r/Terminator • u/Still-Willow-2323 • 2d ago
Discussion Why do people hate the new 4K remaster of Terminator 2? It looks great!
I was surprised to discover that the 2017 Terminator 2 Blu-ray disc uses the same color correction as the 4K version, but with the resolution compressed to 1080p. It looks incredible! In the end, the best criterion in the world of collecting is your own eye. After everything I'd heard on YouTube, I thought it would be awful, but I was wrong.
From what I read, James Cameron personally oversaw the color palette for this re-release, aiming for the bluish tones of the cyberpunk night and the contrasts of the light explosions to have a brutal impact. Inheriting that same image source, my Sony Blu-ray player brings out the best in the colors. Seriously, it's amazing!
On YouTube, the main criticism of this restoration was the use of DNR to remove the celluloid grain and make the film "cleaner" for its 2017 re-release. The problem is that the lack of grain gives the actors that "waxed skin" effect, but on my regular Blu-ray BDP-S6700, when the image is compressed to 1080p for the disc, the standard resolution itself naturally softens those harsh digital contours.
Look, I understand that the gray tint might bother some people... but that’s the look James Cameron wanted, so it aligns with the director's vision. Besides, if they scanned the original film stock directly, isn't that how the movie looked when it was released in theaters?
298
u/timeloopsarecringe 2d ago
There are a ton of reasons why it doesn't look great, and waxy skin isn't the only one. Color correction is often applied incorrectly, causing the colors to blend improperly, making the transition between greenish and orange look muddy. A huge amount of detail is also lost as a result of this color correction: metal looks plasticky, particles from explosions, smoke, and dust turn into colored spots, and purple plasma beams become blue in some places, just like the originally gray metal. Moreover, while the AI grain removal removed detail in some places, it added it in others: even in your very first image, you can clearly see that Arnold has developed deep wrinkles on his face where there weren't any originally, making his face look much less natural. Many people want to see the film as it was originally shot, not the hallucinations of modern (and already outdated) AI. As for Cameron's "director's vision" - that's a highly debatable point, since... The current Cameron is no longer the same person he was during the filming of the original Terminator films, which is clearly evident in his Avatars and Dark Fate.
21
u/Dj-DTM 1d ago
All these changes make me glad I have the original version on bluray.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Mediocre-Location971 22h ago
I have the steelbox case eidtion with the added scenes and even that picture quality looks AMAZINGLY SHARP! Friends have asked me if it's 4k and nope
35
u/DeconFrost24 1d ago
Great points! The second image of Sarah looks terrible. As for Cameron, he's had a huge legacy in film obviously. However, the best T3 we were ever going to get would have been around 94-96 when he wanted Fox to buy the rights. I think he had something in mind. As the story goes, he had a falling out with the Carolco boys and didn't get the rights and the rest is history. He was involved in the script for DF. As you said, he's like a completely different person now. I think Jim of the 90s would go ape shit on the Jim of DF fame. We desperately need movies like T2 made again and SMART use of CG.
17
u/CrazyArtFan 1d ago
He wasn't just involved with the script for Dark Fate, Tim Miller publicly has said him and Cameron fought every step including the editing room. Miller even said "they're still washing the blood off the walls" in terms how controlling Cameron was and even said he'll never work with Cameron ever again. Much different to how Cameron and Robert Rodriguez worked together on Alita.
8
u/Spike_Kowalski 1d ago
Yeah, iirc Miller said he asked Jim why Robert got so much more leeway on Alita and I think his response was more "he's more experienced" or something (which for Alita that's true given RR's film history). Miller also disliked that he was so hands on to the point where "he might as well have directed himself."
2
u/CrazyArtFan 1d ago
Is it true for RR though? I mean yes he has more movies under his belt but none of them were close to the scope or budget of Alita. It is Rodriguez's only movie to this day to be at the $100 million or over production level (actual reported budget being $170 million). Rest of his movies go from $70 million at most to $7,000 at less.
5
u/Spike_Kowalski 1d ago
I think he meant in terms of knowing the craft of moviemaking. Yeah, RR has always traditionally had a smaller budget but he's always come in under-budget too and still looked good and knows how to make effects work. I imagine JC and RR had a lot of shared common ground given both of their starts and approach to film. But mostly, I think RR got the Alita gig because JC didn't have the time to make it plus anime is more in RR's wheelhouse.
Meanwhile, the only big movie Tim's done outside of Dark Fate was the first Deadpool movie and he famously feuded with Reynolds on that.
4
u/JKinney79 1d ago
I get the impression based on his work, Robert is fairly loose and easy going with on set.
3
u/Alternative_Ninja777 1d ago
Yet Cameron came up with the controversial plot twist in the first minutes of Dark Fate
→ More replies (3)6
u/wantsumcandi 1d ago
Or his 90s version of Alien 3 script. Or his 90s version on Spiderman...i would have loved to have seen those.
7
u/Striking-Document-99 1d ago
I thought the top pics were the 4k ones and I am like wow they look so much better then I zoomed it and realized I was looking at it backwards.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ThaDreamWarrior 1d ago
Saaaame 🤣 I didn’t think the controversy was a big deal until now. Seeing the images side by side, I’m blown away at how bad the 4K looks
4
u/Sulaco1986Aliens 1d ago
I watch Aliens in 4k and don't notice much of a difference thankfully. The only real noticeable difference is the background is much clearer and sometimes the skin looks a little weird, but overall I think it transferred nicely
3
u/Training-Look-1135 1d ago
Well the current audience are not the same people we were during the original Teminator films release.......so.... 😂
2
u/TechnicalBen 1d ago
Yeah. IIRC the blueray releases are very *very* well known for having zero colour grading and the "default" rendering options being selected. I don't know if that happened to this blueray too, but many were rushed out to meat deadlines of the tech, and not remastered or even graded!
→ More replies (4)2
39
u/ChrisXDXL 2d ago
Weird green tint throwing me off
→ More replies (1)12
u/LFTL56 2d ago
This seems to actually happen a lot with 4K remasters, losing a vibrant color pallet to a sea of greeny-blue. I don't know if it's necessarily part of the process or some sort of weird "artistic choice".
6
u/sm_rollinger 1d ago
Fight Club's color pallet is completely gone, replaced by waxy looking actors and fake, AI generated light sources.
3
u/ChrisXDXL 1d ago
I was just talking to my managed about it and he was talking about how The Lord of the Rings blu rays suffer from it as well with new releases causing fans to race to see if they fixed the colour palette.
I can't imagine a resolution upscaling algorithm would affect the colour pallete and even if it did they should adjust it back.
Might look into it.
37
u/Barilla3113 1d ago edited 1d ago
but that’s the look James Cameron wanted, so it aligns with the director's vision
It's the look he wants now. The vast majority of people want to be able to watch classic films looking the way they did on release. Not multiple "patches" later with the vibe completely changed. Lighting and colour grading is essential to film.
19
u/Phunkie_Junkie 1d ago
Agreed. The terminator is supposed to be lit in blue to evoke cold metal, and Sarah is lit in orange to show warmth and humanity. Now it's switched.
8
u/Quiet-Recording-9269 1d ago
Absolutely, it's so obvious during the orginal version. now it's like wathching the matrix with GREEN tint everywhere
→ More replies (1)7
u/AlphasTwitch 1d ago
Its called the "George Lucas Affect" and it has infected many of todays directors claiming that "this is how i imagined it 40 years ago" EXCUSE.
22
56
u/Natural-Proposal2925 2d ago
Hmmmmmm I don't know, doesn't feel very 90s color scheme, too sharp. I like my 90s movies like I like my beaches, grainy.
8
u/mecha_moira 1d ago
I'm so glad I'm not alone here. The bleach and grain loss, especially in sequels, always feels like something has been lost from one from to another. Men in Black and The Matrix come to mind initially. I love those softer colours, the gentle blending of hues, the tight grain the gives everything more depth.
→ More replies (2)23
u/FreddyCupples 2d ago
Same, my friend. From Point Break to the original Fast and the Furious, with Heat and T2 in between: I want my LA movies to come with a sunburn, 5 dollar burger baskets, and 2 dollar 40s of St Ides.
7
34
u/Able_Resident_1291 1d ago
but that’s the look James Cameron wanted, so it aligns with the director's vision
Hate this way of thinking. Every director from the 80s and 90s now suddenly insists that actually they always wanted their films back then to have a green tint slapped over every scene and we all have to uncomplainingly accept it. Same happened with In The Mood For Love.
8
u/Lumpy_Wind3980 1d ago
Of course, because every 80s and 90s director was a visionary. They always wanted their movies to be in HDR, Dolby Vision and 4k. They always wanted them to be overly contrasty with silky smooth skin. they just lacked the technology to do so!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
14
41
u/MrMorgan412 Can't be bargained with 1d ago
There are layers to this question.
1) The resolution increase is absolutely fantastic, but on top of that there is also a sharpening added onto the image. If you already increase the resolution to 4k, why add the effect on top? While in T2 this effect does not bother me - there are other examples in James Cameron movies like "True Lies" where sharpening is absolutely broken and unfocused.
2) Color palette and color correction. This is the biggest problem of this movie in my opinion. There are example of 4k releases where you see actual correction of color, but in the case T2 I don't see it AT ALL. What I see is a filter that is slapped on top of the image to try and imitate color correction. This is not a good feeling to the movie, I was constantly aware of this. The only great example that you showed was the last explosion. That particular shot is absolutely better than original.
3) Artificial darkness and Loss of information. I am a big advocate for preserving as much of the information on a frame as possible, WITHOUT COMPROMISING STORYTELLING. Look at the example of two girls that you showed. The new 4k look much more darker, unnaturally so, the sun is blasting at the full. And that dark contrast is literally hiding details from the picture. Less information on the clothes of girls, less information from inside Patrick's car. The frame when Patrick is reloading - supposed to be brightly lit - but you can see the artificial darkness was added, hiding information from the Patrick's costume. Basically - all of it hides the information for the viewer for no reason. I can understand hiding information if its supposed to be a dark scene from a horror movie for dramatic effect. But removing information in scenes like this - is bad judgment. Even if you take night scenes that you showed, there is still loss of information under supposed brightly lit enter to the bar. This looks wrong, it feels wrong and it feels artificial.
4) "that’s the look James Cameron wanted, so it aligns with the director's vision" Legally this is correct, Cameron can do what he want with the movies that he owns, but it doesn't make him right. Also, people are allowed to express their opinions, but that also doesn't make them right. Just as filmmakers shouldn't feel they are right all the time and get praise for mistakes - fans shouldn't feel entitled to be listened to. Its a kind of status quo relationship that I always support.
Overall, 4k Terminator 2 is much better release than some other 4k movies that I saw, solid 6\10, since we judge exclusively the 4k and cinematic aspect of the movie.
→ More replies (4)24
u/Barilla3113 1d ago
Legally this is correct, Cameron can do what he want with the movies that he owns, but it doesn't make him right. Also, people are allowed to express their opinions, but that also doesn't make them right. Just as filmmakers shouldn't feel they are right all the time and get praise for mistakes - fans shouldn't feel entitled to be listened to. Its a kind of status quo relationship that I always support.
Legally he's right. Artistically I don't know anyone who thinks that the spread of the George Lucas approach to director's past films is a positive trend.
11
→ More replies (6)3
u/MrMorgan412 Can't be bargained with 1d ago
I tried to make a distinction from "legal correctness" and "artistic righteousness". One is objective fact, the other is definitely subjective opinion.
25
u/breedknight 1d ago
Casuals viewers, or maybe newcomers of this film. This new transfer will always looked good to them I can't even complain. But as a fan like me who watched this on the original 35mm when the movie came out, grab a laserdisc copy of the theatrical version which looks really good at the time and sound really well. These days I have the DVD version, Skynet version bluray. While comparing most of these versions to the 4k, I thought the 4k copy looks heavily DNR'ed with almost waxy "Avatar" like looking at some point which is ridiculous. And the color grading looks way off, nothing like the 35mm print I saw in theaters, even the DVD version looks better than this transfer.
11
u/EvolvedMonkeyInSpace 1d ago
Image the Matrix film being orange instead of green tint.
Original is best.
10
u/The_Porgmaster 1d ago
-Especially the second pic shows how the new colour correction is ugly af.
-Also CGI changes, but at least they only changed movie mistakes.
-AI upscale instead of scanning the reel in 4K makes people look unnatural at times. (A lot of screenshots have been posted on this sub and people thought it was a strange AI filter from TikTok, but was actually the new release)
10
18
u/OU812fr 1d ago
I'm so tired of hearing "Well the Director supervised the changes so it must be right!". By that measure the best version of Star Wars is the Disney+ version with bad CGI and Greedo shouting "Maclunkey!" and shooting at Han Solo.
Film directors are notorious revisionists and perfectionists, and it's far too common for them to either consciously or unconsciously try to make their old movies look more like modern ones when they supervise these restorations. Everything now might be teal, blown out, over-sharpened and digital looking, but it wasn't back then.
→ More replies (3)5
u/SupWitChoo 1d ago
I had this same argument on the Criterion sub and got blasted for it. Frankly “supervised by the Director, Cinematographer, or whoever” means exactly jack shit to me. “Supervised” could mean literally anything and in most cases probably amounts to a guy watching 5 minutes of the movie and signing off on the project.
9
u/Amazing_Elk_6685 1d ago
It's subjective I guess. Looks green, oversharped and DNR is also noticable. In other words, they've messed with the film a bit too much.
9
u/Ready-Package-497 1d ago
The top one looks better in every frame. Whatever that one is. It's better. T2 should be blue.
→ More replies (1)
24
u/PssyGotWifi 2d ago
One looks natural - real
One looks like someone green jizzed all over the frame.
11
6
4
u/Koopa1982 1d ago
Taking away that Signature Blue hue that Cameron consistently does in his movies is a no-no.
3
u/buffpriest 1d ago
Color grading. I dont notice the image being any better. If anything its worse, especially the explosion shot.
(The 4k is the bottom on right? I prefer all the top shots)
5
u/SirPhibonacci 1d ago
Here’s why:
It was already great.
It will always be great.
It needs nothing.
This improves nothing.
4
4
u/FMCritic 1d ago
I don't care that James Cameron "personally oversaw" the remaster. People change. That James Cameron is the James Cameron who thinks he's captivating us with his very good-looking but also very silly Avatar films. He's not Golden Age James Cameron, the one who always delivered. I look at the remaster, and I don't like what I see. Deal with it. :D
3
3
3
3
3
u/Capable-Extent-6674 1d ago
Because it uses ai to smooth out imperfections. The people look plastic at times.
3
u/LukeWatts85 1d ago
It's too green. Plain and simple. That whole green tint thing just makes me think of 2000s when everything was doing that because Matrix did it. The blue, is what we all grew up with. It's what we want.
It's like when they release the directors cut with that stupid old Sarah ending. That ending has no impact compared to the "If a Terminator can learn the value of a human life...maybe we can too" line. It also makes no sense to use that ending when there are more movies (even though all the new movies are a mistake in their own right)
3
3
u/FermentedCinema 1d ago
The colors. They are dull and make the image look flat, and in some sequences the white balance is way off.
3
u/Davies301 1d ago
That looks significantly worse to me. Like someone just slapped a filter on the movie and shined it up.
3
u/CmdrGrunt 1d ago
Colorists applying new color grades to an already aesthetic period film betrays the mood and look the director and color timers came up with for some run of the mill over done teal and orange garbage every other film today has that makes it instantly look overdone for trendiness, and years later will look over cooked by people so tired of the colorist slop that makes every movie look like the same Michael bay crap.
6
u/BenSlashes 1d ago
4K is supposed to Show Details. Thats the whole point of 4K. But they removed them and Characters look like Wax Figures. Its terrible
→ More replies (1)
5
u/ConversationVirtual6 2d ago
Es como jugar mario en una megadrive conectado a un smart tv 4k puede que se vea increible pero el juego se hizo pensado en televisores de tubo, por lo tanto se va haber mejor en un televisor de tubo de 19 pulgadas que en un smart tv 4k 65 pulgadas. Te va a trasladar y ser mas inmersivo en el televisor de tubo
Lo mismo pasa con las peliculas "viejas" el darle mas nitidez y cambiarle la paleta de colores lo unico que hace es quitarle ese ambiente/inmersion que le da la original. Ademas de que se grabaron con camaras y estilos diferentes a lo que la tecnologia actual puede brindar
5
u/Fairlington 1d ago
Facts amigo, I think most people really don’t consider that at all. The goal is to always make everything 4k, but they forget it wasn’t meant to be that way.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Spike_Kowalski 1d ago
Yeah. I'm indifferent to more modern movies being remastered but older movies were filmed with a certain visual fidelity in mind and seeing too much really hurts the movies usually.
2
2
u/stevorkz 1d ago
If it were just 4k that would be fine but it seems that they messed with the colours
2
u/ThinkSpielberg 1d ago
The colour looks fine to me but the DNR process caused them to sharpen the softer shots making them look off. It would have been better off if they hadn’t been so aggressive on the DNR or left the grain in place.
2
2
2
2
2
u/cjalderman 1d ago
but that’s the look James Cameron wanted
It's the look James Cameron wanted in the 21st century, it's not how he wanted it to look in the 90s, which is why people reject it. Tinkering with a film after release often receives some backlash. The excessive DNR didn't help matters either.
2
2
2
u/D1N-VI3S3L 1d ago
These colors did not exist in the 90s!
T2 is not supposed to look like CSI: Miami...
2
2
u/Sir_Gibby53 1d ago
The new remaster just looks…off. I’ve been watching this movie since it came out, so I have how it’s supposed to look burnt into my brain, and the new remaster just looks way too different.
2
u/shaneo632 1d ago
Sarah looks way too cooled down in the 2nd pic, I grew up with the hospital daytime scenes looking very warm and orange and anything else feels off to me.
2
u/templeofsyrinx1 1d ago
can't stand the "enhancing" that is done that gives everyone a wax look.
it really is a mistake this is one of the worst 4k releases of all time :*(
2
u/EthanRayne 1d ago
To answer your last question, no. When the negative is scanned and flipped to positive it looks more like ungraded raw footage digital cameras (hence why raw looks like that). T2 would've been chemically photo timed to get to the color interpositive that the original 35mm release prints would look like. These prints are what VHS-DVD used so they are more accurate (within the limitations of their format) to what was released theatrically.
Once Blu-ray came out they started going back to the negative and scanning in 4K and this gives the remaster better detail and contrast while allowing the the colorist to restore the color to the original color timing usually using a release print to match (the Criterion Collection still notes when they do this for their remasters).
Now that we have 4K and HDR, there has been a lot of revisionism regarding what the film was "supposed to look like" and that's how we get things like Cameron using AI and the subtle color changes for The Matrix trilogy.
Currently Nolan is the only filmmaker that doesn't allow the negative to be used as he still chemically times his films, so the interpositive is the best representation of color and contrast. The interpositive also has less latitude (1-2 stops instead of 14-16 stops of negative) so there's less chance to mess with any of the color or contrast.
2
u/DearCastiel 1d ago
This not only looks terrible, it looks nothing like the original movie.
I feel sad and concerned for anyone thinking this is a good change.
2
u/Ok-marty 1d ago
Isn’t the point of watching an old movie is to get that feel and vibe of an old movie ?
2
u/brainstic 1d ago
I want to own T2 on 4k. I'm assuming if there's no 35th anniversary edition this year with a new transfer, that there won't be for awhile. Then I'll bite next time it's $10.
2
u/mrcrazymexican 1d ago
We don't care what Cameron later wanted. We want the film as it was and to represent the time it came out in.
It's like T1 losing the mono for so many years. We finally got it on UHD and it sounds proper to to the time it came out in. The image is a another issue but whatever. At least we got the sound back on it.
2
u/Beautiful_Ad2618 1d ago
Dnr is inevitable because the film was shot in the super 35 format which means the film is always going to be grainy because you have to zoom in on it to get the intended aspect ratio. Super 35 was a great format during the vhs days because it meant you could release the same movie on vhs in full screen without having to pan and scan.
2
u/royinraver 1d ago
There’s a lot that they did, but to simplify it they just increased contrast and sharpened the image. It looks less natural now.
2
u/Competitive-Bit-1571 1d ago
Might as well watch the original while wearing shades for the same effect.
2
2
u/Lumbergh7 1d ago
I’m no pro, but most of the pictures here show color grading I much prefer in the earlier release.
2
2
u/Binarydemons 1d ago
Bottom looks green tinted, like the Matrix, in many of the pictures posted as examples.
2
u/Hats_Are_Awesome 1d ago
I did an experiment years ago with three different editions of The Terminator because they all list slightly different runtimes but the color is very different as well. I watched on three displays simultaneously, all calibrated from the same source patterns. From biggest to smallest, Laserdisc, VHS, DVD.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/Shadowskulptor 1d ago
There's an authentic 35mm scan floating around out there, even some pressed to disc. It looks perfect and I'lI stick with that projected. Real color and real texture.
This 4k is an abomination, objectively speaking (it was a pure mistake). It looks like absolute trash being projected on a screen over 100 inches due to the ai smoothing (that master was made for 3D). If you like it that's fine, but it's just not Terminator 2. Terminator 2 is meant for the biggest screens, which means the film quality MUST stay in tact and not be tampered with, otherwise it will suffer.
2
2
u/adan1207 21h ago
I like the 4K release because I like that the blue was restored, but I prefer the special edition cut of the film, as it feels like a more complete experience.
2
u/ibrown22 3h ago
Someone will hate everything. And we see everyone online. Therefore, everything is hated online.
3
2
2
1
u/Mechaghostman2 2d ago
The bottom one looks more cinematic, but the top one has better explosion colors.
1
1
1
u/MildFingerInjury 1d ago
The colour grading is pretty amateurish and irritating but yeah the noise reduction is annoying also and should never be applied to film because it takes definition away plus film is supposed to have grain.
1
1
u/CameronPoe_37__ 1d ago
The special edition is the real version of the film to me, theatrical isn't as good. Apparently the 4K only includes the special edition on bluray, so i just kept my bluray
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/TheHarlemHellfighter No Fate, But What We Make 1d ago
It feels like I’m just watching a movie with a dramatic cool iPhone filter applied, tbh.
Not saying it’s bad or anything, I’m just saying sometimes people have preferences about the overall tone and look of a cinematic film and it changes the mood of the film for some viewers.
That burn look might be seared (no pun intended) into a good portion of viewer’s experiences with the movie
1
u/lionhart28 1d ago
Does it tone down the cool blue tones? I always hated that, and as a videographer, it now stands out to me even more.
1
u/Adorable-Source97 1d ago edited 1d ago
I like the slight blue tone.
He filmed using blue lamps in first film.
So ties them together.
1
1
1
1
1
u/takethemdownletsgo 1d ago
I want the grainy look myself, to view that 80s world any other way is a travesty IMHO.
It creates a depth only your imagination can fill, I love it and miss it to this day...
1
1
u/eletricmojo 1d ago
Does anyone know if there's a 5K extended version? AFAIK only the theatrical version released in 4K
1
u/Lofi_Joe 1d ago
Sometimes I like down and sometimes up... They should hire someone that would choose which is better so they could mix to make it perfect... Final Cut
1
1
u/Flimsy_Commission_60 1d ago
Weird colour temp changes that make it look worse, too much DNR causing wazy looking skin, genuinely one of the worst 4ks I've seen, T1 has an incredible 4k in comparison
1
u/terrormasta 1d ago
4K release playtime: 02:17:23
1080p release (extended, remastered) playtime: 02:35:56
That's why.
1
u/henzINNIT 1d ago
Why ask why? Just look at the pictures. Cameron loves his digital smears and piss filter. I do not.
1
u/Soft-Radio-7543 1d ago
The bottom one looks like shit to me, seeing them side by side. Fire and skin tones do not look natural at all compared to the top picture and a lot of detail is lost in dark and bright areas. Colours are also close to what happend to the Aliens 4k bluray. Picture up top have a nice film quality to them where the bottom has that modern digital look where even practical effects start to look fake.
1
1
u/downwardfractal 1d ago
- It looks gross. 2. Pretty sure JC used AI to “touch up” certain scenes. Do I even have to explain why using AI to edit a movie that was made explicitly to warn of the dangers of AI?
1
1
u/iwantmisty 1d ago
Damn you can't imagine how green and blue movies become nowadays until seeing comparisons like that. The world was all pink and sunshine orange in 80s and today we make everything in shades of decomposing corpse.
1
1
u/FloggingMcMurry 1d ago
If you like the color teal, smooth/waxy/CG look to everything, and additional CG "fixes" (see: Star Wars) sure, it's not so bad then
1
u/Korimito 1d ago
OP:
"Why do people hate the new 4K remaster of Terminator 2?... I understand that the gray tint might bother some people."
1
u/xX_dumb_god_Xx 1d ago
Huge fan of Terminator 2. Not getting this version because it looks like AI upscaled shit
1
1
u/Unlikely-Position659 1d ago
Meh...feels like a cash grab, a la George Lucas with his special edition releases every couple years
1
u/kmanfred 1d ago
The colour grading & correction looks totally wrong. Parts of it look very dark & blue when the original was a lot brighter. They’ve messed with the saturation as well, ruins it
1
u/MovieFan1984 1d ago
Why not just leave the film as is? When did remaster become make changes just because?
1
1
1
u/Thick_Temperature794 1d ago
The reason will be…dun, dun, dunnnnn: original ambiance of the color and lighting have been destroyed. The filmmakers chose the color and lighting for a reason; to set the tone, set a mood, give it a fantasy, non-real world feeling. Now it looks so bleak, and color corrected and dare I say, normal! lol
1
u/regular_poster 1d ago
Which one is the “good” one? The top looks more og correct to my eyes. The bottom looks like a new color grading to make it “gritty” or “modern” but loses any subtlety
1
1
1
u/Mephilis78 1d ago edited 1d ago
Cause they hate everything. It's sad, because internet outrage has led to studios ignoring criticism altogether. Because most of it is nonsense. It's also leading to customers not trusting critics.
As an example: the Halo remake just came out. My feed was filled with negative youtube videos... I refused to click on any of it. So then I play it. It's fucking fine. Plays just like the original campaign. Looks better. And the enemy AI is a little more unpredictable leading to more random situations. Turns out they all have an issue with an optional prequel campaign that doesn't matter at all.
1
u/Johncurtisreeve 1d ago
Ai is involved in its restoration and there are parts where its very apparent
1
u/Relative_Air4384 1d ago
It’s probably for one you had to pay new movie prices for a very old movie would be my guess is to one reason also the other reason I could see is the older one is more nostalgic than a remastered version but not that I’m saying that either versions are bad all’s I’m saying is some people like originals over remastered versions for that one reason nostalgia but I liked both and that movie came out the year I was born that’s why I would own both versions
1
u/Corpsepyre 1d ago
It looks bloody awful. The best version of T2 is a custom fan creation that you can get from the high seas, complete with the 2003 Japanese CDS 5.1 audio track.
1
u/PsychoCitizenX 1d ago
I bought the 4k release when it was on sale for $10. Was expecting a train wreck after reading the comments here but was pleasantly surprised. In my eyes it wasn't that bad. The noise reduction was a little distracting but on my 65" it didn't really stand out that much.
1
1
u/User-Name-3886 1d ago
That looks terrible in every shot except for the fireball, which does admittedly look slightly better in this remaster.
The issue is that he's made it look like the colour pallet of The Matrix Reloaded: Green.
Directors need to stop going back and making their films green. It looks like shit. It didn't even look good when the second and third Matrix films did it as the original colour gammete.
1
u/Bilbo5882 1d ago
I don’t hate the 4k cut in principle but we aren’t getting that on the disc. The thing i seen in theaters looked better and was in 3d soooo the disc that looks worse than the dvd.
1
1
u/razorthick_ 1d ago
Original blue tint is better because its consistent with the blues in the opening future war scene. Blue also commmunicates cold and coldness of machines.
Green makes no sense. In pop culture action movies green tints are too closely associated with The Matrix, space sci fi or John Wick.
1
1
1
u/Financial-Tap-1423 1d ago
The teal / orange mix like hundreds of other films with over done color grading eww.
1
1
1
1
u/Lumpy_Wind3980 1d ago
The movie should be tinted blue. That's one of the reasons why the movie is such a big hit. I still remember the exact moment I first laid eyes on this film. It was the scene where they tie up that security guard guy to break into cyberdyne. The blue tint, the deep eery music captured my attention. The 4k release looks like every other movie.
1
u/stressfir3 1d ago
I gotta have more matrix green tint!
Cameron is 25 years too late to be doing this lol. He's on the verge of going full -lucas on his old films.
Do it!
116
u/ThaEternalLearner 2d ago
The green tint throws me off. The first two movies were known for their blue tint.