Talk:The Terminator/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Top

Was it really an Arnie vehicle from the outset?

He has hardly any dialogue, and is only in the action sequences, with Hamilton and Biehn on screen far more, and doing most of the acting. Sure, its since been repackaged as a star vehicle, but prior to that he'd only been in the Conan movies and various projects related to his status as a bodybuilding champ.

I think a better description is it was the film that *made* him a star, since a monosyllabic killing machine is a role he was born to play...GWO

You're probably right in this respect. I'll amend accordingly. sjc

The middle sentence of the entry originally read: "The pretext of the movie is that a cybernetic construct, the eponymous Terminator (played by Schwarzenegger), has been ported back in time from a future where the world is ruled by computers, (who are bent on eliminating the last traces of mankind), to eliminate the mother of a child that the computers perceive may be a threat to their superiority." That sentence seemed a bit too long to me.

-- I have that tendency sometimes, mea culpa sjc.

Also, why is the Terminator "eponymous"? What people, place, or institution was eventually named after it? --KQ

-- er, eponymous doesn't necessarily have to have something named after it in English usage, it is only American dictionary definitions which seem to be quite so strict. It can simply be used for referentiality in English. But then English is a very inflexible language and quite unlike American :-). sjc

"highly intelligent and articulate"

While this is important information, it is also a description that I think plenty of people would disagree with (I'm not one of them). How could we rephrase this? I don't know, which is why I left the text alone. But I do think it needs to be changed. --LMS

try this for size sjc

I would like to revisit the issue of this moving "making him a star". Conan was his first big star vehicle and was also widely successful. Perhaps re-wording this to "was his break-through role". Many millions of people knew who he was outside of body-building because of Conan made several years earlier. Lestatdelc 22:30, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)

User's home page

I have removed http://home.kc.rr.com/technoir since it is just a link to the anon contributors own site. - Tεxτurε 03:19, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Cyborg or Android?

A point of detail. While the Terminator may have a "living" skin covering, I would argue that the Terminator is in fact an android rather than a cyborg. The design itself was created artificially from scratch from a factory, not from an existing humanoid organic base like for instance Seven of Nine in Star Trek - it has an alloy endoskeleton, there is no heart or "brain", there is no blood in the innerworkings and it has no organic metabolism throughout its body. Its skin is created artificially. The later T-1000 and T-X series of Terminators were explained as having "liquid metal" skins. What do you people think? I myself believe the Terminator should be called an android. Iam 22:58, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Well, he refers to himself as a cyborg, so he definately is one in the film's universe, maybe that world has a different definition. Boffy b 01:15, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
If I'm not mistaken, cyborgs are augmented organic beings...humans probably...the only semi-organic thing is the artificial skin, all the rest is machinery. I'm thinking in the film they meant cyborg more in the fashion of "resembling a human", which would be incorrect use?
But is it a robot or an android, or is there any difference at all (the way I understand, an android is a robot, but a robot isn't necessarily an android)?Rygir 00:49, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
a robot is any automaton, which can be a humanoid, or a box with wheels attached. an android on the other hand is an automaton that is made to appear human.--Tani unit 07:07, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello! Given the varying definitions and usage regarding these terms, I believe he may be both cyborg and android but not necessarily one or the other: movie and online references do not reconcile, so both are valid (references indicating that T is not a cyborg have not been presented as yet, though). In case you're interested, a lengthy discussion and request for comment is underway in the 'cyborg' article regarding this. Enjoy! E Pluribus Anthony 15:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Page move

What was the purpose of the page move? Cburnett 06:27, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

This movie isn't named The Terminator. It's just Terminator. Plain and simple. Even the front cover indicates this. There's no The on the front cover. Like any other movie that shares its name with a word, the move has resulted in (year movie) after the name. For instance, check Equilibrium and you'll understand what I mean. This is just wikification.
EliasAlucard|Talk 06:01, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
It's generally not done to include the year when only one movie is named that. So Terminator (movie) instead. It's also expected that you fix the double redirects (SkyNet) and change the links to avoid the new redirect. As of now, there are only 2 links pointing to the actual article. Cburnett 04:48, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
What about Equilibrium then? It's only one movie and has the year in the name.
EliasAlucard|Talk 11:10, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Same thing, it should be at Equilibrium (movie). Cburnett 01:24, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)

According to http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005N5S5/qid=1114383915/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/002-4493152-3549668?v=glance&s=dvd&n=507846 and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088247/ the movie IS actually called "The Terminator" rather than just "Terminator". --Micpp 23:09, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Terminator 4

Somebody said in the history tab of this article that Terminator 4 was cancelled according to IMDb. But I googled that, and it rendered 200,000+ google hits. That probably means that it could still be in production.

Could somebody verify that? --SuperDude 06:05, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Image title renamaing

The "skin-less" termintator ( [[image:terminator1001.jpg|thumb|Terminator without skin from Terminator]] ) was originally labed as being from T2. This is incorrect because the terminator only gets stripped of his skin in a fire near the end of T1. I have changed the title. --2mcmGespräch 00:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, with that cute stop-motion claymation... =) 81.232.72.148 22:25, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Android or Cyborg

The arguement as to whether Arnie's Termnator is an android or cyborg really needs to be addressed, as it has repercussions for said other 2 articles as well. The partially organic, albeit artificially created nature of the Terminator, means that it might fit very easily into either category, and both have valid points of view. If you open up the talk pages on either android or cyborg the Terminator is at the heart of a heated debate, due to it's organic nature. Personally, for now I'm taking a neutral stance on the issue, at least 'til I can get my head around it, but I intend to check up occassionally on the progress of the issue. Dessydes

Philosophy

I'm not interested in getting into a big debate over this, but these are the problems with the pieces I removed and had reverted. In order of importance:

  1. The paragraph seems like Original Research. Has a 3rd party made this analysis, or is it just what one wikieditor thinks?
  2. Use of analogies doesn't seem very encyclopedic (it seems more like a textbook)
  3. The evolution/ID section doesn't explain why E/ID is mentioned. Is it an analogy, or something else?
  4. The language used is very hard to decipher for someone not versed in philosophy/textual criticism

Regard, Ashmoo 03:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/Talk%7EThe_Terminator_Archive_1_d42c.html"