From: bxp1628@hertz.njit.edu (Brian Perler)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: T2 is crap!
Date: 14 Apr 92 23:22:33 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <54567@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:
>In article <4766@krafla.rhi.hi.is> karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen) writes:
>
>>He didn't have to kill Sarah, it would have been pointless (see below).
>
>>>Much too civilized for a machine that hates humans, don't you think?
>
>>T-1000 didn't hate humans, he killed them if it served his objective
>>(Kill John).
>
>Wrong.  He killed people who didn't serve his objective:
>
>John's foster father.  What was the point?  He didn't need to pretend to be
>him.  The T1000 had obviously fooled the man into thinking he was his wife.
>
>There was no reason to kill him.
>
I think it would have been difficult for the T-1000 to get out of the house
without the foster father attempting to stop it.  Which means, the T-1000
would probably have eventually wound up killing him anyway.  The fewer
witnesses, the better, right?  (And the foster father would have noticed
when his wife just up and disappears after talking to their foster son on
the phone asking for him to come home.)

>The man driving the Liquid Nitrogen truck.  Again, why?  He could have taken
>the truck without killing the guy.
>
>No reason.
>
The driver would put up some resistance to this guy coming up and taking his
truck.  Then, the T-1000 would have been forced to kill him, right?  Plus,
again, he can't have witnesses, and with the police (what's left of them)
most likely trying to find them, leaving someone alive who can say, "They
went thataway" really doesn't make much sense, does it?

Which leads me to my own question:  did the T-1000 kill the police officer
he encountered right after being transported back in time?  It looks like 
he DIDN'T kill him, and, if he didn't, that sort of blows my entire
"no witnesses" theory right out of the water.
 
>Sarah, at least, would protect John.  We've seen this enough.  Here, he
>had a real reason to want to kill her, and he didn't.
>
>And it wasn't because the other Terminator rescued her in time (if he
>hadn't been pussy-footing around trying to torture her, we would have
>had plenty of time to kill her).
>
>And it wasn't because he needed Sarah to call John.  With her dead, and
>the 800 Series out of commision (supposedly), the T1000 could have taken
>out John simply because there's no one left to protect him.  It can be
>as patient as it needs - time means nothing to it.
>
>The only reasons that the T1000 didn't kill Sarah are:
>
>'We can't kill off the star'
>'We have to leave her alive for the sequel'
>
Probably true.  I'm sure, if examined closely enough, there really is no 
GOOD reason to have left Sarah alive.  Heck, the T-1000 could have just
turned himself into Arnie to lure John out.  It probably would've worked
almost as well as imitating Sarah (remember: I said ALMOST as well.  True,
Sarah was the better choice, but seeing as how John was fooled into 
thinking the T-1000 was Sarah, the T-1000 would probably have had an
easier time imitating another Terminator, who wouldn't need to show
emotion towards John like Sarah would.)

At least, that's the way I see things.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13167 alt.cult-movies:3833