In The Terminator, is John Connor his own father?

Question

When re-watching The Terminator, I wondered whether it is possible that Kyle Reese is in fact John Connor. The reason for this is that we never get to see John Connor himself, we only see shots of Reese. Moreover, Reese is very focussed on the picture of Sarah, and there seems no good reason for this.

I am totally wrong here? :)

When a woman gives birth, she doesn't give birth to the man that got her pregnant. — Daft, Jun 30 '15 at 11:44
“Reese is very focussed on the picture of Sarah, and there seems no good reason for this.” He’s been told she’s the mother of the man who led humanity to victory against the machines who wanted to wipe them out, and that she’s about to be killed by a time-travelling robot. Is that not reason enough? — Paul D. Waite, Jun 30 '15 at 11:56
This is an interesting theory, the above comments aside. I'm having a hard time coming up with anything in only the first movie that would disprove it. Reese does come back with only his say so about who he is and what his motives are. And if I remember correctly, we only ever see the photo in Reese's flashback (or is it Sarah's dream?). He claims he had a photo once, but there's nothing proving that's true either. — Plutor, Jun 30 '15 at 12:10
@Daft "she doesn't give birth to the man that got her pregnant" She does if the child grows up, time-travels to 9 months before he is born and picks her up at the bar. It's one of the definitions of the predestination paradox. — paul, Jun 30 '15 at 14:05
@paul no... I believe your understanding of human biology is a bit off. — Daft, Jun 30 '15 at 14:07
The movie is just the first time through the loop -- every subsequent time, John Connor gets a little more inbred. Eventually he's too sickly to lead a resistance against Skynet and they win. — Plutor, Jun 30 '15 at 14:15
If I remember my high school bio lessons properly, it's possible for a father and son to have exactly identical genes, as long as there's no genes where the father is homozygous dominant and the mother is homozygous recessive or vice versa. It's spectacularly improbable, but possible. So one could be their own dad in the right circumstances. — Kevin, Jun 30 '15 at 14:41
This is entirely unfalsifiable. If we are to assume an unreliable narrator sort of twist, there should be some obvious indicators within the narrative of the unreliability of Kyle. Without those indicators, I think this is just pulling things out of thin air. — , Jun 30 '15 at 14:57
@keen The fact that Kyle is very interested in this "Sarah" person is a bit strange, no? Plus, is it that farfetched to assume Kyle may be hiding the truth because that would cause an even bigger shock for Sarah? It just feels strange that John Connor is never shown, and the sympathy Kyle has for Sarah seems a bit off.. — Jonny5, Jun 30 '15 at 16:27
The problem is that once you isolate it to the first movie and then assume that Kyle is an unreliable narrator and/or lying, you have to throw it ALL out. That means even the existence of John Connor is possibly a lie, and the truth behind Reese and the Terminator could be ANYTHING. — Omegacron, Jun 30 '15 at 16:54
@Politank-Z You mean Skyten. God, this is terrible, we should delete these. — Mr Lister, Jun 30 '15 at 17:30
@Xaero182 No, it's not strange at all. John manipulated Kyle into being his father. — , Jun 30 '15 at 18:20
"If history doesn't care that our degenerate friend Fry is his own grandfather, then who are we to judge?" -- Hubert J. Farnsworth — Royal Canadian Bandit, Jun 30 '15 at 21:11
@RoyalCanadianBandit - Also: "Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-my-own-grandpa!" — Wad Cheber, Jul 10 '15 at 01:56
@Kevin: No, that's not even theoretically possible. For one thing, a man inherits all X chromosome and mitochondrial DNA from his mother. For another, the whole notion of genes and dominant/recessive traits is a simplification we impose on a much more complicated system -- in many cases it's still not well understood how genetic sequence determines phenotype. Bottom line, short of cloning or other high-tech intervention, a man cannot be genetically identical to his father. — Royal Canadian Bandit, Jul 10 '15 at 11:34
@RoyalCanadianBandit What if the father and the mother share an identical X-chromosome and the son receives this X from the mother? When both father and mother have the same mother, this is possible in theory. — Jonny5, Jul 10 '15 at 11:41
A man doesn't have to get all his genes from his father and none from his mother in order to be genetically identical to him. So mitochondrial DNA and X chromosomes always being inherited from one's mother doesn't necessarily make this impossible. As long as his father inherited all those same genes from his mother, then they can still match up. And we were already talking about a one-in-a-googolplex chance, so making the system more complicated doesn't make much of a practical difference. — Kevin, Jul 10 '15 at 11:47
@Xaero182: 1) Ewwww. 2) It doesn't apply to the Sarah/Kyle pairing, this ain't Game of Thrones. 3) There is always some replication error, no two egg cells have exactly the same DNA. 4) My second point about genotype vs. phenotype still stands. — Royal Canadian Bandit, Jul 10 '15 at 11:48
Don't find the fixation strange, at all, for Kyle. It would be much moreso for John to have that kind of incestuous fixation than for a member of the human race, ostensibly saved from brutal extinction by Sarah, to idolize her. Also, the fact that John is the leader of the humans who have to rebuild the human world. Once you go through the temporal device, there's no going back, which would make going back, himself, to do individual combat with a Terminator unit unbelievably moronic. — PoloHoleSet, Aug 24 '17 at 16:36
Human chromosomes have (approx) 20,000 - 25,000 proteins per chromosome. There are four possible proteins in DNA. 20,000 ^ 4 = 160 quadrillion (160 thousand trillion). 25,000 ^ 4 = 390.625 quadrillion possible protein combinations. One one chromosome, alone. We have 46. Does not include the number of possibilities for mitochondrial DNA. So, no, there is pretty much zero chance creating a identical genetic match no matter who the parents are or are not. — PoloHoleSet, Aug 24 '17 at 16:45
@Daft "When a woman gives birth, she doesn't give birth to the man that got her pregnant." Normally, yes. But in sci-fi time travel plots it can happen - see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_You_Zombies — RobertF, Oct 02 '19 at 16:19

score 23 · Accepted Answer · edited Aug 24 '17 at 16:33

23

No, John Connor and Kyle Reese are clearly two separate individuals.

We are shown our first glimpse of John Connor in the opening minutes of Terminator 2: Judgement Day. The adult John is shown as he watches over a battlefield, and he clearly looks nothing like Kyle Reese from the first movie, being several years older as well as sporting a horrific scar on his face:

enter image description here

As for Kyle's obsession with the photo of Sarah, this is for two reasons:

Kyle loves John like a brother and practically worships the ground he walks on. Therefore, he sees John's mother in a manner similar to the Madonna.
Kyle has grown up in a bleak & horrible world. The photo of Sarah represents a better time, a thing of beauty that gives him hope.

Essentially, Kyle fell in love with the IDEA of Sarah Connor long before he ever met the real woman. In fact, his love for Sarah is what prompted him to volunteer to come back:

REESE: John Connor gave me a picture of you once. I never knew why. It was very old, torn... faded. You were young, like you are now. You weren't smiling...just a little sad... I always wondered what you were thinking at that second.

He closes his eyes, reaches toward her. His fingertips trace the contour of her nose, chin, cheeks.

REESE: (continuing) I memorized every line, every curve...

He opens his eyes, looking right at hers.

REESE: (continuing) Sarah, I came across time for you. I love you. I always have.

The paradox of the film is not only that John sent Kyle back, but also that

Kyle's love for Sarah (and therefore the impetus of John's existence) largely stems from a photo that John only gave to him BECAUSE he knew of the relationship to come in the future... er, past. Whatever.

edited Aug 24 '17 at 16:33

Liath

12,765
17
76
125

answered Jun 30 '15 at 16:51

Omegacron

63,111
18
213
388

2

I'd personally put less weight in the actors not looking similar than the fact that John meets Kyle in Terminator: Salvation, proving that they are two separate people. (this of course, assumes you accept Salvation as existing.) – phantom42 Jun 30 '15 at 17:57
2

For the record, the John Connor in the T2 timeline isn't the same John Connor in the original timeline. – Valorum Jun 30 '15 at 18:14
@phantom42 : I stuck with the first two movies since they're universally agreed upon as canon. Of course, Genisys should make THAT argument interesting... – Omegacron Jun 30 '15 at 18:21
@Richard I agree with this! I can also see now that it may be Kyles love for freedom and better times that are transformed into the love for Sarah.. But, I thought it was a nice possibility and found no one else exploring this possibility :D In the end, we all have our own view on a movie.. – Jonny5 Jun 30 '15 at 21:48
@Richard same actor or same character? – Jun 30 '15 at 22:23
@cde - At the start of "The Terminator" we're watching the second timeline, the one created by Skynet's interference. Arguably, the first John Connor's father (from the first timeline which we never get to see) would have had to have been someone other than Kyle Reese. – Valorum Jun 30 '15 at 22:27
1

@Richard assuming you don't believe closed time loops are possible – Jun 30 '15 at 23:48
@cde - I'm sure we had a question about the missing time loop a while ago. – Valorum Jun 30 '15 at 23:51
@Richard How was Skynet created in the original timeline? Most people seem to buy into the closed/causal time loop theory. I'm still unconvinced. – phantom42 Jul 01 '15 at 11:25
@phantom42 - There's a line in the original script about Skynet wanting a world filled with "endless fractal copies" of itself. I struck me as likely that Skynet would see the alternative versions of itself as equal to itself (no ego). The first Skynet was presumably made by Dyson (there's a deleted scene in thr first Terminator film where Sarah learns about him and even visits Cyberdyne) but just wasn't as advanced. – Valorum Jul 01 '15 at 11:28
3

@Richard - In the original movie, I think it was meant to be a closed time loop where John Connor's father was always Kyle Reese (also consider the deleted scene where a part of the Terminator is discovered by Cyberdyne). But even if we go with the branching timeline theory to allow for the "no fate" of T2, it's still possible that the future we saw in T1 was not itself the "original" timeline, but rather one where it was already a part of history that some version of Kyle Reese (perhaps from a prior, different timeline) had appeared in 1984 and gotten Sarah pregnant with John Connor. – Hypnosifl Jul 09 '15 at 21:13
(continued) Also, when you say the original script featured Dyson and talk of "endless fractal copies" of Skynet, where did you find that script? Was it published officially, and if not are you sure it's authentic? (if it is I'd like to get my hands on a copy!) – Hypnosifl Jul 09 '15 at 21:19
1

@Hypnosifl - Sorry, I meant the T2 novel, not T2 script. "It wanted a world populated only with endless mechanical refractions of itself, the ultimate egoist, with direct control linkages to automated factories to realize its scheme." – Valorum Jul 09 '15 at 21:31
@Hypnosifl - You can see the deleted Terminator "Sarah takes on Cyberdyne" scenes in this copy – Valorum Jul 09 '15 at 21:33
1

@Richard - You really can't argue that anything in The Terminator is necessarily best explained by an open time loop. We find out in the second movie that Skynet owes its existence to the discovery of a piece of a robot built by Skynet itself. In other words, from a certain perspective, Skynet built itself; or in other other words, Skynet is its own father. In light of this, it is entirely plausible that John was never the son of anyone other than Kyle. – Wad Cheber Jul 10 '15 at 02:00

score 4 · Answer 2 · answered Jul 10 '15 at 01:50

It is very unlikely. If we assume that Kyle isn't a pathological liar, there is no reason to believe that he is actually John Connor. He speaks of John exclusively in the third person (i.e., "he", "him", "John", etc).

What you describe as him inexplicably being very focused on the photo of Sarah is actually pretty easy to explain in the context of the movie. Kyle is from a post-apocalyptic future where a war of annihilation is being waged against the machines. He's a soldier, and probably doesn't see a lot of women in his daily life. In the few scenes in which we get a look at life in Kyle's time, we see very few women, and the ones we do see are kind of gross and covered in filth. I can't imagine that they bathe on a regular basis, and they probably own a single set of clothes, which are also rarely, if ever, washed. They are traumatized by the constant threat of death at the hands of nearly invincible robot assassins, and spend their lives huddled in bunkers and surrounded by garbage, death, and horror.

The picture of Sarah is a glimpse of a woman in the prime of her life, and in a world where the constant horror and suffering in which Kyle has spent his entire life is totally unknown. She is fairly attractive, she is clean, she is healthy, she is vibrant, she is smiling, and the sun is shining. She seems to be enjoying a moment of peace and tranquility, at ease and free from any apparent sense of danger, which is something that Kyle has never experienced before.

Everyone Kyle knows is always on their guard, all the time. It seems likely that he has never met a person who wasn't suffering from some degree of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. He has spent his whole life surrounded by broken people who don't know what it is like to be comfortable and safe. People in Kyle's world don't know what it means to be happy. The closest they get to happiness is not being dead yet.

The photo isn't just a picture of a pretty girl. It is a tiny glimpse of a better time and place, a world where people aren't being wiped out by Terminators. A world where people live normal, happy lives.

John Connor saved Kyle's life, and Kyle has worshipped him ever since. John's early life was spent with his mother, and very few other people. His mother taught him everything he needed to know in order to become the leader of the Resistance. She is therefore directly responsible for humanity's only hope for survival. I don't mean to sound blasphemous, but it is probably safe to say that John worships Sarah, and Kyle worships John, so Kyle sees Sarah the way many Christians (most notably the Catholics) see the Virgin Mary - the mother of the savior.

Now we need to consider the nature of Kyle's mission: he grew up hearing about the woman who made the savior of humanity what he was. He received the photo of her, and was transfixed by it, and by her. Then his idol, and his best friend, orders him to go back in time to save this woman whom he sees as a saintly figure, and protect her from a threat she can't possibly understand. This is the most important thing anyone could ever be asked to do. He has to ensure that the last hope for humanity is born.

In this light, his fixation on Sarah, and the photo of her, is only natural. He's supposed to save the entire human race from annihilation, so the task couldn't be more important. The woman in question couldn't be more vital to the future of our species' existence. And Kyle fully appreciates all of this, because he understands how catastrophic the consequences will be should he fail to accomplish his mission.

When you're told to save the only person who can give humanity any chance of survival, you don't take it lightly.

And on a side note, I don't think people would be willing to follow a man who they know impregnated his own mother. That sort of thing is more likely to make everyone hate John than accept his leadership. Gross.

I wouldn't normally make reference to the movie Terminator: Salvation, because it is pretty bad, but we actually see John meeting Kyle for the first time in that movie. This leaves little room for doubt - they are definitely, unquestionably, indubitably, two separate people.

score -1 · Answer 3 · answered Aug 24 '17 at 15:37

Remember that Sarah Connor had a boyfriend in the first Terminator that was killed by the Terminator. Is it plausible to think that the depiction of John Connor the "commander" in the first film was actually the son of Sarah Connor and her original boyfriend killed by the Terminator? To me this makes sense considering if time played out unchanged this would be the only person who could have fathered the original John Connor. And in my opinion Reese going back in time was to counteract this event.

That was her roomate's (Ginger's) boyfriend who got killed, along with Ginger. The guy who left the phone message standing Sarah up was never seen or referenced beyond that. — PoloHoleSet, Aug 24 '17 at 16:54

In The Terminator, is John Connor his own father?

3 Answers3