Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) (Skynet Edition)

[mugupo]

Look like it won't get remaster treatment in PQ, it just use different format from mpeg2 to AVC, but sound has improve, i might get this if hit near to $10 which is very likely.

[dseb1985]

Originally Posted by aiman04

Blu-ray.com review of the UK edition is up:

T2 Skynet UK Blu-ray.com Review

Are they using the same transfer for US edition as well?

i would like to know that aswell,ive had this movie pre-ordered for a while and it will be very dissapointing if this movie doesnt have a PQ worth more then 3.5 stars...its TERMINATOR for crying out loud,im sure this movie has to be on everyones list of top "MUST OWN BLURAYS"

[KubrickFan]

It will be when the film finally is being remastered and the studio stops using the same master old all the time.

[RedIsNotBlue]

I thought the first release's picture quality was pretty good....not great...but good. From the reviews it looks like the double dip is just a cleaned up version of the first release which is fine. The audio upgrade and of course the extras are enough for me to want to double dip.

[Deciazulado]

US Skynet T2 Blu-ray.com Review

[Kyo28]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

US Skynet T2 Blu-ray.com Review

Interesting review. However, I still have a nagging questions:
Is it worth getting this US Skynet Edition of one already has the UK first release?
I wouldn't mind double-dipping for this movie but I'm hesitant, as the difference in quality and content doesn't seem that big at first sight.

[Eastkhan]

T2 had enough releases on the old old format.

T2 is already a mess now in HD:


old lionsgate BD vs. new skynet BD vs. Geneon BD vs. old studio canal BD (UK/FR) vs. new studio canal steelbook BD (UK/FR)

should I add the famous german HD-DVD as well

[Grubert]

HMM has an interview with disc producer Van Ling about the new T2 release.

Specifically about PQ:

HM: Did you have to clean anything up from the previous Blu-ray transfer of the film?

VL: Lionsgate and Studio Canal both put in resources to do additional dirt cleanup to multiple versions of the film. Even with a great transfer, you can always do more dirt cleanup, and I think we were able to do some significant cleanup work to an already approved transfer without messing with the color or doing any of the, in my opinion, dubious digital filtering that sometimes gets applied.

HM: The picture quality is great, and the 1991 visual effects really hold up well. Was any extra work required to translate them to high-def?

VL: Fans have the fantastic work of director of photography Adam Greenberg, the VFX houses and the eye of Jim Cameron to thank for that, and no, there was no extra work necessary to bring it to high-def. The fact that the movie was originated and finished on film meant that it has an inherent look of film reality we’re used to, and does not have that grainless, video game look that some modern films do today. Even though it was one of the first films to use digital composites for its hero shots, it was still mostly real and in-camera. A lot of people don’t realize that there are probably less than 50 CG shots in the entire film. There are hundreds more in-camera Stan Winston Studios effects and traditional optical composites, and the CG visual effects had to match up to those, as well as to Adam Greenberg’s stellar cinematography.

[Bullseye]

So the UK has the better audio and the US the better picture. I wonder if both reviewers consulted or compared both discs.

US Disc review: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...24&show=review
Reviewed by Martin Liebman
Movie 4.5
Video 4.0
Audio 4.5
Extras 3.0
Overall 4.0


UK Disc review: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...25&show=review
Reviewed by Dr. Svet Atanasov

Movie 4.5
Video 3.5
Audio 5.0
Extras 5.0
Overall 3.5

[Rantlers]

I think one thing to take into account is that's the opinion of two different reviewers who most likely have different ears and different equipment.

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

So the UK has the better audio and the US the better picture. I wonder if both reviewers consulted or compared both discs.

US Disc review: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...24&show=review
Reviewed by Martin Liebman
Movie 4.5
Video 4.0
Audio 4.5
Extras 3.0
Overall 4.0


UK Disc review: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...25&show=review
Reviewed by Dr. Svet Atanasov

Movie 4.5
Video 3.5
Audio 5.0
Extras 5.0
Overall 3.5

Personally I would go with the US review over the UK one. That UK reviewer rating system is messed up. 4.5 for the movie 5.0 for audio and Extras, but he ignored all of those and gave the overall rating the same as the video quality WTF.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Rantlers

I think one thing to take into account is that's the opinion of two different reviewers who most likely have different ears and different equipment.

Yes they most likely have different equipment, but I am almost 100% certain that they do have different ears.

[YodasFootPowder]

Weren't the extras on both discs basically the same?

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

Personally I would go with the US review over the UK one. That UK reviewer rating system is messed up. 4.5 for the movie 5.0 for audio and Extras, but he ignored all of those and gave the overall rating the same as the video quality WTF.

Good morning,

The reason why the UK review ignores extras, audio, and film as far as the final score is concerned is because the key element everyone was looking for in this new release - The Skynet Edition - was video quality/improvement. With other words, while the terrific audio upgrade will be a good enough reason for a number of people to justify a purchase of yet another SE of Terminator 2:Judgment Day, there would have been a substantially larger group of people ready to purchase this disc had the video grade been 5.0 (indicating that all of the issues the two reviews mention are nowhere to be seen).The same goes for the extras grading - if most of the supplemental features that you see on the disc were newly-recorded, exclusive features introduced for the first time on Blu-ray (and not previously made available on different SE DVDs, BDs, etc), then the final score would have reflected it; though, at this point I am unsure what other substantial supplemental features could be added up. As it is, the final score reflects the quality of the video treatment, as this was/is what justified the arrival of the Skynet Edition, at least as far as the distributors are concerned, to begin with.

I hope this helps

Pro-B

[Eastkhan]

Pro-b,

did you have the time to compare

lionsgate skynet BD vs. new studiocanal BD (UK/FR steelbook) ?

VanLing states it was a collaboration of lionsgate and studiocanal,

yet the first lionsgate BD and studiocanal BD (released in UK/FR) were different, I wanna make sure if the new releases are same/different.

+ were you able to check the famous japanese Geneon BD? If yes, how does it hold up to these new releases?

Thank you for your news/infos/reviews, keep up the good work

[Constitution 101]

How is this new edition better(or even different) than the previous one? I don't want to double dip unless it's improved PQ...

[sonyfanboy]

According to DVDfile:
James Cameron's choice to use Super35 restricts the sharpness and clarity by virtue of the film elements themselves, so T2 will never look razor-sharp or crystal-clear even on the best 4K studio master.

http://www.dvdfile.com/views/article...-edition-74336

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by sonyfanboy

According to DVDfile:
James Cameron's choice to use Super35 restricts the sharpness and clarity by virtue of the film elements themselves, so T2 will never look razor-sharp or crystal-clear even on the best 4K studio master.

http://www.dvdfile.com/views/article...-edition-74336

exactly. a lot of people on here seem to think that because it's "T2" and had a huge budget means it will automatically look spectacular on bluray. all depends on how the director shot it, and you summed it up well

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by sonyfanboy

According to DVDfile:
James Cameron's choice to use Super35 restricts the sharpness and clarity by virtue of the film elements themselves, so T2 will never look razor-sharp or crystal-clear even on the best 4K studio master.

http://www.dvdfile.com/views/article...-edition-74336

Always consider the source of the review.

The bottom line is, many older HD masters are just not up to par for Blu-ray. The T2 master was created several years back well before the format and has EE and DNR baked into it. They need to go back to the original source material and do a brand new master transfer without all of the processing. (The Star Trek movies suffer the same dilemma - except for Khan where they created a new transfer which is why is blows the other movies away.) While T2 may never be razor sharp, it is capable of looking like film and much better than the current releases today.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Always consider the source of the review.

The bottom line is, many older HD masters are just not up to par for Blu-ray. The T2 master was created several years back well before the format and has EE and DNR baked into it. They need to go back to the original source material and do a brand new master transfer without all of the processing.

there is talk of cameron supposedly wanting to do that after he finishes avatar...not sure how much it would change it, but definitely prepare yourselves for a triple dip bluray some time in the future...