A friend and I have been arguing about this for days now, though neither of us has presented any concrete evidence as of yet. As we were walking out of the theater having just seen T3, he made an innocent little remark about John Connor having been only 11 at the time Terminator 2 took place, while for some reason I seemed to remember him being 14. I disputed his claim, our geek-egos grabbed hold of us before we could stop, and before we knew it our bickering had escalated into a full-scale wager (to the tune of no less than $5, I’ll have you know).
Any Terminator/Sci-Fi movie geeks here strong enough to be the arbiter of our little joust? Step right up.
(And if you tell me he’s 14, there’s a cut of that $5 in it for you.)
This was always a bit of a sticking point for me. T1 came out in 1984. T2 came out in 1991. Assuming both movies are set in the years they were released, then he can only be a maximum of nine. Obviously, in the movies he was a lot older than that.
At what age can you legally ride a motorbike in which ever state T2 is set in?
Well, the year of the police-station carnage from the first movie was definitely given as 1984 (a police radio dispatcher describes Sarah Connor as working with “the individual responsible for the murder of police officers” in that year). John was conceived in that movie, so he must have been born no later than October, 1985. His exact birthdate might appear on a screen in a police car hijacked by Robert Patrick early in the movie, as he looked up the address of John’s foster parents. T2 was set in 1994, as I recall (the movie was released in 1991), and that could make John as old as 10, if he was born early in 1985 and T2 was set late in 1994.
Some of the promotion posters described the events in T1 as having been “ten years ago.” All told, it’s actually quite difficult to shoehorn in enough years between T1 and T2 for John Connor to be as old enough in T2, let alone T3. He’s much like a soap-opera child who grows at an accelerated pace.
I should point out that Nick Stahl is two years younger than Eddie Furlong, so at least T3 was going in the right direction, trying to “catch up” to John Conner’s age. In any event, if John Connor was born in 1985, he’d just barely be 18 in 2003, and it’s unlikely that a classmate, Kate Brewster (Claire Danes), would already have a live-in fiancé and a job of authority at an animal hospital (i.e. she’s the one they call when a client has a sick cat).
So you’re definitely wrong, and your friend might be right, but you’re arguing over something that simply might not have a correct answer, since it contains a contradiction.
As an afterthought, John Connor could have been born in late 1984, if the events in T1 took place before April 1. Even if he was born as early as October 1st, 1984, he’d be at most 11 during the events in T2 if they took place after Oct 1st, 1994.
If I’ve learned anything about the Terminator movies it’s: Don’t Pay Attention to the Time Line! John sent his own father back to conceive himself! Huh? Just watch the pretty explosions and laugh at the one liners.
And for the record, they say in T3 that he was 13 and in 8th grade in T2. Looks about right to me.
When the T-1000 first arrives, he check’s John’s record via the computer in the police car. It lists his age as ten and his birth date as 2/28/1985, placing the movie’s events after 2/28/1995. However, when they are leaving the gas station, the T-800 tells Sarah Connor that in three years Cyberdyne becomes the largest supplier of military computer systems. Due to their excellent record, the Skynet funding bill is passed and the system goes online on 8/4/1997. This seems to say the film takes place before 8/4/1994.
Actually I am pretty sure T2 was set in 1994 which would be considered the “near future” since the movie came out in 1991. In fact I think the computer on board the police cruiser that the T1000 uses to look up John’s address was meant to be evidence of the “near future-ness” of teh movie since those were either very rare or not yet used in North America at the time of the movie’s release.
John’s age always seemed something you ahve to just wink at. A 10 year old in jeopardy does not make for a good action movie and to set it in the year he would have really been 13-14, it would have pushed the setting too far into the future.
I was a little disappointed we didn’t have a single small scene where John is looking at the polaroid of Sarah Connor (taken at the end of the first movie). He’ll eventually have to give this photo to Reese.
Actually, the rather abrupt dismissal of Sarah put me off, generally.
Bah, who cares what plot points T3 fucked up? I don’t even consider it part of the Terminator saga anyway; as far as I’m concerend the Terminator series ended at T2.
Seriously though, Cameron did not produce T3, he never had any intentions of producing T3 and I’ve heard that Cameron stated “I’ve told my story” (In regards to the Terminator saga being completed). Face it (not you specifically), T3 was just an easy way for the production company to cash in this summer.
That’s a cynical, and not entirely untrue statement. However, I have to say I was impressed that since they decided to go on with the saga, they created a movie with some depth to it. It could have very easily been done cheaply with no regard for continuity and just an excuse for a lot of explosions. Instead, it does hold up rather well as both an entertaining and thought-provoking movie.
That said, I do believe it doesn’t reach the dizzying heights of T2. However, I was entertained. It certainly respects and builds on the franchise. And there is an end in sight, as this whole thing seems to be heading for one big casuality loop, the likes of which haven’t been seen since the Planet of the Apes five-movie series.