He goes into a discussion about how the show was so dark, it was hard to sell. But I like his last line best: “But what do I know? My show got canceled.”

Right, Josh.

I’d say he’s definitely on the outs with WB and Halcyon. Good riddance.

“1. Nobody at WB felt it was likely to work on any other network, not even SyFy, so didn’t bother. That seems implausible to me, though still possible.”

I believe Nick C indicated that SyFy execs had expressed an interest prior to and provided that the show ratings didn’t drop further – which they then did.

“2. WB did shop it around to other networks who all turned it down.”

I think WB didn’t do a “formal shop” but sent out feelers and got no responses. But I have no inside info on that.

“JF had to have known (rather than strongly suspected) on Saturday before the up-fronts when he made the “anywhere but Fox comments” that T:SCC was canceled, so why did everyone act as if it was news on Monday?”

I think Friedman and the executive producers at WB and Halcyon knew, but both wanted to keep the lid on until the T-4 premiere was over, which is why the news was released on a weekend when the wider audience for T-4 wouldn’t notice.

“3. WB didn’t want to continue with the series, but would have been contractually obliged to pick it up if Fox wanted it…”

I suppose it’s possible that Fox, when the show was broached to it initially, may have had some sort of “exclusivity” clause in the contract preventing WB from shopping it to another network down the road. I don’t know if that’s ever done, and I have no inside info on whether it was done here.

“The politics would have had to be within WB itself. They might have been anything from “We need Josh out of here!” to “The Terminator movie crew feel T:SCC is a liability and they want the show ended before the following Terminator movie”.”

I think it came down to WB and Halcyon deciding that the show was both a money loser and potentially damaging to and (excessively) divergent from the franchise. WB and Halcyon always kept a firewall between TSCC and T-4. Friedman and McG were kept at arm’s length. And the movies are worth way more than the TV series, so when push came to shove, WB and Halcyon pulled the plug on it to favor the movie side.

“I’m suspicious of the “it was politics that sunk it” rumors, it’s just as easily T:SCC fans trying to find explanations for something they find inexplicable.”

I agree. I haven’t read any of these rumors yet, so I don’t know how detailed they are.

“But, on the other hand, you have to wonder if anyone at WB was, actually, wondering about the wisdom of continuing to make an increasingly unpopular show, and even subsidizing it, in an attempt to get people to watch the movies.”

This has been my position all along. WB clearly wanted a Terminator TV show that would make money and generate new franchise fans in advance of the movie. TSCC did neither. They paid Fox to keep the show on the air past the first 13 episodes in the hope the back nine would pan out. Then Friedman screwed them with three of the lamest episodes yet, which killed the back nine until the last three or four episodes picked up the pace.

“I think it’s entirely possible (especially as Lanie Grace has said the opposite) that WB never shopped the series to other networks, contrary to received wisdom.”

Well, again, I tend to believe Nick C when he says SyFy expressed an interest, Whether that was due to a WB feeler or a more formal offer I don’t know.

The main thing is that I believe WB DID want A Terminator show on the air, and I suspect they STILL want one. They just don’t want TSCC because it didn’t measure up.

Now, it doesn’t make sense to me that that’s why Fox might have canceled the show (Fox canceled it for fairly obvious “Costs too much for such a low audience” reasons), but it might explain the cryptic “It’s never going to appear anywhere but Fox” from JF just before the cancellation. As I see it, there are three options:

1. Nobody at WB felt it was likely to work on any other network, not even SyFy, so didn’t bother. That seems implausible to me, though still possible.

2. WB did shop it around to other networks who all turned it down. This still seems the most likely explanation, though it doesn’t explain the “politics” rumors, and it leaves us with a bunch of new questions such as “JF had to have known (rather than strongly suspected) on Saturday before the up-fronts when he made the “anywhere but Fox comments” that T:SCC was canceled, so why did everyone act as if it was news on Monday?”

3. WB didn’t want to continue with the series, but would have been contractually obliged to pick it up if Fox wanted it, hence JF’s comments. This does explain the politics rumors, because now there’s a context for WB doing nothing to save the show. The politics would have had to be within WB itself. They might have been anything from “We need Josh out of here!” to “The Terminator movie crew feel T:SCC is a liability and they want the show ended before the following Terminator movie”.

I’m suspicious of the “it was politics that sunk it” rumors, it’s just as easily T:SCC fans trying to find explanations for something they find inexplicable. But, on the other hand, you have to wonder if anyone at WB was, actually, wondering about the wisdom of continuing to make an increasingly unpopular show, and even subsidizing it, in an attempt to get people to watch the movies. They’d have had to be insane not to have doubts, especially once the 2009 half-season started. And, as such, I think that (3) is far, far, far, more likely than (1), and I think it’s entirely possible (especially as Lanie Grace has said the opposite) that WB never shopped the series to other networks, contrary to received wisdom.

Anyway, fine. Cancel Terminator. Now let’s see how many millions they lose with Salvation. It’s already showing with pathetic ticket sales. I was dying to see it until now. I don’t want anyone to even tell me about it now. Screw it. I’m done with Terminator anything. Fox can kiss my butt and so can Warner Brothers. Let them explain to stockholders why they can’t turn a profit on something that should have brought in HUNDREDS of millions.

“Joss’s style takes the first season to introduce the characters, and it’s the second season that really grabs ahold of you.”

Just like the Spanish flu!

As for Chuck… who cares?

i learned that it’s time i get a different hobby

TSCC, is another story. it already had two seasons, and was falling into a rutt until just the last few episodes of season 2. Too little too late. I first liked the show, then was getting bored with it, especially it’s lack of continuity, and then I started to like it again. If Firely’s “Wash” could come over to Dollhouse, maybe Summer Glau from TSCC (and also from Firefly) could also. New dolls all the time right?

“Look, stupids, I’m not wasting any more time discussing AI on this blog. That’s not what Robert and Bill host this blog for.”

No, I don’t suppose that’s what it’s “for.” Neither do I suppose that the site is operated in order to solicit opinions on the window of opportunity that (trans-?) humankind has until local perversion laws become completely anachronistic.

Then again, I’m not trying to elevate myself to the clergy.

You want a clue, go get one somewhere else. Running your mouth doesn’t establish anything but that you’re a troll with a specific problem with me. And I couldn’t care less about some random clown on a blog.

1. “Make no mistake, the notion of a human ‘marrying’ a robot AI is a serious issue which will come up in the next fifty years.”

2. “[I]t’s irrelevant as to the state of AI capability whether or not a human might actually want to marry one.”

3. “Let’s put it this way – David Levy has much more credibility on the topic than one Boris Who-The-Hell-Is-This-Troll.”

Let me get this straight: The *actual* existence of the marriageable robot AIs, which you asserted are a “serious issue,” proves to be “irrelevant,” and my then asking what the “next 50 years” dramatic phrasing was all about in the first place yields nothing but an attempt to brand me as a “troll”? You’re a regular Ptolemy.

I have no idea if any of that is true, but it sounds as good as anyone making absurd claims about people wanting to marry robots. We still don’t even have flying cars!

Will you one day marry a robot?
http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/?p=715

And from another article on the subject:

Although roboticist Ronald Arkin at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta does not think human-robot marriages will be legal anywhere by 2050, “anything’s possible. And just because it’s not legal doesn’t mean people won’t try it,” he told LiveScience.

“Humans are very unusual creatures,” Arkin said. “If you ask me if every human will want to marry a robot, my answer is probably not. But will there be a subset of people? There are people ready right now to marry sex toys.”

“Besides which, it’s irrelevant as to the state of AI capability whether or not a human might actually want to marry one.”

In that case, what do the “next 50 years” have to do with anything?

I know about AI research as well, although I don’t have academic credit in it.

Besides which, it’s irrelevant as to the state of AI capability whether or not a human might actually want to marry one. Hell, humans have wanted to marry blow up sex dolls! LOL!

Anybody who’d want to marry Paris Hilton would marry a robot! LOL!

To state something that is posiible as absolutely impossible, is a guaranteed fault.

“Make no mistake, the notion of a human ‘marrying’ a robot AI is a serious issue which will come up in the next fifty years.”

Speaking as someone who did a couple years toward an AI Ph.D. several years back, you’re deranged.

Max: Summer was always partial to the Jameron thing, although she always kept it ambiguous as per the writers. But she’s a romantic clearly, so obviously she liked the idea of a John-Cameron pairing. Not to mention it was a great role for an actress.

The problem with the relationship is that it continually bounced between simplistic “robot learns to love” crap or being ambiguous about Cameron’s motivations.

Whereas they could have take the correct tack and directly pursued a more sophisticated, complicated relationship where Cameron had no feelings but needed John for her own reasons and was prepared to provide John with what he needed as a human male who probably would never develop any other normal relationship due to his unique circumstances (leaving T-3 and T-4 out of it where he does – he wouldn’t know that at the time the TSCC show was set).

It would have allowed for both of them to acknowledge and accept each other’s unique characters and form a bond that was rational for the machine and emotional for the human. And it wouldn’t have precluded even a physical relationship, which could have been hinted at existing in the future (once again glossing over T-3 canon – or maybe not). And that would have pushed the envelope in exploring the possible relationships between humans and AIs.

Make no mistake, the notion of a human “marrying” a robot AI is a serious issue which will come up in the next fifty years. It’s already been discussed seriously in years past. A futurist wrote a book about it and he got tons of interviews from the media all over the world.

This would have enabled a more complex exploration of the relationship between humans and AIs, which is the central core concept of the franchise.

The problem with Cameron leaving because she thought she was a liability – along with the hideously bad plot device of putting a bomb in her head – is that it again reduces her to a dumb reprogrammed bodyguard, much like Arnold in T-3 who nearly had to lobotomize himself to prevent him from being controlled by the bad Terminator. It makes the character less interesting and reduces the story telling potential.

Cameron should have been a fully independent AI who not only doesn’t obey orders in the present from John or Sarah (which was established in episode 2 of season 1) but in fact didn’t take orders from future John either (although he might not have known that.) The fake script that Lanie Grace wrote about had that very concept in there, in that the Cameron in that script had gone behind John’s back to make a deal with the T-1000′s and when discovered came back in time to escape.

My concept after I saw episode 2 of season 1 was that Cameron was an independent AI who determined that she could not survive in the future regardless of whether the humans or Skynet won the war. As John Henry said about his “brother”, she wanted to survive. So she came back in time to the one place where she could escape, and needed to hook up with Connor because he was the only one who would know and accept her for what she is. Then she could forge a bond with him as long as she needed him (until she was able to deal with human society in the present on her own) and would aid him in stopping Skynet because by doing so she would insure she would not have to deal with Skynet in the future.

This concept would have allowed for all sorts of options in character development far greater than representing her as just a dedicated bodyguard, which in the end really is all she was, regardless of the writers’ dialog in various episodes. The writers made considerable effort to keep her motivations ambiguous, but in the end – and the fans interpretations pretty much prove this – she was reduced to being just another “robot learning to be human” without any real motivations or consciousness of her own.

Not to mention that the entire “glitch” thing not being resolved all season meant that, just like all the other characters except Weaver, Cameron was basically “cursed” by Friedman with damaging characterization, a fundamental un-fixable flaw equivalent to Sarah’s mental instability.

And that was part of the entire season being devoted to sidelining the entire Connor camp in favor of Weaver and John Henry, meaning that the entire franchise concept of the Connors being the heroes was dumped in favor of an “AI vs AI” concept.

That’s fine if it was another show, but it’s not Terminator. Terminator is about humans vs machines, not machines vs machines. The “good Terminators” are there to explore alternatives to antagonism between humans and AIs, not to replace humans as the heroes of the story. They can be one of the heroes of the story, not all of it. But in TSCC the Connors behaved like incompetent idiots all season and in the end, instead of stopping Skynet, they discover nothing they have ever done was relevant at all because Skynet already existed and they were in fact trying to destroy the enemy of Skynet!

You can’t turn the franchise upside down any more effectively than that.

Face it – Friedman either never understood Terminator or even more likely he did and didn’t care that he was overturning it because of his own hubris that he could do a better job than James Cameron.

Friedman saw this show as his ticket to “sci-fi cred” that he didn’t get with his unused “War of the Worlds” script. But he wasn’t up to it. Instead he tanked a spin-off from THE franchise most likely to succeed in current broadcast TV.

Monumental fail.

I’m still hella pissed about this and I want to see more!!!!! Damn it…

I never rooted for the show to fail. I criticized it so it would get better and NOT fail. What irritated me was Friedman’s (and to some degree the writers, as well as many fans) blase dismissal that there was anything wrong with the show even as the ratings continued to tank.

However, once the finale was over, the show couldn’t be worked with, so at that point I was pretty much both confident that the show would be canceled and also partly relieved because I really didn’t want to have to go through another season of Friedman’s crap only to go through this whole process of arguing that the show was doomed all over again.

I agree that the show deserved a better conclusion. It deserved a better whole season 2! However that’s not going to happen. The only way a Terminator show can work now is a total reboot.

Los: “Especially the scene in the season 2 opener (I believe) where she told John he loves her. Very convincing and very conniving. Was that really her telling him that or was that the program doing whatever was necessary to get John to trust her.”

Josh Friedman pretty much made it clear that she was faking it with the love proclamation. And you can tell Connor thought so too, because initially when she was telling him she was fixed, he was buying it, but when she went the other route, he immediately got mad and pulled the chip out. Watch his face in that scene at that moment. He wasn’t happy about it but he was mad she would try to play him like that. He was no dummy in that scene. His later re-activation of her was precisely the same sort of strategic decision that was portrayed in a deleted scene of T-2, where Hamilton’s Sarah wanted to destroy “Uncle Bob’s” chip and Furlong’s John prevented her.

The problem is there was zero evidence that Cameron had any emotional responses in her and therefore had no ability to “love” him. Summer Glau always stopped short of saying Cameron did, just that Cameron was so programmed to be “dedicated” to him that it was the equivalent.

But the problem with all that is it made the scenes of her deliberately trying to seduce him, in “Vic’s Chip” in season one and “Mr. Ferguson” in season 2, nonsense – unless you bought my theory of her motivations. But my theory was ignored all season and pretty much deliberately revoked in the last episodes. But if you accepted that she was just another dumb reprogrammed Terminator sent to protect him, a lot of her actions in that regard made no sense. They only made sense if she was an entirely independent AI who had come back for her own purposes. But Friedman never made a move with that concept, despite the story telling potential.

And then he botched hell out of the final scene between them. That bedroom scene was one of the worst scenes ever in the entire series. There’s no way to read it except as a middle finger given to the Jameron shippers.

It’s not democracy that’s the problem, it’s ruthless materialism. The two have very little to do with each other.

RSH, I am becoming more receptive to your criticisms directed towards Friedman, especially due to his defeatist attitude in light of FOX’s cancellation. However, I think you were wrong to constantly root for the show to fail because of Friedman himself and I think the fans as well as the characters and the story itself deserve a proper conclusion.

ps. SCREW FOX and Kevin Reilly is a pathetic loser!