ext_13058 ([identity profile] shadowkat67.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] shadowkat 2008-02-05 02:16 am (UTC)

In reading your response - I realized that I well wasn't clear. Sorry.

I'm referring to both the TV series The Sarah Conner Chronicles and the films. Not sure if you can see the tv series or not. Some people can apparently download it from the net?

At any rate - the dream sequence is from the tv series not the films. Which may be why you don't remember it.

In the series - the focus is on Sarah as a mother, trying to save the world for her son, and save her son, and to some extent have a life.

The second film - I saw some time ago and remember vaguely, but from what I do remember - Linda Hamilton's role was supporting. Brad Renfro (I think it was Brad Renfro) who played John Connor as a teen, was more or less the lead - we don't see Sarah until about 20-30 minutes in. She's tough and a big presence and sees John as a tool and her son, she's more like a father figure in some respects, while The Terminator played by Arnold S. is more motherly. The relationship that is emphasized in that film is between the Arnold Terminator and Connor. They bond.
So much so, that the boy is devastated when he is killed, almost more so than when Sarah is in trouble. It jars Sarah, and she softens towards her son, realizing maybe the "tough love" approach may not be working. Sarah in that film has just gotten out of the mental hospital (escaped) and taken off to find her son and save the world so he won't have to.
Her focus is the designer of Skynet.

In the third film, Sarah disappears completely.

While she may care about more than John Connor, he appears to be the point of her existence in the films. When he no longer needs her - the filmmaker kills her off - off-screen.

In the TV series - her role is much bigger, but she is still a mother first, woman second.

You're right though - it is a matter of perception I think.

Catcher in the Rye - I read about four or five years back, so also remember vaguely.
Didn't like the book. I think it's overrated ;-) But, from what I do remember, Holden is anti-social much in the same way as James Dean's character in Rebel Without A Cause. For Holden - his sister is the only thing in life worthwhile, the only person who is not a phony. He hates everyone else. And imagines a place they can escape to, together.
Most of the novel is about his misanthropy and dislike of society. The sister stands out, because she's like a flower on a drab landscape, which he must protect. Disturbing novel. I wonder sometimes if the people who hold Holden Caulfield up as such a cool character, have actually read the novel?

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting