T2 3D, not to be confused with T2-3D

The Terminator

The Terminator

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Confusing? a tiny tad.

Terminator-2-3D.jpg


TRAILER:

They could at least have used the correct typeface...

TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY(1991) will get a full 3D make-over and a new theatrical release in/around October, at least in China. OR in 2017 according to some places as of 12 hours ago :confused

EDIT: It should be released globally according to Stereo D's website: http://www.stereodllc.com/james-cameron-dmg-partner-for-terminator-2-3d-rerelease/

Hopefully they will release it on 3D Blu-ray. Though that might make it difficult to watch it since for example Samsung stopped making 3D TVs :facepalm *inaudible ranting*


Read about this back in March, I believe. But this is the first "official" word I have seen :)
 

Attachments

  • Terminator-2-3D.jpg
    Terminator-2-3D.jpg
    90.6 KB · Views: 50
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm yea, I thought "is this just T2-3D?" This film holds up its fx and I dont think it needs any upgrades, is Cameron wanting to gain $ and possibly start something with the Terminator series again? It all just gives more questions the more I think about it haha
 
The Terminator said:
Hopefully they will release it on 3D Blu-ray. Though that might make it difficult to watch it since for example Samsung stopped making 3D TVs :facepalm *inaudible ranting*
Click to expand...
I have two 3-D TVs and I don't think I have used that feature more than maybe twice. It was not worth paying extra to get, lol.
 
Moviefreak said:
I have two 3-D TVs and I don't think I have used that feature more than maybe twice. It was not worth paying extra to get, lol.
Click to expand...

They pretty much all come bundled with it nowadays, but yeah, not worth buying the glasses. I got a deal on the glasses I have, and they ran me around $60 for 4 pairs (good ones, too). Not a bad price, but I've only used them once to watch Avatar, which I found to be supremely overrated. I'd watch Dredd3D with them, but that's it.

As for T2...sorry Jimbo. I buy that film once per format, if that. Adding 3D doesn't make the experience better for me. Actually, it'll probably just give me a damn headache, if my experience with Avatar was any indicator.
 
Moviefreak said:
I have two 3-D TVs and I don't think I have used that feature more than maybe twice. It was not worth paying extra to get, lol.
Click to expand...

Some people actually like 3D :$
Some people actually game in 3D even ;)

My mom is totally sold on 3D as well. Her question to me was "why isn't everything in 3D?" :p

JediMichael said:
That picture of Arnold looks odd. Almost didn't think it was him.
I'd see it in 3D, but mostly just because I never saw it in the theater before.
Click to expand...

It's because it's a bad photoshop work. Basically they have taken a screenshot of the film. (From when the gang is inside Cyberdyne), then they have added the right arm holding the shotgun, all sorts of things is wrong with the shotgun, no reload lever etc, wrong font on the poster.....
 
Any excuse to put a great movie back on the screen and not rubbish remakes is good by me. Now bring back T1 and put it in 3D. ;)


Seriously though Im looking forward to seeing it back in the theatre. :)


Ben
 
Some people have brought up modern CG enhancements (a la George Lucas' Star Wars special editions I suppose)
org-vs-cg.jpg
Thoughts???
 
T2 doesn't have the kind of low-hanging fruit that ANH did. I would vote to leave it alone.

Most older SFX movies have at least a few shots worth fixing. But once filmmakers start down that path they almost always overdo it. And they don't seem to understand that people's standards are higher than normal when they update a pre-CGI movie. Longtime fans will absolutely detest the slightest hint of anything that looks out of place for the movie's original era.



Is it just me, or has Cameron gotten about 20 years older in the last 10 years?
 
Last edited:
Yeah I would say keep the changes to a minimum. Like they did with the Titanic and Jurassic Park 3D conversions, changed a little but nothing major.

batguy said:
T2 doesn't have the kind of low-hanging fruit that ANH did. I would vote to leave it alone.

Most older SFX movies have at least a few shots worth fixing. But once filmmakers start down that path they almost always overdo it. And they don't seem to understand that people's standards are higher than normal when they update a pre-CGI movie. Longtime fans will absolutely detest the slightest hint of anything that looks out of place for the movie's original era.



Is it just me, or has Cameron gotten about 20 years older in the last 10 years?
Click to expand...

Maybe that is what Avatar does to the body? :p
 
"Fixing" FX shots is like cosmetic surgery. Sure, there are sometimes obvious flaws that ought to be corrected, but the question is always how far do you go, and where do you draw the line?

Personally, I have -- for years -- maintained that the only things that should be "fixed" in the original Star Wars trilogy are basically compositing errors. Matte lines around TIE fighters, the snowspeeder canopy bars being transparent, the occasional weirdness in color timing or a prop failure like Obi-Wan's sabre showing the dowel tip on the Death Star, that sort of thing.

Anything else? LEAVE IT ALONE. Part of what made these films the FX triumphs that they were is how good they were at the time. They should continue to be viewed in that context. And, honestly, there comes a point where the CGI looks horribly out of place with the rest of the FX in the film. When every other makeup shot or squib effect is 1992-era, but suddenly you cut to a highly visible sequence that's OBVIOUSLY been "modernized," it doesn't work. The OT suffers quite noticeably from that. Hell, even the very film stock on which films were shot can "give away" the era when they were made, so shoehorning in a modern effect just because it looks, you know, up to modern standards is basically putting lipstick on a pig. Actually, that's not fair. It's like taking a picture of your 8-year-old daughter and photoshopping in a modern hairstyle and makeup an adult would wear.
 
I wouldn't mind them fixing the effects so it looked like the CGI effects used on Arnold during T3. I thought that looked good.
 
The fact the eye doesn't move can easily be explained off as that side of the skull being damaged by the wedge that the T-1000 shoves into his face several times. You can also see all that gunk in the eye socket that would further hinder eye movement. Easy, plausible explanation as to why the eye stays in the forward position and doesn't move with his other eye.

Also, the correction looks like ****. If you wanna do a correction, replace the whole endoskeleton section to get the correct depth and shapes. But then the question is... why would you waste so much money on that?
 
Too Much Garlic said:
The fact the eye doesn't move can easily be explained off as that side of the skull being damaged by the wedge that the T-1000 shoves into his face several times. You can also see all that gunk in the eye socket that would further hinder eye movement. Easy, plausible explanation as to why the eye stays in the forward position and doesn't move with his other eye.

Also, the correction looks like ****. If you wanna do a correction, replace the whole endoskeleton section to get the correct depth and shapes. But then the question is... why would you waste so much money on that?
Click to expand...

Well of course it looks like **** :lol I just took a 3d model of a HUMAN eye ball, added a metal texture to it and made it glow essentially :p

That is a good in-universe explanation :)

Deric said:
I wouldn't mind them fixing the effects so it looked like the CGI effects used on Arnold during T3. I thought that looked good.
Click to expand...

Though that mostly looked good, I would personally say, change as little as possible.
 
Oh, that was you? I think I must not have read closely enough initially, and thought that it was a still from the "fixed" film.
 
Solo4114 said:
Oh, that was you? I think I must not have read closely enough initially, and thought that it was a still from the "fixed" film.
Click to expand...

Yep, that was I :p "visual aid" is usually helpful when you are trying to get your point across :)

Hopefully they won't do something as radical as that.
 
This thread is more than 6 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

Tremas
This Is Spinal Tap 2 seems to be a go!
Replies
5
Views
449
Bloop
Bloop
Egon Spengler
Would you be for or against a Ghostbusters 2 Special Edition? If for, what you would like to see done?
Replies
13
Views
538
JediMichael
JediMichael
Sundowner
May The 4th Be With You 2023
2
Replies
21
Views
1,125
Riceball
Riceball
CB2001
Friendly Reminder: Steamboat Willy version of Micky Mouse, along with several others, will be entering the Public Domain in a day. :D
2
Replies
33
Views
1,387
CB2001
CB2001
Moviefreak
Back to the Future 4. Not really!
Replies
2
Views
550
Funky
Funky
Back
Top