That’s not correct at all. Humans “make” John Connor? What does that mean, exactly?
John Connor would have been born regardless of any coming robot superpocalypse. If there had never been a Skynet, he just would have been some dirtbag kid ripping off ATMs and bouncing from foster home to foster home. In the Skynet future, he helps fight against the robots. He didn’t come into being because of the robots.
Of course there’s a paradox. They don’t manage to kill the mother, but they will still be able to invent the machine again - just like they did the last time. The paradox is that Connor becomes the way he is, because of what his mother goes through.
But there are other strengths to the movie, including just the basic premise and the fact that the material is treated with a respect for the audience.
How would John Connor have been born if there were no Skynet? His father impregnated his mother while being sent back in time to protect her so her (and his) son could be born. Without Skynet, Reese doesn’t exist in that time period.
Am I the only person who saw a movie where John Connor’s father comes from the future? No Terminator, no time travel, no John Connor?
And Terminator 1 is a slasher like movie with SciFi trappings. It’s still a great movie, one that I enjoy immensely, but it’s still pretty much a “indestructible killer taking out everything in it’s path” movie, except instead of the inexplicably hard to kill psycho, we get a Terminator.
And George Lucas must top every “Directors who fell” list.
It’s still one of my favourite movies ever, and I guess the movie works so much better for me than for you is because I kind of blend out the original Terminator movie (which I also love) and see T2 as disconnected from it. I dont know if that makes sense?
However, this “sequel invalidating the previous movie” is totally what ruined T3 for me. I hated it, and I felt it took a big dump on T2. I hated it so much that I never even bothered to watch T4.