Robert Comsol wrote:
Now, did the CGI effects "make the show better"?
Considering that I find the series fine as is, then not really. Only one episode was really improved by the new effects, Tomorrow is Yesterday. During the finale, the lack of technology truly let the episode down. The slingshot method made zero sense as depicted back then. However, the new effects not only cleared it up, it made the sequence exciting.
That was the only episode that was completely improved. Even the Doomsday Machine was always an awesome episode with the AMT models and such. Star Trek did not rely on effect - if couldn't - so it was always the writing and acting that kept it afloat, And no amount of CGI will change that.
Did the CGI harm Star Trek? Well, it wasn't always accurate and they didn't always actually listen to the dialog to get it right, but for the most part, nah it didn't harm anything. Did it make it better? Aside from that one example, no. It was ALWAYS good! It never would have stayed alive this long if it wasn't. People who "suddenly like it because the effects are better" are, IMO, missing the point and probably can't watch any series that vintage. A shame, but that's their privilege. However, I do appreciate that people enjoy the new effects because they hold up well in HD where the originals do look worse. Which is why I don't like HD for old shows with optical effects.
If anything "harmed" Star Trek visually, it was High Definition.
Bob Justman's comments were evenhanded, which I also appreciate.