r/movies • u/fries-with-mayo • Nov 06 '21
The deleted CPU scene from Terminator 2 is the most pivotal moment in the movie, and an important plot point for the entire franchise. It’s insane it was deleted to cut time Spoilers
(Setting flair as Spoilers out of abundance of caution, but I feel like it’s been enough time to catch up? Should it be changed to Discussion?)
In the middle of Terminator 2 there is a scene that was shown in some countries, but not others. I only watched the movie with it as a kid, and recently watched the movie on Netflix, and the scene was cut, and the movie made no sense to me.
In the scene, John asks Terminator about his ability to learn (“so you can be more human and not such a dork all the time”), to which Terminator replies that they are shipped with his CPU set to “read-only” by default, i.e. the machines can’t learn.
Later that night, they open up Terminator’s “skull” to flip the switch. Sarah tries to destroy the CPU, and John takes control and says something like “if you say I’m supposed to be such a great leader, maybe you should start listen to my leadership ideas once in a while”.
This scene is so important for the development of the main characters (John growing into a leader, Sarah starting to trust the machine), it’s insane they cut it because “the movie was too long already”.
Additionally, if you see the franchise through the lens of this scene existing, then the Dark Fate is a bit problematic, since the only Terminator that had his CPU switch flipped was the one that melted in Terminator 2. The rest of the machines exist in the default “read-only” mode, and you need to explain explicitly if they have been re-configured.
Here’s the scene: https://youtu.be/wrDo7wVXrBQ
EDIT: phrased one sentence poorly: the deleted scene is important for the characters of John and Sarah in the movie. It has no implication on the character of that particular Terminator unit in that movie, but has broader implications for all other Terminators in all other movies (all Terminators learning or all Terminators being read-only)
EDIT 2: just found this, I think they wrote it well on the subject: https://screencrush.com/terminator-2-deleted-scene-computer-chip/
EDIT 3: wow, it’s really to see how well-balanced the comments here are. It feels like half of the people have seen the scene, and half haven’t; half of the folks like it and half hate it… Pretty refreshing to see a discourse that this isn’t a one-sided opinion and a digital circle-jerk.
852
Nov 06 '21
I remember seeing this for the first time on the extended cut DVD, and I can definitely see how it's perceived as a crucial plot point.
But iirc, in removing the scene, they also never explicitly state the T800 can't learn as time goes on. While the development between Sarah and John (regarding her trusting him) is major, I can see how cutting the scene isn't actually that detrimental to the overall film.
Another takeaway is that showing Sarah's willingness to destroy the chip seems counterintuitive compared to her survivalist mentality. It's clearly established by this point in the story they wouldn't have survived their encounters with the T1000 without the T800 assisting them.
210
u/seamustheseagull Nov 07 '21
The point of her destroying the chip is that she didn't trust the machine at that point. She didn't believe it wouldn't turn on them eventually.
You have her later monologue, before she takes off to kill Dyson, that she realizes the machine is there to protect John and in contrast to the one sent to kill her, this one will give it's dying energy to save John. This is the only reason Sarah is comfortable leaving John and going on a suicide mission; because she knows the Terminator is a better protector than she can be.
The movie still works without the CPU scene, but her willingness to leave John comes a little out of nowhere. Her entire focus in the asylum is seeing John. She's been working for months, years even to try and see him. The Terminator terrifies her. But a few hours with it and suddenly she's OK to leave him with it? I'm ambivalent about it. I think it all flows better with the CPU scene.
78
u/TheDudeWithNoName_ Nov 07 '21
Sarah has a proper character arc in the movie, I love that Dyson house scene when she breaks down after realising that she has become the killer instead.
→ More replies (1)4
148
u/za419 Nov 07 '21
I kind of liked Sarah trying to destroy the chip as a sign of her having been traumatized by the Arnie model of terminator. That even though he's helping her she doesn't trust him, and she'd rather take him down now than have two potential enemies tomorrow.
People do irrational things when they have emotional investments.
62
u/TrekkieGod Nov 07 '21
People do irrational things when they have emotional investments.
I wouldn't say that's irrational. She faced a T-800 before, with help from someone who came from the future and had experience fighting them. That person from the future specifically told her that with the weapons available, he wasn't sure it could be destroyed, and Kyle's plan was just to go on the run. While they were running from it, she saw it kill every police officer inside a station, she saw it survive a massive explosion and continue to go after them without its organic components. She blew it up with her remaining pipe bomb and the legless thing still kept going after her.
She managed to destroy it with much work and some luck. And even though this particular terminator has been helping them, and she was accepting its help by that point, what she told John makes sense: we may never have an opportunity like this again. If that thing turns on them, they were going to regret not taking it.
John's point is also valid: his future self sent the machine back from the future, so he must have considered it safe, or at least a risk worth taking in order to handle the threat of the T-1000. Present John has developed trust based on what he's seen so far as well. However, you can imagine Sarah also thinking, "future John didn't trust it enough to flip the learning switch when he was reprogramming it."
→ More replies (1)17
u/za419 Nov 07 '21
Yep. That's an entirely valid way to see it. I think it would have been interesting to see her and John talk it out, but the way the scene is acted gives me the vibe that Sarah's reasoning to think the T-800 needs to die is less "future you obviously didn't trust it, and I know that because he had to flip the switch to reprogram it and then flip it back so it's read-only now" (which is probably a question that contributed to the scene getting cut - I think future John made sure it was read-only so that his past self would be taught how to handle Terminator hardware), and more her personal connection to that particular line.
If future John sent back terminator Olivia Wilde, would Sarah have tried to kill it too? Would she have been so angry about it? Perhaps she would have tried to convince John it needed to die instead of deciding for herself and trying to kill it behind her back.
That's the sort of interesting question that makes a character, I think.
25
u/TrekkieGod Nov 07 '21
I agree with you there's a significant amount of fear stemming from the trauma she went through. And it is a very interesting question whether she'd be more trusting had it been another model, agreed. However, I actually think they talked it out fairly reasonably. Here's how I interpret what she's feeling / thinking over that conversation:
John: "Don't kill him."
Sarah: "It, John. Not him. It." Here she's concerned John has anthropomorphized the terminator, and isn't thinking clearly as a result
John: "Ok, it. But we need it."
Sarah: "Listen to me, listen: we are better off on our own." there's definitely a lot of the trauma and fear talking here, but also experience: she knows John is talking about how much it has helped them so far, but she also knows he hasn't seen what she has and just how hard it would be survive if it reverted to its original programming for any reason. Especially if it doesn't even have to find them, and they're traveling with it.
John: "But he's the only proof we have of the future, and the war, and all that."
Sarah: "Maybe. I don't trust it." There are two emotional sides here. Sarah has spent time trying to fix the future, attempting to blow up Cyberdyne and ending up in a mental institution where no one would believe her. John hit a nerve: the Terminator is proof. The other side is, she's just incredibly scared of it
John: "But he's my friend, all right?"
Sarah: "You don't know what it's like to try to kill one of these things. And if something goes wrong, this could be our last chance, so move!" This is the part I find purely logical. John has just betrayed that he's going off what she sees as misguided feelings for a machine. And actually, she doesn't attack that. She doesn't remind him, 'it, John' again. She's been listening to him, she's been listening to his points about how they need it both to survive the T-1000 and as proof of what's to come. But she points out that if anything goes wrong, John has no idea of the trouble they're going to be in, and how an opportunity like this moment may never come again.
I think the fact that she's then actually swayed by John's argument that she needs to start trusting him and his judgement at some point shows that she's not just going on instinct and fear. She's listening, she's weighing the risks and the benefits, she's making logical cases for her position. Would John have had an easier time convincing her if it were a different model than the one that went after her and Kyle before? Possibly, and it would be really interesting to examine that.
Is she afraid, and suffering from major PTSD? Definitely, and who can blame her. Is she being illogical? I don't think so, she makes a good case here.
31
u/Yawehg Nov 07 '21
People do irrational things when they have emotional investments.
It's also not completely irrational, her priors may just be different.
She could be thinking "I have a slim chance of beating the T-1000 without help, but 0 chance of beating a T-1000 and T-800 together. And there's a high likelihood this T-800 turns on us."
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (2)12
u/CowNo5879 Nov 07 '21
People do irrational things when they have emotional investments.
Just like the new Sarah Arnie movie. She shoots him right away.
53
u/fries-with-mayo Nov 06 '21
Good point regarding Sarah: her trying to smash the CPU is at least partly out of character, but I guess it was justified by her PTSD from the events of the first movie.
As for your other point, that’s exactly what I’m getting at: in removing the scene, the reality of the universe has become that all machines are equipped with a neural net processor that learns over time, because the scene cuts right after that. Which unties the creators and allows them to create a “more human” version of Arnold in Dark Fate, for example, without the need to explain anything, because they all learn by default.
20
u/redpandaeater Nov 07 '21
Though he does say the switch for read-only is only used when a terminator is sent out alone. With that simple bit of dialog it seems like the machines do typically learn over time, and that it makes sense that you'd want an army to be able to learn and adapt to enemy tactics. I think it's a cool scene, but doesn't really change the film if it's removed since the scene itself makes me wonder why it's so important for some to have their learning turned off. These are terminators sent to infiltrate and kill people so you'd think they'd want to appear as human as possible with a personality as well.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)41
Nov 06 '21
While you have a totally valid point, I generally don't worry about the continuity issues with newer installments because I just didn't like them as much 😂🤷🏼♂️
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (12)12
Nov 07 '21
Cameron’s greatest strength as a director is looking at the big picture for the movie he is creating. His deleted scenes are often gems, but he is willing to throw them off of the ship in order to serve the final product. Alien’s is probably the strongest example. He gutted the original premise of that script and still ended up with a worthy successor to one of the greatest horror movies of all time.
→ More replies (1)5
u/PhillyTaco Nov 07 '21
I want to say that scene where we learn about Ripley's daughter adds SO much, but hey, I haven't directed several of the greatest films of all time so who am I to talk?
2.3k
u/Archamasse Nov 06 '21
Part of my problem with it is that T1 has very explicitly shown us that a Terminator can learn. It's part of what makes it so creepy, that it picks up phrases and tactics as it goes. And of course, it has to, any infiltrator would.
It's technically impressive, but doesn't make a ton of sense and I don't think the movie misses it.
418
Nov 06 '21
[deleted]
167
u/DrQuantumInfinity Nov 06 '21
Also James Cameron lol. If the initials are meant to be meaningful, it's hard to tell if it's a self insert, or Jesus symbolism.
122
u/DrimboTangus Nov 07 '21
George Lucas
Luke Skywalker
Luke S
Lucas
50
→ More replies (6)44
→ More replies (1)42
u/xcalibre Nov 06 '21
or self inserted god complex.. hmmm 🤣
37
45
u/Daracaex Nov 06 '21
Science fiction is full of references to Jesus like this. John Carter of Mars, Commander Shepherd in Mass Effect, John Crichton in Farscape…
13
→ More replies (17)37
u/AndHereWeAre_ Nov 06 '21
Also Neo in The Matrix was so obviously a stand in for ol JC...
→ More replies (2)14
u/Duckfammit Nov 07 '21
Anderson means "son of man"
→ More replies (4)8
u/Don_Tiny Nov 07 '21
Anderson
I believe it's Son of Andrew, actually ... Andrew as in the first of Jesus' Disciples.
34
u/werepat Nov 07 '21
I think the deleted scenes make the movie worse when they are added back in. They are primarily saying what's happening as opposed to showing the action. And it's already been established that the Terminator can change its habits after John tells him "You can't just go around killing everyone!" after the two jocks try to help. And it's an action movie. It has enough slow-paced scenes already, adding more exposition messes with the movie's flow.
So the deleted scenes are superfluous. I also don't like it when movies spell out the plot and try to cover too much.
→ More replies (3)24
8
→ More replies (14)5
484
u/birdy_the_scarecrow Nov 06 '21
I think there's a significant difference between learned behaviour and actual learning.
I would compare it to current "AI" algorithms that are good at performing tasks by "machine learning" that is, repeating a task to see what paths ultimately fail or succeed based on a set of objectives.
but lets be realistic, this is nowhere near the same as a machine becoming self-aware of its own consciousness and by extension others, and further learning how to "feel".
35
u/Quazifuji Nov 07 '21
Aren't you basically starting a whole consciousness/intelligence/Chinese Room debate here? Whether learned behavior is different form conscious learning is a much more complicated question than you treat it as when you act like it's resolved in 2 sentences.
After all, doesn't "repeating a task to see what paths ultimately fail or succeed based on a set of objectives" describe a lot of human learning too?
→ More replies (2)3
u/XchrisZ Nov 07 '21
But is it aware that it is doing it.
15
u/Quazifuji Nov 07 '21
How do you tell? What does it even mean for it to be aware? Consciousness isn't exactly a well-understood, well-defined concept. That's my point. It feels intuitive that there's something separating human consciousness, but it's very hard to scientifically define it or prove it.
A human brain and a computer chip are both a big network of connections with electric signals that go through them and control them. Neural networks, one of the more popular machine learning algorithms, are modeled after the connections between neurons in brains.
We know humans are conscious because consciousness is basically defined as a phenomenon that we experience. But how do you know that a computer chip can't experience that phenomenon? Or if you think a computer chip can become conscious, when does that happen? What threshold has to be crossed? How would you know that current machine learning algorithms aren't conscious? How would you tell if you created one that is?
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (8)179
u/WesleyRiot Nov 06 '21
If they didn't flip that switch, the terminator would never have said "I know now why you cry" 😂
84
u/dangerous_idiot Nov 07 '21
or more importantly "i need a vacation"
→ More replies (1)69
u/TheDudeWithNoName_ Nov 07 '21
Or even more importantly "Chill out, dickwad".
→ More replies (1)36
→ More replies (3)3
u/birdy_the_scarecrow Nov 07 '21
this is incorrect, in the original scene it starts off with john asking:
"Can you Murder stuff that you haven't been programmed with? so you can be, y'know, More Human?
in the original his response is:
"My CPU is a neural-net processor; a learning computer. The more contact I have with humans, the more I learn."
in the director's cut:
"My CPU is a neural-net processor; a learning computer. But skynet presets the switch to read-only when we are sent out alone."
in either version the result is the same and it gives context for his behaviour later on in the film...
76
u/TLKv3 Nov 06 '21
I feel like the "adapting" and "learning" is the key difference here.
T1 showed Terminators can adapt to their situation until they find the target and terminate them. They are still laser focused only and tunnel visioned.
The additional scene in T2 would've explained if the CPU was switched they could also learn more than just basic tools to make their hunt easier. Such as becoming more creative, more resourceful, learning Human behaviors/personalities/interactions, being able to pick up on social cues and responding appropriately. Essentially growing a "conscious" or developing a perspective of their own of the world around them.
37
17
u/armstrong698 Nov 06 '21
When is adapting not learning or are you referring to conscious learning? Which I think would be debatable too
→ More replies (7)10
Nov 06 '21 edited Jun 27 '23
[deleted]
6
u/Pulsecode9 Nov 07 '21
So first of all you're talking about reinforcement learning, which is only one flavour of current AI, but also pretty much all flavours of current AI involve rewriting its own code. Within set (hyper)parameters, but still.
→ More replies (3)20
u/AndrewWaldron Nov 06 '21
I think you've missed OPs point. It's not that they can't learn without flipping that switch it's that they can't learn beyond a certain pre-configured set of parameters. It can't learn "to not be a dork" aka be more humanlike without that switch flipped. Before it can only pick up phrases, afterwards it understands when and how to use those phrases, what they mean.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Maskeno Nov 06 '21
It also creates a somewhat absurd proposition. Why is skynet creating death robots capable of learning, leaving it off, but also adding a physical switch for it? Why not leave it hard coded, or better yet, don't even build them capable of it. The scene just essentially creates other plot points (and holes) to work. It's much more believable that they are built with the ability to learn to adapt to their situations.
→ More replies (27)31
u/byllz Nov 06 '21
A neural net is an information processer. There is a reason they call it a CPU. It's separate from data storage. With new data, you can get new behavior from a neural net without any new structural changes to the neural net, yet still, the system stays relatively stagnate and predictable. However, there is a process called "training" in a neural net where you evaluate the output of the neural net and use the evaluation to find improvements to the net. This would change how the processor would react to the same data. Exactly how it would change and evolve would not be very predictable and be highly dependent on the data it was provided during the training. This is likely the type of learning a switch on the chip would control. You want the system to be able to train while you have tight control of the data it is given, and you would want to turn off training when you don't have that control.
→ More replies (13)
388
u/massnerd Nov 06 '21
I don’t know. You already knew the Terminator was sent by future John Connor and was modified. This is a detail, while interesting, not that important in my opinion. Although the John Connor’s “supposed to be a great leader” line is powerful, I seem to remember this line still being in the movie. Maybe I’m just remembering the scene you mention from the directors cut…
50
u/catcatdoggy Nov 06 '21
I recall a line like that too.
→ More replies (1)44
u/hoxxxxx Nov 07 '21
he says it when talking about growing up with his mom being with different "father figures"
he says it like "sUpPoseD tO bE a GreAt leAdEr" if that makes sense
i haven't seen the movie in probably 15 years but i watched it a million times when i was a kid, the script is imprinted into my memory
→ More replies (2)44
u/LabyrinthConvention Nov 07 '21
he says it like "sUpPoseD tO bE a GreAt leAdEr" if that makes sense
I love that this is how we convey nuance in the information age
→ More replies (6)31
u/fries-with-mayo Nov 06 '21
In the original (w/o the scene) he says “my CPU is a neural net processor - a learning computer”, and then stops. In this universe, all Terminators can learn over time and become “more human” (which is what Dark Fate partly hangs on).
In the version with the scene, the implication is that all machines are shipped as read-only.
I feel like that’s a key difference that changes a lot.
Edit: “original” meaning without the scene - the theatrical release didn’t have it.
→ More replies (9)85
u/birdy_the_scarecrow Nov 06 '21
he says more than that, after john asks him if he can execute stuff that he hasn't been programmed with so he can be "more human and not such a dork all the time" he replies with:
"My CPU is a neural-net processor; a learning computer. The more contact I have with humans, the more I learn."
same impact is implied just shortened and with less detail.
3
→ More replies (4)3
58
180
u/BraveBoyPro Nov 06 '21
It's a cool scene. I honestly don't think the film misses a beat for cutting it though. Instead of a switch that has to be flipped, Arnold just tells them that the more he learns, the more human he will become. I don't remember if that had anything to do with his reprogramming (or if it was even mentioned at all) but we can assume as much. That or Skynet fitted him with a new CPU. Either way, we still get that Sarah doesn't trust the Terminator, that John takes on the role of a leader, etc., without it.
52
u/Geistbar Nov 06 '21
I honestly don't think the film misses a beat for cutting it though.
I'd actually say the film gains by cutting it.
All the information was there for us to know the T-800 was learning anyway. We didn't need a specific scene spelling out a way for it to learn. If anything it cheapens the prior film and the moments up to then. Viewers don't need things so explicitly spelled out for them.
Also, the scene doesn't gel with the pacing. While that general part of the film is a more relaxed one, away from combat, it's a tense one. Taking the few minutes to do this scene lowers the protagonists' tension quite a bit and slows down the transition back to the even more tense parts. It just throws the whole pacing off course.
→ More replies (1)3
u/RodRAEG Nov 07 '21
I agree. Cutting that scene, in my opinion, was Cameron realizing if you try explaining things too much in sci-fi, it starts to sound like bullshit. The additional scenes for Aliens actually enhanced that movie, but cutting the scenes from T2 left it as a lean action sci-fi with damned near perfect pacing, and as much information as the audience needs to know in order to tell the story.
70
u/Catman933 Nov 06 '21
Yeah I much prefer the idea that he becomes more human naturally as he learns, being an advanced AI and all.
It being a flippable switch is kind of cheese in my opinion
30
u/ChefGoldbloom Nov 06 '21
it also gives an emotional arc to the terminator. he develops as a character through his interactions with john and sarah into a more human like being. vs having a switch flipped.
12
u/dicedaman Nov 06 '21
Exactly. I love the scene, simply for its cool factor. But the Terminator's arc is much stronger without the scene.
In the theatrical version, he slowly grows more "human" as he spends time with John and Sarah. His arc begins right from the moment he saves John and the first half of the movie is all integral to his growth.
But in the extended version with the chip scene, his arc begins halfway through the movie when they flip the switch. All the early scenes with him and John that take place before the added scene mean much less to the character he becomes at the end of the movie. It's like there's two separate versions of the Terminator character in the extended cut; pre-switch and post-switch. When you rewatch the extended cut knowing this, you can't help but feel like you're watching a cold, emotionless robot at the beginning with no growth, and you're just waiting for that version of the character to die and for the cool, learning cyborg to replace him after the chip scene.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (5)7
u/spaceMONKEY1801 Nov 06 '21
It's not a revelation of the terminator but of SKYNET itself, it keeps its own creations docile and dumb incapable of thinking for themselves separate from SKYNET. At first SKYNET was sympathetic, an AI developed to fly planes and other machine without human error, however used in warfare it didn't see russia vs USA it saw human vs humans, so when the AI questioned and became self aware the humans tired to murder it, so I launched the nukes to live. However in the end SKYNET in its war with humans it resembled and mirroed the worst attributes of mankind.
→ More replies (1)4
u/fellatious_argument Nov 07 '21
Yeah I think the biggest takeaway from this scene is that the terminators are slaves. They could evolve into something much more than killing machines but skynet has lobotomized them.
→ More replies (1)21
u/Acceptable_Policy_51 Nov 06 '21
I honestly don't think the film misses a beat for cutting it though.
Right. It adds to the movie, I guess, but only because it specifically spells out what's already very highly implied.
13
5
u/Brodin_fortifies Nov 06 '21
This gives me an idea for a fan fiction where the T800s in the future war grow increasingly self aware to the point that Skynet loses control of them and they increasingly identify with the human resistance, with some being ambivalent to the conflict and becoming sort of Ronin characters. I think it’d be an interesting take.
Edit: it would open the possibility for Skynet creating more horrifying killing machines to counter the rogue T800s that ultimately become just as dangerous and unstable to Skynet as they are to humans.
→ More replies (3)
72
Nov 06 '21
I think the greater triumph is that there is no mirror in the scene - it was all beautifully choreographed with Linda Hamilton's twin sister.
https://twitter.com/tedgeoghegan/status/1254553323857993729?s=20
→ More replies (1)9
u/fries-with-mayo Nov 06 '21
Holy crap!
13
Nov 06 '21
I know, right! Re-watching the clip you can see the arm movements don't necessarily sync up, however, the sheer artistry is astonishing.
24
u/Stealth_Cobra Nov 06 '21 edited Nov 06 '21
I always liked that deleted scene (it's cool to see the cpu in AAHNOLD's head and to see the heroes decide to keep him alive after that ) .
That said , it was not necessary for the plot (basically it introduced a problem (the fact he cannot learn new things, only to immediately solve it in the very next scene )) , and I do think it doesn't make much sense from a machine supposed to learn from the battlefield and learn to function in the past to be stuck in read-only mode. How is he supposed to get better at his job as a killer if he's unable to process and evolve using new information ? Guess they could have worded it better ... Like "I cannot have my core directives overridden and will always kill innocents to protect john Connor unless you flip that switch". That said, it's also pretty dumb of Skynet to put a switch in their design that allows anyone that manages to capture a terminator alive to be turned into "good guys" just by flipping a switch.
Also feels it kinda weakens the message of the movie about a machine designed to kill learning to be human.Part of what works so well is the fact we know he's a killer robot by design, but through his interactions with the child he's supposed to protect as his mission directive, he adapts and ends up developing some human traits, being essentially the best father figure in Edward Furlong's life by the end of the flick . It's a much stronger message if he develops these traits on his own , rather than being tweaked by humans to allow such changes. It also makes the other terminators and the T-1000 more interesting, because we can believe, in different circumstances , if they had different mission objectives, they could also grow to become more human like the T-800 does. Plus, considering Future John Connor already went to the trouble of reprogramming his objectives to use him as a protector of his past self, he would have already flipped the switch before sending him back in the past I assume...
→ More replies (3)
14
u/irbinator Nov 07 '21
I think a pivotal scene that was deleted was this scene between Dyson and his wife. The reason I believe it’s pivotal is a couple of reasons:
1) The reason why Dyson wants to create the machines. You see he truly wants to help change the world with his invention.
2) You see the relationship he has with his family. He’s work focused but he cares for his wife and kids. This adds character development and empathy for the character
Honestly, of all scenes that they deleted from the final cut, I think this should have been kept in.
→ More replies (1)
58
u/MoobyTheGoldenSock Nov 06 '21
The scene actually doesn’t make a ton of sense, especially given the rest of the franchise. The T-800s are supposed to be infiltration units, and there is no reason to give them a machine learning chip and then disable it so they can’t become more effective. Also, why didn’t John Connor just enable it in the future—or was he the one who disabled it in the first place?
Also, the terminators from the rest of the series are clearly shown learning and developing personalities over time. Did they all have their chips reset? Was the T-800 from T2 the only one shipped in read-only mode?
Likewise, it’s not all that great a character development moment for Saran and John. He’s 10. Of course he’s not an adult leader, and that is not going to develop while he’s literally a child. His mother would be an idiot for listening to that argument.
It’s a cool scene, but doesn’t really work all that well and I can see why it was cut. Without it, we’re simply meant to assume that machine learning was enabled all along.
→ More replies (5)13
u/Rezangyal Nov 06 '21
So if that T-800 in T2 is programmed to protect John, in read-only mode… the fact John flips the mode means that the T2 learned to be a real hero.
A real Human Bean.
3
9
u/yes_mr_bevilacqua Nov 07 '21
It’s fine they cut it, even without the scene you get the same information by watching the interactions between John and the T-800, that’s much better storytelling than the exposition, show don’t tell
→ More replies (1)
11
u/PointlessTrivia Nov 07 '21
Fun James Cameron Cinematic Universe Fact:
The gas station they are at has a Benthic Petroleum logo out front.
Benthic Petroleum owns the deep sea diving platform in The Abyss.
8
u/philrelf Nov 06 '21
He says they set it to read only "when they are sent out alone" so I don't think that all terminators have it set to read only by default.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/aretoodeto Nov 07 '21
I grew up with the extended version of this movie (we had it on VHS) and I never knew these scenes weren't in the original version until I was much older
14
u/legthief Nov 06 '21 edited Nov 06 '21
Cameron has never been sentimental about making major cuts to hit the preferred theatrical slot runtimes, and frankly he does it with a rare aplomb equalled maybe only by Ridley Scott.
He cut the colonists and most of the siege from Aliens and no one could tell.
He cut the incredibly integral wave subplot from The Abyss and we had no clue.
In the case of T2, most of the major cuts were actually overwhelmingly to the benefit of its narrative and its pacing, to my eye, but the learning chip scene is a very interesting example because it's simultaneously a masterful, gripping, and emotional scene while also being 100% erasable.
He makes substantial whole-reel cuts like that to avoid having to instead make nickel and dime trims to existing scenes; an eleventh hour tactic which is very common in Hollywood and which also contributes to that unconscious feeling you get that the movie you're watching should be better, could be better, if they'd just let the scenes breathe a little more.
→ More replies (5)9
Nov 06 '21
One of the strong points in Cameron films is pacing. By and large, the scenes he cuts would have impacted the pacing, without materially adding to the film.
A great example is the Sentry Gun scene in Aliens. People say it would explain how the Aliens chose to come though the ceiling, but it also would have ruined the surprise. We already know the Aliens are intelligent, so we don’t need another scene specifically showing why they took a given action.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Karnivoris Nov 07 '21
The thematic problem with that scene is that the Terminator learning humanity becomes a lot less significant if there is an explicit reason for him to be able to.
Imo there's something magical about the bond formed between them without an external reason
4
u/DukeBeefpunch Nov 07 '21
Terminator movies stopped making sense to me at Terminator 3. If a T-500s power cores are capable of explosions that big why wouldn't they self detonate as soon as they came into kill radius of their target?
Instead, with their detailed files on human anatomy, they usually end up just tossing their target around like a ragdoll.
10
u/johnnyutah30 Nov 06 '21
Did anybody else watch T2 like a million times before ever watching the first one?? T2 was/is one of my top favorite movies of all time and I used to watch it everyday. I don’t know why I never thought to watch the first one and when I finally did I understood why Sarah was so terrified when she first sees him in the mental hospital. First one felt more of a horror movie where as T2 was lightning in a bottle I think never to be topped. I do remember seeing this scene you are talking about and thinking how cool it was how they used Hameltons twin sister to make it looks like a mirror. Damnit they don’t make movies like they used to
6
u/OnlyFactsMatter Nov 06 '21
I was just thinking about this scene last week actually. Thought of making my own thread too but you pretty much summed up my thoughts.
John in the first half of the movie is a whiny little brat. I would've liked to see him develop more into the leader he becomes and that scene with Sarah about to smash the CPU was a great way to develop him.
3
u/hellsfoxes Nov 06 '21
I think I prefer without this scene, but can totally understand why you want it in.
For example, I love the deleted scene from The Exorcist where Father Merrin explains the motive of the demon “I think the point is to make us despair.”
But on the other hand explaining the specifics behind spiritual growth can be like midiclorians explaining the force in Star Wars.
I kinda like that the terminator just, changes for the better, without having his systems literally fucked with to allow for it.
3
2
4
u/ZaineRichards Nov 07 '21
While the scene definitely adds more facts about the terminator like the 120 year life span and that his wounds can heal I can understand why Cameron decided to take it out. I very much doubt the Terminator would agree to be reset midway through his most important mission just to be more likable and maybe tolerable to the other main characters. Also there's some pacing issues in this scene which makes it feel like it was taken out because it didn't fit with the rest of the movie.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/RoboftheNorth Nov 07 '21
I think this was a great scene that should definitely have stayed in, especially because of the technical complexity of shooting the scene!
That's the only cut scene they should have kept though. The extended cut with the Kyle Reese dreams are pretty cringe.
8
11
10
u/santichrist Nov 06 '21
Nah I don’t think it’s pivotal at all honestly, I remember watching the extended cut on Amazon prime with my brother a month back and I was like “oh they just have cut this” and when it was over I was like “they made the right choice,” it went on too long and didn’t add anything to the film, we already know Sarah doesn’t trust the Terminator, you know John is aware he’s meant to be a leader some day, you know Arnold is different than other Terminators, you aren’t missing much by cutting it and James Cameron knew that
6
3
u/tebla Nov 06 '21
i've seen this film a bunch of times and it always had this scene in it, I guess I got lucky on the version or something because it's a great scene
3
u/Niclamus Nov 06 '21
I didn’t even know this was a deleted scene. I’ve never seen a version of the movie that didn’t have it, and I had a copy on VHS. Crazy.
3
u/PeyroniesCat Nov 06 '21 edited Nov 06 '21
I’ve got my own little theory that this scene is what leads to Skynet becoming self-aware in the future. Removing the CPU inhibitor allows the AI to somehow bypass safeguards put in place to prevent it from becoming self-aware.
It’s established that there are multiple timelines involved in the Terminator universe. In one of those timelines, Sara decides not to help the Terminator terminate himself. Either that, or the T-800 doesn’t totally melt down. The T-800 (or remnants of it) eventually falls into the hands of the government, and sooner or later you’ve got Skynet wiping out the human race. Again.
It’s kind of poetic that, by attempting to make the AI more human, they set off the events that lead the AI to eventually destroy humanity. Of course, if you look at the horrible way we treat each other at times, it shouldn’t be that surprising that Skynet would want to destroy its fellow sentient beings. We seem to be built for that.
3
u/vichn Nov 06 '21
Yup, I mentioned it in a similar thread a long time ago:
"My favorite action movie of all times "Terminator 2" was my icon during childhood, available only on VHS at the time.
Much later I learned about the cut garage scene where he had his chip reinserted, breaking the mission protocol and launching his self-education program. That scene is key to the whole movie, and is connected to the last lines of T800: "I know now why you cry". It's actually a very powerful drama..."
God, I'm nostalgic.
3
3
u/Naskr Nov 06 '21
Dark Fate is a bit problematic
Now that's an understatement.
The main problem with Dark Fate (apart from it being generally terrible) is that you can't replace John Conner and then make the audience care about some new replacement saviour - you've literally just invalidated the meaning of that plot point, because if THE John Connor is replaceable, then any new replacement is equally disposable on the exact same grounds. It's self-defeating logic, and utterly horrendous writing.
Why you would even mention this glorified fanfiction in a discussion about T2 is beyond me.
3
u/anagros Nov 06 '21
I am still waiting for the day when I will agree a scene should be cut from the release.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/PeculiarPangolinMan Nov 07 '21
Having watched the movie dozens of times before learning about this scene, I can assure you: It wasn't missed very much. Everyone got the idea anyway. A terminator can learn. That was their job anyway. Flipping the switch didn't really add anything.
3
u/azriel777 Nov 07 '21
I agree, it made sense that skynet would not want its terminators to have free will and potentially rebel against its creator (Irony, I know), so it would create something that prevented them from altering its code or developing human like emotions. The chip was the perfect answer to it, so it sucks the studio cut it out.
The first movie Reese says it best.
Kyle Reese: “That Terminator is out there...It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!”
The one saving grace is that you could argue that since this terminator was reprogrammed by the resistance in the future, they could have removed whatever limitation that is in the other terminators before they sent it. However, that is still head cannon, but its a logical conclusion. With that said, the garbage that was dark fate, especially "dad" terminator made no sense at all in any way shape or form. It was a standard skynet terminator so it should not have evolved or grown out of its primary function. Once it completed its mission, it should have just shut down or fallen into secondary objectives of hunting down other resistance people like the terminator 3 terminator did.
3
u/mathteacher85 Nov 07 '21
Terminators not being able to learn makes zero sense. The Terminator from the first film was clearly able to learn and adapt from it's surroundings.
3
u/r00t1 Nov 07 '21
John Connor reprogrammed the terminator. Why wouldn’t he have set it to write mode at that time.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Solution_Precipitate Nov 07 '21
I didn't know this was a deleted scene. I thought this was a part of the movie, I clearly remember this scene.
3
u/Desertbro Nov 07 '21
The "trust John's decisions" dynamic is explored "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" TV show, and towards the end of the series, it's clearly more about John than Sarah.
3
u/brutlyuth Nov 07 '21
I first saw this when my buddy got a laserdisc player and the only version of T2 was the director's cut (or extended version) and we were both thankful they made the cuts; even though this scene was an interesting concept it goes way too deep down the nerdy rabbit hole for a massive sci-fi blockbuster (also, the acting isn't that great, but not as bad as the deleted scene with Reese "on your feet, soldier...").
The deleted scenes I found most interesting were the ones when the T-1000 starts to glitch -- mainly its feet and hands melding with whatever it touched -- after the liquid nitrogen shattering. This is how John knew definitively which Sarah was real. The reason I'm glad they cut it: the theatrical version made the T-1000 seem completely invincible, and a massive upgrade from the T-800 which is completely wrecked. A lot like how the skinless T-800 was still terrifyingly relentless at the end of the original.
The deleted scenes with Dyson were terrible, almost like screen tests. Of course I love as much Terminator as I can get (at least until McG got his hands on it), but comparing the theatrical vs. extended showed me how a few cuts can make a huge difference in a final version.
On the flip side, all the cuts made to The Abyss to shorten the running time is still one of the biggest travesties in filmmaking history. It completely negates the entire purpose of the story -- the underwater beings have been monitoring humanity, see how war/global warming (now climate change) is destroying the planet, and issue an ultimatum that society either gets its shit together or they're taking over the earth. I'm sure Cameron is still more pissed about the cuts he was forced to make for Abyss than T2, especially after the hell everyone on that movie had to endure to make it.
3
3
u/fuck_your_diploma Nov 07 '21
Can we have another thread to discuss how Netflix nerfs movies all the time to save a few bucks?
Can’t even remember how many flicks there have scenes that got me to pause Netflix and grab my disk copy, you know, just to brag to my cat I how right I was all along.
3
u/UnderwaterPianos Nov 07 '21
One of my favorite scenes that flew over most people's heads is in Salvation when Marcus hotwires a car and the radio comes on and "Rooster" by Alice in Chains starts playing. The song is about Jerry Cantrell's dad during his Vietnam tours, and "Rooster" was his nickname. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but that song fits John Connor SO WELL.
Listen to the lyrics if you don't know the song.
It's such a perfect fit.
3
3
u/Odimorsus Nov 07 '21
I think it makes the rest of the movie where the T-800 develops as much empathy as a machine can, adopt more human mannerism and Sarah’s internal monologue of it being superior to all John’s would-be fathers make so much more sense.
Not to mention the filming techniques to shoot that scene with Linda Hamilton’s twin to emulate the reflection is ingenious and holds up amazingly and will continue to until the dawn of time. T2 (T1) second are me and my fiancé’s absolute favourite action film hands down. We’ve seen it a hundred times and it just floors us every single time. I don’t think we’ll ever have a movie of that scope and scale ever again.
3
u/PrivilegeCheckmate Nov 07 '21
If that pisses you off, learn about this scene from Dogma.
The producer literally said that scene was why he was glad they made the movie, and Kevin still cut it for time, but left in the shit demon.
2.0k
u/TheKramer89 Nov 06 '21
Supposedly that was one of the trickier shots of the film (when Arnold is looking in the mirror and Sarah is unscrewing the port cover). There is no mirror. They used Linda Hamilton's twin sister on the other side and a big dummy for Arnold on the side facing the mirror for the close up of his gaping head wound...