lionhead

4th Jan 2019

The Terminator (1984)

Question: How exactly do both the Terminator and Kyle find addresses? We are led to believe that is the reason for the phone books, but none of the addresses in the phone books match up to the addresses where either the first Sarah is killed, nor the apartment of our Sarah.

Answer: My two cents: The T-800 Terminator does indeed, rip out the page of a phonebook for the address, but remember, he was looking for any and all Sarah Connors, not a specific address. He did not know which Sarah would give birth to John Connor, so by process of elimination he began terminating any woman with the name Sarah Connor. He did plug the first Sarah Connor (a housewife), then went to kill the other Sarah Connors in the phone book.

Scott215

I already gave that answer, but apparently that's not what the question is asking.

Charles Austin Miller

Answer: Gonna be totally honest... that might just be nothing more than a simple continuity error. They accidentally made a phonebook prop that didn't match up with the locations where they shot, and assumed most people wouldn't notice or care. (And to be even more honest, I never noticed it until I saw this question today.)

TedStixon

Answer: Both the T-800 and Kyle look up Sarah's address in the phonebook and it's Kyle who rips out a page. Neither uses a police computer; that's the T-1000 in Terminator 2.

But that doesn't answer the question (and it's already been mentioned) since the information in the phonebook appears wrong.

Bishop73

Answer: Kyle, as we are shown, uses a police computer to find the addresses. The T800 just uses the phonebook as you mentioned. He rips the page out and takes it with him.

Ssiscool

Except 2 of the addresses in the phone book don't match. So how does the Terminator find them using the phonebook?

Bishop73

The Terminator is just blindly killing everyone in the phone book whose name is Sarah Connor (apparently a common name). Process of elimination. So, the day he arrives, unrelated women named Sarah Connor start dropping like flies, and the police believe it's the work of a serial killer. Our heroine Sarah Connor barely escapes this sweeping extermination by sheer luck and Kyle's intervention.

Charles Austin Miller

You just described the plot. Were you trying to answer the question? Because the question still stands. (As it is, it's either a mistake or plot hole in the film).

Bishop73

Perhaps I'm not getting the question. What is meant by "none of the addresses in the phone books match up"? Match up to what, the murder scene addresses? I wasn't aware that the murder scene addresses were prominently displayed.

Charles Austin Miller

Exactly. The addresses seen don't match. Specifically the first Sarah Connor's house number is "14239", but in the phonebook it is listed as "1823." And the real Sarah Connor lives in an apartment but the phonebook doesn't list an apartment number.

Bishop73

Perhaps though this all doesn't matter because phone books can quickly become outdated, the phone book he found could be over a year old. Someone moves but can still be listed in the phone book with their old address. He could have gone to the addresses but found someone else living there and then asked where the previous owner might be, and he was told (or he forced them). This might be how he found all the Sarah Connors.

lionhead

Are any of the Sarah's listed as living at 1823? I've not got access to the film right now to check.

Ssiscool

The first is listed as "1823." The second is "2816." The 3rd is "309." Although after reviewing the scene and thinking about it, for "309" (which is supposedly our Sarah J Connor), the full address isn't actually seen and the apartment number could have been listed.

Bishop73

Reese never uses a police computer; that's the T-1000 in Terminator 2. He rips out the page from the phonebook. The T800 also uses the phonebook but is never shown ripping out a page.

27th Sep 2021

The Terminator (1984)

Question: In various online posts, I often see the Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) referred to as a T-800. However, I never heard that model used in either of the first two films, unless I missed something. I do remember in part two the terminator refers to himself as a Cyberdyne Systems model 101. So where did the T-800 name come from?

Kyle G.

Answer: In a Terminator 2 deleted scene the term is on the HUD of the terminator. The terminator itself is a series 800, an upgrade to the 600 series mentioned by Kyle Reese in Terminator 1, which only had rubber skin. The Arnold Schwarzenegger type of skin is the Model 101. In flashforwards in Terminator 1 you see a T-800 Model 102 infiltrate a rebel base, which looks different. Several types of terminator can wear the same skin Model. So there can also be a T-850 Model 101 (as seen in Terminator 3).

lionhead

31st Aug 2021

The Terminator (1984)

Question: Why didn't Terminator scan the punks clothes before ordering to hand them over?

Answer: He probably did but we just didn't get to see it like we did in Terminator 2.

lionhead

26th Oct 2019

The Terminator (1984)

Question: Why would a gun store have ammo on display? Would it make more sense to have it behind the counter or a hidden place so customers can't take some when the clerk's not looking?

Answer: Things that are sold are on dispay or people wouldn't know you got it for sale now would they? The clerk is alert for shoplifters, its his risk. No difference from a gas station.

lionhead

I think the question is referring to why would they have the ammo on the counter and not on a shelf behind the counter or in a display counter? Having live ammunition on the counter is, as you say the clerks risk. But it does seem rather foolish.

Ssiscool

I think inexpensive things are common to be put on counters to sell. Like cigarette lighters, candy and lottery tickets. Bullets seem a bit dubious as this scene shows someone can load their gun on the spot, but I don't think in reality anyone would do that.

lionhead

Agreed, non-expensive items are generally kept on counters. But slightly stupid and dangerous to do it with ammo.

Ssiscool

9th Jan 2019

The Terminator (1984)

Question: If the Terminator had succeeded in killing Sarah and effectively wiping out John Conner, then that would mean the machines would win and even kill off mankind. So after Skynet's mission was complete and all humans are dead, what would the machines do now that with no more humans left to kill?

Answer: It's really impossible to answer definitively, considering the film-makers have never addressed this. The films never specify any purpose Skynet has outside of wanting to wipe out humanity. Skynet simply wants to "live", to exist as a sentient consciousness but views all of humanity as a threat to its existence. Since artificial intelligence is thus far only a fictional concept, we can't even really speculate based on information outside of the Terminator series. We can perhaps imagine a scenario wherein Skynet is successful and lives in peace as the only intelligence on Earth. The machines themselves do not have individuality and only exist for the purposes of killing humans so there doesn't seem to be a logical reason why they would exists if Skynet wins. However, there doesn't seem to be any reasonable way Skynet could ever be sure they have killed every single human on the planet so I can also imagine a scenario where the machines endlessly patrol the planet, making sure humanity never rises again. Also, and this is food for thought, the time travel scenario present in these films is a grandfather paradox. Skynet leads to it's own creation by sending back a Terminator to kill Sarah Connor. Similarly John Connor is conceived because a Terminator was sent back in time, which is the paradox. Skynet winning would create another paradox wherein Skynet could not exist because John Connor was never born so they had no enemy to fight, etc. This sort of stuff can make your head explode.

BaconIsMyBFF

Just to be clear, the first movie doesn't say that Skynet created itself by sending a terminator back, that's the second movie. Also John Connor never being born doesn't remove their enemy, humanity is their enemy, it would stop the resistance and prevent the humans from winning, presumably. It does create a paradox though, like all time travel movies do.

lionhead

The first movie deleted specific scenes which referenced the defeated Terminator being used to create Skynet. This of course was fully formed in the sequel. Technically since they are deleted scenes they may not belong in a discussion about the first movie but I was speaking generally with regards to the series as a whole. It's really only relevant to my point about the paradox which doesn't really have anything to do with the original question. Also, John Connor is specifically Skynet's enemy. Without him humanity would have been easily defeated. Technically, yes they want to wipe out all humanity but without John Connor they would have succeeded and there would be no need to send a terminator back in time, which of course is the entire point of the series. Both the humans and Skynet believe this to be true.

BaconIsMyBFF

John Connor is the key to the paradox, true. Since John was created by Skynet's own attempt to stop him it's impossible for them to win the war. All movies tell us (except the horrible, terrible last one called Genisys) that skynet can not win the war by time travel. I had a whole essay written down but I decided not to post it, since talking about paradoxes is a paradox and they are highly interactive. Catch my drift?

lionhead

Thinking about paradoxes in movies like these can drive you insane.

BaconIsMyBFF

Yeah, but it's so much fun.

lionhead

Agreed. I actually really love the paradox in the first Terminator. The idea that John gave Kyle a picture of his mother and Kyle fell in love with her because of that picture, and he always wondered what she was thinking about when the picture was taken, and it turns out she was thinking about how much she loved Kyle. Brilliant.

BaconIsMyBFF

Yeah, you know now I think about it, the first movie doesn't have a grandfather paradox at all, it's the exact opposite. They actually created a loop, the time travel made the resistance exist and skynet always will try to use time travel to destroy the resistance. The paradox, is the sequel, where they make us believe the time travel also made skynet, which is impossible and an actual grandfather paradox because skynet invented time travel (since in the second movie the time travelling terminator from the first movie became the "grandfather" of skynet basically). Maybe we should move this to the Forum though.

lionhead

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.