Adventure Gamers - Forums

millenia - 06 August 2015 03:13 PM

I’m really into fatality in stories anyway, so I also love 12 Monkeys and the like.

Totally. Bad endings often make a far bigger impact than good ones. Even if it’s just the writers being evil (anybody watch the series The Outer Limits in the 90s? ).
I’m also a fan of the self-fulfilling prophecies where trying to prevent the disaster causes it to happen. Food for thought.

millenia - 06 August 2015 02:21 PM

Basically what I’m saying is that people often give a lot of unnecessary criticism to products of sci-fi, fantasy, surrealism or anything that stretches the imagination. And often they demand everything to be explained. Not all unexplained things are plotholes.

I agree that not everything needs to be explained, and plot holes and leaving things up to our own imagination are two very different things. In fact when it comes to time travel paradoxes, I would be perfectly happy if they just had someone say something like: “Wouldn’t that create a paradox?” and another answer: “Time doesn’t actually work that way!” and leave it at that.

Where I do have a problem, is when like in Back to the Future, they actually make the paradoxes an important part of the plot, but instead of coming up with a plausible explanation that solves the paradox, then they just say a lot of words that have absolutely no meaning whatsoever, and hope that the audience isn’t smart enough to recognize that they didn’t actually explain or solve anything. It’s this “sitting between two chairs” that bothers me the most, and where the plot holes arise.

TimovieMan - 06 August 2015 03:00 PM

That said, I do admit that I prefer the fixed timeline approach (like The Terminator (the first one) and Twelve Monkeys) over the parallel universe one, and that I prefer that one over the timey-wimey ball, but you gotta admit that it’s all handled pretty well in both Day of the Tentacle and the Back to the Future films (especially the awesome first one).

First of all, to get the definitions straight, the timey-wimey ball explanation given by Dr. Who is actually the same thing that I referred to with “Thief of Time” (more or less), and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with BttF or DotT. It is two very different views of what time itself actually is.

Secondly I don’t agree that BttF handled it pretty well, in fact I think that it handled it pretty awfully. It might still be a good film for other reasons, but the “have to get mom and dad together, or I will cease to exist” part was pretty awful imo.

As for DotT then, as SoccerDude28 said, it is really more a case of Looney Tunes logic, so they can get away with it.

Thirdly, I don’t think Terminator actually used the fixed timeline like Twelve Monkeys did, at least not as its primary time-view. The apocalypse might have been unavoidable like in TM, but the whole reason they send the terminator back in time, was to kill Sarah Conner so should could not give birth to the rebel leader, or in other words to change the past, which isn’t possible in a fixed timeline - They of course failed at it, so it might just be a cause of everybody including the machines, being to stupid to realize that it is impossible .. so you might actually have a point!
This paragraph didn’t end at all where it started, the joy of thinking and writing at the same time, but I will leave it as it is

millenia - 06 August 2015 03:13 PM

I’m really into fatality in stories anyway, so I also love 12 Monkeys and the like.

TimovieMan - 06 August 2015 03:45 PM

I’m also a fan of the self-fulfilling prophecies where trying to prevent the disaster causes it to happen. Food for thought.

I agree, I also really like those kind of stories.

TimovieMan - 06 August 2015 03:00 PM

As an aside, if you haven’t already seen it, you might be interested in the movie Primer. It has an interesting take on time travel. Be warned, though, it’s a very difficult movie, and you’ll probably need to watch it twice AND take a look at this spoilery timeline to fully get it.

I have seen Primer, and I must admit that I found it very difficult to keep track of what was actually going on, and it would be impossible for me to actually give a summary of the events. But while I was watching it, it all made perfect sense .. in a very confusing way though.

The Lake House, Looper, Predestination - all films that I haven’t watched, somehow they have slipped under my radar, but they are now on my to-watch list. Well I might give The lake House a slip, or watch the original instead.

I can also recommend Coherence for something about those alternate universes.

Iznogood - 06 August 2015 05:11 PM

First of all, to get the definitions straight, the timey-wimey ball explanation given by Dr. Who is actually the same thing that I referred to with “Thief of Time” (more or less), and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with BttF or DotT. It is two very different views of what time itself actually is.

I’m using the TV Tropes definition that the timey-wimey ball means that the methods or results of the time travel aren’t consistent within the same work.
Back to the Future II was a lot worse at this than the first movie: Biff goes back from 2015 to 1955 to give his young self the sports almanac, then goes back to the same 2015 he left earlier instead of a 2015 where he is rich (like in the alternate 1985).

Secondly I don’t agree that BttF handled it pretty well, in fact I think that it handled it pretty awfully. It might still be a good film for other reasons, but the “have to get mom and dad together, or I will cease to exist” part was pretty awful imo.

Makes sense within the movie. And it’s a way to circumvent the grandfather paradox.
Comes apart when you over-analyze it, but that’s what suspension of disbelief is for.
Personally, I think it’s handled brilliantly, because I only question it in a discussion like this (and I’ll still accept it the next time I watch the film).

Thirdly, I don’t think Terminator actually used the fixed timeline like Twelve Monkeys did, at least not as its primary time-view.

Self-fulfilling prophecy: by trying to prevent the birth of John Connor, they cause John Connor to be born. Stable time-loop, imo.
Until they break that in the second film.

Iznogood - 06 August 2015 05:11 PM

Thirdly, I don’t think Terminator actually used the fixed timeline like Twelve Monkeys did, at least not as its primary time-view. The apocalypse might have been unavoidable like in TM, but the whole reason they send the terminator back in time, was to kill Sarah Conner so should could not give birth to the rebel leader, or in other words to change the past, which isn’t possible in a fixed timeline - They of course failed at it, so it might just be a cause of everybody including the machines, being to stupid to realize that it is impossible .. so you might actually have a point!

Rambling - Part 2:

Side note: (I have not seen all the Terminator movies).

There are several issues with Terminator that make no sense in a fixed timeline. It is known with certainty that the timeline was normal until burst onto the scene Kyle Reese and the Terminator. Therefore it is assumed that even before this, John Connor did exist in the apocalyptic future and it also knows that his mother was Sarah Connor, but ... who was the father then? ..., to make sense it should be anyone but Kyle Reese, he can not be. Skynet sends the past to the Terminator and Connor to Reese, but nothing, absolutely nothing presaged that he would become his father. Can this be possible ?, I think not, when Reese has sex with Sarah and begets a child with her, automatically the Connor from the future should disappear, the father is someone else, genes are different and this makes John is not the same or on the other hand, not even exist at all. In my view, the leader of the resistance would vanish through the fault of himself, all for sending Reese to the past ... it is suicide over time.

Another thing is that I believe that Terminator simply can not kill Sarah, is an impossible mission, why? Because if he kills her, Connor would cease to exist (including the Connor from the future) so the presence of Terminator in the past would have no sense at all, Skynet would never have sent him in the first place.

millenia - 06 August 2015 07:31 PM

I can also recommend Coherence for something about those alternate universes.

Good recommendation. I watched it a couple of weeks ago and I enjoyed it alot. It keeps you guessing all the time forcing you to ask yourself what really going on. The story is based about some events that occurred in Finland. I think.

Renacimiento - 06 August 2015 09:48 PM

Rambling - Part 2:

Side note: (I have not seen all the Terminator movies).

There are several issues with Terminator that make no sense in a fixed timeline. It is known with certainty that the timeline was normal until burst onto the scene Kyle Reese and the Terminator. Therefore it is assumed that even before this, John Connor did exist in the apocalyptic future and it also knows that his mother was Sarah Connor, but ... who was the father then? ..., to make sense it should be anyone but Kyle Reese, he can not be. Skynet sends the past to the Terminator and Connor to Reese, but nothing, absolutely nothing presaged that he would become his father. Can this be possible ?, I think not, when Reese has sex with Sarah and begets a child with her, automatically the Connor from the future should disappear, the father is someone else, genes are different and this makes John is not the same or on the other hand, not even exist at all. In my view, the leader of the resistance would vanish through the fault of himself, all for sending Reese to the past ... it is suicide over time.

Another thing is that I believe that Terminator simply can not kill Sarah, is an impossible mission, why? Because if he kills her, Connor would cease to exist (including the Connor from the future) so the presence of Terminator in the past would have no sense at all, Skynet would never have sent him in the first place.

That’s what’s known as a stable time loop.

The Terminator ALWAYS appeared, and Kyle Reese ALWAYS was sent after him, the events of the first movie ALWAYS happen in exactly the same fashion. You can’t fight fate (which is ironic, given the second film), and they already changed the past in the future.
It’s the same as in Twelve Monkeys. Young Bruce Willis ALWAYS saw older Bruce Willis shot and killed in front of him at the airport, right before the virus broke out…

In the Terminator series, they just threw their own concept for the first movie out the window for the rest. Which makes the series a timey-wimey ball.

Renacimiento - 06 August 2015 09:48 PM

millenia - 06 August 2015 07:31 PM

I can also recommend Coherence for something about those alternate universes.

Good recommendation. I watched it a couple of weeks ago and I enjoyed it alot. It keeps you guessing all the time forcing you to ask yourself what really going on. The story is based about some events that occurred in Finland. I think.

Tbh, I don’t think those events actually happened here. We’ve all heard about Tunguska but there is no record of the meteor in Finland. I think the whole story about the couple is some sort of urban legend, I’ve heard it before, though I don’t think it was even a Finnish tale, neither it involved a meteor. But it’s a nice tale and a nice movie.

TimovieMan - 06 August 2015 07:47 PM

I’m using the TV Tropes definition that the timey-wimey ball means that the methods or results of the time travel aren’t consistent within the same work.

Ahh .. well I guess that also makes sense, as Dr. Who isn’t completely consistent throughout the series. In fact despite the explanation, the episode Blink from which the quote is taken, actually uses the fixed timeline with a closed timeloop.

The reason I associated it with the “Thief of Time (non-causality, quantum mechanics)” view of time, is because that is basically what he is describing. It might sound like complete and utter nonsense, but it actually isn’t, at least not completely.
It is a trick that Terry Pratchet also often used in his Discworld novels, take an advanced physics theory, mess it up a bit and make it sound like complete nonsense, but funny nonsense, and nobody that didn’t already knew the theory, would recognize that it is actually a complicated physic theory that he is describing in words simple enough for everybody to understand. The exact opposite approach to as for example Jurassic Park, where they instead took something that is complete nonsense, and try to make it sound like actual science, in this case Chaos Theory.

Either way the “timey-wimey ball” still has nothing to do with DttF or DotT, as both are consistent in their mumbo-jumbo.

Renacimiento - 06 August 2015 09:48 PM

Another thing is that I believe that Terminator simply can not kill Sarah, is an impossible mission, why? Because if he kills her, Connor would cease to exist (including the Connor from the future) so the presence of Terminator in the past would have no sense at all, Skynet would never have sent him in the first place.

True, and that was also the reason why I started my Terminator paragraph the way I did, but then I realized that this could be explained by the fact that Skynet is an idiot!
As long as Skynet doesn’t realize that that the mission is impossible, it actually makes sense. Of course that it would be able to create the means to send a terminator back in time, and not actually understand how timetravel works, is a bit implausible, but only a bit.

Renacimiento - 06 August 2015 09:48 PM

There are several issues with Terminator that make no sense in a fixed timeline…

TimovieMan - 07 August 2015 02:07 AM

That’s what’s known as a stable time loop.

Or a closed time loop.
Note that closed time loops can only occur in a fixed time line, but not in any of the other kind of time travels.
Imagine that one day you meet an old man/women, that gives you the complete schematics and instructions on how to build a time machine. You then spend the next 30 years actually building the thing, and when you are finally done, the first thing you do, is to travel back in time and give your younger self the schematics and instructions on how to build a time machine…
That way time machines can be invented, without anybody actually ever inventing them
This of course only works if the loop is actually closed, if for some reason you never travel back in time and give your younger self the schematics, then the paradoxes will reveal their ugly head - Which is also why free will can’t exist in a universe with a fixed time line.


P.S. To anybody hoping or expecting some interesting discussions about Day of the Tentacle - Sorry that it has all turned into time travel discussions, but that is how it often goes.