The Terminator: SE 5.1 Audio Track -- Thumbs Down! (1 Viewer)

[Mark Zimmer]

If you are implying that we should stick dialogue soundtracks onto silent movies and colorize black and white movies, I have one word for you:

Better get the asbestos suit on.
------------------
"This movie has warped my fragile little mind."

 

[Matt_Stevens]

Wow. Just how did the TERMINATOR ever become such a popular film with just a stupid, boring mono soundtrack. Gee. We all must have been nuts.

------------------
www.deceptions.net/superman

 

[Ken Seeber]

i really dont know how people can actually want a lame mono soundtrack instead of something much beter...why not go back to silent and black and white films too??

Actually, I watch silent and black & white films quite often. In fact, "Dr. Strangelove," "To Kill a Mockingbird" and the films of Buster Keaton stand as my all-time favorites.
You should try them sometime. You might find something you like.

 

[Andrew 'Ange Hamm' Hamm]

This is a big part of why I hate audio remixes that change sound ratio.
Part of what makes Terminator an all-time classic of film is how much it did with how little it had. Cameron had basically no budget and no big-name actors, and all he did was create one of the biggest smash hit movies of the 1980s and a landmark in modern sci-fi. How? With a great story, bang-for-the-buck effects innovations, brilliant directing, and canny, talented actors. The fact that it is in mono only reinforces my respect for the achievment every time I watch the film.
------------------
Andrew Hamm's new album Link Removed is available now!

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Steering back towards the topic header - Ken - my position is as follows - I am for the best presentation of a movie possible.
Supporting OAR is easy because the alternatives such as pan & scan lessen the movie.
Enhancing a movie anamorphically and - if need be - taking a mono or stereo soundtrack and remixing it to 5.1 presents the movie in the best possible manner.
Sound is an integral part of a movie. Please understand I do not want the wishes of those who prefer to listen to the mono soundtrack denied. By all means include the original audio as well. The beauty of the DVD format is that it allows both versions to coexist.
For me there is no comparison as to the level of involvement one gets when they are immersed in a soundfield as opposed to having more traditional audio presentations coming from one source.
As Tom_G said above Quote:
"I always say to each his/her own. If you like the mono track, fine. If you like the 5.1 track, again that's fine. It's your movie and enjoyment of the presentation."
Peace and everyone enjoy the movie the way they want to.

 

[Matt_Stevens]

The beauty of the DVD format is that it allows both versions to coexist.

ONLY when the studio is smart enough to include the original soundtrack. In the last year we have seen countless films remixed, with results that are controversial, but with NO ORIGINAL MIX to appease those that want it. SUSPIRIA, TENEBRAE, PHENOMENA, OPERA (hello Anchor Bay) and SUPERMAN are some high profile examples.
------------------
www.deceptions.net/superman

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Point taken Matt.
Sounds like another campaign needed to ensure that happens!

 

[Tom-G]

I enjoy the 5.1 remixes when done properly. Jaws and Superman are good examples. But, I do understand the desire to retain the original soundtrack. It's the same issue as retaining the original aspect ratio. DVD is the ideal format for the coexistence, as mentioned previously. I'm glad to see that MGM decided to do this even though I prefer the 5.1 track.
------------------
As for the bad rap about the characters--hey, I've seen space operas that put their emphasis on human personalities and relationships. They're called "Star Trek" movies. Give me transparent underwater cities and vast hollow senatorial spheres any day. --Roger Ebert on The Phantom Menace

 

[Chad R]

I've never equated 5.1 remixes with pan & scan. One is taking away while the other is adding.
So in that vein I compare 5.1 remixes to colorizing B&W movies. Both are adding things that weren't there. I've never had a problem with mono, and probably never will. I'm very happy that the mono is there.

 

[Tom-G]

Chad, that's what I'm saying. Retaining the original theatrical presentation includes the sound, not just the aspect ratio.
------------------
As for the bad rap about the characters--hey, I've seen space operas that put their emphasis on human personalities and relationships. They're called "Star Trek" movies. Give me transparent underwater cities and vast hollow senatorial spheres any day. --Roger Ebert on The Phantom Menace

 

[Norm]

Heres what Van Ling & Cameron think about remixes.
Van Ling, on Terminator:Special Edition from Widescreen Review interview October 2000 issue.
" a new sound mix a nice, true 5.1 We even had composer Brad Fiedel come back in and remix his music masters, and MGM hired Gary Rydstrom at Skywalker to do the overall remix on my recommendation. So MGM really put their money where their mouth was on this title."
" Yeah, the movie was mono originally. And there were a number of faux-stereo things out there. In my discussions with Lightstorm and talking with Cameron about it, we would always say that it would be cool to have something in stereo, but only if it was done right;and doing it right require some diligence, because you want to stay true to the mix and stay true to the balance that people have come to expect. But at the same time, you want to broaden the soundtrack a little bit. You don't want to do something that is totally different because maybe part of the appeal was a way it sounded in mono. And that's one of the things that was really important and one of the things that led Jim to say, "If you're going to do it, do it right." Its not just a matter of panning the mono right and left like some of the earlier faux-stereo mixes. And if I have my way on the disk configuration, MGM will also include the original mono audio as a separate track for the real purists."
I can't wait to get my copy tomorrow and hear that 5.1!
------------------
Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation
http://apacure.org/

[Edited last by Norm on October 01, 2001 at 09:09 PM]
[Edited last by Norm on October 01, 2001 at 09:10 PM]
[Edited last by Norm on October 01, 2001 at 09:11 PM]

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I've never equated 5.1 remixes with pan & scan. One is taking away while the other is adding.
So in that vein I compare 5.1 remixes to colorizing B&W movies. Both are adding things that weren't there. I've never had a problem with mono, and probably never will. I'm very happy that the mono is there.

Replacing or overlaying is not adding.
A lot of people think that you can watch a colorized movie by turning down the 'color' setting on the TV and watch it as originally composed. Actually, that is not the case. The colorization process does not just modify the 'chroma', or color channel, it also modifies the 'luma', or intensity channel. This destroys the original black and white composition, and there is no way to get it back from that presentation.
Likewise, there is no way to get the original mono composition back from a remix, and in the case of a remix using newly created elements like 'The Terminator', you cannot even get close.
On the issue of preserving art, there are no shades of grey. Only black and white.
If you want to see art modified to fit the shape of your screen, or to use all of your differently colored phosphors, or to fill all of your channels, you defile art in the name of the utilization of technology.
I yearn for the days of laserdisc, not the technology, but for the like-minded nature of those who collected the format. The mainstreaming of DVD has legitimized Joe Six Pack mentality. Resist!

 

[Reginald Trent]

Has it occurred to any of you that everybody has not seen Terminator which would make it a NEW FILM to some? Where is the problem if the original mix is there? We don't seem to have a problem with DVDs that have a 2 channel stereo, Dolby Digital and DTS tracks. Why should we get up in arms over the addition of another track as a option to the original?

 

[cafink]

Has it occurred to any of you that everybody has not seen Terminator which would make it a NEW FILM to some?

So what? No matter who may or may not have already seen it, "The Terminator" is not a new film. It's not an issue of keeping the soundtrack because that's the way we remember it, it's an issue of keeping the soundtrack because that's the way it was originally made, for better or for worse. It's a piece of movie history, flaws and all.

 

[Greg_Y]

On the other hand, the original mono track that's included on this new disc is very weak when held up against the original Image DVD released back in 1997. That mono track rocked with low frequency that made it much more vivid and aggressive sounding. If you have that disc, I'd say you should keep it because it represents the original sound of The Terminator much better than this new DVD does.

2. As stated above, the mono soundtrack we got is encoded at a low bit-rate. So the message is "New soundtrack with many boom-boom sounds FIRST ... somewhat non-original mono mix SECOND" instead of "Original Theatrical MONO mix FIRST ... newly-created BOOM-BOOM track SECOND." If it was as simple as choosing between an awesome presentation of the original mono soundtrack and an awesome presentation of a new 5.1 soundtrack, this thread would have ended a page ago.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

On the other hand, the original mono track that's included on this new disc is very weak when held up against the original Image DVD released back in 1997.

Sounds like Cameron's crew maybe doesn't want their new work to have to stand up to scrutiny against the proper original soundtrack.
Remember when Van Ling used to swear that all of the grain on the original 'Aliens SE' laserdisc was from the film stock?

 

[Lewis Besze]

Attention purists!!!!!!!!!!!
Do not buy this disc,the sound is altered and it isn't how it supposed to be,not only that the included mono mix is just a shadow of the original.
The new 5.1 doesn't go with this old movie[gee it was made in the last century,man I feel old],it seems odd,and transports this "B" movie to "A" wannabe.
If you want enjoy the superior picture of this disc and the super duper sound of the LD or previous DVD you need to put both on,and cue up the sound on the later one,and voile!

------------------
"You Hungarians always disagree"

 

[Anthony Thorne]

Playing devil's advocate for a moment - folks who have never seen THE TERMINATOR before now could give a rat's ass about the original mix, and will happily enjoy the new 5.1 soundtrack. From memory, James Cameron is the same guy who stuck a flyer in the packaging of THE ABYSS SPECIAL EDITION LD stating that he preferred pan/scan (in the Super 35 format, anyway) to widescreen on video, as it was more appropriate for the home viewing audience. If the 'director's vision' explicitly leads Cameron to reformatting his movies for home viewing, it wouldn't surprise me if he felt less anal-retentive about the original mix than others.
I used to throw a fit over every minor change or alteration in a movie, but now I'm less certain. Anchor Bay's SUSPIRIA remaster was getting rave reviews until Vincent Pereira and a few others mentioned online that certain sound cues and lines of dialogue had been changed from the original. Fans who had been ecstatic over the new disc have started to change their tone, despite my suspicion that the vast majority of them would never have noticed the alterations until they read about them in point form on the internet. With 60'000 discs or more on the market, a lot of folks will be viewing SUSPIRIA for the first time, and as with THE TERMINATOR won't know/won't care about the changes that differ it from the original. As LD's rot and tapes get chucked, SUSPIRIA will by and large be viewable only via Anchor Bay's new DVD. The film hasn't screened theatrically in wide release for 25 years or more - maintaining an exact fidelity to the 'original theatrical experience' is going to be less pressing and more irrelevant as time goes on.
One story has it that Argento doesn't care to rewatch his own movies. The other is that he oversaw the new remaster and essentially gives his approval to the new disc. Either way, he (a.) doesn't care to scrutinize how the film is presented, or (b.) he's observed the changes Anchor Bay have imposed on the mix and isn't too fussed by them. Martin Scorsese once mentioned that he expected his movies to recoup their money and be seen by the largest number of people on video, not in theatres. Studios quite often cut/rework movies (not all, but many) up until the week of opening, with or without the director's involvement. I suspect that studios - maybe even some directors - are starting to feel it less necessary to make the video release an exact replica of what screened theatrically, and that this tinkering will continue in more and more ways. I'm not really convinced anymore that this is a problem.
At a certain point, I'm not sure WHAT point fidelity to the original theatrical experience serves. I dislike a badly cropped picture, don't care for blatant censorship and feel unhappy when a film differs wildly from how I pleasurably remember it. Beyond those three complaints, I'm not sure if fidelity to how a film screened in theatres has any bearing at all anymore on how much I should enjoy watching a film on video.

 

[Ricky Cash]

Being one who has very seldom gone to theatres for the last 17 or 18 years. The so called original theatrical version of any film would be lost on me. I have depended on VHS, Premium Cable, and now DVD for my movie experiences.
So seeing and hearing Terminator on DVD will be like seeing a brand new movie. I for one will not complain about modern sound in a old movie. Especially if it sounds as good as Superman.
I do hope that studios continue to utilize the versitality of DVD to provide as many choices as possible for J9P as well as HT enthusiasts alike.

 

[Michael Reuben]

I yearn for the days of laserdisc, not the technology, but for the like-minded nature of those who collected the format.

Well-phrased, Mike. The mentality of the collectors was a helluva lot more consistent than the product.

M.