Sneak Peek At Unaired TOS-R Episodes | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Sneak Peek At Unaired TOS-R Episodes November 20, 2007

by Matt Wright , Filed under: TOS Remastered , trackback

The new Star Trek Season One Box Set contains seven TOS Remastered episodes that have yet to air in syndication. TrekMovie.com thought you might like to get a sneak peek at what you can look forward to.

Check em out below


“The Alternative Factor” (airs December 1, 2007)
A unique angle of the Enterprise firing on the uncharted planet


“The Return of the Archons” (airs December 8, 2007)
A nice close-up pan of the Enterprise


“A Taste of Armageddon” (airs December 15, 2007)
Great new matte shot for Eminar VII incorporating live action


“The Enemy Within" (airs January 26, 2008)
Nothing really new – so here’s evil Kirk chugging brandy


“Operation Annihilate!" (airs February 23, 2008)
Enterprise drops ultra-violet satellite


“Mudd’s Women” (airs April 19, 2008)
Harry Mudd gets a ship


“Court Martial” (airs May 10, 2008)
Ion storm damaged Enterprise

If you cant wait or want to see them in HD, order the TOS-R Season One Box from Amazon – available now $132.95


Star Trek: The Original Series – The Complete First Season [HD DVD] — $132.95

Comments

1. JeFF - November 20, 2007

Is that the Intrepid over Starbase 11???

2. Adrian Anansi - November 20, 2007

FIRST

I’ve never got it before!

3. Sean "Sean4000" Burns - November 20, 2007

wow

4. Adrian Anansi - November 20, 2007

Awwww Jeff you suck!

5. toddk - November 20, 2007

cool

6. SPB - November 20, 2007

LOL!!!

Love the photo of Shatner getting blitzed! Simply sticking it in the middle of all the rest makes it even funnier!

7. Ocanhopper - November 20, 2007

More! More! More!
Please Anthony, Matt;
Desperate fandom pleads for more! :-)

8. Commodore Z - November 20, 2007

The alien city in “A Taste of Armageddon” was not a reuse of StarBase11. The Armageddon city was later reused in “Wink of the Eye” but that was replaced with a new painting in the Remastered Version. The remastered Armageddon city looks like a cleaned up version of the original.

9. JeFF - November 20, 2007

Ha sorry man… I saw that shot of another Constitution Class ship, saw the episode name, and remembered that the Intrepid was also at Starbase 11 when the damaged Enterprise made her way from the ion storm… as I recall, Commodore Stone delayed the Intrepid so that E could take priority in repair… so if the shoe fits, I guess I answered my own question.

I cannot WAIT to see “The Ultimate Computer!” We get to see (hopefully) the Hood, Potemkin, Lexington, and the poor Excalibur get wrecked.

10. Kyle Nin - November 20, 2007

Isn’t Starbase 11 also in “The Menagerie”? If so, then the planet shown in the “Court Martial” screenshot is the wrong planet because it doesn’t match the one that was in “The Menagerie”.

11. Diabolik - November 20, 2007

The new Emeniar 7 cityscape is new, just very close to the original. Can’t wait to see it in use with the live action element. I bet it’s a monorail going past.

12. Toonloon - November 20, 2007

Those look sooooo cool! I’ve got this on order and i cant wait to see them although i’m tempted to spoil the surprise by keep looking in here.

Are there many more changes?

13. Heywood Jablomee - November 20, 2007

Beautiful images! Alternative Factor is one of my faves…kinda dark and brooding, somewhat of a departure from the rest of the series. God, the Big E has never looked better!

14. Michael Hall - November 20, 2007

The works looks good, but in truth I was really hoping to see something in the way of the orbital drydock/repair facilities, in addition to the Intrepid. Oh, well.

15. Chris - November 20, 2007

It would have been interesting if they added a TMP style drydock over the Intrepid.

16. Pumpkin - November 20, 2007

#8:

They cut off the top part of the matte paintingin “Armageddon”, however, it is the same matte painting in the Menagerie, A Taste of Armageddon, and in Wink of an Eye.

Even if its not the same painting, they all beam down in both episodes in front of the exact same wall…

17. Dr. Image - November 20, 2007

I’m not nitpickin’- the stuff looks GOOD.

18. Sean4000 - November 20, 2007

Yeah….i know…….

http://trekmovie.com/images/entdock.JPG

19. Doug - November 20, 2007

Isn’t technology wonderful? This new stuff lends a second birth to the origins of our TREK universe. It may be revisionist, but it sure looks nice!
Nice thing is it doesn’t detract from the original in the least… wish I could say the same of some of the changes Lucas made on Star Wars.

20. Jeff - November 20, 2007

I’ll have it in hand tomorrow!

21. T2 - November 20, 2007

this is awesome, i can’t wait to see what they do with the battles from “The Ultimate Computer” and “Elaan of Troyus”…some more great ship models

22. ensign joe - November 20, 2007

These are available on netflix right now if you don’t wanna shell out the $$.. looking forward to some nice remastered original trek..

23. Nathan - November 20, 2007

Alright! Keep ‘em coming…

24. pcumby - November 20, 2007

I love this stuff…

25. Skippy 2k - November 20, 2007

These new shots look awesome! I’ve got the set pre-ordered but will probably be a few days. :( I’m curious also about the episodes done with the first model. I know they didn’t go back and redo them but curious how they look in HD given the difference between the TV/HD comparison of the newer eps. More of a difference than I thought there would be and they look nice!

26. Jeffery Wright - November 20, 2007

the aft area of the primary hull is inaccurate, you’d think they’d be more careful with the 1701…

27. Diabolik - November 20, 2007

#16… sorry, that matte was not used in the Menagerie. Only “Armegeddon” and “Wink of an Eye.” Trust me.

28. Diabolik - November 20, 2007

#16… But the wall part is too true!

29. Iowagirl - November 20, 2007

Eminar VII looks fantastic!

30. JL - November 20, 2007

I’m sorry, but the “Enterprise firing on the planet” shot looks SO… FAKE!!! – – as do most of the other shots! OMG, how can anyone sit there and say this stuff looks even remotely real? Looks 100% CG phony, like a cinematic videogame sequence.

31. Xplodin' Nacelle - November 20, 2007

Re: # 15

Maybe they did????

Wait till the episode airs.

32. Scott Gammans - November 20, 2007

Thanks for posting these, Anthony!!

Michael Hall… perhaps you will still get your wish. Maybe that image of the Enterprise and the Intrepid in orbit over the Starbase 11 planet was a still from a left-to-right panning shot… and when the camera pans to the right you see all the orbital drydock goodness.

33. Scott Gammans - November 20, 2007

Oh and Diabolik… look very closely at that Eminiar 7 still image… there are not one but *two* monorails!

34. CanuckLou - November 20, 2007

Cool! Thanks for the sneak peek!

@30 – does not! ;)

35. Krik Semaj - November 20, 2007

#30.
The shot’s look better on a bigger screen.

36. Plum - November 20, 2007

Isn’t it fun that we get to see Enterprise drop those ultra-violet satellites? In the old days, the bridge was always doing cool things like that… well, they said they were doing coolio things, we just had to believe ‘em! The sound effect helped, but still… this is another exciting treat fro the CBS CGI guys… thanx guys!

37. Son of Sarek - November 20, 2007

#30
I agree. While I think the new effects are an improvement they are very CG looking, and not that great of CG either. Could have done a lot better. Obviously these were done on a limited budget. Something about the gray dull look of the Enterprise really bugs me. Maybe it’s the lack of a bright light source…to create more light on the model. Not sure. Wish they would shoot for the look of the movie models.

38. Spock's Brain - November 20, 2007

#30 Dude. Pay attention. The new shots are supposed to “match and be true to the original concepts.” They were never meant to be photorealistic; but were intended to fit into the look and feel of TOS. Anything more would be glaringly inappropriate for the 1960s state-of-art-design. For example, most of the planets as viewed from space, except those in our own solar system, look like a great matte painting from one of the better science fiction films of the 60s and 70s. (See “2001: A Space Odyssey”). The city on Eminar VII could have been much cooler if rendered as a CGI model with 2007 technology, but instead it is a beautiful new matte painting inspired by the original. Even the Enterprise and alien ships are something just short of photorealistic in appearance. For the most part, this project has been a fantastic success.

39. OR Coast Trekkie - November 20, 2007

These are some really good shots. Though earthlike, the planets are beautiful. The close-up ship shots are fabulous. I like the satellite drop-out shot.

I think the phasers could be tweaked just a smidge, giving them that more particle-like texture. I’m also a little disappointed that the Intrepid seems to be another copy/paste of the Enterprise, lacking its own personality. Yes, I’ll freely admit, I sound a little nit-picky.

While it would be nice to see some drydock action, the truth is, it would seem rather unRemastered like if we did. Simply because the whole drydock thing came about in TMP, and not TOS. If they stick with the TOS vision, we will not see a drydock. Also, it would cost money.

Do I want to see a drydock? Hells yeah! But I’ve learned from this not to hold my breath on such things.

I certainly hope that for The Ultimate Computer, we do see starship tweaks, and those shield hits get a MAJOR overhaul.

40. JL - November 20, 2007

#38

Dude. I work in the visual arts in a creative environment as an art director. I am an avid TOS fan. And I know when something looks out of place when I see it. That new stuff goes with the original show like oil and water. IMO

As bad as most of the original SFX shots are from the series, I would rather see grainy, somewhat shitty footage from the late sixties of a REAL MODEL that takes up actual physical space – – than a dull, fake looking shot that appears to have been created for use as a videogame cinema. ANY DAY OF THE WEEK

41. Marvin the Martian - November 20, 2007

I’m of two minds regarding this project… overall, I love the fact that the SFX are being replaced with improved shots. On the other hand, I find photos like these to be distressing. From time to time, I’ve seen shots that appear fake, but ALL of these very poorly rendered, even compared to, say, shots in the remastered version of “Miri.”

Are they running out of money? Time?
Are quality CG artists leaving the project out of frustration with overly high work expectations given the lack of money and/or time?
Are the shots just poorly captured for this blog and don’t really show the quality that is apparent when actually in motion on an HD set?

I’d really like to know. I’ve been suspecting that there are two teams putting these together–a more-experienced A team and a young, hungry, but less-experienced B team–that split the workload in half, and that’s why we get such erratic work quality from week to week. Some weeks, the FX are phenomenal, and other weeks, we get dull gray rings around a dull-looking, poorly rendered planet.

Just wondering what’s going on.

42. Son of Sarek - November 20, 2007

#40 – Seriously – these are video game quality. Actually, I’ve seen better in video games come to think of it. I guess we’ll have to wait for the re-master of the re-master to fix this mess.

Oh and one other annoyance! Have you seen some of these shots where they show the Enterprise doing these unrealistic maneuvers like it’s some kind of scout fighter? Makes it look like a tiny toy. I think Doomsday had a few of these goofy shots.

43. Matt Wright - November 20, 2007

Sorry guys no drydock, lots of little shuttles and work pods going about the orbit of the planet and the skyline of the Starbase though.

44. Mr. Mike - November 20, 2007

These shots will look amazing in HD. The Menagerie was simply spectacular in the theatre and the new effects fit just fine. I find it hard to believe people actually judge the final product based on these internet images. However, this is all a subject of opinion isn’t it?

45. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

I have to say the opening few seconds of ”Court Martial” are the best work from TOSR I’ve seen. Truly excellent stuff.

46. Daniel Broadway - November 20, 2007

I had my own go at creating a “Remastered” shot using CG. Mine is a bit more contrasty

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/PixelMagic/1701_3d-1.jpg

47. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

That looks excellent Dan, although it looks a bit like it belongs on a big movie.

48. Benjamin Adams - November 20, 2007

#40 – ‘I would rather see grainy, somewhat shitty footage from the late sixties’

In HD you would? Really? With the rest of the surrounding footage so clear that you can see every pore on Kirk’s face, and finally see the zippers on the sides of the uniforms, you would rather see old process effects shots that have heavy in-built grain from 2, 3, 4 layers of film being processed? Footage that literally cannot be cleaned up?

Good for you then that the original versions of the episodes are still available on DVD. Go watch them in upscale and let us have our new HD shots, thanks.

49. Dr. Image - November 20, 2007

#18 Sean4000
Now, now. Comparing this stuff to Eden FX- that’s just not fair!

As I’ve said, I think they would have been better off buying a Master Replicas model and shooting it green/blue screen. They could have used it as a base image to enhance off of ;)

The Menagerie looked like Shit in the theatre I saw it in.
Fathom’s projection system SUCKED.
These caps look great by comparison.

50. JC - November 20, 2007

I didn’t know Enterprise had hinged bomber doors under the primary hull “Operation Annihilate”.Seems primative for the 23 century.

51. JC - November 20, 2007

Sorry secondary hull.

52. Fleet Captain Scott - November 20, 2007

No matter how many formats this show is released in, I’ll probably purchase it! This new CGI just makes it more worth it.

53. Robo-Dude - November 20, 2007

The opening Camel Toe shot from Elaan Of Troyus is about one of the best parts of the entire episode. A nice close up high resolution of her (and that) would rule!

54. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

The more I see of Eden FX stuff the more I think it just would not fit into TOS style.

If people want to try and show some possibly better GC stuff then pick Darren Docs work. That’s the *only* possible alternative to this.

55. Jiminy Kirk - November 20, 2007

#38
Dude YOU pay attention.
The matte in Wink of an Eye was completely photoreal.
CBS digital’a matte work has been very good for the most part, but the ship work is very mediocre and inconsistant. Sometimes it looks pretty good(Space Seed) and sometimes it looks awful (Mirror Mirror)
Had they used a REAL model we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
IT WOULD ALWAYS LOOK REAL!
: )
The original 11 foot model was completely PHOTOREAL because it was a REAL object.
If anything using glaringly obvious CGI is in direct contrast the “look and feel of TOS”
TOS is about as ANALOG as you can get.

56. Sean4000 - November 20, 2007

#49:

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CBS-D HAS BEEN AWARDED THE CONTRACT TO REMASTER ALL OF STAR TREK THE NEXT GENERATION!!!!!!!!!!

HERE IS THEIR DEMO SHOT THAT AWARDED THEM THE CONTRACT:

http://www.thelogbook.com/phosphor/nes/2007/s1.gif

LIKEWISE, EDEN FX IS SCRATCHING THEIR HEADS WONDERING WHY THEIR FX CLIP WAS NOT SELECTED AS THE NEW STANDARD:

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/e/e7/Galaxy_class_aft.jpg
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/0/07/USS_Enterprise_%28NCC-1701-D%29_enters_asteroid_field.jpg

57. Son of Sarek - November 20, 2007

Here’s what the real Enterprise looks like folks:

http://www.cloudster.com/sets&vehicles/STEnterprise/SmithsonianMiniature.htm

Notice it’s white – NOT gray.

58. Batts - November 20, 2007

I think Return of the Archons was impressive!! Court Martial was outstanding!! I will watch the rest later on!.

59. steve623 - November 20, 2007

That proves absolutely nothing. How many times has the Smithsonian model been repainted? 3? 4?

60. R Sull - November 20, 2007

Love the teaser images but can anybody post a screencap of Starbase 11 from “Court Martial?” The original matte was beautiful and I am dying to see what CBS-D did with it.

61. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

#57. Actually it is grey. It’s called Ghost Grey.

62. Dr. Image - November 20, 2007

#57- That was after the first restoration- it was the FIRST horrible paint job.
The only area untouched was the topside of the saucer, and the color is so off in those shots it’s impossible to tell anything.
Check The Idic Page for history. CBS-D got the color RIGHT. It’s gray.
Do the research. You’ll see.

63. Thomas Jensen - November 20, 2007

The actual model was a shade of gray with greenish elements.

64. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

Not to mention those pics were taken with flash photography which is why the Enterprise looks pale and almost white. Lit up like a christmas tree.

65. Kevin - November 20, 2007

I think at least 2.

No one uses models anymore. It’s all CGI.

The reason CBSD is working on this rather than EdenFX or ILM is simple-Cost.

Personally, I don’t really see anything wrong with CBSD’s CGI. I like their Enterprise. ‘Just wish the time and money had been there to do more.

That’s why I won’t pay the amount they want for the DVDs.

The shots above look pretty good to me, but I agree that a drydock or better indication that the ship was being repaired would have been better. Along with smaller ships of different classes in orbit.

The Enterprise doesn’t look that damaged to me.

66. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

#60 Here it is:

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/2442/courtmartialjz1.jpg

67. RTC - November 20, 2007

Does anyone know if the TOS-R episodes on DVD are ‘sliced and diced’ like those that aired, or are they the complete episodes? That’ll have a bearing on whether I pony up the bucks to buy the set.

68. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

Of course they’re the full eps. Why wouldn’t they be?

69. Mr. Fancy Pants - November 20, 2007

I agree with those who say these FX look too CGI. And just how big is the ultraviolet satellite? How many decks would that thing take up?

These updated FX continue to be a mixed bag, but these shots look like the team was just rushing to finish these episodes in time for the DVD release.

I truly hate to say it…because I support this project with enough time and money!

70. Mr. Fancy Pants - November 20, 2007

The post-ion storm Enterprise just looks a *little bit* dirtier on the outside…

…big whoopty doo! They could have done more with that! And that Eden FX shot of the Enterprise in drydock…whoa!!! That is COOL!!!!

71. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

To be fair, those commenting on a still picture without seeing the whole sequence of the Enterprise under repair. May as well be talking out of your anuses, because you haven’t seen it yet.

72. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

I just bought it, opened it and watched some of it……….and the verdict?…………………I LOVE IT I TELLSYA!!

As Chekhov would say, “it was so….real!”

It is so clear and so beautifully done, I’m never leaving home again!!

I’m going to watch it over and over again until I’m one of those guys where they have to use a helicopter to airlift me out of my apartment because I weigh a thousand pounds!!

Pass the popcorn……..munch…..munch………..

STAR TREK LIVES!!!!!

73. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

I feel the same way Harry, almost…

74. Bramblett - November 20, 2007

Does anybody know where I can get this set? I could not find it anywhere. It WAS released today wasn’t it?

75. Anthony Pascale - November 20, 2007

74
In stock at Amazon…also low price too (see the big image at the bottom of the article)

76. Roger - November 20, 2007

2. Adrian Anansi – November 20, 2007
FIRST

I’ve never got it before!

…and you never will.
Ha-Ha!

77. Scotty's Swollen Left Testicle - November 20, 2007

Not paying 130 bucks for anything. They can suck my healthy right nut!

78. The Doomsday Machine - November 20, 2007

I’m with you, Scotty’s Nut! Over a hundred dollars for a forty year old TV show? Give me a break! But a bunch of dumb bozos will do exactly that…

79. Balock - November 20, 2007

I saw The Menagerie at the movies. I wanted see if CGI looked better in big HD versus the web previews. I don’t understand all the positive posts, I was disappointed with all shots where the models use to be. In fact, there were shots of the models in previews, and the closing credits, and they looked way (way) better then the CGI stuff.

Generally, I’m okay to tweaks made to other artwork, for example, all the improvements around around Starbase11 looked great. Also, the overall image quality was great in HD, although overall scenes seemed a little too dark too me. I’m also okay with an attempt to bring more shots of ships, angles, etc. Too bad they didn’t use models, because the CGI jst doesn’t cut it (the shuttlebay, shuttelcraft, Ent, etc.). I think the result would have been better if they cleaned up the original model shots. The one exception may be the Doomsday Machine, perhaps the Ultimate Computer.

80. Balock - November 20, 2007

I saw The Menagerie at the movies. I wanted see if CGI looked better in big HD versus the web previews. I don’t understand all the positive posts, I was disappointed with all shots where the models use to be. In fact, there were shots of the models in previews, and the closing credits, and they looked way (way) better then the CGI stuff.

Generally, I’m okay to tweaks made to other artwork, for example, all the improvements around around Starbase11 looked great. Also, the overall image quality was great in HD, although overall scenes seemed a little too dark too me. I’m also okay with an attempt to bring more shots of ships, angles, etc. Too bad they didn’t use models, because the CGI jst doesn’t cut it (the shuttlebay, shuttelcraft, Ent, etc.). I think the result would have been better if they cleaned up the original model shots. The one exception may be the Doomsday Machine, perhaps the Ultimate Computer.

81. fatman bruno - November 20, 2007

Well we know that all the major effects houses visit this site from time to time….so how about they send trekmovie.com their version of what the new movie Enterprise would have looked like if they had got the contract,
Come on Eden, Digital Domain etc etc show us what you’re made of!!!
-got to say I like the Enterprise in #18

This is the U.K. signing off for the night (1.30am)

82. Michael Hall - November 20, 2007

#66–looks like the Starbase 11 matte wasn’t changed at all, then, other than the foreground comp of the shuttle flyby. And while I can understand that–of all the original mattes, it was one of the more technically perfect–it still comes as something of a disappointment.

Nevertheless, I’m looking forward to seeing these on DVD for myself. $130.00 is not all that far from reasonable. :-)

83. Michael Hall - November 20, 2007

Addendum–the only “dumb bozos” are those who think their own artistic judgement is inherently superior, and that they know best about how others should spend their own money.

84. Gene Coon was the Better Gene - November 20, 2007

#66 Wow! That stinks! Looks just like the original. This shot was famous for being in the closing credits. They should have added new CGI yellow titles over the purple buildings. (I’m in a bad mood)

85. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

#82

One thing you can’t really see in a still picture is all the movement of the people walking about inside the tower.

86. CmdrR - November 20, 2007

46. Daniel Broadway – November 20, 2007
I had my own go at creating a “Remastered” shot using CG. Mine is a bit more contrasty

Nice, but coupla things: there’s a big crease in the front of the primary hull. I know you want it to look like paneling, but it looks like my ex borrowed the ship and dinged it. Also, the forward, round windows (I think) are actually supposed to be very bright anti-collission lights, not viewports. I do like looking in the other ports, though. Still hoping to catch Rand in the shower.

87. The Doomsday Machine - November 20, 2007

Artistic judgment has nothing to do with it. I’m talking finances here. Much finer shows can be purchased for thirty bucks. No show is worth 130 dollars to me, but because dumb bozos will pay that price, it’s what happens. Nothing artistically judged here. I’m judging YOU, the dumb bozos who are willing to pay ridiculous prices. I’ll be fine without the show until I can find a more reasonably priced used set, or maybe I’ll shoplift it…

88. Ty Webb - November 20, 2007

#87. Trust me meathead, it’s a great set. If you can’t afford $130. Then I dunno, get a new job perhaps.

89. Bramblett - November 20, 2007

#75 Thanks, Anthony. (It’s frustrating never being able to find Star Trek stuff locally.)

90. Shatners Hairpiece - November 20, 2007

Costco has the set for $129. Everybody who is bitching about the effects should think this is a good thing reguardless becasue at least they are paying attention to Trek and I think the HD makes it look so much better.

Antwat

91. T Negative - November 20, 2007

Just ordered mine from Amazon earlier today. Should arrive tomorrow (I did next day air). I tried buying one here in Northern Colorado but no one had any in stock anywhere!! They all said they had not gotten them yet. Sounds to me like a mix-up perhaps. Anyway, I can’t wait to watch these.

Thanks for the Sneak peak Matt!! makes me even more excited for tomorrow.

That “Armageddon” shot looks amazing. I remember Rossi saying that the opening shot in “Archons” was going to be a good one too. There was an article here a while back where I remember him saying that. Looking forward to it!!

92. Xai (not first and really don't care if you need to be) - November 20, 2007

I am tired of the “First” stuff and I personally think the “first” should be blessed with a week long ban.

And I think all the remastered shots should be judged as they appear on-screen, not here. No offense, but the site doesn’t do them justice.

93. Mr Fancy Pants - November 20, 2007

I’m going to laugh my tokus off at you fools who paid $130 bucks for these sets when WALLY WORLD marks those Remastered Season One Sets down to fifty bucks!

:-)

94. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

It’s a shame when people who don’t have enough money to buy something end up criticizing those who CAN afford it. Here in Canada it cost me $170 (taxes included) for the new TOS HD-DVD set. I’m watching it tonight and have already gleaned enough enjoyment out of it to warrant paying that amount.

Hell, dinner for two at a nice restaurant would cost the same, with the Trek discs being infinitely more entertaining with the added bonus of having them to enjoy OVER and OVER again for years!

Worth it? Damn straight, and then some!!!

95. CmdrR - November 20, 2007

Dinner for two costs $170 in Canada?
What the heck they feeding you, Harry?

$130 is top dollar. Is it worth it? Obviously, some people think so. Wishing for the price to drop isn’t going to make it so. Paramount smells money. That’s it.

96. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

Me like to eat!!

97. Greg2600 - November 20, 2007

Daniel Broadway – Nice artwork indeed, but probably would cost too much money for CBS-D. As for the Enterprise Smithsonian model, that one is very much debatable because I think the guy who prepared it repainted the model in the wrong color. In addition, the slight cheesiness in the CGI in TOS-R is actually I think good, because it still makes it look kind of old school. Although I have also felt that all along, the Enterprise was poorly lit. I don’t know why they do that?

98. The Doomsday Machine - November 20, 2007

#88
Man, you stupid Bozos don’t get it, do you? I have plenty of money. I just bought an iMac and a digital SLR. I had no problem with spending thousands on those because I thought they were worth it! What I’m saying is, and I’ll try to type slower here so you can understand, is that TOS is not worth 130 dollars TO ME! Does that help, the caps, because I don’t know how else I can spell it out. That old fossilized show is worth forty bucks, tops, and that’s all I’d consider paying. Get it now? I know I’m a meathead and all, but I think I’ve explained it as basically as I can. I don’t speak Bozoian very well, though.

99. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

Bozo was a clown, wasn’t he?

Hmmm, I’d rather be a clown than a horse’s ass!

100. Scotty's Swollen Left Testicle - November 20, 2007

Hey, Dooms, I hear ya! I have a lot of shows I’ve liked better than ST and they were much cheaper on DVD. I’ve also chosen not to reward greed by buying overpriced sets. But it’s all a matter of perspective. To some people, $130 is well worth it. Convincing them otherwise won’t work. I think you’re just pissed that Paramount is gouging, and I don’t disagree with you there. The restoration they’ve done and the new FX certainly don’t warrant the gigantic price they’re asking for. Especially when they don’t have to pay any of the writers or actors any residuals from the sales! So, yeah, I’ll boycott it with you, and bless the bozos for paying top price if that’s what they want!

101. Bozo - November 20, 2007

Hey, I am STILL a clown, OK? And I don’t appreciate anybody using my name in a demeaning fashion. So screw you, Doomsday Machine! Get your fist out of your mother and put it in your face where it belongs.

102. Anthony Pascale - November 20, 2007

Queffer/Bozo/Testicle/Doomsday/Bozo
banned for a week for spoofing and spamming and inappropriate language (and names). If you come back…find a new name and no more of the above or permaban

comments to http://trekmovie.com/about/feedback

103. Buckaroohawk - November 20, 2007

seeing some shots of yet-to-be-aired episodes is cool, but I’m not liking the “barn doors” on the underside of the secondary hull. How could they possibly be hinged to the hull? The area where the hinges are supposed to be is so small the doors would snap off as they’re opened.

It would have been better to have the doors slide up into the hull. That would be more in keeping with the streamlined aesthetic of the Enterprise.

not that I’ve put much thought into it or anything…:-)

104. I AM THX-1138 - November 20, 2007

Anthony, I got lost in all that. Is Queefer/Bozo/Doomsday/Testicle all the same dude? If so, was he/they arguing and conversing with himself/themselves? If so, that’s nuts (sorry Harry)!

It is with glee that I fork over my money for this outrageously overpriced bunch of 40 year old TV with new FX. Why you ask? Because I’m a geek with money and that’s what we do. Hell, look at Paul Allen. That dude likes football (bought a football team), basketball (bought a basketball team), Rock and Roll and Sci-Fi (bought the most outrageous bunch of memorabilia and opened a museum).

105. Skippy 2k - November 20, 2007

I also can’t wait to see the new eps but I agree about the open doors, would have been better if they slid apart. The “closeup pan” image, is there a particular reason within the ep to show that part of the ship or is it just part of a pan on the whole ship? Maybe and odd question just wondered why it was specifically a closeup of the aft section?

106. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

You know what I’m noticing so far in watching the HD-DVD? It’s how gorgeous Nichelle Nichols looks….with this clarity of detail, she’s never looked lovelier!!

As for Shatner….that must be one hell of a toupee he wore during TOS’s original run because, even with high definition picture, I can’t quite make out the edge or hint of any hair replacement and THAT’s during extreme close-ups….Damn he’s good!!

107. Sean4000 - November 20, 2007

Harry, that alone might convince an old Eden-stalwart like me to pick up this set. That woman was stunningly beautiful in her youth.

108. Son of Sarek - November 20, 2007

For my money – these folks do a far better job with the effects. In particular download World Enough and Time…

http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/

109. Son of Sarek - November 20, 2007

Some shots from 1966 in the Desilu studios. Not a dingy gray!

http://joeorman.shutterace.com/Trek/trek_spaceseed2.jpg
http://joeorman.shutterace.com/Trek/trek_spaceseed1.jpg

110. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

Look, it’s 1a.m. but I just had to share…..I’ve watched four episodes so far of TOS HD-DVD and I am THRILLED at the quality of the picture!

It may take twenty years before they come out with holographic imaging of the original episodes, but until then, this will do nicely, thank you!!!

Now excuse me while I pull an all-nighter and watch Trek with my 60″ plasma 1080p, hi-def, 7.1 surround-sound, the whole shebang………..uh……..uh……….guh……….anybody got a cigarette????

111. Son of Sarek - November 20, 2007

Daren Dochterman did the first take on a CGI based enhanced project. Unfortunately, CBS didn’t give him the job.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYKfQYxXxvc

More can be found here. Daren’s take on the CGI is more true to the original look. He gave it some grain to make it fit better with the film…

http://trekmovie.com/2007/02/09/daren-dochtermans-doomsday-is-done/

112. Sean4000 - November 20, 2007

To all who love this stuff. Whatever. To each his/her own.

I just hope they keep their ***beeping***hands off TNG

113. Matt Wright - November 20, 2007

#60 — CBS-D pretty much left it alone, but added little people actually walking around in the offices of the building in the matte painting, and they added some little shuttlepods flying by at night in the distance.

#70 — Actually you get a nice pass by the beat up Enteprrisein one of the “planet orbit shots” and there are scars and a small chunk of the aft section of secondary hull is missing, and in a really cool touch, you can see people in the windows by the observation deck (I think that’s where it is) as you pan past it.

#105 — It was really just an arbitrary screenshot, it is a shot fixed in orbit very close to the Enterprise and we watch all of the Enteprise pass us (the camera/viewer) very close by. The episode doesn’t have much going on as far as CGI is concerned.

Mudd’s Women also has a new miner encampment shot that looks nice.

114. The Vulcanista - November 20, 2007

#110: Here ya go:
~
~
____________________
[_____|______________|

:-)

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

115. The Vulcanista - November 20, 2007

Hey! That didn’t come out right! The little squiggly things are supposed to be over the other end of the cig!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

116. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

Thanks, Vulcanista…………………..was it good for you?

117. Kirky - November 20, 2007

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwocentsa146.html#bitontrek

Over at digitalbits they are a bit underwelmed with the picture quality of the TOS remastered picture quality, I copied and pasted it below.

The one last comment I wanted to make however pertains to the video quality. I was expecting to be blown away by remastered TOS on disc, and at times I was. But I was also expecting the quality to be significantly improved from the high-def broadcasts, given how much better the video bit rates should be on disc, and I wasn’t so much. I’m having a hard time coming up with a reason why that would be – because it shouldn’t be – other than that the video may have been compressed a little too much to fit these episodes on to the HD-30 portion of the combo discs. Each disc seems to have three episodes plus some extras. The first episode I watched was Where No Man Has Gone Before. And I have to say, I was a little surprised to see what looked like compression artifacting during some of the effects shots. I couldn’t help wishing that there was a Blu-ray version on BD-50 discs to compare it with. Now… I don’t know how much of a difference that would realistically make, because most of the studios that do or have supported both formats seem to use the same video encode for both formats for cost reasons, which means the video bitrates for Blu-ray are always reduced because of the need to accommodate the disc space available on HD-DVD. In any case, forget Blu-ray – I was still really expecting to be dazzled by the HD-DVD image, and I’m not. Don’t get me wrong: This set still seems to be quite good overall. A lot of hard work has obviously gone into it, and as I said I want to really take the time to give it a fair shake. But so far, I’m just a little bit underwhelmed. I’m sure that will be spun like crazy in various quarters online, but so be it. It can’t be helped, I suppose. Anyway, I’ll keep looking and report in more detail later.

118. Harry Ballz - November 20, 2007

Gee, Kirky, you lost me after “listen carefully…”

119. Kirky - November 20, 2007

No where in my post did I type “listen carefully”. Oh I forgot to put quotes around all of that large paragraph, oops.

120. Bernd Schneider - November 20, 2007

Nice pictures!

I would have preferred Mudd’s Class J to be the same ship as the J Class, but the way it was done it is nice too.

121. Laserlover2254 - November 21, 2007

Wow, nice Class J.

Good one, TOSR people. I thought you were going to use the one from Enterprise.

122. Al - November 21, 2007

Herc at AICN notes this in his review:

Learn that Gary Lockwood already knew he was doing Kubrick’s “2001” when he booked the “Trek” pilot. Learn that Gene Roddenberry commissioned a second title theme for “Trek’s” second pilot, but nobody liked it as much, so they went back to the now-familiar original title-theme for the series. Learn that the same planet set served as both Talos IV (in the first pilot) and Delta Vega (in the second pilot). Learn that a fan poll favored changing the “R” to a “T” on Kirk’s gravestone, but the HD-DVD producers lacked the resources to make the fix. Learn why HD-DVD producers decided not to fill the skies above Starbase 11 (where broken-Pike lived) with lots of spacecraft. Learn that it took six weeks to remake the single brief shot zooming into Pike’s bridge. Learn that the HD-DVD producers wanted to redesign the clunky “Balance of Terror” Neutral-Zone map, but ran out of time before they could. Learn that Michael Okuda thinks everybody trying to be very very quiet in “Balance of Terror” makes zero sense because the vacuum of space doesn’t carry sound waves. Learn that Phyllis Douglas, who plays superhot Yeoman Mears in “Galileo Seven,” played Rhett Butler’s daughter in “Gone With The Wind” and a hippie chick in “The Way To Eden.” Learn that half of “Star Trek’s” first-season episodes were written before shooting began. Learn that the name “Uhura” came from the title of a book Nichelle Nichols was carrying when she met Roddenberry. Learn that though the Klingons were introduced in season one, their ships were not designed until season three. Learn that film critic Pauline Kael loved “Space Seed.”

123. Al - November 21, 2007

#106 HD and Shatner’s toup

Consensus is that the Shat had frontal hairline and that hair was laid in front of the piece.

124. Holo J - November 21, 2007

Is thats as close as we get to seeing Mudd’s ship? Or does it get any closer?

125. bill - November 21, 2007

The main problem with these remastered episodes is that they update things that for the most part work well in star trek. The utter stupidity of the idea that they didn’t want to change too much and alter the “look and feel” of the show is as ridiculous as the morons who believe it are gullible. It is all budget. Thats why their CGI looks like video game footage. Some of the shots are certainly improvements. But the real problem with the effects of TOS is the dated look of it. From the silly creatures (the horta: A man crawling around the floor under a rug), Aliens that cannot close their mouthes (The gorn comes to mind, and one of the creatures from the menagerie I believe), to the silly buttons and displays that scream cheap 1960’s tv show they all suck. These are the things they need to be replacing. That would actually make it possible for the later generations to appreciate Star Trek for what it is instead of laughing at it because of the cheesy effects. The so called remastered versions do nothing to remove this silliness. The idea that they are preserving the original creators of the show intent is absurd. Do you really think the creators of the show wanted to have a visually dated product that has effects, sets and backgrounds so bad in quality that they have become laughable? I doubt it. Even if they did I personally could care less. I’d like to see them actually remastered. Replacing everything about Star Trek that sucks and making a damn near perfect show. I for one am not stupid enough to swallow their absurd reasoning to get us star trek fans to purchase something that is of lesser quality than most modern video games. The fact that so many of you are swallowing this crap is simply amazing. Makes me want to photocopy some photos out of my collection and sell them. You people will apparently buy/swallow anything!

126. Ty Webb - November 21, 2007

#117.

Digitalbits has a huge blu-ray bias, so I’d read anything on there with a huge pinch of salt. It’s not really a credible site at all IMO.

127. jonboc - November 21, 2007

125- Your rant is noted and millions of people worldwide still disagree with your opintion. But thanks for sharing.

128. non-fanatic - November 21, 2007

A sneak peak interview from whoever is in charge of Star-Trek in the future:

Technology has moved on so far since the original remastering work of 2006, that we can now do things that took a dedicated team days or even weeks to complete in a couple of hours, and do it much better.
At the time we were unable to realistically simulate the original characters either visually or audibly, so we were pretty much locked to the original action and script. Of course, all that’s changed in recent years and we are able to improve and extend dialogue and place the characters wherever we want them.

For example, when we undertook the original remastering, we really wanted to do more. We wanted to replace those cheesy 1960s stage sets but with the technology available, this would have been near impossible to do or it would have taken weeks of work for just a couple of minutes of footage. Now or course, we’re able to use simulated characters and place them in whatever setting we want and use more realistic lighting so they don’t look like they’re filmed in a studio. We can then use the facial expressions and movement of the original footage, or adjust them if appropriate. With this technique we’re able to replace any environment where the original characters were filmed. For instance, We’ve built whole new 3D “sets” for the bridge, corridors, turbo-lift, engineering, if fact all environments are new. It’s actually quicker to replace them completely now than to clean up or modify transfers of the existing footage as we did back in 2006.

The original audio track has been translated into simulated audio format. Without getting into the technical jargon, the result effectively sounds identical to the original, only it is totally clean with no noise or studio reverberation. It sounds like it was recorded with state-of-the-art technology. We can easily manipulate any part of the audio, or add new dialogue if necessary. We then apply a simulated ambience modelled from the 3D landscape we’ve placed the characters in, which all helps to add to the realism or the show.

For the first time we’re able to create whole new scenes using the original cast, and you cannot tell the difference. We can even complete the original five year mission, but I don’t want to say any more about that at the moment!

There will be new aliens also, so no more “man-under-carpet” or “man-in-gorn costume” monsters.

I’m fully aware that there will be some Star-Trek fans who have grown-up with the original re-mastered series from 2006 who will not want to see any changes at all. I understand that. Let me assure them that we have gone out of our way to keep to the original “computer game” look so beloved by the fans of the re-mastered episodes. We’ve just made it a bit more believable — hopefully a lot more believable — for a new generation of up-coming Star-Trek fans.

129. COMAPSSIONATE GOD - November 21, 2007

Re: 94. Harry Ballz – November 20, 2007
“It’s a shame when people who don’t have enough money to buy something end up criticizing those who CAN afford it. ”

So childish, that it is still difficult to believe anyone would make such a class-laden comment.

Price has nothing to do with one not wanting to waste money (as in my case–an issue of inferior efx and no HD originals sans CBS’ mess).

Individuals with money stay that way by NOT making BAD investments, Mr. Harry. Just so you know.

As I said in another thread, have CBS call me when they release TOS-HD without the tribute to videogame animation, and I (for one of many) will be glad to slap down the bucks for such a set!

130. doubleofive - November 21, 2007

I think that they should at least release a cheaper set that doesn’t have the DVD side, and since there would be more HD DVD layers, there would be fewer discs. And what would it hurt to have the original versions on there? They’re not Lucas for goodness sake.

131. Cervantes - November 21, 2007

Nice to see Harry Mudd getting what looks to be an interesting ship, and some nice new shots in general, but I sure wish the ‘Enterprise’ hadn’t ended up so, well…GREY…overall. I’d have liked it to have had a WHITER appearance over the episodes myself, as the original seemed to have. That’s a fine ‘city’ matte though.

#126 Ty Webb

As a big fan of http://www.thedigital.bits site for a long time now, I have to say that it has ALWAYS been an in-depth and reliably even-handed resource on all things DVD-related. I visit it on a regular basis, for early heads-ups and factual information on Movies and Shows coming to DVD and High Def DVD, and Bill Hunt and Co. do a great job on it in my personal view.
But I respect your wish to differ…

132. Ty Webb - November 21, 2007

I think the next person to liken the FX to a video game should be taken out to the barn and shot quite frankly.

133. Cervantes - November 21, 2007

Oh, forgot to say…

#46 Daniel Broadway

If only something like this masterwork of yours was the final look in the upcoming Movie, I would be a VERY happy audience member.
A fantastic job IMO.

134. petitspock - November 21, 2007

Starbase 11 is a repair facility. Where’s the space dock?

135. Michael Hall - November 21, 2007

“Compassionate” clearly has a problem with reading comprehension (as well as just allowing others to enjoy what they like in peace without insulting them), as the original posting was critical of the notion of spending $130.00 on a “40 year-old TV show”–Trekmovie.com being a great venue for such criticism, btw–and not specifically a slam at CBS-D’s work.

And thanks for your creative posting, non-fanatic, which nicely addressed the profound foolishness of #125.

136. Nelson - November 21, 2007

The hairpiece is visible in What are Little Girls Made Of. The side view shot close-up when he’s on the table saying, “Mind your business Mr. Spock, I’m tired of your Half Breed interference.”

The HD-DVD is very much worth it and everyone has their level of what is worth while. To me, Star Trek is very much worth it. It’s good for the soul to splurge every now and then!

Agree with earlier posters, one is noticing so much that they’ve not seen before or wasn’t as apparent. Nichelle Nichols was hot! Seeing The Shat’s pores! The join on Nimoy’s ears. The props and sets, the costumes! I never knew the floor of the bridge was carpeted. Very clear in Charlie X. Etc, etc.

137. Scott - November 21, 2007

Re: #128 non-fanatic.

Hang onto a copy of your post — I’ll bet it won’t be far off the mark within a decade or so…except for maybe the tongue-firmly-in-cheek final paragraph.

We 50- or 60-something year-old fanatics will no doubt be shelling out to buy yet another round “original” Treks!

Scott B. out.

138. GaryP - November 21, 2007

#46 Daniel Broadway

I like your rendering of the Enterprise a lot ! One of things you capture that CBSD does not is the sheer vastness of space. The orbiting of a planet looks more realistic when a planet is that big. CBSD makes the Enterprise orbit around planets as though they’ll make a full pass around it in 3 minutes. The only time they got it right was when they sampled planet Earth using actual telescope imagery.

139. JL - November 21, 2007

132
“I think the next person to liken the FX to a video game should be taken out to the barn and shot quite frankly.”

Don’t be ignorant. I spent years working in the videogame industry and some of this re-done stuff DOES look like it belongs in a videogame, as a cinematic cut sequence. If you don’t know what that means then you don’t know what the – pardon my french – F you are talking about.

And I am not just judging still shots like the ones above – – I have managed to watch a few of these re-done episodes on TV and I was shocked at how fake a lot of it looked. As many have stated, I think some of the sequences are okay, sure, even an improvement, but a lot of them are just plain HOKEY.

Oh. IMO

140. Doug L. - November 21, 2007

re 132

I Call ‘em like I see ‘em

Doug L.

141. COMAPSSIONATE GOD - November 21, 2007

Re: 135. Michael Hall – November 21, 2007
“Compassionate” clearly has a problem with reading comprehension (as well as just allowing others to enjoy what they like in peace without insulting them)”

Obviously, hypocrisy is in your blood, as you just engaged in the very thing you accused me of practicing. How does that feel, kid?

“as the original posting was critical of the notion of spending $130.00 on a “40 year-old TV show”–Trekmovie.com being a great venue for such criticism, btw–and not specifically a slam at CBS-D’s work. ”

..reading comprehension is not your friend if you cannot conclude that the reply I made specifically addressed a nasty comment based on the idea of not being able to afford an item. If you do not “get it” then that is your problem to deal with. Try understanding the bigger picture before you enter with more flaming…difficult as that may be for you.

BTW, if you were truly interested in people expressing their opinions, then you would STOP attempting to silence opinions (as in other threads) which do not support YOUR particular view of a situation. If any negative views of CBS’ work will NOT prevent you from buying or enjoying Remastered, logically you have no reason to complain–reducing your flaming to nothing.

See how that works?

142. Shatner_Fan_2000 - November 21, 2007

Now I know why Harry keeps asking how much Nimoy is being paid for XI … he want to make sure the wily Vulcan isn’t making more than him! ;)

143. the king in shreds and tatters - November 21, 2007

I like pie.

…kinda disappointed it’s not the ecs class j or federation scoutship they’re using for Mudd’s vessel.

144. Ty Webb - November 21, 2007

#139. I really don’t care that your a guy that works in the video games industry. Oh and if there was trek game with cut scenes as good as TOSR, then I’ve never seen that game. That game would rock. Besides actually *like* the strange real/unreal look of some these new effects.

145. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

if anyone would care to read CAREFULLY, they would see that people, like myself, who purchased the new set were being referred to as bozos and fools…………therefore I make no apologies for responding with the notion that their insults were predicated on an inherent jealousy of not having the means to buy it!

If someone is going to act like a child, they deserve to be treated like one!

146. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

#142 Shatner_Fan_2000 “why Harry keeps asking how much Nimoy is being paid”

That’s a sweet notion, but if I had a nickel for every nickel I own……..I’d have a nickel!!!

147. Michael Hall - November 21, 2007

Wrong. “Negative views” of CBS-D’s work wouldn’t in the slightest interfere with my enjoyment of these episodes, since (there’s that issue with reading comprehension again) I’ve previously expressed quite a few negative views myself with regards to their work in other fora; in particular with regards to their most recent efforts as seen in “The Deadly Years.”

But of course the issue isn’t the mere stating of one’s views about the quality of the work, which by any definition is fair game. The issue is your apparent unwillingness (and that of a few other CBS-bashers) to do so in a way which doesn’t outright claim that people who do enjoy the work are aesthetically challenged Viacom suck-ups who will gladly purchase any garbage that bears the Trek label. I know the distinction between such vitriol and a posting which amounts to “I think CBS-D’s work misses the mark–here’s why” is an untenably fine one for you, but there it is.

As for my “hypocrisy” in calling to account those who viciously castigate others for having the effrontery to like what they like–well, such reasoning seems a tad sophomoric to me–akin to accusing those, say, who deplore racists of engaging in de facto bigotry themselves. But in truth, you may have a point.

148. COMAPSSIONATE GOD - November 21, 2007

Re:145. Harry Ballz – November 21, 2007
“if anyone would care to read CAREFULLY, they would see that people, like myself, who purchased the new set were being referred to as bozos and fools…………therefore I make no apologies for responding with the notion that their insults were predicated on an inherent jealousy of not having the means to buy it!”

Thanks for admitting what someone else claimed did not exist.

Harry, did the “bozo” or “fool” line bother you THAT much? From your posts, you’re going to enjoy TOS-R time and again no matter what anyone says, so why give in to the slam by insulting the other person’s alleged lack of finances? In the end, YOU will still be happy with TOS-R, so…you know…why care?

149. COMAPSSIONATE GOD - November 21, 2007

Re: 147. Michael Hall – November 21, 2007
“Negative views” of CBS-D’s work wouldn’t in the slightest interfere with my enjoyment of these episodes, since (there’s that issue with reading comprehension again) I’ve previously expressed quite a few negative views myself with regards to their work in other fora; in particular with regards to their most recent efforts as seen in “The Deadly Years.”

There’s that flaming hypocrisy again, kid, and if you admit to having issues with the efx, you invalidate your rants against me (and others) when you are (drum roll, please) DOING THE SAME THING! It cannot be that hard.

“The issue is your apparent unwillingness (and that of a few other CBS-bashers) to do so in a way which doesn’t outright claim that people who do enjoy the work are aesthetically challenged Viacom suck-ups who will gladly purchase any garbage that bears the Trek label.”

If it is truly “a few” as you say, then you seem pretty petty to complain and flame as much as you do; classic making a mountain out of a molehill.

Michael, you’re a big man. Learn the 1st rule of life: as the decades pass, you will encounter opinions and observations about yourself and your tastes which you may find unsettling, but this causes no ill effect to your life and ability to think and feel as you so desire, therefore your defensive behavior has no justification.

In short, get over it, as EVERYONE has the same rights you do–as much as you want to spin that as some sort of assualt on the innocent.

150. Anthony Pascale - November 21, 2007

I suggest everyone calm down…now

151. Sean4000 - November 21, 2007

Everybody look out, there are already TOS-R bootleggers on eBay. I just reported one and there will most likely be many more.

152. Shatner_Fan_2000 - November 21, 2007

I’m with you, Harry. I can’t wait to pick up my set this weekend! If buying it makes one a bozo, then hand me my red nose!

Now quit being modest and loan me $160.

153. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

The $160 is in the mail, but that would, of course, be in CLOWN DOLLARS!!

154. Kertrats - November 21, 2007

Reading the verbal jousting back and forth on this page, I have to ask… do any of you people have jobs?!?

Ha, just kidding. I do have to admit, I’m one of those schmucks who ordered this set on amazon already. Just waiting for it to arrive now.

Oh, and here’s an interesting bit to add to the discussion of prices: I live in Canada, and therefore, the front page of Amazon.com has a banner encouraging me to order from Amazon.ca, their Canadian equivalent. When I ordered the set, the Canadian dollar was worth about seven cents more than the American dollar. However, when I went to Amazon.ca, the price they had it for was $155 Canadian. The price on Amazon.com? $132 US. Now, thankfully, I can order from Amazon.com and pay about $6 US for shipping. Why these guys are taking so long to allow the prices to get a little closer to parity, I have no idea. Well, other than squeezing every red cent they can out of us of course…

155. Jonathan - November 21, 2007

Sorry folks…I will wait to buy these until a) the price comes down to about 1/2 of what it is now, and b) after the format war between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray is settled.

The HD aspect is exciting as is the cleaning up of the images, but the price is just too high for something that may end up being obsolete in a year or two.

And I must say that I am VERY disappointed to hear that the sound is back to only 2 channels again :( :( . The DD5.1 sound on the previous DVD sets was way cool…why did they not include this option again?

BTW, did they get rid of that horrible scratch that ran vertically down the screen for several seconds in “Courtmartial” during the “heartbeat” scene (right after Mr. Cogley declares that Ben Finney is “NOT DEAD!” :) ?

156. I AM THX-1138 - November 21, 2007

I think I am going to buy two sets of these DVD’s. One to watch and the other to use as coasters for my drinks. Maybe three sets. I’ll use the third set to cut into star shapes and play ninjas in the back yard.

Seriously, though, I could have waited to buy these after the price inevitably went down but there is this nagging “now” factor that comes into play where Star Trek is concerned. I must have my stuff NOW!

How much corn have you gone through so far, Harry?

157. Ty Webb - November 21, 2007

#155. ” the price is just too high for something that may end up being obsolete in a year or two.”

How will it be obsolete? I’ve got laserdiscs from 15 years ago that still work fine.

158. Michael Hall - November 21, 2007

“There’s that flaming hypocrisy again, kid, and if you admit to having issues with the efx, you invalidate your rants against me (and others) when you are (drum roll, please) DOING THE SAME THING! It cannot be that hard.”

*Sigh* No. “DOING THE SAME THING!” would be saying the FX work was bad. . . and that anyone who thought otherwise was either a Viacom shill, entirely without taste, or incompetent to hold an opinion. Remarkable that you still can’t see the difference between that and a measured, thoughtful critique (see Doug L., Daren Dochterman, or Scott Gammans, for starters) of the work itself. It cannot be that hard.

“Learn the 1st rule of life: as the decades pass, you will encounter opinions and observations about yourself and your tastes which you may find unsettling, but this causes no ill effect to your life and ability to think and feel as you so desire, therefore your defensive behavior has no justification.

In short, get over it, as EVERYONE has the same rights you do–as much as you want to spin that as some sort of assualt on the innocent.”

Gee, thanks. Shorter version: your assertion that you have every right to be a perfect ass. To which I can only agree.

159. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

Four episodes so far, THX…..Man Trap, Court Martial, Naked Time and Mudd’s Women!

I tellya, the picture is SO CLEAR that after I watch an episode, I wonder why my face is hurting and then I realize….it’s because I’ve been grinning like a madman for the whole time!!

160. CmdrR - November 21, 2007

159 – I wonder why my face is hurting and then I realize….it’s because I’ve been grinning like a madman for the whole time!!

If you like that, Harry, wait til you discover women.
**zing**

Couldn’t resist.
Love ya, Harry!
Love TOS.
Love CBS-D.
Love Shatner. (In fact, he’s my daddy, but you’d never get him to admit that.)

HAPPY THANKSGIVING ALL!

161. Kertrats - November 21, 2007

160 – “If you like that, Harry, wait til you discover women.
**zing**”

Bwa ha ha ha ha!!! Oh man, that was a good one.

162. Jonathan - November 21, 2007

#157

“Obsolete” in the sense that if Blu-Ray format wins out in a year or two, then those who have bought this HD-DVD set and the accompanying HD-DVD player will not be able to buy anything new for their players.

The ST sets and the HD-DVD player will still be good, yes…but any other new hi-res DVDs that a person might want to purchase thereafter will not work, and the person will be stuck having to purchase yet another DVD player and perhaps additional copies of other DVDs purchased previously…

I have no beef with those who want to purchase these sets right now…believe me, I have a serious urge to do the same as I can certainly afford it, but I have personally decided to draw the line here as I consider the price to be a rip-off, especially for a set that I just bought a couple of years ago (after having bought all of the single, 2 episode disks before that).

But hey, your mileage may vary… :)

163. Anthony Pascale - November 21, 2007

the notion that in one year HD DVD units, which are selling like crazy at places like WalMart and Best Buy will suddenly be ‘obsolete’ is absurd. And even if it loses out in a few years, you can always buy a hybrid machine and all your old movies will keep on working into the next decade. It seems to me that if you have a fancy expensive hdtv and you want to see it with HD content. The players are 200 bucks and you get 10 free movies. If you are really paraoind, then rent your HD DVDs from Netflix..then there is no risk at all

164. Ty Webb - November 21, 2007

Not to mention, that this set includes normal DVDs as well. Normal DVDs play on Blu-ray players. OK, not in HD, but you get the point.

165. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

#160 CmdrR “If you like that, Harry, wait til you discover women”

Well played, CmdrR! Hmmm, that’s what I get for letting my guard down, eh?

When next we meet in the arena….we shall see who spills first blood…..

Women? Yes, I’ve heard of these emotional, yet tantalizing, creatures….where would one find such a treasure?

Nyuk, nyuk……………woo, woo, woo………………:)

166. COMAPSSIONATE GOD - November 21, 2007

Re: 158. Michael Hall – November 21, 2007
“DOING THE SAME THING!” would be saying the FX work was bad. . . and that anyone who thought otherwise was either a Viacom shill, entirely without taste, or incompetent to hold an opinion.”

Since I never said that about you, once again, you are a liar turning to infantile flaming, which only reveals your failure to tolerate opinions different than yours..about a TV series’ efx work–the very heart of your ever crumbling arguments around here. Good show, kid.

Because you failed to get it the first time, i’ll post it again…

Learn the 1st rule of life: as the decades pass, you will encounter opinions and observations about yourself and your tastes which you may find unsettling, but this causes no ill effect to your life and ability to think and feel as you so desire, therefore your defensive behavior has no justification.

In short, get over it, as EVERYONE has the same rights you do–as much as you want to spin that as some sort of assualt on the innocent.

“Gee, thanks. Shorter version: your assertion that you have every right to be a perfect ass. To which I can only agree. ”

Only a perfect ass could agree. After all, your every post is nothing short of the textbook example of intolerant ass-like behavior which turns into defensive, empty rants and flames. Again, good show. Let’s see if you are man enough to grow up and offer anything intelligent, or will it be the same old song from you?

Surprise the world.

167. CmdrR - November 21, 2007

Harry — you like Chinese gals? My wife has a habit of match-making. Come to Atlanta. We’ll fill you with calzones and get ya hitched.

168. CmdrR - November 21, 2007

Or, we could fight to the death with lirpa.

169. Anthony Pascale - November 21, 2007

compassionate god I have warned and warned…told everyone to tone it down…next flame from you = permaban

comments to
http://trekmovie.com/about/feedback

170. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

CmdrR….it seems like every time somebody offers me a meal of calzones, with a lovely girl involved, there’s always a hitch!

Next time I’m in Atlanta I’ll look you up and we can drink wine and laugh ourselves silly! Now if I can only slip my lirpa through customs!! :)

171. Sean4000 - November 21, 2007

What is it not okay to post our opinions if they don’t praise CBS-D?

172. Sean4000 - November 21, 2007

I’ll keep it civil but I WILL NOT HOLD BACK MY OPINION!

173. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

Just finished watching Balance Of Terror TOS HD-DVD and I can’t help but notice that the outfits worn by the Romulans in this episode bear a striking resemblance to the wardrobe worn by Quinto in the recently released shots from the new movie……is that worth discussing?

174. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

What, everybody asleep already??

175. Sean4000 - November 21, 2007

You and I are the only ones Harry. So, how’s the weather?

176. Harry Ballz - November 21, 2007

Hey, now wait a minute………….I’m watching Where No Man Has Gone Before TOS HD-DVD and when Gary Lockwood and Sally Kellerman are first chatting in Sickbay, as he grabs her and they start debating, you can actually see the shadow of the boom microphone floating in the left background!! Aw, c’mon!! Couldn’t the wizards who remastered this thing simply remove this abberation? Hell, if I spotted it, I’m sure they did!! And don’t tell me it would cost very much to remove a shadow from the film negative….???

Sheez, Louise…………….welcome to amateur hour!!!!!!!

177. The Vulcanista - November 21, 2007

Harry, Sean:

Still up too! Waiting for the PEE-kan/Puh-KAHN pie to finish!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

178. DGill - November 22, 2007

Regardless of how many people love TOS-R and hate it, I’m still going to buy it since it will be my first time owning the original series on DVD.

So am I correct to assume that this is the actual season one boxed set with all of the season one episodes (including ones we haven’t seen on TV yet) and not just the hodge-podge of various episodes from CBS Digital’s ‘Season One’? I’ve been getting some conflicted reports on this.

179. OR Coast Trekkie - November 22, 2007

It appears that from al these posts, we agree to disagree. Purists don’t understnad the non-purists and vice-versa

Most of you probably realize that I am of the non-purist camp and really wanted to have seen more done, or at least the vision be a bit different. I would like to have seen modern, 21st century looking effects, not modern 60’s looking effects. I would like to have had ALL the musical scores redone, not just the title scene. I would liked to have had all the sound effects digitally re-recorded, but keeping the sounds as they were. I would liked to have seen updated display panels.

The problem is that it appears as though new effects were never really part of the original intent. The true original intent was to simply restore the fil to true HD standards. However, the space shots, when restored, obviously looked horrible. The thing is: this probably wasn’t realized until AFTER the budget and deadlines were made. So all of a sudden:

(the following dramatization may or may not have occurred)
“Uh oh… these space shots are bloody awful on DVD. Certainly we can’t release this. What should we do?”
“Well, lets get somoene to redo those special effect shots.”
“But we don’t have that kind of time or money.”
“Hey, I can make a CGI Enterprise on the computers here. It’s pretty easy, quick and cheap.”
“Like your mom.”
“Shut up Chad.” (slap fight ensues)
“Hey, we can just say that we’re keeping with the original vision. After all, the original effects were made quick and on the cheap too.”
“Genius thinking Bob.”
“Hey, I got some Mr. Pibb in the break room fridge. Let’s crack it open and celebrate.”

I realize I was being completely unfair , but sometimes, that’s how it is. The point is, the reason why this remastered project is so hit and miss is because more is being done than was ever intended and planned for. IT would sem as though poor planning is what is making this project inconsistent.

That’s not to say there hasn’t been some awesome work here. But there’s also been some dreadful stuff too. Much of it is fair. It pains me to have to say that, becuase I think it should ALL be awesome.

Now the question I have for you puristis is: Isn’t having TOS in HD non-purist anyway? TOS was never meant to be seen THAT clearly. The amount of detail showin on HD was itself never meant to be seen. The boom mic shadow, for example, was something the original cameras would never have caught. Nor were the zippers that clearly visible, make up and skin flaws, etc. Justify to me how turning TOS to HD isn’t in and of itself a violation of TOS.

180. Holo J - November 22, 2007

179. OR Coast Trekkie

you make a good point, the effects were more of an after thought and because of this the finished result has suffered. I agree there has been some very good work done but also some rushed not so good.

“I would liked to have had all the sound effects digitally re-recorded, but keeping the sounds as they were. I would liked to have seen updated display panels.”

I would really like to have seen those display screens tackled as well because feel they really needed an up date, Plus those sound effects re-recorded as you mentioned as well.

I really hope this is just the start of a now on going remastering of TOS and that one day will get that version where all these things have been done. When that copy becomes available I will buy it, but until then I’ll stick with the originals.

181. Doug - November 22, 2007

re 179 180

I agree with you both here. Although “purist” is a highly subjective term. I embrace pretty much all the series with some caveats, but where the original enterprise is concerned, I consider myself a purist.

Probably since Star Wars came out in 1977, I’ve been dying to see the classic ent with top notch modern effects, and as you guys point out nicely… it’s hit or miss with the ext effects, and my disappointment shines through knowing this opportunity came and went and left me wanting more, more, better, better.

You’re absolutely right about the screens and sounds etc too. I certainly don’t blame CBS-D, but damn if this isn’t an unfinished project.

Doug L. Happy Turkey day all.

182. Doug - November 22, 2007

re 158 M Hall.. feeling your pain man.

re 166 – I don’t think anyone here needs a “life lesson” from you or anyone else.

Doug L.

183. COMPASSIONATE GOD - November 22, 2007

First of all, Happy Thanksgiving to fellow Trekkers, old-schoolers, new-schoolers, sparring partners and anyone else–and please avoid (if possible) hitting the streets, as the usual drunk drivers who started the party yesterday have not put the bottle down, as seen in my town over the past few hours.

Now to the rest…

179. OR Coast Trekkie – November 22, 2007
“It appears that from al these posts, we agree to disagree. Purists don’t understnad the non-purists and vice-versa”

True.

“Most of you probably realize that I am of the non-purist camp and really wanted to have seen more done, or at least the vision be a bit different. I would like to have seen modern, 21st century looking effects, not modern 60’s looking effects.”

Despite my problems with the efx, I really do not understand how you can upgrade the efx and retain the PRODUCTION era (and fictional era’s) look for the sake of franchise continuity (at least from TOS to Voyager) without doing too much damage?

“I would like to have had ALL the musical scores redone, not just the title scene.”

Curious–have you ever heard any of the original soundtracks isolated from the episodes? If one can forgive recording process of the period, the musicianship is still wonderful–a character all its own. I would almost have a bigger issue with that being replaced over the visual efx.

“The problem is that it appears as though new effects were never really part of the original intent. The true original intent was to simply restore the fil to true HD standards. However, the space shots, when restored, obviously looked horrible. The thing is: this probably wasn’t realized until AFTER the budget and deadlines were made.”

Your drama was amusing, but part of the “anti-CBS-efx” side’s (if one can call them that) argument is that the Remastered project is “what it is” but for the sake of respecting and preserving history, the HD-remastered TOS WITHOUT the CBS efx should have been released as well–on the other side of the discs, in this way, CBS earns more, because ALL sides are pleased.

Instead, it appears we are going through the George Lucas effect all over again: He tells us the Star Wars Special Editions are now THE only versions of the films, and the original theatrical versions are not, and will not be remastered or packaged for consumers (the release of the so-called “original” films on DVD from a year or so ago do not count, as it was–and I stress–alleged the transfers were from the pre-digital masters used for the old laserdiscs, hence customer complaints).

“That’s not to say there hasn’t been some awesome work here. But there’s also been some dreadful stuff too. Much of it is fair. It pains me to have to say that, becuase I think it should ALL be awesome.”

Agreed. At its heart, the Remastered project would never have pissed me off so much if it were not a shoddy rush job, where the big “E” is outclassed by the “New Voyages” fanfilm version, AND the non-CBS-efx versions were released on HD, too. Do they (CBS) NOT wish to sell as many units as possible?

“Now the question I have for you puristis is: Isn’t having TOS in HD non-purist anyway? TOS was never meant to be seen THAT clearly. The amount of detail showin on HD was itself never meant to be seen. The boom mic shadow, for example, was something the original cameras would never have caught. Nor were the zippers that clearly visible, make up and skin flaws, etc. Justify to me how turning TOS to HD isn’t in and of itself a violation of TOS. ”

Well, here’s the thing, if you have ever seen the raw, 35mm film of 1960’s color TV series (I have), it makes broadcast TV, VHS, laserdisc and even some DVD versions look like….waste. The TOS artists tried and succeeded at making a visually stunning series, so I think for TV and films where visual impact was a goal, why not remaster it for HD to see it as it was (likely) meant to be? Now i’m not saying TOS’ crew predicted HD quality as a consumer technology, but they would want the best to capture all of the creative energy and “brushstrokes” they put into that show.

184. IrishTrekkie - November 22, 2007

hmmmm , mudds ship is a J-class cargo ship

We have seen them in star trek Enterprise , remember the ECS Horizon !!!
hmm it does not look like the same ship to me lol. i want a close up !

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schematics/j-class.jpg

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schematics/j-class-screen.jpg

185. Mr Fancy Pants - November 22, 2007

Daren’s work doesn’t look CG at all…it’s amazing work pure and simple.

Too bad he didn’t get the contract to do this remaster.

186. Doug L. - November 22, 2007

183…

You’re just arguing semantics with your HD vs non HD question. It’s really not relevant whether it defies my “purist” credo to watch classic trek in HD. Being a purist is a highly subjective statement anyway. I wrote earlier that where the exterior design of the Ent is concerned, I’m a purist… meaning, I don’t see any need to “improve” on it for a new movie.

Some purists think that the only good trek is trek with Kirk. Others think the only good trek is shatner as kirk, while others still think TOS is the only real Trek… and so on… it’s an over-used term which really lacks specific meaning, and is largely used to pigeon hole people into a lump sum rather than attempt to understand their individual point of view.

Got to get back to the family. cya. Doug L.

187. Thomas Jensen - November 22, 2007

The worst thing about the remastered audio is when we get the second and third season hd-dvd’s we’ll be hearing the opera singer stand 10 feet in-front of the orchestra and bellow “ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah” right out front, leading the charge. I think it ruins the music because in the originals you did hear the voice, but not so LOUDLY. I just hope they put the chapter point right after the titles then I can just skip it after the end of the teaser.

188. Harry Ballz - November 22, 2007

Funny, Thomas, I usually don’t mind hearing a woman go, “ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah”…………………..personal preference, I guess! :)

189. Inge - November 22, 2007

Just one question to those which have already seen ““A Taste of Armageddon”:
How about the orbit shots, when the ENT is attacked?

190. Daniel Broadway - November 22, 2007

#188

*RIMSHOT*

191. Izbot - November 22, 2007

Re: Netflix. Don’t know what you guys are talking about. Netflix does *NOT* have the Remastered HD discs available.

192. jonboc - November 23, 2007

191- The set was just released 2 days ago. Give them time, they’ll have them eventually.

193. doubleofive - November 23, 2007

I just viewed the directory that the posted pictures are in, and they took a couple more shots:

http://trekmovie.com/tosrem/s1_teaser/cm_damage.jpg

http://trekmovie.com/tosrem/s1_teaser/mw_mining_colony.jpg

That Court Martial shot looks incredible! A lady in the window, totally cool!

194. Skippy 2k - November 23, 2007

That is cool, the other pic just looked like they dirtied the ship up a bit. Hadn’t notice that pic yet, is that Denise Okuda in window?

195. Sean4000 - November 23, 2007

Yeah, most likely.

196. Mr Fancy Pants - November 23, 2007

Still looks video gamey as hell, but I appreciate the effort anyway.

With feature film time and budget, these would be excellent shots.

197. Mr Fancy Pants - November 23, 2007

#184, your picture links don’t work…ugh…

198. Mr Fancy Pants - November 23, 2007

Hmmm…in the Return of the Archons image above, they left the ion pod off the CGI model….

199. Cyberghost - November 23, 2007

in the past I downloaded the ST TOS HD versions from xbox marketplace and when viewing these downloaded episode, the intro and all the re made SFX all viewed in true 16 x 9 (filling the whole screen) and when viewing the acting portion it switched back to the 4×3 true format, it looked great. Now I have received the new HD TOS DVD set.and to my dissapointment, all parts of the HD version are in 4×3.

Are there different versions like letterbox available or was the xbox marketplace version the only ones with the nice 16 x 9 and 4 x 3 switching format?

Is everyone else viewing their new ST TOS HD DVD in 4 x 3 format without the nice full screen 16 x 9 switching format or is it something I am doing, was this a marketplace episode exclusive?

200. Captain Hackett - November 23, 2007

200!

Last night I ordered the Star Trek: TOS HD-DVD boxset from the Best Buy online. I can’t wait to watch it when I get it! :)

201. jonboc - November 23, 2007

199- It’s 4:3, you’re not doing anythng wrong.

202. Harry Ballz - November 23, 2007

Captain Hackett……I bought it the day it came out and have been DEVOURING it ever since!!

Now, maybe, it’s because I’m watching it on a brand new 60″ Pioneer Elite Plasma with 1080p, Toshiba HD player, Karman Hardon, Monster cables, Energy speakers, etc……………but, that aside………….

Believe me, you are going to LOVE IT!! The picture is so clear you almost feel like you could climb up into the screen and join Kirk in his adventures!! Yahooooooooooo!!!!!

203. TJ Trek - November 23, 2007

This whole HD questions is a bit too much for my brain. I am one who would have liked to see the original designs and efeccts updated to todays standards. I wanted the original Trek to look as good as ENTERPRISE did. The ships on enterprise (for the most part) looked crazy good. Why couldn’t the original TOS ships look that good. I would pay real money to see the original show like that.

204. Cyberghost - November 23, 2007

jonboc, is that boc like Boca Raton? In live in Boca and you?

Thanks for your answer, to bad all the episodes were not like the ones from xbox marketplace, its nice seeing all the SFX fill the whole screen.

Scott

205. Sean4000 - November 23, 2007

#203: That is the subject of much debate here on these furums. Suffice to say it is a money issue and the job that CBD is doing is marginal. I would have loved to see EdenFX do these shots over again like they did from the Enterprise mirror universe two parter.

We’ll take what we get I suppose.

206. Sean4000 - November 23, 2007

I’m calling it marginal, there might be some human that goes “CBS-D is Christ’s company and they can do no wrong!”

207. Jonathan - November 23, 2007

Just an FYI to all…DeepDiscount.com has the HD set for just over $106 if you use the coupon code “PRICESEARCH” which gets you 20% off of the normal price of $132.85. The code is good until Sunday (11/25).

Still not going to go for it myself…I’m still drawing the line as it were with Paramount and Viacom, but for those who must have it now, I just thought I’d let y’all know…

208. Driver - November 23, 2007

I am viewing the HD eps from Netflix now. It all looks super great on my 51″ Hitachi RPTV. Connection via Toshiba HD-A2 and HDMI.

209. cyberghost - November 23, 2007

Does anyone know why Star Trek TOS HD was released for download on the XBOX Marketplace 10 episodes, some from series 1 and 2 with all the Intro and SFX showing in 16 x 9 format and acting switching back to 4:3? Its great to see all the new ships, battles, etc filling up the whole screen without the bars on the side vs. the new HD set is only 4:3, I downloaded them months ago, when they were released. Why would they use that cropped version vs. the whole screen shot version. The work was obviously done on some episodes, why not use them.

I am happy with the set, although I guess I was spoiled watching the HD XBOX marketplace versions over the past couple of months and was expecting the same, like the 10 episodes done with all the intro and special effects done in 16 x 9 format.

Also, I purchased it from Amazon for $132, no tax, no shipping, why would anyone buy from Best Buy online?

Maybe a special edition on the way, it just seems like a waste and for you that have not downloaded them from XBOX marketplace, do youself a favor and check it out and you will see what I mean, especially in episodes like Balance of Terror. (Lots of space sequence)

Download one episode from marketplace and you will have drank the coolaid… But if you decide to download the episode from the marketplace, make sure it says HD on the episode or you will not get the reworked HD Version.

210. Holo J - November 24, 2007

194. Skippy 2k

yeah it looks like her. I wonder if they will do anymore shots like that in future episodes? I like the idea of seeing more people near the window shots. I wonder if the argued over who would be at the window for that shot?

211. Dr. Image - November 24, 2007

#207 Jonathan
Thanks! $106.28 to be exact! Got the Toshiba HD-A3 yesterday at BB and AVOIDED the Trek set, thank God! No negative issues with the latest batch of players either, according to them anyway. Works for me.
(Get 2001. Looks awesome.)

212. Khan - November 24, 2007

Get TOS-R for $106.28 right now at deep discount with code DDAF.

213. Khan - November 24, 2007

Sorry, didn’t see that this was old news.

214. j w wright - November 26, 2007

the cgi 1701 still looks like massless polygons, more suitable to a re-imagining of the animated series than the live action one. they shoulda used a real miniature… greg jein or martin bower would have produced a model that could be shot from any distance and look perfect.

215. Sean4000 - November 27, 2007

I bet they could have for sure! I just want this whole project ended. But that means the next victim could be TNG………..

216. Commodore Wesley - December 2, 2007

#104: and Paul Allen also financed SpaceShipOne.

I must admit that I’m an old fart that doesn’t understand such lingo as 16 X 9, 4:3, etc. I think I’ve asked this stupid question before: will HD DVDs work on non-HD DVD players? Because I have a non-DVD player, and I don’t intend on buying an HD player until (God forbid) the vast majority of DVDs are released exclusively in HD. I also don’t intend on replacing my 1995 Monkey Ward’s, 20″, non-stereo, non-HD T.V. until it doesn’t work anymore (I have to press the on/off switch a few times before it turns on; but, to date, it always turns on eventually).

I also don’t get the video game comparisons. I’ve got a PS2, and I have yet to play a game that looks as realistic as CBS-D’s work, even the bad scenes.

I’ve also clicked on the links on many of ths site’s posts to the work of other CG artists (e.g., the one on this thread of the Big E in spacedock). To me, the vast majority of it is great art, but usually doesn’t look as realistic to me as CBS-D’s work. Maybe it’s the lack of motion; perhaps a pan by the spacedocked Enterprise, with vehicles/astronauts moving around it, would fool the eye into concluding that this is a photorealistic scene.

That said, I’ll always feel, at the current state of technology, that large models rule! Examples: the Enterprise in the first 6 movies; the 54′ long Discovery in “2001.” There were scenes in TOS, non-remastered, when the closeup shots of the Enterprise were very good. An even bigger model, shaded panels, better lighting, etc. would be unbeatable. Of course, CG is a LOT cheaper. To my eyes, with the exception of the usual suspects from Miri, Balance of Terror, etc. the CBS-D’s closeup shots of the E thrill me, and have (together with the remastered original mattes, new, wide-angle surface scenes as in Spock’s Brain and Amok Time, etc.) created a new excitement about viewing TOS episodes every week, which I haven’t had since I started religiously watching the syndicated series every day after school in 1969!

As for the first season remastered DVD set: I’ll wait until, inevitably, all 3 seasons are released in a boxed set for $200 or less. That is, if I can play them on my non-HD player!

Now, to all you Young Turks and technophiles: please don’t flame me. All of this is strictly IMHO, based on the evidence of my, admittedly, 47 year old eyes.

Thanks for reading. Be thankful that we have something TOS-related to chat about!

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.