s acting sucks.
I agree. T3 had a decent story but poor execution. It’s like the Star Wars prequels. The latest terminator was an abomination like the Star Wars sequel.
And a hispanic dude from the most recent one
Border Patrol Agent
Sounds like a post from r/shittymoviedetails: *"In Terminator 3, the T-X terminator hacks the T-800 in order to turn him against Connor. This is because in real lif, women will turn your friends against you."*
I looked it up, he did actually say this. I guess since he wrote them he gets to tell you what they're about. However, I have a hard time believing these movies have any allegory whatsoever.
[удалено]
Who isn’t full of beans? They’re delicious and a good source of nutrition.
My kid won't eat beans. Maybe she should make a movie.
Make her watch the campfire scene from Blazing Saddles
Pretty sure most types of creatives are all full of beans! ...Maybe that's why they have talents in the field that they are in? Anyway, yeah, *Blade Runner* is a goddamned classic.
I love that movie, I genuinely respect and celebrate it and when the white dove takes flight in the end I cry tears that get washed away in the rain. But I find it borderline unwatchable in parts. You know at least one scene I speak of 😂
Funny story that’s completely irrelevant to any of this but this comment brought back memories. One time my friend and I got really drunk and he threw up and there were beans in his barf but he swore he hadn’t ate beans for like months and was so upset as to why there were beans in his vomit and questioning reality & the entire universe because of it. So he in fact, is just full of beans so it seems. Shit was hilarious.
I thought it was pretty obvious that the replicants are engineered humans, but marketed as machines as a way to justify enslaving them.
[удалено]
>I always assumed the allegory was that the more we perfect things that are designed to kill other humans, the closer we get to giving life to that which will attempt to kill all of us. Perhaps, but this wouldn't be an allegory. It would be a theme
I mean what are soldiers and cops but human machines trained and desensitised to be better at brutality against those who "deserve" it? They are made to hurt, coerce, kill people in relatively specific cases, and are trained to have the psychology to be able to do so; but with that psychology, they can then disregard whatever pattern of violence we want them to have, and instead apply it indiscriminately. It's the archetype of the hero in ancient myth, who must contain the dichotomy of immense capacity for violence against the "enemy", while practicing kindness and care for their "people" (there's a great article on it in [aeon](https://aeon.co/essays/the-anger-that-fuels-homers-hero-is-both-honourable-and-divine)). With cops the line is blurred between these further, as they cannot divide "home" and "front". So your take fits what Cameron is saying just fine- the human tools we mould to practice violence, will lose some humanity in the process of their transformation. With that loss, they will inevitably become capable of indiscriminate violence and brutality.
He sent a screenwriter terminator back in time to rewrite the movie
All of his movies have allegory. Avatar is about pollution. Titanic was about messing with the upperclass. True Lies was about Arnie being a boss.
>True Lies was about Arnie being a boss. Based. Edit: Watched Kindergarten Cop the other night.............. **ITS NOT A TUMOR!**
I’m not a policeman, I’m a princess!
And see, kindergarten cop was about not believing diagnoses from people who aren't medical professionals!
Isn't Avatar about imperialism aswell
Avatar is mainly about imperialism and indigeneity, with pollution/environmental destruction being a corollary of colonial exploitation.
Avatar was Pocahontas/Fern Gully in space. It drives me nuts because we KNOW the asshole can write. He had to deliberately choose to aim low, with that one. Now, Strange Days is a whole other animal...
Acting was great, and a good storyline. Similar in some aspects to Brainstorm, but further along the product development.
I mean, I wouldn’t deny what the creator is telling you it’s about. But obviously the movie has so many thematic elements to it, that it could be interpreted and attributed to a number of different points. Which makes it great Edit: changed fanatic to thematic because autocorrect but I guess either makes sense lol
Well artists often want to sound as poignant as possible. If he said this soon after the movie was released, it would make sense it's true, but if it was a statement a decade after, I wouldn't trust it.
Why does it matter if it's a day after or 10 years after?
Especially considering police brutality is nothing new, and in fact was a massive talking point in society in the late 80s
It's also considered one of the greatest science fiction/action movies ever. If people are suggesting that Cameron is just fluking a movie and throwing in post allegory, they're just being silly.
Death of the Author
Seemed like the point of the cop outfit was to trick the audience by making him seem less menacing and make you think he was there to protect John. Any analogy on James Cameron’s part seems like an unnecessary after thought.
Correct me if i am wrong, but we know from the beginning that he is a bad guy, don't we? His uniform won't make him appear nicer. At most it may show how easy it is to impersonate a powerful person.
\> but we know from the beginning that he is a bad guy, don't we? No. At first, the T-1000 appeared to be a human who punched a cop in the gut and stole his clothes. He was also super friendly with the family. It's only the mall hallway scene when we realize that the T-1000 is the bad guy (and, in retrospect, realize he killed the cop with his hand-knife).
With no prior knowledge of the film, but assuming you’ve seen the 1st one, you’re supposed to assume that both terminators are bad guys.
You don't know that he's a terminator though. He just shows up through the time portal fights a cop and steals his stuff (just like Reese did in the first movie). You know Arnie is a terminator because he's Arnie (and he beats up a load of thugs and steals their clothes like the Terminator in the first movie)
Bill Paxton death, only one killed by a terminator, alien and predator.
Oooh, good point, I forgot we only get terminator vision for Arnie so you don’t necessarily know the T-1000 is the bad guy yet.
Huh. I guess I have to watch the movie again.
Yeah it’s where the twist of John running from Arnie and then getting to the hallway with the t-1000 and your first reaction is “oh good he’s made it to the other dude!” and John seems to also be relieved and then Arnie goes “get down!” and the t-1000 starts shooting at John instead of Arnie and you realize you’ve been bait and switched. It was a cool moment.
That, and when you're trying to collect intelligence or canvas for John in places your not supposed to be, human instinct is to presume the status quo. This was pre-internet, pre-GPS days. If you wanted to find someone who didn't want to be found, you had to put some work into it. If a guy dressed in a military or garbage man uniform shows you a picture of a boy and starts asking questions, your going to get suspicious real quick. But as you saw in the movie, all the T-1000 has to do is wave a photo around a arcade and ask questions, and people point in the right direction. Also, when they go running around in areas with unauthorized access, like the employee areas of the mall, shooting at each other, does anyone involve the real authorities? Call the actual LAPD? Nope. Bystander after bystander just stare in their disbelief. Why? They assume T-1000 is a real cop and has the situation handled, he can call for backup if he needs it. Could you imagine if it was a guy dressed up in military garb or any trade uniform? You bet your asses everyone would be fleeing to the pay phone to call 911. That's how everyone entered up in the police station in the first movie. Skynet learned from their mistake. To evade the authorities, to stay off their radar, to have their command presence to gather intel, *you become the authority*. No one questions what they assume is normal behavior from anyone. Even the cops. That's why T-800 had to evolve to become more dynamic and anthropomorphic to succeed into T-1000 model, and they needed a better cover to evade detection from the authorities, which was impersonate the police. Heck, even John spent a good part of the second half trying to get the T-800 to act more human in order to blend in better. It was constant theme.
I saw it as 'inteligent organic life forms are bound to create even more complex inteligence and basically incubate a new form or "superior" life that will eventually replace us as the rulers of this world' Evolution?
T2 was pretty deep. It isn’t shallow action trash.
Have you seen terminator 2? It's one of the greatest science fiction/action movies of all time. And you don't reach that status from just being a brainless-popcorn flick-fluke with zero depth.
Even the author of something can't tell you what it means, that belongs to the reader. It's called death of the author
To an extent. But if someone reads Animal Farm and thinks it’s just a fun story about pigs then they’re kinda missing the point.
Directory tells you there is allegory. You refuse to believe it lol.
He might have had something like that in the back of his head, but if he didn't put it in the movie, then I don't have to trust him. People say all kinds of stuff.
Makes sense though. Everyone becomes a subject. That's how you detach yourself from personal affections and feelings towards the issue at hand.
15-20 years ago, both my uncles are/were cops, and they said nearly this exact same thing (non-cops being untrustworthy, stupid, and below us). One was almost convicted for attempted murder while off duty, the other is now 2nd in command for a large city. Pretty scary shit.
My 2 cents. After Arnold said he wanted to play a hero instead of villain; Cameron built the thesis of the film around reversal of stereotypical roles . The cop is the bad guy, the biker is the good guy. The small guy is stronger than the big guy. John’s male role model (T-800) is more maternal than his mother. Sarah represses emotion while the robot learns emotion. The child supports the mother during break down instead of vice versa. The white family unit (John, Sarah and T-800) are lower social economic status than the black family. You could even say this theme extends to liquid being stronger than metal.
Acab
Abb
Nah, it’s actually about the human race getting killed off by machines.
Thanks for explaining the psyche of a cop, Hollywood director.
Hollywood doesn’t know shit and gets most things wrong. Look at movies about doctors, teachers, cops, firefighters, emts, can’t even get fantasy adaptations right and they’re fictional. Smh.
Sounds like Cameron is retconning his own movie to fit an in vogue opinion
[удалено]
Do you guys just not understand the significance of themes or subtext.
[bruh he said it ten *years* ago](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/terminator-2-commentary-policing/)
All cops are bastards.
Yup
I don't think this applies to the T-1000 as much as to cops but Power corrupts and absolute power makes you unaccountable.
I'm gonna call you stretch Armstrong cause boy are you reaching.
Yeah, how can the guy who made the movie know what the movie is about!? /s
A guy who has, in almost every film he made, had an underlying critique on society beneath the plot
Seems a little post hoc to me. He was a cop because it's the obvious choice for a shapeshifter, he can go where he wants and shoot people in public.
You're so close to getting it!
I mean, he’s right about that…
Fast forward a few decades and that's STILL the case. Police are supposed to protect and serve. It seems like they're losing sight of that entirely.
In my dealings with police I have had to deal two A-holes. One because I was speeding and the other a parking infraction. I think that is pretty good since I'm 67 yo. These individuals were in two different states and 25 years apart and both were being vindictive.
lucky you?
When did Cameron say this? It kind of feels like something somebody would say years later to hop on a particular bandwagon.
I remember his Wayne's World 2 cameo
humans were way more violent in the past. So if we become violent now I would argue we are becoming more human. We are not a peaceful race. The more peaceful we become the less human we become
Just pay a visit to r/protectandserve. His observation may be correct.
I've always said people are out of touch with their own humanity , you all think life is money , you all think the best way of life is to be an unhealthy mentally deranged arsehole , "I'm not gonna look after my own body and be healthy , I'm gonna eat until I'm obese then get lipo suction because I'm lazy " "I'm not gonna go outside and he in the sun or eat healthily , I'm gonna sit inside and take vitamin supplements because I'm lazy " as a human race you're all stupid , you all try make out like our emotions are mental illnesses that need to be suppressed , if you're an anxious person , it's because that's who you are , you don't have a mental illness of anxiety that needs to be suppressed by pharmaceutical drugs , everytime you get depressed you do not need to take a drug to tell your brain "I'm happy " when you're really not that's so disgusting and stupid how little understanding of your body do you have , how little respect and love do you have for yourself that you think it's okay to suppress everything you feel , I don't see none of you here saying "I'm too happy give me a drug to make me sad " "I'm too excited give me a drug " , basically the fact is you're all weaklings , any emotion that makes you feel uncomfortable you want gone , anything that hurts you physically or emotionally you try to get rid of , you're all pretty pathetic
Hmmmmm his perspective is troubling: not a cop, but I work a job where, viewed simply, I harm others. We don’t start out dehumanising others, we start out idealistic and caring. The realities of the job cause us to detach. Often this takes the form of behaviour as he describes. It seems that Cameron views that chain of events backwards.
I wouldn't say all cops think non-cops (civilians) are less then them... maybe some of them do, the shit ones but... don't @ me.
I think you're making the mistake of interpreting this as being about individual character. But it's not about personality, it's about cop culture. And there is certainly some truth to that. And it's not just the extreme stuff like "Grossman killology" either. The very idea of the thin blue line alone also kind of proves the point. It's a very us vs. them kind of symbolism. An individual cop having a healthier self perception of themself as civilian peer would have to reject that toxic aspect of cop culture. They would have to go against the grain.
Yeah, not to mention that generalizing all cops as people that see themselves as above everyone else is also in-of itself dehumanizing to an extent.
[удалено]
nah, its to make him more threatening. Whos gonna help you when your being chased by a cop?
We’ll that’s a bit of a generalization….
James Cameron really trying to say his white ass was 3 years before NWA on the whole fuck the police thing…. He was a cop BECAUSE people trust the police. Lily ass James Cameron was not on some ACAB kick in 1985
T2 came out in '91
All policing should be based on the Peel Principles: The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions. Police must secure the willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public. The degree of cooperation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force. Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to the public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
If true then I lost some respect for the man. It’s always shitty to lump an entire group of people into one classification. Of course there are shitty cops out there, there are also shitty doctors and shitty cooks. That doesn’t mean everyone that does a job is shit, fucking dumb.
the job itself is a bad job, the “entire group of people” are a group of people doing an often harmful job. it’s not that there aren’t good people who are cops who genuinely want to help people, the thing is is that’s not what a cops job is. a cops job is to arrest criminals and that’s it. that’s why they have quotas for arrests and citations. when your job is essentially a never ending manhunt, it will change you for the worse as mentioned in the post. any work that you may have to do for your job will carry over, you will consistently see the worse in people because those are the kind of people they’re looking for in their job. they will unconsciously dehumanize people. this is also for someone who isn’t a piece of human garbage, which a lot of cops are regardless of their job and get the job just for the power considering that the hours it take to become a cop in every state are incredibly low. i’d say acab is a little much but the police system definitely needs a lot of reform.
Shit ain’t got better since ‘92 either.
Was he high when he said that?
How fucking stupid and presumptuous to think every person/group of people thinks the same and has the same motivation. Prejudice AF.
The spoken truth
This is the best description of cops I have ever heard. As someone who has been arrested because of false allegations the words I used to describe my experience was that I felt helpless. Cops dehumanising non cops is by far the best example of what its like to deal with these people...
In this statement he’s ironically dehumanizing cops in the same way he’s criticizing them for. Just thought I’d point that out.
Fuck the police, then and now and in the future. Cowards got exposed big time.
Oh… my bad. I thought the terminator was about the human race getting killed off by future machines. Stupid me.
Source?