Sign in or 
Location: Sarah Connor Chronicles: Episode Guide
Discussion: Low points of TSCC?
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this
Dr._Allison_Cameron |
40. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 5:46 PM EST
"cardinal rule: never ever ever introduce a terminator and kill/disable/render harmless in the same ep. vick was introduced in the 2nd or 3rd ep, wasnt killed till a few eps later, and even after he was dead (powered off, whatever) they were still learning about him. cromartie was there from the start and had to rebuild his biological covering (freakin genius) whereas we haveI think thats a great point. And if the writers knew it, then it mustve been a victim of the standalone ep command. hope they understood this for the back nine. Do you find this valuable? |
|
HawkDsl |
41. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 5:52 PM EST
"I think thats a great point. And if the writers knew it, then it mustve been a victim of the standalone ep command. hope they understood this for the back nine."I have good news, but not a link, on that very thing. Fox butted out, and they are letting them do the show the way JF wants it done. I believe it was in a JW interview (for Dollhouse), but can't be sure. At least, that's the "word" anyway. Having the back 9 be more like the first 9 ever (SE1), would be nice indeed. Just think... We have a stuffed cow to look forward too! Now that's entertainment. Do you find this valuable? |
Losa78 |
42. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 5:56 PM EST
"myron stark had a huge impact in lore but was dealt in the same ep. they shouldve stretched that out for another ep or something. dying in the same ep hes introduced (and cam discovers him) lessened the impact he had over the last few decades and the lasting impact he would have had"Yeah, but what I still could not understand to this day was: what was Stark's importance in the overall TSCC plot after all? What was he supposed to mean to the Connors, Cameron or the future? Why did it matter if he killed that congressman in 2010 or not? Why was the congressman so important? Why did Cameron go wipe out Stark? In essence: why should we give a damn about Stark or the congressman at all? Just filler? If so, oh well... low point to me. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
DavidB1111 |
43. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 6:27 PM EST
Er, I think it was a stand alone, right?If not, I don't have any clue. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Losa78 |
44. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 6:32 PM EST
"Er, I think it was a stand alone, right?So, because it was a standalone, all the questions I posed are to remain unsanswered? Was there really no purpose or relevance to Stark AT ALL? Was Cameron just having fun or killing time when she went to off him? Really? Is everybody ok with this? Filler, filler, filler... That's sad. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
summerglau4ever |
45. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 6:33 PM EST
Probably not finishing the thing with the prom, or figuring out what was with the other girl.
1
out of
1 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
DavidB1111 |
46. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 7:17 PM EST
"So, because it was a standalone, all the questions I posed are to remain unsanswered?How about I have no freaking clue whatsoever. :) What's wrong with a stand alone. Am I going to have to keep my pimp-hand strong? :) Seriously, what's wrong if it's a stand alone that had very little to do. Also, how did she see the future event anyway, that made my head hurt. 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
daemondark |
47. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 7:29 PM EST
I think the only REAL low point in the show is the fact that the writers made Johns Current mindset and emotional state last so long. 4-6 Ep's I could deal with. but 13 is just absurd.I know for is what done for character growth and development, but after the 5 EP of S2 he just started to piss me off. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Losa78 |
48. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 7:32 PM EST
"How about I have no freaking clue whatsoever. :) What's wrong with a stand alone. Am I going to have to keep my pimp-hand strong? :)What was wrong with this standalone in particular was that the heroine (Cameron) decided to go off the bad guy (Stark?) without giving the viewer any reason whatsoever to do it, without explaining why Stark had to be terminated or why the congressman had to be preserved. The viewer is supposed to have a reason to root and desire for the hero's sucess. The hero's actions aren't supposed to be pointless and meaningless, otherwise the viewer just doesn't care, like I didn't. So, after that Stark suplot I was left thinking: why didn't Cameron go for icecream instead? Oh, I forgot, she probably wouldn't be able to taste it... 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
Brovane |
49. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 10:34 PM EST
"Blasted edit fail. Uh, what hazards around Depleted Uranium? It's use in Radiatiion shielding, so I don't think Radiation is a concern. It's used in armor, and last time I checked, you don't violate laws of hazardous material stuff by owning it."Depleted Uranium is a controlled substance. It isn't dangerous when properly handled and it is used in the M1 Abrams to increase the armor effectiveness against Kinetic Energy penetrators. When the Abrams was being built there was a lot of concern about Anti-tank missiles that essentially use a directed explosive blast to blow through the armor. The Abrams uses a British developed armor system called Cobram that uses a armor system to greatly increase the effectiveness against these explosive warheads. The Abrams armor system is the equivalent of over 1200mm of armor plate vs these warheads. It was found lacking against kinetic energy penetrators so depleted uranium was added to the armor package which greatly increases the armor effectiveness against kinetic warheads. Figures over over 900mm of armor plate equivalent against these warheads have been discussed. This adds considerable weight to the vehicle so a lot of times Abrams used for training will not have the DU package. However the tanks that are taken into combat have the DU package. In shells the only time there is a concern with DU is after the round hits. When you hit a tank with a APFSDSDU the penetrator can basically break apart and scatter uranium over the vehicle. This is one of the theories about gulf war syndrome is that US soldiers got exposed and breathed in uranium dust as they where inspecting destroyed Iraqi vehicles. US Law on DU U.S. NRC general license U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations at 10 CFR 40.25 establish a general license for the use of depleted uranium contained in industrial products or devices for mass-volume applications. This general license allows anyone to possess or use depleted uranium for authorized purposes. Generally, a registration form is required, along with a commitment to not abandon the material. Agreement states may have similar, or more stringent, regulations. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Dr._Allison_Cameron |
50. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 10:42 PM EST
"cobram">> Chobham ? Do you find this valuable? |
|
Brovane |
51. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 10:54 PM EST
"I have no clue. That's all my reasearch showed as well. You might want to contact the writers themselves. :(Ok a .50 Cal Desert Eagle and .50 Browning round are in two different categories of power. A Desert Eagle .50 AE bullet has around 2200 Joules of Energy and is going at around 1510 ft/s for a 325gr bullet. A .50 browning round has around 18000 joules of energy for a 647gr bullet and is going at 3,000+ ft/s. My theory in the pitch pit is the .50 Browning round hit the Terminator in the eye which is a weak point. Pistol rounds like a .44 Magnum, .50 A&E, .50 S&W are far outclassed in penetrative power by rifle rounds like 5.56mm, 7.62mm and .50 Browning round. The .50 Browning round is a good start for when you seriously start causing damage to a Terminator. Like Derek said you make them pause and reconsider there life choices. If I was long range sniping of a Terminator I would probably want a rifle firing a 14.5mm round. Something like the Denel NTW-20. The 14.5mm round delivers around 32,000 joules with a 990gr bullet. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Brovane |
52. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 10:57 PM EST
">> Chobham ?"Chobham - Yup that is right. The name was misspelled on article I was looking at. Should have known that it didn't look right when I was typing it. Do you find this valuable? |
|
robhot |
53. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 13 2009, 11:41 PM EST
Depleted Uranium is refined Uranium from which the U-235 isotope has been removed. (The U-238 isotope could be used to make Plutonium). It doesn't explode or nuthin'.Uranium is heat-treatable for hardness which will enable the round to hold its shape when it contacts armor plate and begins boring in. The effect of the round comes from the extremely high velocity at which it is fired. The extremely high velocity of a tank cannon or 20mm aircraft cannon plus the high density of the U-238 make it an effective penetrator. Most of the damage to an opposing tank comes from the spray of molten metal which the penetrator round creates on its way in. A 12 gauge shotgun shell is a low velocity round so the kinetic energy release would be low and quickly used up pushing the heavy DU round out the barrel. There would be no spray of molten metal because of the low velocity of the round. It would be a very ineffective solution. DU projectiles are penetrators which get their effect from the extremely 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
t5000 |
54. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 14 2009, 4:23 AM EST
"Low point. The unnecessary transvestite story. That character was a distraction to the episode. It was made worse by casting a woman to play a man pretending to be a woman. Way to much WTF moments to take away from Sarah getting shot and Riley's arrival in a time bubble and subsequent writst slashing. "your a soldier , your a seeker" sticks in my mind , because I cringe when I hear it."ok first I sAY the low point of this show was the last 2 eps, alpine fields and earthlings, were both poorly thought out and written. but having said that, at the time they thought the show was over and wouldnt get the back 9, they didnt find out till they were filming earthlings. so they might have just half ass done the 2 shows thinking that would be it. good excuse but what if we hadnt got the back 9 ?? those last 2 bad eps would have been the end and I am sure everyone would not have liked how it ended.lucily we got back 9 and can for first time do a real season ending show. now on the quote I agree with what u say on earthlings ep, also sarah going off by herself made no sense, derek, john or cameron, one of them should have gone with her. and then to go to the wharehouse alone?? then believe the guys whiny story. alot of mistakes for the legendary sarah conner. although I liked the riley stuff about when she got here , but the wrist slashing was poorly done, almost no reason for it , was given during the show, there are reasons though. they should have cut down on sarahs story to give a little more time to what happened with riley cam and john. 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
CoolZoneAlex |
55. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 14 2009, 5:03 AM EST
Any idea why John does not start to experiment on T-888 captured chips at this young age to try to reprogram them? He has the advantage of getting them much earlier before the war begins and he could use them as bodyguards.
Do you find this valuable?
|
Ta73Nb41 |
56. RE: Low points of TSCC?
Jan 14 2009, 5:35 AM EST
one aspect of season 2 is character building, but they've pulled the characters apart to do is, and the cohesion has been lost. They can't expect to move the show forward by isolating the characters for too long. Then again maybe this is one those, one thing about being together is being apart thing ;) There are still 9 more episodes to go!Do you find this valuable? |
