This article is from the The Terminator FAQ, by Karsten A. Loepelmann firstname.lastname@example.org with numerous contributions by others.
Several astute people have pointed out minor continuity discrepancies. These
are not plot problems, they are simply byproducts of the complex endeavour of
shooting a film. For example, the numbers on the house of the first "Sarah
Connor" don't match the listing in the phone book. Also, in T2, the
Terminator scans the cars in the parking lot, and mislabels a Ford as a
Again, Van Ling has the final word.
From: <email@example.com> (KiraProd):
Arnold's face was NOT grafted via CG onto Peter Kent's body in the bike
jump into the canal. You are simply looking at Peter Kent wearing Stan
Winston facial prostheses to make him look more like Arnold.
A previous post asked about the windshield continuity problem (the glass
is popped out during the jump, then is back in until T-1000 knocks it out
later). This is an instance of practicality taking precedent over
continuity. Yes, the glass popped in the single take we did of the jump
(an aborted practice take notwithstanding). However, Jim wanted the glass
to remain intact for much of the scene, in order to a) help hide the stunt
driver in most shots, and b) allow for clear closeups of Robert Patrick at
the same time. This is not as mutually exclusive as you may think.
Even Jim Cameron wasn't going to get to say "let's do this $$$$ gag again,
and make make sure the glass doesn't pop this time!" There's a point
where you have to decide whether to blow the bucks on a retake of a gag
that hopefully should not yank you out of the film if the continuity is a
little off, or to plow that money into other, more crucial parts of the
movie, really finesse a cool CG shot, etc. I hope you'll agree we made
the right decision. ;-)
PS: I'm the first guy you here and see in the Cyberdyne lab intro scene,
sitting at a terminal next to the neural net processor.