My Theories On Time Travel In Movies

Lately I had been thinking about time travel in movies lately since I saw Terminator Genisys. I wanna take this moment to talk about time travel in movies, which ones I think got it right and ones that I feel are wrong and why they are.

Let’s start with Back to the Future. Great movies, but I feel they got most of it wrong. I buy that someone would fade away like they never exist, but I doubt that Marty would stop fading away because he got his parents together. Because, Marty came from a future where his father was a loser, not an acclaimed writer and wouldn’t there be another Marty in that 1985 living the good life. Also the end when Marty returns to the future he saw himself go back in time, he already caused the change, wouldn’t this new Marty going back in time cause some kind of other change?

Now we have The Time Machine and Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. Both movies claim that time has a way of “balancing itself out” like if you cause a change, it will happen a different way. Like in Terminator 3, they didn’t stop Judgment Day in T2, but merely postponed it from 1997 to 2003. People argue that that makes sense because if the war doesn’t happen, then Kyle Reese wouldn’t have gone back in time, and John Connor wouldn’t be born. I argue that’s bull, because Kyle Reese came from a future where Judgment Day happened in 1997, not 2003, if he wen’t back in time then he would cause a new timeline. Same with The Time Machine, Guy Pearce went back in time to save his girlfriend from being killed by a mugger, he does, then she gets run over by horses. Because she has to die or he wouldn’t have built the time machine. Again, he built the time machine because she was killed by a mugger, not because she was run over by horses. Which brings up the other problem with the Time Machine, if he went back in time, wouldn’t there be another version of himself, because there wasn’t. Are they saying that his past self at the time he traveled back to teleported into the time machine?

Looper got some things right, but the problem with that is, Bruce Willis went back in time to save his wife from being killed by the Rainmaker, but he ends up creating Rainmaker. That doesn’t work because in the original timeline his future self was killed by his past self. I buy the rest.

I feel Terminator got it right. Terminator established the Predestination Paradox or the Loop Theory. I think of it like a schedule, everything on the schedule will happen, even the time traveler’s presence will be part of the schedule. Kyle Reese and the Terminator traveling back in time were part of the schedule and give birth to John Connor and Skynet. Like, if I went back in time to save Kennedy, something would stop me, like I’d probably get hit by a car because that was part of the schedule.

Terminator 2 also. I believe they can change the future and it wouldn’t effect your existence, like preventing Judgment Day without John Connor erasing like Back to the Future. Here’s a good example from the Terminator TV series. In Sarah Connor Chronicles, Kyle Reese’s brother Derek and his friend Billy Wisher were put in a Skynet war camp where Wisher revealed that his real name is Andy Goode and confessed that he was the creator of Skynet. After escaping the war camp, Connor sent Derek and other Resistance fighters back in time to aid his past self, Sarah, and their Terminator guardian Cameron. While in the past, Derek tracked down Andy Goode and killed him. If he killed him, he couldn’t meet him in the future, and wouldn’t he no longer exist? Also in the series, Derek’s girlfriend Jesse from the future finds a Gray, a human helping Skynet, she claims that he experimented on Derek in the future, but Derek has no memory of this. Derek concluded that he and Jesse were from different timelines due to the changes they keep causing in the present. In conclusion, changing the future causes diverting timelines and it doesn’t change your existence, like you could go back in time and kill your grandfather and you wouldn’t fade away. It just makes sense to me, I just don’t like T3.

Those are my theories of time travel in movies.


My Terminator Genisys Timeline Theory

I recently saw Terminator Genisys, and I liked it, I liked it a lot. But I had a lot of questions. What mostly bothered me was:


In Terminator Genisys we see the future war from John Connor winning the war to sending Kyle Reese back to 1984. But the problem is, right when Kyle is sent back in time, a Terminator played by Matt Smith, called as Alex, grabs Connor and we later learned turned Connor into a Terminator, a T-3000. But if this is the same timeline we saw in Terminator and Terminator 2, than when was the 2nd Terminator, will call him Uncle Bob, and the T-1000 sent back in time to 1994? Now we know for sure that this movie retcons Rise of the Machines and Salvation, but does it retcon Terminator 2 also, which seems unlikely since we see T-1000s. I think I have pulled together the timeline for the series. According to the writers of the Genisys explain that Alex is from a different timeline:

Laeta Kalogridis: Skynet. You see in the beginning. He grabs John. He’s not from this timeline. He’s from an alternate universe, in the multiverse, another of the many universes that exist. That Skynet is not from that timeline.

Patrick Lussier: It is the understanding that for Skynet, finally realizing that “I cannot just wipe out the humans, I can never defeat the humans unless I have the best weapon that humans have, and that is him.”

Laeta Kalogridis: Or, more simply put, if you have a Skynet that has witnessed multiple iterations of the rise of the machines, which Skynet has…

Patrick Lussier: And being wiped out over and over…

Laeta Kalogridis: This Skynet has been to this universe, and this universe, and this universe. That’s why he says, “I came a very long way to stop you.” He’s not from here. So he’s watched it. He’s watched it happen a bunch of different times, and each time he’s seen it there is a different result but the same result.

Laeta Kalogridis: This particular Skynet, from another place. This Skynet – not from the original two movies – can [hop to different dimensions].

So this leaves me to believe this is how the timeline goes:

Full Terminator Timeline

It’s likely that the writers of Genisys were retconning Rise of the Machines and Salvation, but it’s possible that they didn’t. The writers leave me to believe that Matt Smith’s Alex/Skynet somehow, traveled from a parallel future, possibly after Salvation or another timeline that overrides Salvation to the original timeline that he originally lost and assimilated Connor.

Though that’s not how I would’ve done it. If I did the movie, I wouldn’t have Connor assimilated right when Kyle went back and have Skynet come from a parallel timeline. I would’ve had Kyle simply go back in time without Connor being attacked, the story continues from there, then we meet Connor, who came from an unknown future we haven’t seen yet where he was assimilated instead of the original timeline we saw in T1 and T2. I feel the way Skynet coming from a parallel timeline and assimilating Connor in the original timeline before he sends back the 2nd Terminator Uncle Bob just complicates things. It would’ve been simpler if Connor was assimilated in another timeline.

We still don’t know who sent back Pops and the Asian T-1000, if they get a sequel, which looks dodgy at this point, we’ll probably find out. I just hope if they get one, they explain more of these problems.

But don’t get me wrong, I overall liked it, I liked it a lot, I thought it was the best sequel since the 2nd one. It just confuses me a little, that’s why I came up with this theory, which makes sense, just very complicated. I just think it would’ve been better the way I pitched to you with Terminator-Connor coming from a different future. I think it would’ve been better this way.


I would’ve also preferred to somehow include Michael Biehn and Linda Hamilton in someway, shape, or form. I mean if they’re gonna bring back old fart Schwarzenegger, why not Biehn and Hamilton.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Reboot

It takes me forever to find a subject worth talking about, but this one is very near and dear to my heart.

I use to be a fan of the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, comic book and movie. I use to like the movie very much, but not a lot of people liked it as much as I did so I lost interest and it does have it’s fair share of flaws I’ll admit that. But I also like the comics and after awhile I became a stickler when it came to adaptations of books, comics, and videogames, any adaptations for that matter.

Those of you who don’t know, the comic and movie tells the story of a team of classic literary characters such as Mina Murray (Dracula), Alan Quartermain (King Salomon’s Mines), Captain Nemo (20,000 League Under the Sea), Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and the Invisible Man. Many other character are in the stories as well, pretty much every character in these comics is from a classic book. The book was about them being united to find a stolen invention to prevent it from being used for evil, the movie was about them trying to stop a world war with the addition of characters Dorian Grey and Tom Sawyer.


Both the book and the movie had the same basic premise, the league united by someone who uses them for evil without their knowledge, their employer turned out to be Professor James Mariorty (Sherlock Holmes). In the book they were used to recover an invention that was stolen from him to use for evil, in the movie he brought them together to steal their powers and sell them to the highest bidders.

The movie was a bomb, it even pissed off the writer Alan Moore that he didn’t wanna be credited in anymore of his books adapted into movies such as Watchmen and V for Vendetta. But it has come to my attention that they are gonna reboot the comic book. I am both excited and frightened at the same time. Because first of all I’m hoping they get it right this time, and make a proper adaption of the book like they did with Watchmen and V for Vendetta. It reminds me of a story that my dad told me of a book that was adapted into a poor movie that was nothing like the book, years later someone pitched to adapt the book into a movie, they replied “But it’s already been adapted” and the writer replied, “Haha, no it hasn’t.”

Anywho, I like the first two books, despite the book turning one of the League members, my favorite League member, into a villain and killing off another. What also bothers me is that it might be impossible to adapt them because the first movie ran into the problem with copyright when they couldn’t use the name Griffin for the Invisible Man because it was owned by Universal and they couldn’t use the name the Phantom and had to spell it as Fantom.

But another thing that scares me is that, I don’t seem to be fond of the 3rd book and spin-offs. I haven’t read the books but I researched them and they don’t sound appealing. They portrayed James Bond and Harry Potter as a villains, which I don’t approve of and disgusted by. If the reboot becomes a success (yeah right), what happens when they adapt those, I doubt Bond and Potter fans will approve of that like I hadn’t. Let’s hope they at least do the first one justice, maybe they’ll make the same mistake as the first movie and make a total new story that isn’t like the comic book at all.

Those are my pros and cons of a LXG reboot. Let’s hope they get it right this time.