Terminator 2: Judgment Day Ultra HD Blu-ray Review & Comments

Casimir Harlow

Movies Editor
Joined
Feb 28, 2005
Messages
9,255
Reaction score
18,868
Points
8,058
Age
45
Location
Reading
Looking forward to blasting this again :thumbsup:
 
Grain was present due to the technology used at the time, it was not an artistic choice by the director 'to add grain'. I have no idea why people are complaining!

Look forward to this one!
 
This could be a future purchase for me when the prices drop. I'm starting to get fed up with changing versions of movies not knowing which is the right print. I recently was given the arrow version of The Thing, loved by 90% of fans. I found it too bright and too much grain showing up badly in the sky and parka jacket's. I'll stick with the universal one. This version of T2 sounds great with little grain. I want films to pop on my OLED and look better than they did on plasma and CRT. Whats the point if they don't look any better and are full of grain.
 
Grain was present due to the technology used at the time, it was not an artistic choice by the director 'to add grain'. I have no idea why people are complaining!

Look forward to this one!

Indeed, if film technology was starting afresh then it wouldn’t be grainy, real life is not grainy
 
Can't wait for Schwarzenegger in Terminator 14- Geriatric day in 8K
Arrggh mee back!
 
I'm guessing theres an extended cut version in the works, then an alternate ending version, then a 3 in 1 version, then the 30th anniversary edition to look forward to, then on to 8k :)
 
The revisionist argument is an interesting one. If we want movies to be presented EXACTLY as they were in the cinema back in the day, then you can throw HDR in the bin entirely.

Personally I say leave it up to the director. It's his film, so he can do what he likes with it. We then have the choice whether to give him our money or keep it in our pockets. The director get the final say on everything.
 
This could be a future purchase for me when the prices drop. I'm starting to get fed up with changing versions of movies not knowing which is the right print. I recently was given the arrow version of The Thing, loved by 90% of fans. I found it too bright and too much grain showing up badly in the sky and parka jacket's. I'll stick with the universal one. This version of T2 sounds great with little grain. I want films to pop on my OLED and look better than they did on plasma and CRT. Whats the point if they don't look any better and are full of grain.

The Thing is one of my favourite movies and I thought Arrow's print (which was supervised and approved by Carpenter himself) was great. It looked very film like, which is generally how I like things to look.
 
Grain was present due to the technology used at the time, it was not an artistic choice by the director 'to add grain'. I have no idea why people are complaining!

Look forward to this one!

Grain removal doesn't just remove grain, it removes detail right across the frame. If it's overdone it can lead to faces looking like they're made of wax.

Grain can be distracting if it's excessive, and HDR makes grain hugely worse, but it also create a nice, warm, film like image. The Leon 4K disc is a good example of this.
 
Thanks for the review Cas,

This was a day one preorder for me, but I went for the us version so I also got a digital copy.
I saw the 3D version in the cinema too, buying into the “only showing once” promise that turned our to be bogus!

Overall I think it’s a great disc, severely let down by the lack of alternate versions.
Those missing scenes are some of my favourites, especially the chip and smiling scenes :)

My worry is that this will be a continued trend, and when the alien films get the 4K treatment we will be having the same disappointment!
 
Grain removal doesn't just remove grain, it removes detail right across the frame. If it's overdone it can lead to faces looking like they're made of wax.

Grain can be distracting if it's excessive, and HDR makes grain hugely worse, but it also create a nice, warm, film like image. The Leon 4K disc is a good example of this.
Except there is way more detail visible on the de-grained UHD than on the previous blu-ray releases, fine facial and body hairs being the most noticeable improvement.

Personally I love the UHD in all it's DNR'd glory. I view it as James Cameron got a lift back to 1991 and filmed it on digital cameras rather than film, or it was made in an alternate universe where digital cameras were invented 30 years before they were in our one.
 
Hope its better than the skynet version watched once and never again completely ruined my enjoyment of T2
I remember the DVD version of T2 PQ being as being excellent (No upscaling) along with quite a few other DVD's looking better than the Blu-ray
Ooooops what have I just done
 
......Personally I say leave it up to the director. It's his film, so he can do what he likes with it. We then have the choice whether to give him our money or keep it in our pockets. The director get the final say on everything.

What about Greedo shooting first?

Runs for cover damn quick. :rotfl:
 
Except there is way more detail visible on the de-grained UHD than on the previous blu-ray releases, fine facial and body hairs being the most noticeable improvement.
I don't really get the current obsession with "detail". I mean, does being able to make out Sarah Connors individual downy hairs make this version more enjoyable than the non downy hair version? Do people sit watching in stunned awe because they can finally see the stitching on Arnies leather jacket?
 
I don't really get the current obsession with "detail". I mean, does being able to make out Sarah Connors individual downy hairs make this version more enjoyable than the non downy hair version? Do people sit watching in stunned awe because they can finally see the stitching on Arnies leather jacket?
Might as well watch upscaled blu-rays otherwise...;)
 
I don't really get the current obsession with "detail". I mean, does being able to make out Sarah Connors individual downy hairs make this version more enjoyable than the non downy hair version? Do people sit watching in stunned awe because they can finally see the stitching on Arnies leather jacket?
Yes
 
Image manipulation/presentation issues aside, there's no way on earth I'd shell out for a 4K version of this that doesn't even contain the special editions. Epic fail!
 
I don't really get the current obsession with "detail". I mean, does being able to make out Sarah Connors individual downy hairs make this version more enjoyable than the non downy hair version? Do people sit watching in stunned awe because they can finally see the stitching on Arnies leather jacket?

Why are you even in this forum then?
 
The revisionist argument is an interesting one. If we want movies to be presented EXACTLY as they were in the cinema back in the day, then you can throw HDR in the bin entirely.

Personally I say leave it up to the director. It's his film, so he can do what he likes with it. We then have the choice whether to give him our money or keep it in our pockets. The director get the final say on everything.

You mean a old print that had been around god no how many cinema,before it ended up at my local flea pit,and in the old days when you could smoke,a haze of smoke as well. :D
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom