New TOS-R Effects Compilation Video December 2, 2007
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TOS Remastered , trackbackCBS has released a four minute compilation video of effects from TOS Remastered.
The compilation is an update of the video put together and presented by Mike Okuda at the Vegas Star Trek con in August. It contains clips from the unaired episodes “Operation Annihilate!” and “A Taste of Armageddon.”
CBS Autodesk Endorsement
Another TOS-R item that was just found (but looks to be a few months old) is a CBS Digital endorsement for the Autodesk suite of products, including the rendering program Maya. In the article CBS-D chief Craig Weiss says of the project:
While we are re-creating many of the series’ revered effects elements and shots from scratch, our creative goal has been to digitally restore them to their most pristine condition, without pushing beyond the level of effects that would have been possible in the 1960s
Weiss goes on to discuss how Autodesk products help the team put together the episodes and mange the workflow of the 30-45 effects shots they do each week. Check out the full article at Autodesk.
Compilation Video courtesy of STARTREK.COM
Loading ...
Comments»
“without pushing beyond the level of effects that would have been possible in the 1960s”
Don’t you think if they were possible then…they would have been attempted? Sorry, I don’t agree. I know the budget was limited and I like the new ones. but that’s overstatement.
FIELD DAY! Give me time, I’m preparing my “axe.”… as someone said a few weeks ago.
Rats, these vids often don’t work on my Mac. The QT player/web interface is iffy. No, it’s not ME startrek.com.
While we’re at it, why don’t we just re-do the effects in every flippin’ genre work produced for film and television pre-1970s? Metropolis, Things to come, Forbidden Planet, the George Pal films, The Day the Earth Stood Still, 2001, Planet of the Apes, Fantastic Voyage, Twilight Zone, Outer Limits, ad infinitum. I mean, it wouldn’t be pushing beyond the level of effects of that time era, would it? Would it?
What’s the neologism the kids today use? “Craptastic” I think? Applies to the thinking behind ST-R, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
>>“without pushing beyond the level of effects that would have been possible in the 1960s”
Don’t you think if they were possible then…they would have been attempted? Sorry, I don’t agree. I know the budget was limited and I like the new ones. but that’s overstatement.
With regard to the above:
Yeah, it’s probably not literally true in every case, but I think the point is that they’re trying to honor the look of the original, even while giving it a little more polish.
Congrats CBS-D! Great work.
#4
That neologism is, etymologists suggest, a backwards formation from ‘craptacular’, a word which has been attributed to Bart Simpson.
Anyhoo, whatever these CBS-D people say their reasons for remastering Trek and replacing the effects have been admitted as a) because the original negatives of the effects were grainy and pock-marked into oblivion by the original compositing process and so are unremasterable into HD and b) to generate a bit of interest in TOS again so they can go on selling it.
I think that those being the intentions there’s not a lot to say about the thing but “oh, i do/do not agree with this motive”. If it’s all a cynical ploy that catches on and is applied to those other examples then i’d be surprised. People would be reluctant to spend the money on every bit of old rope i think.
Humm. Well, in the sixties computer animation was not possible at all. For this reason Kubrick – like many others who were into SiFi at the time (and the makers of TOS did so, too) used to film miniature ship models. The “level of what was possible in the sixties” is set just by the virtuosity of what Kubrick came up with and I suppose that the remastering folks just do not want to invest in just another rendering session while they sell the shortcomings of a low budget digital remastering as a benefit. Seen like that all that counts is just and only about the budget, and, well, thus they are really up to how they treated Trek when it was first made ;-)
Effective immediately, it’s COOL TO BE NUMBER TEN :)
I go to eleven baby!
I go to eleven baby!!!
Eh……damn posting delay which caused a double post!!!! 13th!!!
I like the effects.
That background music, though, is excruciating.
I’ve said it before, but what the heck –
On the whole, I like this remastering project very well. Having said that, the advancement of sfx in general is so fast that in less than ten years, I honestly believe this level of digital work will look very dated. I remember how amazed I was at “The Last Starfighter” (and for that matter the Genesis proposal sequence in TWOK.) Now, those bits look clunky, compared to say LOTR or Pirates. Give it a decade and Pirates will look as clunky as the first Star Wars film does now. Does that mean you keep replacing the sfx every stinkin’ decade? No. You enjoy the work as is. Can anyone here tell me you absolutely can’t sit through the original King Kong because it’s stop-motion photography and –gasp– black and white? If so, you’re a fool. TOS, in my humble opinion, should always be viewed as a creation of the 60’s. It’s dated and flawed, and magnificent. Not long ago, I looked at what would become my wife’s engagement ring under a high-powered scope. It’s full of cracks and holes. Geez. But, on her finger, it’s absolutely gorgeous.
Bottom llne: gussy up the old gal all you want, as long as you remember her name: Star Trek. It’s the stories, characters, and fun that matter.
Whatever the reasons, it is the end result that counts. And in this case, the results have been excellent, in my opinion of course. This is the first time I have bought ST in DVD format and I’m glad I waited.
The picture, sound, and effects are stunning. And most importantly, the episodes for the most part still hold up.
BTW being Number 11 is cool too.
I am wondering if the above posts, which are very common on this website in terms of their negativity on TOS Remastered, are artifacts of the internet or not. I suspect it is. That artifact is that the most passionately negative individualsmake the loudest noise and the “silent majority” tends to be much more positive. I guess the alternative is that most t people really are angry and disappointed in the Remastered project.
When a customer service agent does a great job, most people do nothing, but when they provide bad service most people speak out. Sometimes I ask to speak to a supervisor to let them know I was provided with excellent service. I think that people should do that more.
With that philosphy in mind, here goes:
I for one consider the remastered project to be an unexpected gift. How many forty year old shows get remastered at all? Think about that. How many can you name? We are LUCKY. But not if one is dedicated to a half-empty glass worldview. Yeah, the remastered effects could be better. But for the most part they are superior to the original effects, and the worst of the original effects have been eliminated. For example, in the original, unremastered episodes the Enterprise usually orbited the same exact planet, (no matter what the episode) except for occasionally shading it blue instead of orange.
Now,at least I can show the episodes to my son, and many other parents can, without the kids laughing and disregarding the show, which has so much to offer in terms of characters, plots, and philosophy. The new generations would tend to disregard all of that because of the poor original effects- they have grown up on a different sensibility.
And there is the JOY, for me, of seeing something new in a show that is 40 years old- not knowing what to expect when a scene is remastered. That alone is wonderful- the show was frozen for us that have seen the episodes dozens of times over the years- and this brings it alive again as a viewing experience.
Life is too short. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and of course people don’t have to like it. But is the remastered project really THIS BAD? If people are this angry about Star Trek being remastered, I have to wonder in what other way the potential for enjoying life is being squandered.
There’s a lot to celebrate here. Am I the only one who can feel good about this project? Anybody out there?
I don’t know about everyone else here, but I bought the TOS HD-DVD set and have been enjoying it ever since! The detail and clarity is a pleasure to watch. If any of you are waiting for a better rendition of TOS to come out anytime soon, you might be old and grey before THAT happens!
Indulge yourself!
Does anyone know who did the music for this video?
You know what I can’t understand? They already watermarked the movie, so everybody knows whom it belongs to… so, why they strive so hard to make it undownloadable, thus forcing me to go back and re-stream it whenever I want to watch it? It’s lose-lose situation: their bandwidth is suffering, my bandwidth is suffering, and their website workers have to work overtime in order to implement some new anti-downloading countermeasure that can’t stop anybody except newbies.
Anyway, the System Shock-style music is kinda nice touch, yes indeed. Not really fitting with the images, but still a nice touch. :-)
Hey, I just watched “This Side Of Paradise” on HD-DVD and I’ve gotta say that Spock was a player when under the influence of the spores on the planet………….in fact, he was kind of…..a pig….Good for him!!
Spock, most times, was a naysayer
Once he got on the planet, a player!
He smiled all the time
Got laid on a friggin’ dime
Serving in Starfleet didn’t stand a prayer!
Anthony, I sometimes access this site by my IPhone. It would seem the YouTube videos work without a hitch. But the StarTrek.com QuickTime doesn’t. I hope everyone would find a happy medium.
17. Gary Seven – December 2, 2007
Well said.
Beautiful video. I love the style of the new CG work. Completely keeping in tone of the 60s episodes.
Will these new FX date? IMO, no (because the style is in keeping), and if they do at all it won’t be nearly as much as the old ones they’ve replaced. Think about that peeps.
My axe is almost sharpened…….
#17 Great Post.
While I have been critical of CBS at times for their work. For the most part I love Star Trek: Remastered. It’s like watching the show all over again. TOS is my favorite television series of all time and the fact it’s getting a major overhaul 40 years after the fact is awesome.
I just don’t understand the people that continue to bitch about it. If they don’t like it they can easily buy the originals on DVD and watch those forever!!
I did see that Autodesk article some months ago on their site. I had been curious what package they were using and I was surprised it was Maya as there are the other packages used.
#15, well said. I’ll touch on it in my essay I’m writing for this topic.
Axe at 40%
#17, #26
Agreed. Very well said. It is far too easy to be negative and to be critical than to be positive and to give praise. So, the compliments tend to go quiet, unspoken, and overlooked. That said – love the compilation and the music. I’d also love to find out where the music is from. Thanks, Anthony for the video!!
Nice Video
The shuttlecraft launches still look like crap….
I would have to say that I am 90 percent pleased with the remastered effort. Overall, it looks great. The originals are still there for us to enjoy, so I have no problem with the remastered effort at all.
NOTE:
I have not been continuously negative.
Things I have praised:
**The “Amok Time” bridge crossing
**The “Doomsday Machine” as a whole
**Changing the model after fan criticism
**Their choice in tools. I LOVE Autodesk’s suite. This is mainly because of their Linux compatibility but overall it is great software.
There is a shot from Mudd’s Women on the Rigal Planet, I think that is new…
Now if they were really good, they’d cgi Kirk’s movie-era hair-do on top of his younger scalp. He’s the only dude I know who gets thicker, fuller hair the older he gets!
I mean come on, the invention of Pert in the 1970s was good, but not THAT good . . .
Oh, and they’d loop in Checkov saying “nuclear wessels” into each old episode at least once. As in, “Keptain, there’s a Romulan nuclear wessel approaching” . . . . or, “Keptain, that green space alien thingy looks like a giant nuclear wessel.”
Or when he goes into the bathroom after Spock finishes his business, and he says, “Mister Spock, what a big nuclear wessel you left.” Or when he passes Rand in the hallway: “Good morning Yeoman, and good morning to your big, nuclear wessels.”
(I was up all night last night, I think I’m overtired. Sorry.)
I realized something watching that compilation. I’ve had my ups and downs with the work CBS-D has done, but seeing many of those FX shots in sucession reminded me that they’ve actually done a pretty good job overall. Of course, they didn’t show any of those clunky shots from the first few epsidoes they remastered (the video seems to be more of a “best of” compilation), but I really enjoyed watching it.
Anyway, back to my realization. While I think the work CBS-D is putting into this project is well done, I’ve come to the conclusion that it doesn’t really fit the “look” of TOS. Perhaps it was seeing the FX shots on their own without any live-action scenes, but I couldn’t help thinking “this stuff looks great, but it just doesn’t look right.” It’s an entirely subjective thing, and difficult to put precisely. Perhaps, if I hadn’t watched TOS for the past 35 years with the original FX, then the new ones wouldn’t seem a bit out of place. They are out of place, though. Very well done, but still out of place.
Is there anyone out there who could possibly be watching the episodes for the first time ever, who has never seen the original FX and knows only those done by CBS-D? If so, I’d love to hear their take on how well they integrate into the live-action scenes.
This isn’t at all meant as an indictment of the work CBS-D is doing. It’s just an observation that struck me as I watched the clip reel (which I wish I could download to my desktop and watch at my convenience). I know others have mentioned similar opinions in the past. I can now see where they’re coming from. Still, I wish CBS-D continued success and I’m looking forward to seeing what they come up with for future episodes.
Anybody else see the new Shatner commercial for World of Warcraft? Hilarious!
I have. Prag, it was freaking funny!
Here’s a direct link.
http://startrek.com/videouploads/200711/071130-sp-remastered-fx-2/300k.mov
okay, that was beautiful, sweet, everything i’ve always wanted from the project. too bad fer youse guys who hate it. god, i love technology.
Buck… a… roo… hawk.
Wow. I usually read through the pretty fast. But overall I read them all.
After reading halfway through your post I noticed it was from you Buck.
You recently told me that you wanted the new Star Trek 08 enterprise movie to have the added realism that was not on TOS.
And now your starting to question if the new FX are even appropriate to TOS as a whole? This does not bode well for the new movie at all.
That is if your are going to this movie to see STAR TREK as it was when we grew up. I said here last week that the original effects were, in my own view, amazing. They needed only to hint at future technologies. The Enterprise. Its design. Perfectly conceived with all spacefaring contingincies in place. But created in a way that was wonderous and ETHERIAL! Not realistic. but Futuristic.
I’ll say it again here. I think the falling down with Star Trek started when big business came a knocking . . . right after . . .
S T A R
W A R S !
((Trekkie/er Shivers here))
Yes the suits entered the room with $ ) in thier eyes.
Is everyone so sure that they “upgraded” the Enterprise to make it look more believable? And NOT because of the ships of Star Wars? Are you so sure? I mean it was pretty cool to see an X-wing for the first time right? And if you look at the hull color and texture (minus the heavy weathering of the poor Rebel ships) of the X-Wings they seem pretty close to the hull color and texture of the STTMP Enterprise. Certainly closer than STTMP looked to the original TOS Enterprise. Right? R i g h t?
see examples here…
Star wars…
http://www.scifi3d.com/images/wip/2890_src_xwing_t-65_1.jpg
Star Trek…
http://inconstruction.kairo.at/ship/ncc1701a_d2.jpg
Not like our favorite…
http://a52.g.akamaitech.net/f/52/827/1d/www.space.com/images/030624_ncc1701_04.jpg
Ok, follow me here.
Take for instance STTMP Enterprise vs TOS Enterprise.
The new STTMP “improvements” were very aparent but what did that really achieve? Greater believability for our “fictional” universe.
Trek was ALWAYS shooting much higher than that. The typical TOS episode always evoked a sense of wonder.
In creating this futuristic canvas the creators of the show provided a magical glimpse to what could be our proud and happy future. Peace for all mankind! Great wonderous technologies that advanced and spread humanity through the universe.
And the special effects? They complimented the message. How many closeups in TOS had a cheesecloth over the lens to soften the shot?
Or, how about all the Kirk lighting? We all know what that is.
The TOS Enterprise was created with for TV in a way that it would photograph well for the studio shots. With that in mind the FX artists came up with wonderous (and I do not use that word lightly) design.
It provided for all the necessary items that a futuristic space craft would need. A shuttle bay, Sensor disc, deflector disc, warp engines, impulse power, phasers, a bridge area that you could point to, ship marking, a life bouey primary hull with propulsion, all wrapped up in a magnificient and majestic hull design cnfiguration. Just looking at the damn ship evokes a sense of wonder, does it not?
Isn’t that enough?
It was all about the look and feel of the series.
My message is… (and I mean this sincerely) they had lightning in a bottle back then!! For instance, JUST as a hypothetical… If “they” could have produced a 4th season and never aired it, and then released it today. HOW MUCH CASH WOULD THAT BRING IN FOR THEM ALL??? Billons today I am sure. Of course, that never could have happened right?
To the present day creators. if you really want that look and feel of TOS, that the Trek purists in all of us know so well, then please strongly consider what you are doing.
Just make two episodes in one for this movie. Two different missions. 1st part would be the Enterprises 1st mission. the second half would be a new mission with the Kirk and the crew we know so well. And then maybe step back and decide how you can make the Spock time travel plot wrap aound it all. Perhaps it would serve the story well to have Spock as more of a narrator to advance the story along.
An alternate solution to all of this would be to take your complete marketing budget for this movie (20 million?) and give it to some aspiring young filmmakers to create again what would best be achieved by frugal people who have a passion to complete a vision.
Well for now we are trying to create that lightning again.
Good luck!
Ok, what’s up with the nightclub music in this?
I’ve made my opinion known in other forums before. I’m kinda 50/50 on this. I’ll admit, most of what they included on this video is good stuff (except the shield hits in the battle sequence, though I think the first one shown has a bit of tweaking) and there are a lot of good exterior shots.
However, I do think that this is an incomplete project. There are some things that this project could have done that they didn’t do. Phasers for example could have been addressed. We saw the awesome potential in “Wink of an Eye.” Things such as adding a tractor beam when dialogue called for it. Fixing some of the display screens. Heck, they changed to a digital clock, why not go further? I also think that all sound effects could have been digitally rerecorded (as the originally sounded) and that all the music could have been digitally rerecorded (as originally composed, the same way the opening theme was). Things like warp effects could have been done too.
We do have to keep in mind that new effects were not a part of the original vision of this project. So under the circumstances, with many of these episodes pretty much being thrown together, there’s some good stuff.
However, I do think that giving Trek a 2007 style would better help to ring in new fans. While the new effects may work for folks who were 10 in the 60’s, I’m not sure they do the trick today.
I’m sorry to say this, but eventually, Trek will need to have a more updated look to their effects if it wishes to remain an amount of relevance in culture.
#16 – “BTW being Number 11 is cool too.”
A slight reference to 11:11 perhaps? :)
Back on topic, I actually like the work CBS-D are doing with Star Trek TOS, They are bringing this classic series up to date and giving it a new lease of life to a new audience while maintaining the originals style and charm. I have the original non remastered versions on DVD anyway so they can tweak away as far as I’m concered.
#9 Sven K, you bring up an excellent point. Reminds me as a kid in the 70’s reading “The Making of Star Trek”. I was appalled at the problems Roddenberry and crew had with small budgets and time constraints. I remember reading somewhere, don’t know if it was “Making of ST”, where Roddenberry had so much on his plate that actors where actually standing around waiting for their lines while Gene was still writing them. Someone would actually walk into his office and stand on his desk waiting for him to finish writing the next scene. Don’t know if that’ a true story or not, maybe someone else here can confirm that.
By the third season Gene was burnt on the whole process and decided to move on to other things. From what I recall, one of the things he was frustrated at was the limited budget for special effects. While known as a great writer and idea man, contrary to what some believe, Gene was also a big fan of technology and special effects. What set him apart, was his ability to balance story line and effects, although there were times he was unable to do that. He left TOS at that time disappointed that he wasn’t able to include more and better special effects into the series, especially the third season. As much as we all cherish TOS, it sounded to me like he walked away from it wanting it to be so much more than what it was.
I think in the beginning of this project, the special effects guys may have been a little apprehensive about going beyond remaking the original special effects and putting their own “artistic values”, if I may, into the project. I don’t always want to see a frame for frame remake of the old effects. They have proven to me that when they “opener ‘er up a little”, they do an excellent job of providing a fresh look while staying true to the original series. I hope they continue in that direction.
I don’t agree with those wanting to leave TOS alone, nor do I agree with those who want to see the Enterprise do “barrel rolls”. I really like the majority, but not all, of the effects I’ve seen on TOS-R. I applaud them for listening to constructive criticism and making changes, such as the nacelle cap issue. I don’t have a problem with those who criticise the current effort, as long as it makes sense and isn’t extreme. I applaud you for your criticism, as it is based in fact and makes sense. I’ll bet if we where able to interview some of the effects guys, they would mirror your opinion.
It is frustrating to see the unrealistic time constraints yet again being put on the production of this series. When I see frames of the old series reversed and not corrected, I am puzzled, because I know they were that way in TOS because of time constraint issues, not artistic value. I don’t have a problem with CBS wanting to make a profit, in fact, I want them to. But it doesn’t seem to me that it would take that much more to allow the special effects guys to do the job they want to do. It’s not like the old days where you had to wait for sets and models to be built. I can’t imagine the pressure those guys are under.
@17 – Amen! Ayy-Mheenn!
[...] Ich bin etwas erschüttert darüber, dass die Star Trek Classic-Serie jetzt mit Digitalquark aufgehübscht wird. Ich war da ja eh nie so richtig Fan von, aber ich bin mir des Werts der Serie durchaus bewusst. Der liegt zwar auch darin, Science Fiction voran gebracht zu haben (nicht in den Feuilletons, dafür war James T. Kirk zu rüde, aber in den Herzen der Leute), vielmehr jedoch ein gesellschaftshistorischer Wendepunkt zu sein. Gene Roddenberry hat in Star Trek als erste Serie Japaner, Russen, und Amerikaner, Schwarze und Weiße in einer Crew zusammengeführt. Der erste Filmkuss zwischen einer Schwarzen und einem Weißen fand hier statt. Das war revolutionär Ende der 60er. Über die Effekte und wirklich merkwürdigen Handlungen können die meisten heute vermutlich nur noch lachen, daran ändern auch ein paar 3D-Animationen und Spratzeleffekte nix. Im Gegenteil, sie lassen in ihrer Deplaziertheit den Rest der Bilder nur noch anachronistischer und damit lächerlicher wirken. Zumal die Effekte ja auch nicht gerade taufrisch aussehen, sondern — da schließe ich mich sven k. an — wie aus Computerspielen der 90er Jahre abgefilmt. [...]
i thought the new effects shots look pretty crap, tbh. They obviously didn’t have very much money (which isn’t their fault, of course) but the whole exercise seems like a bit of a money-spinner to me.
What was wrong with the old effects?! I’ve always though they looked pretty cool. I certainly think that the Enterprise looked a lot better in the originals than in the remastered versions
That is the most awesome 4 minutes of video I’ve seen this year!
35. Buckaroohawk
I’m one of those watching the episodes for the “first” time with these new effects. I don’t know what to think anymore.
Originally, I loved the new effects. Anything would be better than the grainy, matte-lined, fuzzy planet orbits. I still love them, but I’m beginning to see why people are complaining.
They’re almost too nice. Too clean (especially when looking at something on the grainy viewscreen). Too dark sometimes (compared to the bright interiors and planet surfaces).
I wish they could be more seamless, but I don’t think that’s possible. For what they are, they work and I’d rather have them than the originals. But I’m beginning to see why some are still complaining.
Hate to stir the pot, but that’s how I’m feeling today.
#42. They are pretty seamless if you’ve got the set, because they’ve cleaned the episodes up so much the new footage kind of matches. If they hadn’t cleaned up the eps the new shots would stand out.
Still finding it hard to understand why people think they don’t match, when for the most part it’s the same old TOS Enterprise faithfully recreated in the scenes. It’s the same Enterprise, it looks the same. The Starbases are faithfully recreated, they look the same. The shuttle crafts, are the same. It’s the same style and it fits. Unless you want it to look like Voyager or DS9 which would be totally inappropriate.
For the most part, I’m loving these new effects and look forward to each new episode. Having said that…I find it ironic that I’m getting just as “tired” of the new CGI “stock” shots as I was of the original “stock” shots. No matter how good it looks, it’s very obvious when they use the same orbital fly-bys and space travel shots over and over and over.
I wish every shot could be slightly different. I realize that isn’t practical, but it would be alot more fun than counting how many times in one episode I see that SAME red star pass by the new improved E.
I read somewhere that the original vfx elements existed, at least until the time of the making of the movie “Airplane 2.” There’s apparently a shot of the original Enterprise in that film that does not look bad on the big screen, and there was speculation it was made by recompositing those original elements.
If they did in fact survive until today, I’d love it if they original VFX shots could be restored and put on a future hd release.
And we didn’t even get consistent handphaser beams…
But I look forward to the eventual WIDESCREEN incarnations…
#52. “But I look forward to the eventual WIDESCREEN incarnations…”
Agrh. Unless you want to lose half the picture.
Shame that they didn’t include shots like Chekov in the agony booth or Norman’s innards, or a blinking Gorn and show us all the non-effects shots that they’ve been jacking with.
I like how they cut away just in time NOT to show the old nacelle caps.
I also am reminded of how WE ALL were instrumental in seeing that that issue addressed.
All in all, the effects are unmistakably unique. That is, they have a “look”- not THE look- not Dennis’ or Daren’s in other words- but a look nevertheless.
Some have said the fx are inadequate. Oh well. I’ve gotten used to the look, and for better or worse, we’re stuck with it. It is what it is. And you know what? It’s BETTER than the low-budget, grainy 60’s Van Der Veer opticals we always wished were better!
“Rats, these vids often don’t work on my Mac. The QT player/web interface is iffy. No, it’s not ME startrek.com.”
DITTO!
I’m with #17 all the way.
And I’m happy for the cleanup and new effects, wish there was more, wish they’d have had the opera singer as part of the band and wish deepdiscount.com would ship the darn set!
I like the visual part of the video.
But what the heck is that crappy background noise, this contrary of music? Why didn’t they use some Star Trek related music? Don’t get it.
#55: They did indeed improve the nacelle caps and the ship itself as the show progressed. However, has anyone asked CBS-D if they did this in response to fan complaints, or was this something they would have done anyway?
46. Captain Fantastic – December 3, 2007
i thought the new effects shots look pretty crap, tbh. They obviously didn’t have very much money (which isn’t their fault, of course) but the whole exercise seems like a bit of a money-spinner to me.
What was wrong with the old effects?! I’ve always though they looked pretty cool. I certainly think that the Enterprise looked a lot better in the originals than in the remastered versions ”
I agree. The original Enterprise actually looks like a large, solid object–not something generated on a PC. That’s the difference some will forever (and conveniently) ignore, or fail to see for whatever reason.
If this project was a new, all CG version of TOS, the Enterprise would be FANTASTIC for such a series, because the rest of the “world” is just as artificial, but CG’s natural flaws are too obvious for half-efforts, which is why Star Wars: The Phantom Menace–for all of the money spent–has CG elements which were (in 1999) and remain painfully, obviously CG (Jar-Jar Binks, the podrace, Jabba, etc.) when it was supposed to be a seamless match with the live elements.
Even the Jabba seen on the DVD of A New Hope: Special Edition–produced well into the Star Wars Prequels years/efx advancement, was blasted by many for NOT being an improvement on the equally blasted version seen on screen in 1997. The only difference was the design of the creature, but it was still fake and never blended well with the footage with Harrison Ford. In short, CG is not the cure-all, bells and whistles to sell old properties.
Someone here wondered about the negative responses to TOS-R, but maybe that comes from some NOT liking anything tossed at them. Maybe they are NOT the fanboys CBS wanted: buy any new gimmick no matter the quality because the original “Star Trek” is the subject.
Maybe most of the complaining would not exist if CBS provided the non-CG TOS on HD as well, giving fans the (dare I say it) OPTION to pick the version of TOS they REALLY want. Maybe CBS does not want to face the possibility that such an option would reveal more widespread feelings about Remastered project.
I do wonder how many units of the new DVD sets were produced/released, and what the sales figures are so far.
Plum wrote:
> Rats, these vids often don’t work on my Mac. The QT player/web
> interface is iffy.
Works well with my Mac Powerbook G4 (1.25 gHz, 512 meg RAM), OS 10.4.11, and all the Quicktime updates.
I have my set of the remastereds and I have a set of the originals on DVD. I think that anyone who says that the Enterprise looks better in the originals than the remasters is not being honest with themselves. A large solid object, Compassionate God? You mean one that you can occasionally see through parts of? Or one that has pointy nacelle caps one shot and spinners the next? The old Enterprise looks exactly like what it is: an eleven foot model shot in a scorching quonset hut in front of a blue screen on a shoe string budget. You can’t even compare it to it’s contemporary FX from 2001: A Space Odyssey, a movie that had the time and money to do the shots some form of justice. I am not saying the CG shots are perfect but better and more consistent than the originals. Hey, if you don’t like them, don’t buy them. I sit back nightly and watch with great enjoyment. My son (who used to laugh at the “problems” with the original FX shots) now points out the new FX and often times says how cool the re-thought shots are. And in my opinion, that was the target audience for this project. Not all us old fans, but the new ones who thought it was too corny or that the dated FX didn’t hold their attention. We older or original fans accept Trek as it is. But old farts aren’t keeping Trek alive. It’s the prospect of new blood and new $$$ that make TPTB WANT to pump money into the franchise as opposed to letting it fade away.
Again, if the new DVD’s arent for you, don’t buy them.
#62 Well said.
#62- I AM THX-1138–
I agree with Dr. Image- well said. I believe we share a congruity of thought- as per my post above (#17).
I mentioned early that I was 90 percent happy with this effort. I think the majority of the effects look great. But if there is one area that needs work in my eyes, its with these two:
1 : The Shuttle Craft bay and Shuttle craft leaving Enterprise. Needs serious work. Looks way to cartoony.
2: The Bridge wall surrounding the Viewscreen.
Viewscreen bugs me, because they could have filmed a new wall using a model, or even CGI, and used it everytime the viewscreen was show. So easy, and yet the choose to just place the viewscreen on top of the old wall, which contrasts way to much. I really hope they go back and fix that someday.
Hey Demode, I’m 2 steps ahead of you. i said that quite a while ago but they’ll never go back and fix it. I agree with you but I’m only 60% satisfied.
#62 You made your points quite clearly and I agree with you. I’ve also just reviewed the compilation video, it’s quite good. I’m looking forward to sharing it with kids. I know it’s a commercial venture to promote the first season remastered release, but I hope they do one with each season release. This kind of video has something which makes the show look very cool, and appealing to kids.
Of course, too bad they’ll have to think and process the story while watching… You have to be intelligent to watch the old show. It has to hold some appeal for you. As a series, it certainly wasn’t perfect, but that show certainly could tell some tales.
Ditto Gary Seven (#17) !!! ‘Nuf said!
Re: 62. I AM THX-1138 – December 3, 2007
“I have my set of the remastereds and I have a set of the originals on DVD. I think that anyone who says that the Enterprise looks better in the originals than the remasters is not being honest with themselves.”
I disagree. The miniature serves its purpose better than a CG element appearing quite inferior this LATE in the ever-advancicng art of CG efx. So, the miniature does indeed look better–because it actually appears to be a large physical body, rather than a poor computer graphic which gives no sense of scale. Again, this is even more glaring when superior works exists in the industry–in other words, CG which looks realistic.
“Or one that has pointy nacelle caps one shot and spinners the next?”
That’s a budget issue in using 2nd pilot flybys along with the new model shots, which appears to be a complaint of continuity, more than realism.
“And in my opinion, that was the target audience for this project. Not all us old fans, but the new ones who thought it was too corny or that the dated FX didn’t hold their attention. We older or original fans accept Trek as it is. But old farts aren’t keeping Trek alive. It’s the prospect of new blood and new $$$ that make TPTB WANT to pump money into the franchise as opposed to letting it fade away.”
But it is us “old farts” TPB are actually catering to with the Remastered project (allegedly, a built-in audience) and the new film set in a period most kids do not know–TOS’ time period. Its no coincidence TPB are going back to TOS in the new film, when so many abandoned the last few Berman efforts set in the 24th century, or his revisionist “past future” in “Enterprise.”
With so many disgusted by the Berman mess, what better way to lure fans back than to bring back the most known, popular version to the Boomers and X-ers who are a large number of Trek fans? Your son may be different, but if it were left up to many of today’s kids, they would rather see the “Pirates” films, “Harry Potter” or “X-Men” than sit through the more serious, lofty ideas used by TOS, CG or no CG.
As I mentioned the bad Jabba efx in the Special Edition movie and DVD, why do something if you’re not going to do it right? In assuming fans would just swallow up a previously cut scene (which was not necessary, as the same, relevant dialogue just appeared in the previous scene with Greedo) Lucas’ ILM slapped on a wholly cartoony Jabba which paled in comparison to the half-foam/half-mechanical full-scale puppet shot for “Return of the Jedi” over a decade before the Editions! CG only works when time and care are the project leaders, not assumption that old=bad and new CG=only way to repackage old material, or that fans will eat up anything tossed their way. That was the fatal flaw in Berman’s (and associates) approach with the majority of their series, and where did that go?
Its interesting that you compared the efx of “2001″ to TOS, because if a random viewer watched any of Remastered’s efx side-by-side with the miniatures from “2001,” i’m willing to bet the viewer would say the models appear head and shoulders more realistic than allegedly state-of-the-art digital efx in 2007….and that should not be the case.
TrekMadeMeWonder (#40),
I understand what you’re saying and you make extremely valid points for your argument. There’s one little glitch in your reasoning, however: The new Trek movie isn’t TOS. Sure, it’s set during that time, but it’s not going to be the same animal, and I don’t expect it to be.
I have no problem with them updating the look of the TOS Enterprise for the new movie as long as they don’t mess around too much with the overall design. The CBS-D FX for Trek Remastered are a separate thing entirely. I like the detail they’ve added to the hull of the ship and (with a few exceptions) I’ve enjoyed how the new FX shots are composed and executed. My primary complaint is that I now believe that the new FX shots just don’t fit all that well with the live action footage that was filmed 40 years ago. If TOS were being produced today the new FX would be a better match, but I’ve come to realize that when I’m watching Trek Remastered I feel like I’m watching two different shows, one that’s 40 years old and one that’s contemporary. Both are good, even great at times, but they seem like they don’t belong together.
The new Trek movie is going to be it’s own thing, made from the ground up in the here and now, and the prouction design will reflect that. Conversely, I don’t think CBS-D’s FX reflect the production design of TOS, even though they’re using accurate representations of the original models. In every technical sense, the new FX are superior to the original TOS FX. Superior does not equal better, however, and I’m now beginning to see that. Of course, like I said, it could just be that I’m so used to the original FX that new ones, no matter how well executed, will look right to me.
In any case, though, I certainly don’t lump the new movie in with TOS despite that it’s set in that time. So my saying that I’m no longer that enthusiastic about the Trek Remastered FX has no bearing on what the new movie crew might be up to. We haven’t seen anything from them yet, so my mind is still open to those possibilities.
I hope this clears things up a little. Thanks for taking the time to address my post.
I can see why you guys like to argue about the use of miniatures……whereas I tend not to sweat the “small” stuff!
Some would say, “that’s BIG of you, Harry”, but please, don’t……:)
#71-Harry Ballz-
You are so modest and have so much humility. One question: If you are uncomfortable with viewers remarking on how you are BIG, may we at least express admiration for how you do not easily “sweat?”
Well I hope I don’t get banned. Just emphasizing the value of hygiene, as this is a clean site?
No sweat!
#74-Harry Ballz-
OK, OK…now you are starting to brag…
No brag, just fact………an old girlfriend once opined, “I’m sure glad you’re not into sports…..the last thing I need is a sweaty Ballz!” :)
Buckaroohawk!
Good points concerning TOS-R. I agree completely. In fact, I see the new remastered episodes in thier own light. Good. Amusing. And as a modern conveniece that provides a slightly expanded view to the shows.
I’d like to hear you coment on my Star Wars comparisons.
Surely we would not have had STTMP if not for Star Wars. Good or bad.
Probably good considering some of the early concept art that Series 2 offered. A round white Captain’s chair? Reminded me of Next Gen with thier round table on the bridge idea. WoW! Fortunately they scrapped that idea too.
—
Star Trek the Original Series certainly had the complete package. Except maybe for a little more budget in the FX department and a stronger emphasis on consistent storylines.
But that damn show did almost ruin my high school carreer. Through 11th and 12th grade our local broadcaster aired the series at 2:00 am weekdays. But it was always great to see that show (and the Enterprise). It was so optimistic and offered a proud viewpoint on humanity. Thanks Gene! Where ever you are!
—
But seriously. I still think the orginal had “lighning in a bottle”
All elements should be copied. EXACTLY! Trust me.
With the budget they have, I expect to see at least three space battles, some scientific space exploration, a few different worlds and maybe Kirk could beat an Olympic god again by the end of the movie.
But please no Battle Star Enterprise!
HERE’S TO: HOPING FOR THE TRUE STAR TREK EXPERIENCE!
#77-Trekmademewonder:
Amen, brother.
I think we all just wished Star Trek looked the way it did before it was remastered on Sci Fi Channel and later on regular DVD.
I don’t mean to argue with you, Compassionate, but what is your problem with the remasters other than you think they are inferior? I don’t agree with you. Do you own the remasters? Have you seen them on a high def screen? You do understand that they were going for the aesthetic of the original shots while updating how those shots were produced? This wasn’t supposed to be a super realistic rendering of space ships ala Ep III of Star Wars. They didn’t burn the original negatives. Those DVD’s are still available. And as far as shooting models goes, just who out there is actually doing quality spaceship miniature FX filming these days? Do you know? And regardless of whether TOS used stock footage of the E during it’s run, the fact remains that the continuity of the ship took those of us who paid attention, out of the moment.
Are you upset that some of us like the new DVD’s better than the originals? You should come over to my house and see them. My set-up is sweet (not sweat) to say the least and all of my kids are enjoying Trek with me.
Sweet, not sweat
I have no regret
Watching Trek on plasma
Makes me go orgasma
The effects don’t make me fret!
Succint. Eloquent. Correct.
Harry in a nutshell. (Get it?)
I’m shell-shocked by your nut remark! It takes ballz to make a comment like that!! :)
The new Enterprise:
http://probertdesigns.com/Folder_STORE/Folder_CONCEPT-KITS/Ambassador_Kit.html
Enjoy!
Bart’s doing his best to make us believe that Andrew Probert’s USS Ambassador (originally a preliminary design for the Enterprise-D on TNG), is the Big E for the new movie.
Funny thing is, on the very page he links, a full explanation of exactly what the design is for is stated.
Not the brightest way to start a false rumor, Bart. You’ll have to stay after class and write “I will not post falsehoods about the new Trek movie” on the chalkboard 100 times.
Nice going, Bart.
D’oh!
Re: 80. I AM THX-1138 – December 4, 2007
I don’t mean to argue with you, Compassionate, but what is your problem with the remasters other than you think they are inferior? I don’t agree with you. Do you own the remasters? Have you seen them on a high def screen?”
Oh yes. A friend has the set, and i’ve seen it here and there, and the original footage looks great–which never presented a problem–that’s how all old TV–especially with the kind of cinematography used in the 60’s–should look on “home video.” It is the new effects which suffer, even on HD screens.
“You do understand that they were going for the aesthetic of the original shots while updating how those shots were produced? This wasn’t supposed to be a super realistic rendering of space ships ala Ep III of Star Wars.”
Then the goal should have been (among other things) to mirror the appearance of the miniature, and at least appear solid with a sense of scale–like the model.
“They didn’t burn the original negatives. Those DVD’s are still available.”
I understand that, but the standard DVD season sets–which I purchased when originally released–are simply not on the level of the HD version, and suffer from a bad transfer. I would say they are either the same as the laserdisc transfers (I bought them back in the day, too) or another that with not much done, as grain and other artifacts remain on the picture, hence my comment about CBS should have provided the pre-CG version on HD as a seperate release for all of the fans who wish to see the imporved picture. Why release the Remastered vesion as if it were the “only” one, while stepping over the fans who wish to see the original?
So, while they did not burn the negative, in avoiding releasing the original on HD, it appears to be another George Lucas case–where he’s only going to push the Special Editions as the “official” version, so bye-bye to the idea of seeing it on superior formats.
“And as far as shooting models goes, just who out there is actually doing quality spaceship miniature FX filming these days?”
I never suggested they were, as most productions use CG–but its HOW its used (as i’ve always said) that is the issue, as in my example of quality CG work.
If you recall, I compared the “2001″ miniatures to 2007 TOS-R CG, suggesting that an observer would think the “2001″ models more realistic than so-called state-of-the-art efx on Remastered, and again, that should not be the case, when TOS-R should at least take on the TOS Enterprise’s solid body/scale look.
“And regardless of whether TOS used stock footage of the E during it’s run, the fact remains that the continuity of the ship took those of us who paid attention, out of the moment. ”
I was always aware of it, but that did not bother me, because I realized what was going on, and accepted it.
“Are you upset that some of us like the new DVD’s better than the originals?”
Not at all. That’s your right to like whatever you want, but the PTB should never be so arrogant to push this new product on the public as though there were not efx problems (hence changing the 1701 “model”) , as though there are no fans who want to see the original versions on HD.
“You should come over to my house and see them. My set-up is sweet (not sweat) to say the least and all of my kids are enjoying Trek with me. ”
I’m glad you and your family can enjoy it, but I would find this new Enterprise more acceptable if it was on a pure CG-animated Trek series.
Guys……as someone who watched TOS in it’s original run of 1966-9 and was able to enjoy the STORIES……I didn’t care if they had paper mache boulders and lizards with zippers down their back…….it was just GREAT FUN TO WATCH!!
As Deepak Chopra would say, “let it GO!” :)
beast wars had better cg than this crap. i’ve seen better graphics on an n64.
#89, I’ll tag your post.
I was more impressed with the TOS videogame for the Nintendo Entertainmment system than all of TOS-R. Seriously. Check it out.
#53 Ty Webb
Having caught some ‘widesceened’ footage of UNremastered TOS, I am convinced that I will enjoy it’s cinematic look on a big T.V., even if some shots turn out to resemble the Siergio Leone school of film-making…
And at least some of the new effects might look better too, in that kind of framing…
Compassionate, you should get an HD DVD player or one that at least upconverts. I think that might at least address the problem you are experiencing. On my HD player, the resolution between my new DVD’s and my old DVD’s is negligable. And that is on a big screen.
looks like a trailer for a video game. a rather badly designed one at that.