Unknown Soldier
Veteran
Sarah Connor Chronicles
- Thread starter Unknown Soldier
- Start date
OMG. I didn't even think about that. Whoopsie on that plot hole.Terminators need to have flesh on them to go through the time machine. That was explained in the movies and in part 1 of this show. So, that the head made it through the time travel was rather wrong. The humans and terminator lost clothing, but big metal skull made it through...... huh.
Heh yeah and
they thru a 6+ ft super sweet metal endoskeleton into an auto junk yard? Nobody thought it would be neat to take a closer look at that! Crime scene investigators miss headless nasty robot war machine corpse in their examination... 
I'd say it's plainly obvious that we have some writers here who aren't exactly big sci-fi buffs....
Rumour has it that of the 8 they shot, the last two or three were finished by the studio with no participation of the writers & producer because of the writers strike. Soooo, that could get ugly quality-wise if they insist on showing them.
Otoh, the Directors came to a deal yesterday, so it's not out of the question that the writers strike will be over in a few weeks. Maybe.
Otoh, the Directors came to a deal yesterday, so it's not out of the question that the writers strike will be over in a few weeks. Maybe.
digitalwanderer
Legend
The greed of others can be a royal bitch of a hurdle to overcome.
Personally, I find the whole hollywood rights structure to be byzantine.
I don't see why DVD is different than VHS is different than on-demand, etc.
But, I do see the studios' issue: how do we structure the royalties? From the net? From the gross? What do you do about 'all you can eat' content(like Yahoo! Music)? How much should each person get, etc? A portion of the subscription? Pay per play?
Its pretty difficult to come up a scheme that covers all the basis.
I don't see why DVD is different than VHS is different than on-demand, etc.
But, I do see the studios' issue: how do we structure the royalties? From the net? From the gross? What do you do about 'all you can eat' content(like Yahoo! Music)? How much should each person get, etc? A portion of the subscription? Pay per play?
Its pretty difficult to come up a scheme that covers all the basis.
In TV, typically the "writer-director" and "writer-producer" models are very common. And, typically, those guys are actually "the creator" of the entire concept of that particular TV show in the first place --the folks that first walked into the studio and pitched what this show was going to be about, and why it would work. A lot of these guys are now called "showrunners", a relatively recent term. So, in many cases when "the writers" walked, some of those same people were also wearing director/producer hats. . . and those hats walked too. So even if you don't need more writing for a given episode, even if you have all the principal photography in the can for that episode, somebody has to do all the editing and post-production work that turns raw footage into a TV show. And if it's not the guys who've had the vision all along of what they are trying to achieve and where they intend to go with look/feel, foreshadowing of events a mile down the road, etc. . . . the product is going to suffer.
Which is the long way of saying that in many cases it was a lot more than "the writing" that walked out the door. . . and my understanding is that was the case with this particular show as well.
It has so much conflicting crap its hard to take somewhat serious.
Beiing science fiction is one thing, breaking all selfimposed "physical rules" in the movies is another.
Apart from sending his plain head through time, his head mysteriously powering itself and controling the body over air, the headless body having enough senses so the head serving little more than cosmetic purpose...
Didnt it struck anybody that the terminatrix couldnt spot a safe trough a damn poster, while being capable of measuring just about anything else by just looking at it?
Also I masterfully came up with a way to transport weapons (up to the size of a newborn) thru time, its even hinted at the first scene with the bad terminator
Didnt it struck anybody that the terminatrix couldnt spot a safe trough a damn poster, while being capable of measuring just about anything else by just looking at it?
Also I masterfully came up with a way to transport weapons (up to the size of a newborn) thru time, its even hinted at the first scene with the bad terminator
Beiing science fiction is one thing, breaking all selfimposed "physical rules" in the movies is another.
I think it is simple, the writers should get a percentage of sales. I do see one problem in that if there is a greater proportion of cost associated with a medium then perhaps their share should be smaller, or you could do it on the net revenues. Net revenues are a terrible idea though b/c then the studios have an incentive to spend more on advertising their product for example, b/c they will get compensation in smaller payments to writers.
DVD VHS BluRay etc... are all the same IMO.
You already said what it should be with subscription, it might have a few issues, but it still seems that it should not be that hard to work out.
Ok, so they get a percentage of sales. What if that percentage is too high, and the studio actually has to lose money to sell the content?
And how do you handle licensing of libraries (rather than individual items)?
I think the DVD/VHS thing is a travesty, but the VOD and library licensing issues of late don't seem to have much of a decent answer.
And how do you handle licensing of libraries (rather than individual items)?
I think the DVD/VHS thing is a travesty, but the VOD and library licensing issues of late don't seem to have much of a decent answer.
Well one would think they could just fix the DVD thing over night.
As for the rest why not give a percentage of the sale price subtracting infrastructure cost. Then they cannot include waste on ads and such, but if the servers are expensive they can cut that out. The companies themselves are saying they are going to make huge profits with online viewing though so you think they could pay.
Well, I don't care to derail this thread with writer strike why's and how's. www.unitedhollywood.com is a good place to start for those who care to get up to speed.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Anybody else watching this anymore? I watched the first episode few weeks ago and now I'm up to date with the US schedule. I think it's fairly enjoyable show...
The thing that struk me about the whole Terminator universe is that, how on earth are the humans supposed to win the war in the future. I mean in every Terminator movie and in this series it looks like it's only handfull of people fighting against the machines on a planet that is completely obliterated. The setting for humans is in my opinion even worse than in the Matrix and John Connor is no Neo
The future is in my opinion a complete no win situation for the humans...
As far as the show goes. John Connor hasn't been as annoying as I first thought he would be and in general the episodes have been pretty good, except s2e4, which was total gargage. Heh even that 90210 guy is pretty good :smile:
The thing that struk me about the whole Terminator universe is that, how on earth are the humans supposed to win the war in the future. I mean in every Terminator movie and in this series it looks like it's only handfull of people fighting against the machines on a planet that is completely obliterated. The setting for humans is in my opinion even worse than in the Matrix and John Connor is no Neo
The future is in my opinion a complete no win situation for the humans...
As far as the show goes. John Connor hasn't been as annoying as I first thought he would be and in general the episodes have been pretty good, except s2e4, which was total gargage. Heh even that 90210 guy is pretty good :smile:
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
I really like Cameron. I like the way she's got that thousand yard stare and then when she needs to pretend to be a person, she clicks into "human emulation". That one episode where she's begging John Connor not to kill her and how she loves him was very striking, because we realise that until then we've never seen any real emotion from her before. Then afterwards she claims John can't be trusted not to put himself in danger because of the way he saves her. I noticed that John's new girlfriend is the exact physical opposite of Cameron.
Sarah as a character is just getting annoying. She's always whining about how precious John is when he wants to do anything at all, and then is always rushing off to put herself (and by extension John) in danger for completely sentimental issues.
My big problem is that the Terminators are supposed to be ruthless, unstoppable killing machines, but they seem to be becoming more devious and sneaky, and doing all kinds of planning that makes them no longer that particularly unique enemy of the movies.
And what's with a Scottish singer as a terminator running a multinational company - that's just not terminator behaviour? Or the businees with uploading Cameron to the traffic light? That's just cringeworthy nonsense, and I suspect that unless the writers get their act together with something more coherent, the show may fall foul of the US broadcasters tendency to kill off any show that doesn't hit the ground running from the first episode. It was looking pretty dicey after the first half-series and the writier's strike.
As for humanity's bleak future - one tenant of the terminator universe is the "the future is not written". Things can and are changed in the future by the actions we take today. That's why Skynet and the resistance send soldiers back in the first place. If the resistance fighters didn't belive that, they'd stop fighting and give up.
Sarah as a character is just getting annoying. She's always whining about how precious John is when he wants to do anything at all, and then is always rushing off to put herself (and by extension John) in danger for completely sentimental issues.
My big problem is that the Terminators are supposed to be ruthless, unstoppable killing machines, but they seem to be becoming more devious and sneaky, and doing all kinds of planning that makes them no longer that particularly unique enemy of the movies.
And what's with a Scottish singer as a terminator running a multinational company - that's just not terminator behaviour? Or the businees with uploading Cameron to the traffic light? That's just cringeworthy nonsense, and I suspect that unless the writers get their act together with something more coherent, the show may fall foul of the US broadcasters tendency to kill off any show that doesn't hit the ground running from the first episode. It was looking pretty dicey after the first half-series and the writier's strike.
As for humanity's bleak future - one tenant of the terminator universe is the "the future is not written". Things can and are changed in the future by the actions we take today. That's why Skynet and the resistance send soldiers back in the first place. If the resistance fighters didn't belive that, they'd stop fighting and give up.
