Terminator

The Terminator Machete Timeline

/ Imperfect Glass / Leave a comment

There comes a time where every parent must make vital choices regarding their children: how shall they be disciplined? What do I feed them? How do I balance work and spending time with them? And, most important of all: What order do they watch the Star Wars movies in on their first viewing?

Back in 2011, the internet went abuzz with the introduction of the Star Wars Machete order, an attempt to create a way for first-time viewers to watch the series in a particular order that would preserve the franchise’s biggest surprise (that Darth Vader is Luke’s Father), while still allowing the prequels to play a part. In short, you start with ‘A New Hope,’ then go to ‘Empire Strikes Back,’ and then go to ‘Attack of the Clones,’ and ‘Revenge of the Sith’ to see Anakin’s fall (while omitting ‘The Phantom Menace’, if you choose), and then finishing with ‘Return of the Jedi.’

Recently, I wondered if this idea of out-of-order-viewing could be applied to the Terminator series as well. With James Cameron revealing in an interview with Empire magazine last year that future Terminator movies will move away from Sarah Connor, John Connor, and the T-800, this means that story Terminator films have been telling for over 40 years – the quest to protect John Conner so he can defeat Skynet – has come to an end.

There’s just one problem: That story never got a conclusion.

‘Terminator 2: Judgment Day’ was meant to wrap the Terminator saga up with an open – but hopeful – ending. But since it made more money than the total GDP of several developing nations, we got four more movies that kept postponing Judgment Day and ending with the promise of more sequels. But the law of diminishing returns eventually took hold, and after the box office failure of ‘Dark Fate,’ we never got the movie that chronicled the destruction of Skynet and the ultimate triumph of humanity… until now.

After reading about Star Wars’ machete order, I’ve been wondering if such a tactic could be applied to the Terminator films, and began to ponder, brainstorm, and try to come up with a way that can re-tell the John Connor saga in a way that is logical, keeps as many of the films in as possible, and, most importantly, end the story for good without needing any more sequels or follow-ups. And to that end, I have created what I’ve dubbed, The Terminator Machete Timeline.

To begin, here’s the films included in this timeline, and the order in which we watch them:

1. The Terminator

2. Terminator: Dark Fate

3. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

4. Terminator: Salvation

5. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (extended cut)

While this may look confusing and nonsensical at first glance, I’ve come up with a backstory that connects these five films via the magic of time-travel in a way that, I believe, creates a new narrative that has a definitive beginning, middle, and, most importantly, a conclusive ending.

The Machete timeline begins with the one that started it all: ‘The Terminator.’

But when it ends with Sarah driving towards the mountains and the coming war, we then proceed not to ‘Judgment Day,’ but to ‘Dark Fate.’

In this dark future, John is killed, an aged Sarah learns about Legion, a new machine hellbent on destroying humanity, and Dani begins her journey to becoming the leader of the resistance and the savior of the human race.

But in the Machete timeline, this is where things change.

At the beginning of ‘Dark Fate,’ John is shocked to see the T-800. That’s understandable, considering he saw Uncle Bob melt himself into slag to stop Skynet from being created. But in the Machete timeline, Skynet sent back not only a T-1000 to kill a young John in 1995, but also a T-800 to act as a partner and as backup to his robot brethren. Thus, Sarah and John had to stop Cyberdyne while also trying to stop two Terminators working together trying to kill John. Against all odds, Sarah succeed (how she pulled it off will remain a riddle for the ages). Thus, when John is stunned at seeing the T-800, it’s not because he’s seeing his robot buddy again, but because he realizes that his old enemy has finally tracked him down, and this time, Sarah can’t save him.

At the end of the movie, Sarah and Dani drive off to prepare for the inevitable war against Legion. But as they drive, Sarah has an epiphany: she realizes that time travel will inevitably be created and put to use in the war against Legion… why not hijack that technology and use it to save John? But Sarah isn’t dumb: while she’ll do anything to save her son, she also knows that, no matter how many times an intelligent AI defense system is destroyed, another will inevitably take its place, meaning that a human-machine war is inevitable.

But what if it isn’t?

While training Dani on how to be both a warrior and a leader, Sarah tries to figure out how the inevitable war between humans and machines can be stopped, and eventually realizes that if humanity can move past the tribal instinct to have bigger, better weapons than your adversaries, then there will be no need for an AI military system, and Skynet will never be created.

Perhaps, Sarah realizes, John can be humanity’s savior without being a military commander. Maybe he can work to inspire humanity to use AI for benevolent purposes instead of as a weapon of war.

With her idea in motion, Sarah tells Dani her plan: When Legion develops time travel, Sarah will go back in time to save her son as a child and teach him to be a leader, not a warrior. If she succeeds, then Skynet will never be created, Legion won’t take its place, and the endless cycle of war between machines and humans will end. Dani – not wanting to lose her family or Grace – agrees to the plan. And so Sarah finishes Dani’s training, stockpiles supplies for Legion’s attack, and goes to hide in a bunker (presumably playing Angry Birds to pass the time).

When the war finally begins, Dani plays her role, becomes the leader of the Resistance, gets wounded, and Grace is augmented and goes back in time. Shortly afterwords, Sarah emerges and becomes augmented herself to ensure that her aging body will last long enough to complete her mission. Thus, with Dani and the rest of the Resistance watching, Sarah travels back in time to save her son… but because time travel is not a perfect science, the time machine malfunctions, and Sarah finds herself not in 1995, but in the year 2005, arriving just before the events of ‘Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines’ play out.

Having landed in a remote part of the world (say, somewhere in Asia), Sarah has no chance of reaching John in time to help him. She is, however, able to use her cybernetic implants to learn that Skynet is taking over the world’s computer systems and manages to evacuate to the wilds, where she survives Judgment Day. Once the dust clears, and the nuclear winter begins, Sarah starts out towards Los Angeles, knowing that John will establish his headquarters there. But with most of humanity’s jets, planes, and vehicles now either destroyed or running out fuel, Sarah’s journey takes several years; as she nears its end, the events of ‘Terminator: Salvation’ take place.

After John is evacuated from his assault on Skynet’s San Francisco headquarters, given a new heart, and prepares to head back into battle, Sarah finally catches up with her now-adult son and is reunited with him. Though shocked to see his now-augmented and elderly mother, an overjoyed John listens as Sarah recounts the events of ‘Dark Fate’ and explains that she’s trying to get back to 1995, and how she has to get a T-800, reprogram it, and send it back to be John’s protector instead of his killer: a young John will then realize that machines can learn to live peacefully with humans, and hopefully work to create a future where such a thing is only possible, but happening.

John and the Resistance agree to this plan. They manage to capture the T-850 that was going to kill John in 2032 (who’s organic covering has not aged to the point that it was in ‘Rise of the Machines’), and Sarah reprograms it with her implants. Skynet is defeated in a final battle and sends the T-1000 back, but the Resistance stops it from sending the original T-800 back, and instead send back the reprogrammed T-850, and the events of ‘Terminator 2: Judgment Day’ play out.

But before we reach the end of this timeline, we’re going to make one more change: instead of watching the theatrical cut, we instead watch the extended edition of the film, which ends with an alternate 2029 where Skynet was never built, Judgment Day never happened, John works to make benevolent AI the norm, and humanity’s future has never looked brighter.

Sarah’s time-traveling quest to save humanity has succeed, John has worked tirelessly to help machines and humanity live together in peace, and the original Sarah – un-augmented and now in her 60’s – can live her life in peace, with the only thing she has to fear in this future being hideous 2029 fashion.

***

And there you have it: The Terminator Machete Timeline. While ‘Terminator: Genysis,’ was not included in this timeline due to having little overall impact on the series as a whole, this timeline preserves all the other films and allows them to be part of one continuity, but it also does two things not present in the original series:

1. Sarah takes a far more active role in saving humanity, and succeeds in her quest, becoming even more heroic than she was in the original series. (albeit, off-screen)

2. By going with ‘Judgment Day’s alternate ending, this viewing order – combined with the backstory that connects the films – creates a story where Skynet is defeated not by force or by acts if violence, but by John fulfilling his role of humanity’s savior by being a leader in peacetime instead of a wartime commander, inspiring humanity to finally put aside the endless arms race that humanity has had for all of its existence, which means there’s no reason for Skynet to be created in the first place.

There’s also one more thing this continuity does: it gives Terminator fans an ending that truly finishes John’s story, ties up all the loose ends, and gives everyone – including those who were spared by Judgment day never happening – a happy ending.

As is often said in the films, there is no fate but what we make for ourselves: maybe part of that is not relying on a studio deciding to do the right thing and finish a story that should have ended long ago, but to take it upon ourselves to give that story the ending it deserves.

Or you could just stick with T1 and T2. That works too, I guess.

Film Theory: ‘Jaws’ Takes Place In The ‘Terminator’ Universe

/ Imperfect Glass / 1 Comment

On July 17th, 1987, the world of cinema was changed forever as humanity witnessed the cinematic spectacle of Jaws: The Revenge, a film that thrilled moviegoers, took the world by storm, and became the first movie to earn over a billion dollars at the box office, win every academy award, and be heralded by many as the stunning and moving conclusion to the Jaws saga… or, at least, that probably happened in a parallel universe. In ours, Jaws: The Revenge was such a critical and financial flop that the Jaws franchise dropped dead, continuing only in the form of the occasional video game, LEGO set, and clothing line.

But what if I told you that the Jaws series, while seemingly dead, is actually part of a much larger narrative that has continued to this day?

What if I told you that the Jaws series was actually part of the Terminator film series?

But how could a movie series about a family fighting shark after shark after shark share a world with time-traveling killer robots, you might ask? Simple: My theory is that the events of the Jaws series chronicle Skynet dispatching robotic Terminator-sharks to kill Sean and Michael Brody, who will eventually grow up to become high-ranking lieutenants in the Resistance, and – supported and helped by their parents – become invaluable in humanity winning the war against the machines.

Impossible, you might say; there’s no evidence to support such a theory. But when you examine all four Jaws films, there is! This evidence can be grouped into three categories:

*The behavior of the sharks in the series

*The appearance of the sharks in the series

*Time travel erasing the events of the third film from existence.

Shark Behavior

Let’s begin with the behavior of the sharks in all four films, and how they reveal that all six sharks (yes, six) are Terminators.

Jaws

*When hunting sharks, Quint fires harpoons into their skin, which are then tethered to barrels, which serves to tire the sharks out and prevent them from diving. However, the film’s shark can dive down and stay underwater even with three barrels attached to it, something which even Quint admits is impossible. Could a normal shark do that? No… but a robot shark from the future can!

*At the film’s climax, Brody defeats the shark by shooting an air tank in its mouth, causing both to explode.

But as Mythbusters proved, this wouldn’t happen in real life. In a film that otherwise sticks to realism, the only logical conclusion is that Brody’s final shot hit a vital (and explosive) component of the shark’s power systems, causing it to blow up in a way similar to how the T-850’s fuel cell was damaged in Terminator 3, and subsequently exploded.

Jaws 2

*Early in the movie, the corpse of a killer whale is discovered with teeth marks that match that of a great white shark.

However, killer whales are natural predators of great white sharks due to their size, speed, and intelligence, and travel in pods, making it very unlikely (though not impossible) that the film’s shark could have killed this orca… unless it was a killer robot with an extremely powerful bite force that had to attack the orca to prevent damage to its outer skin that could reveal its metallic interior and blow its cover.

*The shark survives being next to an exploding boat. At such close range, a normal shark would have been blown up or killed by the resulting shockwave. Yet, this one survives without so much as a scratch.

*In perhaps the most irrefutable piece of evidence that the shark is a terminator, notice how when it tries to eat Michael, its metallic innards can clearly be seen!

*The shark is strong enough to not only stop a helicopter from taking off from the water, but is also able to overturn it.

*The shark is defeated by a massive jolt of electricity.

While this would kill an ordinary shark, it also makes sense that a Terminator could be killed by a massive, sustained current of electricity. While this has never been shown on-screen, The T-X in Terminator 3, and the T-800 in Terminator: Genysis were momentarily incapacitated when exposed to an electric current. In Jaws 2, it’s conceivable that a stronger and more sustained current would short-circuit and destroy the terminator trying to kill Chief Brody.

Jaws 3

*Compared to the sharks in the previous two films, the sharks in this movie display an increasingly mechanical, non-lifelike appearance, something consistent with a robotic shark covered with a crude rubber skin.

*The smaller shark (a Terminator sent back with a larger unit to infiltrate small areas) is a very weak model; not only is unable to kill its chosen targets when it could have easily done so, but upon being stabbed by an incredibly lucky hit from Kay into a motor servo, the shark is paralyzed and unable to do anything.

Later, the continued exposure to salt water finally short-circuits the Terminator’s CPU and it becomes inoperable.

*When approaching the underwater control room, the main shark freezes up, appearing to glide into the windows, only opening its mouth at the last second. A normal, organic shark wouldn’t try to ram a building, much less just glide towards it, but a robot that’s glitching and experiencing mechanical problems certainly would.

*When stuck inside the control room after crashing through the glass, the shark doesn’t suffocate; Great White Sharks need to continuously keep moving in order to get oxygen through their gills, and since the shark can move around and attack for a few minutes without breathing (as well as swim backwards, which it did inside the filtration pipe, which is enormously difficult for a real Great White, even more so when the creature is suffocating), it is clearly a non-organic organism.

Jaws The Revenge

*In the opening scene, the shark purposefully damages a buoy to lure Sean out to the area, where it then attacks and kills him.

Seeing as Great Whites cannot lay traps for humans, the only way this makes sense if if the shark was a robot with knowledge that Sean was a police officer, and thus likely to be called out to deal with a damaged buoy.

*When Ellen, Michael, and his family fly to the Bahamas, it’s commonly assumed that the shark pursues them, a journey of about 1,359 miles, in a day or two. Even for a Terminator with nigh-infinite stamina, crossing that distance in that time is impossible. Thus, I would like to propose that there are not one, but two Terminator sharks in the film: One at Amity, and one in the Bahamas: when the Brody family leaves Amity, the Terminator stationed there (who got a visual ID on Michael, Ellen, Carla, and Thea) dispatches a message to its peer in the Bahamas, who is then ready and waiting when Michael and the others arrive.

*In the Bahamas, the shark repeatedly targets the Brody family and ignores other humans, even when it would be easy to kill them:

-The shark swims next to Jake’s minisub and, upon realizing that he’s not Michael, ignores him. Later, when Michael is piloting the same submarine, the shark immediately goes after him.

-When the shark pursues Michael through the ship, it rams a ladder at one point, briefly exposing it’s mechanical innards.

-The shark goes after Thea on the banana boat, but terminates the wrong person by mistake.

-The shark attacks Hoagie on his boat, but upon realizing that he’s not a Brody, lets him go.

-The shark attacks Jake and injures him, but, once again, notices that he isn’t a designated target and lets him go.

*Michael’s plan of using electrical impulses to disrupt the shark’s brain probably wouldn’t work in real life (I couldn’t find any information online if it would, so I’m leaning towards no), making the scene of the shark hopping around and roaring impossible under any circumstance.

However, the scene does work if the pulse is scrambling the Terminator’s CPU and internal circuitry, causing it to malfunction and act erratically, including making the aforementioned roaring; though rarely seen in the Terminator films, Terminators do have the ability to vocally mimic voices and presumably sounds. Perhaps the roar was on file if it really wanted to scare its victims.

*The shark has a heartbeat that can be picked up using sensors. However, the heartbeat momentarily stops just before Jake is attacked. Can an organic shark momentarily stop its heart? No. Can a terminator with an artificial heart do the same? Yes.

*When impaled by the boat at the climax, the shark explodes. Again, impossible for a real shark, but possible if Ellen hit an explosive component of the Terminator’s innards, like how Martin destroyed the Terminator in the first film.

The Shark’s Appearances

Now to the second piece of evidence: the shark’s appearance in all four films: Where T-800 and subsequent Terminators have perfect organic coverings, Terminator sharks… don’t.

A Real Great White

(Picture from Terry Gross at Wikipedia, CC BY 2.5)

Skynet Great Whites

Why is this? Having placed a priority on infiltrating human resistance groups on land, Skynet has little need to use aquatic Terminators, so much less effort is spent developing a perfect appearance for them. While they do have skin, blood, and internal organs to allow them to pass as sharks, they become noticeably more fake-looking as the series goes on, suggesting that Skynet is resorting to rush jobs in a desperate attempt to go after the Brody family before its defeat at the hands of the Resistance.

The Third Film Never Happening

While all four films take place in the same continuity, Sean and Michael look completely different in Revenge compared to the third film, complete with different careers (Mike was an engineer for Seaworld, but is then a marine research scientist). Why is that? Because Skynet managed to alter the timeline at one point strongly enough that the events of the third film never happened, erasing it from existence, and subsequently altering history so that Michael and Sean aged differently and followed different paths in life.

The idea of the past being altered to cause subsequent stories never take place has happened numerous Terminator films; Genysis erased Judgement Day, Rise of the Machines, and Salvation from continuity, while Dark Fate ignores every film that takes place after Judgement Day.

Problems With The Theory:

Despite the three lines of evidence mentioned above, there are still problems that need to be addressed:

1. Why didn’t Skynet just send back T-800’s to take out the Brody siblings like it did in the Terminator films?

-We don’t know how many T-800 and humanoid Terminators Skynet has. We also don’t know the energy requirements on sending a single infiltrator unit back in time, but considering how Skynet has sent only a handful throughout the films, it can be deduced that sending Terminators through time costs considerable resources, and thus Skynet can’t send tens of thousands through history to wipe out the Connors and their lieutenants.

Though they are valuable targets, the Brody family are not as high a priority as Sarah and John Connor. By wiping out the leader of the Resistance, Skynet has a much higher chance of winning its war against humanity, with everyone else in Connor’s line of command being secondary targets at best. Thus, it makes more sense to send advanced infiltrator units after the Connors, and less-advanced units like the Terminator sharks after everyone else.

2. Why do the Terminators in the first three films go after random people instead of exclusively targeting the Brodys?

-Skynet knows that the Brody family lived on Amity island, but because of records being lost on Judgement Day, Skynet does not know exactly where they lived or what they looked like. Thus, because it can’t spare valuable T-800’s to go after them, and can’t send cruder models like the T-600 (who would be easily detectable), the only logical choice is to dispatch multiple Terminator sharks through time to kill the Brodys, attacking people who fit the description of their targets (a middle-aged woman, man, and two adolescent boys) in the hope of chomping down on their targets. This is averted in the fourth film, where, as noted above, the first Terminator in Amity manages to get visual identification of Michael, Ellen, and Thea, and sends that information to its counterpart in the Bahamas.

3. If the shark in the first film is trying to kill the Brody family, why doesn’t the shark just ram the Orca and quickly kill everyone aboard?

-I admit that there is no easy answer to this problem. Perhaps due to being manufactured relatively quickly and being nowhere near as advanced as their landlocked peers, the Terminator sharks might be vulnerable to the effects of salt water and subsequently find their CPUs glitching out at random moments, forcing them to retreat in order to try and correct the problem, only returning when they are back to 100% operational efficiency. Thus, the reason the Terminator in Jaws doesn’t just ram the boat and sink it instantly is because these glitches are happening more and more frequently, forcing it to retreat more often. This also explains why the Terminator swims right by Michael in the first film when it could have easily killed him.

Conclusion

While the aforementioned problem does put a dent in this theory (along with other little nitpicks, such as the Terminator killing a fish for no reason in Jaws 3), adding up the three bodies of evidence still produces a very strong case that the Jaws and Terminator films take place in the same universe. Though silly, this theory has the advantage of retroactively helping improve the quality of the sequels by resolving plot holes, production errors, and the nonsensical idea of sharks seeking revenge on specific individuals (while roaring).

But most importantly, the sequels – long-seen as inferior and unnecessary followups to the original film – can now be seen as important parts of a larger, two-franchise narrative, where a family unknowingly fights off and defeats the agents of a malevolent supercomputer that wants to kill them before they can help save humanity. While Martin and Sean are ultimately killed (indirectly, in Martin’s instance), Michael and Ellen make it through and survive to one day join the Resistance and save the human race. And when viewed in this light, the Jaws series is given something it hasn’t had since 1987: a fitting and satisfying conclusion that ties everything together, and ends the saga of the Brody family on a high note.

A Dark Fate vs A Force Awakened

/ Imperfect Glass / Leave a comment

‘Terminator: Dark Fate’ was intended to be the start of a new ‘Terminator’ trilogy that would eventually close the book on the story that began all the way back in 1984. However, despite making over $249 million dollars at the box office, ‘Dark Fate’ appears to signal the end of the Terminator franchise (for now, at least). Yet, despite the overall lukewarm reception, and disagreeing with some of the story choices, I’m still a fan of the film, thanks to the enjoyable cast (especially with Linda Hamilton and Arnold Schwarzenegger back together) and action scenes.

However, when writing about the film two weeks ago, I realized that ‘Dark Fate’ is surprisingly similar to 2016’s, ‘The Force Awakens’: Both are sequels to popular movies that feature new female leads, have the new antagonist that’s almost identical to the old one,  have a character from the original series be killed, and end with the main leads heading out to fight the new antagonists.

Yet, while I was disappointed with ‘The Force Awakens’ for feeling too much like a remake of ‘A New Hope’ with elements from ‘The Empire Strikes Back’ sprinkled in, I had no such problems with ‘Dark Fate’, and ever since realizing how similar both movies are, I’ve been brainstorming why that’s so, and I think I’ve figured it out: The main reason I prefer ‘Dark Fate’ over ‘The Force Awakens’ is how they treat characters from the original series. In ‘Awakens’, most of them are given only minor roles, with only Han, Chewbacca, and Leia getting the most screentime. In ‘Dark Fate’, though, Sarah and the T-800 have large roles to play, with Sarah being newcomer Danni’s mentor throughout the runtime, and the T-800 acting as a bodyguard/protector who ultimately destroys the REV 9, ensuring Danni’s survival.

In short, ‘Dark Fate’ brings back legacy characters and gives them plenty to do alongside new characters. ‘Awakens’ may bring back more of its original cast, but only gives two (Han and Chewie) substantial roles.

When writing legacy sequels, or sequels that take place a long time after the previous entries, it’s important to let original characters have the limelight: longtime fans love seeing their favorite characters again, and it’s a good bet that newer fans enjoy seeing them, too. Despite killing off John Connor too quickly and easily, ‘Dark Fate’ honors and respects Sarah and the T-800 by giving them a lot to do and making them vital to the story. Considering how it’s unlikely we’re going to get a new Terminator film for a long time – if ever – it was a wise choice.

Hotels and Dinosaurs: What we can learn about Legacy Sequels from ‘Doctor Sleep’ and ‘Jurassic World’

/ Imperfect Glass / Leave a comment

NOTE: My apologies for the lack of recent updates. Living near wildfire areas means that, eventually, you’ll have to face said fires.

NOTE 2: This post spoils the plots of ‘Doctor Sleep,’ ‘Jurassic World,’ and ‘Terminator: Dark Fate’

I went to see ‘Doctor Sleep’ last week, despite being skeptical of a sequel to the 1980 classic, ‘The Shining,’ especially one that comes out almost 40 (!) years after the original. But to my surprise, it was a great sequel that doesn’t rely on the power of nostalgia to tell a story that not only feels like a logical continuation of the original film, but also enriches explores and enriches the mythology of Stephen King’s world.

Since seeing ‘Sleep,’ I’ve been musing about why it works so well as a legacy sequel (loosely defined as a sequel to a work that comes out a decade or so after the original) when so many other similar film sequels haven’t done as well at the box office, and realized that the 2015 juggernaut, ‘Jurassic World,’ shared quite a bit of similarities in its storytelling. And while there’s no guaranteed formula for creating a successful legacy sequel, I think ‘World’ and ‘Sleep’ does four things right that writers should keep in mind when doing their own legacy sequels:

1. They take place quite a while after the original.

While the stories of most sequels typically take place a year or two after the original (so the actors don’t age too much), ‘Sleep’ and ‘World’ occur decades after their predecessors and largely feature new cast members with only one or two familiar faces returning. While this may seem like a disadvantage, it can be a blessing in disguise: When audiences return to a fictional world where twenty or thirty years have passed, they’re naturally curious about how both the world and the people in it have changed. Best of all, having the story set so long after the original subtly tells the audience that the writer/s have taken their time to create an interesting story instead of hastily throwing something together so that a studio and publisher can get into theaters or stores to make a quick buck while the anvil is hot.

2. They don’t copy the first story.

When given a choice, the entertainment industry likes to play things safe: If a movie or book is a critical and financial success, why change the formula for the sequel? Have the same characters, have roughly the same plot, and make the spectacle bigger and better. Imagine if ‘Sleep’ was about a grown-up Danny being forced to take a caretaker job at the Overlook to support his family, or if ‘World’ was about Ingen building Jurassic Park 2.0, only to have an insider shut down the power to try and get rich in the process. Aside from a few differences, it’d be the same story we’ve seen before, and leave audiences disappointed.

Thankfully, ‘Sleep’ and ‘World’ they build off what came before; where ‘The Shining’ is about an alcoholic dad being driven insane by ghosts and subsequently trying to murder his family. ‘Doctor Sleep’ is about his grown-up son struggling with his own alcoholism while battling psychic vampires who gorge themselves on the screams of dying children (Wut). And while ‘World’ has the same basic premise of ‘Jurassic Park’ (humanity creates a theme park full of living dinosaurs and something goes catastrophically wrong), this version of the park is a resounding success. So much so, in fact, that the park’s operators create genetically-modified murdersauruses to recapture people’s interest, which leads to the inevitable breakout of said murdersaurus.

In both instances, ‘Sleep’ and ‘World’ borrow elements of their predecessor’s story, but don’t copy it, instead trying to create something that feels like a logical extension.

3. They don’t invalidate what came before.

‘Terminator: Dark Fate’ billed itself as the true continuation of the ‘Terminator’ story by ignoring all the other three sequels that had come after ‘Terminator 2: Judgment Day.’ Considering how ‘Judgment Day’ is one of the best sci-fi sequels of all time, I was excited to see what would happen… and then John Connor is killed in the first five minutes, followed by a race to save the person destined to save humanity from a new evil AI called Legion. ‘Dark Fate’ retroactively sours the first two Terminator films because we now know that everything that Sarah, Kyle, John, and Uncle Bob fought for amounts to nothing. Humanity is still almost wiped out by an evil AI, and there’s nothing they can do to stop it.

‘Sleep’ and ‘World’ smartly avert this problem by not invalidating everything their predecessors went through. ‘Sleep’ shows that Danny and Wendy’s struggle to survive being chased by Jack Nicholson at a spooky hotel brought them another decade together, and that Danny eventually overcomes the trauma he endured. ‘World’ shows that the operators of Jurassic World learned from the mistakes of the first film, and made John Hammond’s dream of a family-friendly park filled with dinosaurs come true. Granted, it inevitably falls apart, but for ten years the park brought joy and happiness to millions. Both stories show that the suffering and struggles of the previous stories ultimately amounted to something good, where ‘Dark Fate’ made it so that the suffering and struggles of the previous stories ultimately amounted to nothing.

4. They save nostalgia for the third act

There are few forces as powerful as nostalgia, and indulging fans by giving them the return of a favorite character, the big battle that’s been teased for decades, or hearing a familiar catchphrase from an older actor reprising a role he had twenty years ago can bring about a squeal of joy for any audience. ‘Sleep’ and ‘World’ both know the importance of nostalgia, and follow the classic advice of saving the best for last. Or, in storytelling jargon, saving their biggest, most crowd-pleasing moments for the third act.

Most of ‘Sleep’ features Danny and his new companion, Abra, using their shining abilities to battle psychic vampires in New Hampshire. But in the third act, Danny and Abra drive to the now-rotting Overlook hotel for the final showdown with the last surviving vampire, where Danny goes back through all the old rooms we saw back in 1980, eventually confronts the spectral form of his father, and then does battle with Rose by unleashing all the Overlook’s ghosts before destroying the hotel for good.

‘World’ takes a different approach: Instead of indulging in nostalgia in the third act, it sprinkles little bits throughout the film, including a visit to the original visitor’s center in the beginning of the second act. But the biggest nostalgia moment comes in the climax: Having exhausted all other options to stop the Murdersaurus Rex Indominus Rex, park operator Claire releases the park’s T-rex to fight the Indominous. And this isn’t just any T-rex: this is Rexy, the same T-rex from the original 1993 movie, the one that terrorized Alan Grant and the kids outside its paddock, the one who chased Malcom, Sattler, and Muldon in the jungle, and who saved the day in the visitors center. Now, over twenty years later, Rexy returns to save the day once again in the most spectacular climax of the series to date (and one of my personal favorite final fights in years).

What’s so great about both these climaxes is that returning to the Overlook and releasing the T-rex to fight the villain (sadly, not in the same story) isn’t just done for fanservice, but as important parts of the story to resolve the conflict: The Overlook is the only place where Danny and Abra can possibly defeat Rose the Hat, and Rexy is the only chance Claire has to try and stop the Indominus Rex after every other containment option has failed.

As stated earlier, there’s no guaranteed formula for creating a popular legacy sequel. Said sequels can tell new stories without relying on the original and having just the right amount of nostalgia, but still fail. But if writers follow the four points outlined above, we have a much stronger chance of creating a worthy follow-up to delight audiences both new and old.

What we can learn from ‘Let’s Go’

/ Imperfect Glass / Leave a comment

Armageddon. Ragnarok. The end of all things. Almost every culture and mythology has its version of the moment when everything ends and the human race is wiped out.

But what if someone survived?

A few days ago, I came across the above music video, which tells the story of a Chinese astronaut who devotes his life to making it to the Moon, only for it to be all for nothing. Though only a little over three minutes long, it’s a gripping story, so let’s take a look and see what it does well.

You audience admires determined, focused characters

Though he gets no lines, or even a name, the astronaut in the video gets our attention thanks to his strength of will: Thanks to a very efficient montage, we see him devoting everything to accomplishing his dream of getting on the Moon, sacrificing joy, happiness, or even love. Yet, we still root for him to succeed: How many of us wish we could devote every waking moment of our lives to accomplishing our dreams? Sadly, many of us can’t, which makes us envious and (begrudgingly) admiring of those who can. The same goes for fictional characters. Perhaps your character wants to become president, or go into outer space, or win a spelling bee. Seeing them striving to accomplish a dream makes for compelling drama as they learn whether their dream is really worth everything they’re sacrificing.

It’s important to note that determined, focused characters don’t need to be heroes. Consider the T-800 and the T-1000 in the first two Terminator films, Sauron from ‘The Lord of the Rings,’ and the Thing from the 1982 Universal film of the same name: All three have solid, achievable goals (kill John Conner, take over the world, and take over the world by assimilating everyone on it), and stop at nothing to achieve those goals. Both antagonists and protagonists benefit from laser-like focus, and when their strength of wills clash, it can make for some of the most compelling drama ever put to page or screen. Need proof? Consider Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader in ‘Return of the Jedi’: The former wants to redeem his fallen father, and the latter wants to convert him to the dark side. Neither will budge, and their duel of wits becomes what is arguably the most dramatic sequence of any Star Wars film:

Consider exploring what would happen to the lone survivor of a world-ending event

What would you do if the world was destroyed, and you were the only survivor? What would you do? How would you live? Would you even try to, or let yourself succumb to despair and throw yourself out the airlock? In the case of the music video, the astronaut realizes that what really mattes to him most is achieving his second chance of experiencing love, and he stops at nothing to make it happen.

While destroying the world shouldn’t be done lightly in any medium, doing so has the advantage of forcing a character to confront reality without all the masks that they put up to protect themselves from other people and society at large. Do they go nuts and indulge their every whim? Succumb to despair and meaninglessness? Or do they defy the odds and refuse to give in, searching for others who might have survived, or chronicling everything for whatever sapient life form comes after them? There are countless possible answers, and wanting to see what happens to isolated, vulnerable characters will keep an audience engaged in our stories.

Consider having your character escape/navigate/survive the fallout from a world-ending event

When something big – like a building, a city, or a planet – is destroyed, it creates a lot of debris and wreckage. In some situations, it gives us an opportunity for a unique action scene of characters having to escape said debris. ‘Let’s Go’ has the astronaut fighting to reach the space station before it gets out of reach, but to do so, he has to go through a debris field consisting of wreckage from Earth, making it extremely difficult for him to reach his goal, and with the promise of certain death if he fails.

When writing our own stories, having to navigate the ruins of a wrecked mega-structure can lead to some exciting action scenes that we don’t get to write very often. If the opportunity arises, embrace them and milk them for all they’re worth. One of my favorite examples comes from 2016’s ‘Independence Day: Resurgence,’ in which David Levinson and friends have to dodge falling debris sucked up from all over the Earth that subsequently rains down on London.

https://youtu.be/fj_j8Y4j_xI

Consider having your character/s decide to accept death and pass the time as best they can

In disaster movies, it’s very common for the survivors and main characters to either find a way to stop the disaster, or start rebuilding afterwords, hopeful and upbeat that one day, things can return to normal.

But what if they couldn’t? What if they had no chance at all of rebuilding, or surviving, and death is inevitable?

One type of story we don’t see too much of these days is the disaster story where there’s no way for the characters to survive in the long run. It’s easy to understand why: Audiences want a happy ending, or a hopeful one. A story where everyone is going to die, won’t leave them feeling good after leaving the theater, closing the book, or turning off the game console. But if we choose this path, writers have a unique opportunity to explore what characters might do if they only have a little time left to live. Will they weep? Try to make peace with their god? Resolve any lingering conflicts with their loved ones? Or will they accept it and try to have fun before the end? Both astronauts choose the last option in ‘Let’s Go,’ deciding to play video games together as they drift off into the void.

Choosing the path of inevitable death need not be dark. It can be sad, but it also gives characters one more chance to enjoy themselves, or to choose how they will spend what little time they have left. And if they go out having fun, or healing long-simmering hurts, that can be just as uplifting as a happy ending.

The Takeaway

Our audience will always admire a protagonist or antagonist who has a goal and obsessively pursues it, even at a cost of personal happiness. They’ll be even more interested if that individual is the only survivor of a world-ending event, and applies that determination to surviving or continuing on, no matter how bad things get. But if they are doomed, those characters can become their most interesting selves when they have to decide how to spend what little time they have left.

What we can learn from ‘Sarah Conner vs. Jason Vorhees’

/ Imperfect Glass / Leave a comment

Ever since his first appearance as a masked killer in the 1981 film ‘Friday the 13th Part 2,’ Jason Vorhees has become the poster child for slashers who take out horny teenagers as brutally (and creatively) as possible. Being such a staple of pop culture, it was inevitable that he’d eventually face off against other pop icons, the most famous being a fight against Freddy Kruger in 2003’s ‘Freddy vs Jason.’ But many of these fights have taken place in fan videos, featuring Michael Myers, Pennywise the Clown, Leatherface, and even Barney the Dinosaur. Today, we’re taking a look at what would happen if Jason Vorhees took on one of the toughest women in cinema: Sarah Conner from ‘Terminator 2: Judgement Day,’ courtesy of Youtube creators WTFLOL

Having a plausible explanation as to why two characters are fighting makes it easier to accept such a fight

When most pop culture characters fight, plot usually comes second to seeing them duking it out. But having a strong reason why two different characters from two different universes are fighting each other makes said fights easier to accept. ‘Conner vs. Jason’ has a particularly good one: Sarah, while en-route to foil Cyberdyne yet again, has car trouble and breaks down near Camp Crystal Lake. While searching for help, she comes across helpless campers being slaughtered by Jason, and rushes in to help. Not only is this a plausible way for the two to meet up, but it also helps us root for Sarah by showing how she doesn’t hesitate to help others in trouble, even if she doesn’t know them.

In our own stories, it’s a good idea to set up the fight in a way that feels logical. While it’s tempting to throw your two (or more) duelists together as quickly as possible, setting up why they’re fighting will make your story more believable, and tell your audience that you’ve thought this out beyond the standard, ‘Hey, wouldn’t it be awesome if ______ and ______ fought each other!?”

Consider limiting how much of your intercontinuity fight doesn’t revolve around the title characters fighting

Perhaps more than any other type of story, your audience knows exactly what they want when they see a duel film (watching the title characters fighting each other). They won’t be interested in anything else that doesn’t lead up or add to those moments. Thankfully, ‘Conner vs. Jason’ smartly limits those scenes to Sarah going to Crystal Lake, and the camp’s campers being killed off by Jason in quick order, knowing that audiences don’t have any interest in the campers being developed when they’re only going to be killed off.

In our own stories, while some buildup and setting the scene is always necessary, cutting out everything that isn’t necessary to set things up, or that doesn’t relate directly to two famous characters fighting is a good idea; our audience will thank us for getting to what they came to see in a quick and timely manner.

Consider having the nerd help save the day

Pity the poor nerd: this unfortunate character continues to be relentlessly mocked in pop culture, portrayed as being wimps, cowards, and having zero social skills. Yet, don’t underestimate them: while the nerd in ‘Conner vs. Jason’ first comes off as the stereotypical game-obsessed dweeb, he quickly comes through by using his smarts to tell Sarah about Jason’s only weakness, and risks his own life to lure Jason towards said weakness at great risk to himself (and saving Sarah in the process).

While it’s easy to use the nerd as an easy source of humor and comic relief, it’s much better to have them have hidden depths: Nerds may have a love of all things video games, movies, anime, and cartoons, but they’re still people with weaknesses and strengths, and showing those, whether it’s bravery, strength, or resourcefulness will help make them memorable.

Consider poking fun at a character’s mythology in your crossover fight

Little moments of humor can often be the most memorable parts of any story, and in a crossover fight – where drama and strict adherence to the rules of either universe are put aside for the sake of awesomeness – poking fun at both story’s mythologies can make funny moments even funnier: my favorite here comes when the nerd loudly yells about smoking and having lots of premarital sex with naked women, causing Jason to immediately ignore Sarah and head after the nerd. Another has the Terminator, after blowing Jason to pieces, saying his classic trademark about how he’ll be back. Is it cheesy? Yes, but it’s funny, and a good reminder on that we watch these crossovers to see how awesome they are; having some humor – even if it’s slightly out of character – only makes a fun experience even more enjoyable.

Avoid having someone come in and steal a victory at the end of a crossover fight

While having the Terminator suddenly show up to save the day at the end of the video is undeniably awesome (The Terminator vs Jason? Heck yeah!), it does have the unfortunate effect of making the whole ‘Sarah vs. Jason’ fight somewhat pointless, as neither of them determine the outcome. While it’s common for crossover fights to end in a draw (so as to not offend fans of either character by having them be defeated), having neither side winning, or having both off each other, having a third party arrive and end the fight by themselves feels like a cop out. Even Freddy vs Jason made this error by having one of the teens decapitate Freddy at the climax of the big fight, instead of Jason.

When writing our own crossover fights, having them end because of the results of the fighter’s efforts – instead of an outside force – will avoid the feeling of the fighters and the audience being cheated out of a fair match. If you must bring in a third party, foreshadow it before the fight, or at the very beginning (such as how Sarah Conner helps Pops during the Terminator vs Terminator duel in ‘Terminator: Genysis’), but still avoid it if you can.

An Alternate Universe version of ‘Sarah Conner vs. Jason Vorhees’ that learned from its mistakes

While en-route to take out a subdivision of Cyberdyne, Sarah Conner’s car breaks down outside Camp Crystal Lake. Setting out to search for help, she hears helpless campers being slaughtered and runs to help. While she’s too late to save everyone, she does save one nerd from Jason. The two quickly hatch a plan to lure Jason to the camp’s lake, eventually managing to get them there, thanks to the nerd’s smarts, and Sarah’s combat skills.

However, when trying to knock Jason into the water, Sarah – injured from her fight – runs out of ammo for her weapons. Using herself as a battering ram, she tackles Jason, managing to shove him into the water.

The nerd anxiously tries to decide whether he should jump in after Sarah to save her. Then she appears: Injured and bleeding badly, but alive. With Jason defeated and trapped at the bottom of the lake, the nerd helps her back to the camp’s main building to patch her up and call for help. Along the way, he asks if she’s interested in a date, to which she replies that he’d better not hold his breath.

What we can learn from ‘The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny’

/ Imperfect Glass / Leave a comment

 

 

https://youtu.be/4WgT9gy4zQA

 

There’s one question that has dogged mankind since the moment we could walk upright, form languages, and come into contact with other cultures, a question that every nerd, writer, and child asks at one point in their lives: Who would win if __________ and __________ got into a fight?

There’s no denying how cool it is to see two characters from different franchises, eras, and universes fight it out for dominance, survival, and bragging rights. Admit it: When you were a kid, you loved having all your toys fight one another for no other reason than it was fun. I did; granted, most of my toys opponents tended to be dinosaurs, but it was great. But as we grew up, such questions become relegated to fan fictions or our imaginations as we put our toys away.

Then, come 2005, an animation was posted on NewGrounds that changed Internet culture forever.

I don’t remember when I first saw ‘Showdown,’ but it hooked me from my very first viewing. Here it was, a showdown featuring dozens of pop culture characters duking it out for no other reason that it was cool, set to the beats of a disturbingly catchy song. Now, 13 years later, that song is still as catchy as ever, but what’s great is knowing that this song and video were, at one point, the peak of crossovers, long before the Avengers and cinematic shared universes came into our culture outside of comic books. In a way, this is the precursors to all those things, and though it wasn’t the first, it’s one of the most important.

Though short, this song and music video offers some valuable lessons for those of us who want to write our own crossover fights:

If logic is no object, then nothing is off the table in a crossover

How can Shaq take on Godzilla? Where did all the good and bad guys come from when they started fighting in Tokyo? How can an ordinary human deflect bullets with his hand? Such logic isn’t needed to enjoy the sight of so many characters fighting each other: One part of crossovers that makes them so special is how rare and unique they are. Remember how excited everyone was when Marvel’s ‘The Avengers’ was first announced and then released? It was a once-in-a-decade event and was so exciting because a movie crossover involving so many characters from different films, all fighting together for the very first time in Hollywood history. While we’ve gotten three more such superteam crossovers (soon to be four), ‘The Avengers’ was so memorable that we were willing to accept any flaws or cliches the film had (ragtag group of different individuals fighting amongst each other – literally – before coming together to fight a common enemy), and ‘Showdown’ is the same. It’s so cool to see all these characters fighting that logic is temporarily thrown out the window.

Consider having a good guy fight to save others even during a free-for-all

In a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it moment in the video, Optimus Prime rushes in to stop a skyscraper from falling after Godzilla hits it with his tail. Though this moment costs him his head, it speaks volumes about Optimus’ character, in that in the middle of a battle to the death between every fictional character, he stops to try and save innocent lives. Doing a similar act for your own fights is a great way to show that someone really is a hero who puts others ahead of themselves.

Consider the pros and cons of focusing on a small group of main characters in a free-for-all

Every story needs a main character that the audience can focus on or follow, and free-for-all battles are no exception. Here, the protagonists are Batman, Abraham Lincoln, Shaq, and Jackie Chan, and most of the video focuses on them. However, consider changing up the roster of secondary characters as your story goes on; while it’s cool seeing Abraham Lincoln wielding an assault rifle, a machete, and go pole-vaulting to try and take on a shape-shifting robot from outer space, I can’t help but feel it would be cooler to have other characters come in during the song’s second act to shine, even if only for a few seconds each. Who wouldn’t want to see, say, Spider-Man running around with a machete, or Solid Snake pole-vaulting into Optimus? Part of the charm of these giant fights is seeing a large group of characters fight, so it’s smart to give everyone time to shine, no matter who they are.

Consider including a character so powerful that it requires others putting aside their differences and teaming up to defeat them

He only does two things in the song (kick Indiana Jones in the crotch and kill Batman), but Chuck Norris’ appearance marks him as the most powerful and badass character in ‘Ultimate’ He’s so powerful, in fact, that it takes the combined might of over 20 other characters to take him down in the bloodiest battle that the world ever saw. And even cooler, most of them would be mortal enemies outside of ‘Ultimate’; where else would you see every single Power Ranger fighting alongside Darth Vader and Benito Mussolini?

The advantage of bringing in uber-powerful characters into your story is that they immediately dominate the battlefield, forcing other characters to to put aside their differences, even if only for a few moments, to work together for their own survival, giving you a unique opportunity to have characters who would never otherwise tolerate each other be forced to do so, leading to moments that are either awesome, funny, or a mix of both as they interact and play off each other.

Consider making the survivor/winner of your big fight an unknown who isn’t a fighter

Just who would win in a winner takes all fight of pop culture characters? Depending on who you ask, there’s an infinite number of possible victors, ranging from the strongest, the fastest, smartest, or the most clever. ‘Ultimate’ bucks that trend by having the victor not be a muscle-bound warrior, a magical wizard, or a dictator, but Fred Rogers, host of ‘Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood’.

What’s great about this ending is that the victor of such a bloody battle isn’t even a warrior, but a kind, gentle man who, by all accounts, never raised his voice or said anything unkind about anyone. It’s unexpected, it’s novel, and even heartwarming to see someone opposed to violence standing as the greatest character in pop culture, and mourning all those who perished (though, personally, I think the seppuku was going a bit too far).

The Takeaway

When doing an incredibly awesome crossover that involves lots of fighting, you have more leeway to break the laws of physics or logic in order to get something cool. Consider following a core group of characters, but remember that your audience will want to see everyone get a moment to shine, especially when dozens of them have to team up to take down a particularly powerful character, and to see good guys/gals doing little deeds to try and help others, even at the cost of their own personal safety. And when it comes to endings, consider having someone unexpected win, instead of the most popular character.