TOS-Remastered: a waste of time

[Captain Robert April]

The only complaints I have of what I've seen so far of "Blood and Fire" are all technical (camera angles, pacing, etc.) but storywise, I wouldn't change a thing.

Well, I might snip the angle with the Klingons and the damage to the ship and put emphasis on the bloodworms, but other than that, I like what I see.

Has anybody read the "Star Wolf" version of this story?

[Nerdius Maximus]

JoeD80 wrote:

---

I have not met anyone recently that doesn't know that it's "Star Trek."

Right before the dvd/blu-ray release, I heard someone walk up to a Best Buy employee and say "Whenzat new Star Trak movie comin' out?"

[trevanian]

Captain Robert April wrote:

---

The only complaints I have of what I've seen so far of "Blood and Fire" are all technical (camera angles, pacing, etc.) but storywise, I wouldn't change a thing.

Well, I might snip the angle with the Klingons and the damage to the ship and put emphasis on the bloodworms, but other than that, I like what I see.

Has anybody read the "Star Wolf" version of this story?

Yeah, it's okay. Not as bad as MIDDLE OF NOWHERE by a long shot, but short of the first STAR WOLF novel (and way short of the 1978 rewrite of YESTERDAY'S CHILDREN.)

[RandyS]

Captain Robert April wrote:

---

The only complaints I have of what I've seen so far of "Blood and Fire" are all technical (camera angles, pacing, etc.) but storywise, I wouldn't change a thing.

Well, I might snip the angle with the Klingons and the damage to the ship and put emphasis on the bloodworms, but other than that, I like what I see.

Has anybody read the "Star Wolf" version of this story?

Yeah, 10 or 12 years ago, so all I remember about it is that I liked it.

That, and David Gerrold's account of the story's history at the start of the book.

[King Daniel into Darkness]

Captain Robert April wrote:

---

Okay, who wants to be the first to defend "Blood and Fire"?

Captain Randy Hall wrote:

---

Not first, but I really enjoyed it, which I do with all the Phase II "independent productions."

Captain Robert April wrote:

---

The only complaints I have of what I've seen so far of "Blood and Fire" are all technical (camera angles, pacing, etc.) but storywise, I wouldn't change a thing.

Well, I might snip the angle with the Klingons and the damage to the ship and put emphasis on the bloodworms, but other than that, I like what I see.

It was part 2 I hated so much.

Alex should’ve died at the end – as it was the episode plodded with lots of boring nothing-happening talking afterward. James C’s version of the Kirk Morality Speech was painful. Then, in the grand finale, Denise Crosby turned into a butterfly.

Turned into a butterfly.

…turned into a butterfly?

TURNED INTO A BUTTERFLY.

That then had butterfly babies.

Oh dear.

(I want to add that I liked “World Enough and Time” and the non-all-a-dream-BS first version of “To Serve All My Days”)

[RAMA]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

(Warning! Disappointed fan’s rant and rave)

Having seen a few episodes of TOS-Remastered (only now finally on in the UK, to coincide with the DVD release of STXI), and ‘skipped ahead’ and seen FX clips of later episodes on YouTube, I have reached a conclusion: It’s a complete waste of time and effort. If you’re gonna keep everything so close to the original, why bother at all?

It’s *far* too slavish to the original. Where’s the detail on the Enterprise? Where are the phaser banks? Torpedo launchers? Thrusters? Blemishes? Hull plating? I’m not saying re-imagine the ship, but a little bit of USS Kelvin-style hull detail would have made the world of difference.

The space shots really needed to be rethought from the ground-up, rather than doing largely identical shots with CG instead of the old models. Why do the ships still fly off at bizarre angles? The lack of details and odd movements make them look like little plastic toys rather than giant spaceships (the Romulan ship in ‘Balance of Terror’ was probably the worst example).

Another big disappointment was ‘The Ultimate Computer’ – the fleet that attacks the Enterprise were all originally reuses of the Enterprise because they couldn’t afford building and shooting a new model. What’s stopping them now? I would have thought seeing at least one new TOS design (it’s not like they don’t exist – try Franz Joseph’s old manual if you can’t make up your own!) would have been a given.

New sound effects would have helped a great deal, too – some of the scenes have an ‘unfinished’ feel.

There are a few bits I do like: I like when they ‘zoom out’ and expand the scene with a CG landscape, and the Gorn blinking was sweet (although he stops blinking during the fight). I like the nods to TAS (a CG Mr Arex in the background of an episode or two would have been beyond awesome). The planets look nice as well, as did the space station (from the Vanguard novels by the looks of it). But it all could have been so much more!

I think what could have been a brilliant redo of the TOS special effects was ruined because a few people in charge were afraid of upsetting the obsessive minority (who might write nasty things on their websites! All would be lost!)

It’s inexcusable that the professionally produced TOS-R would have inferior CGI to the recent James Cawley fan films.

Rant over. Feel much better now

This has been explained a million times over...personally I think the remastering is the best thing to happen to TOS since syndication.


RAMA

[A beaker full of death]

GhostFaceSanta wrote:

---

what we saw in the sixties with a low budget.

Don't know what show that was.

And TOS-R was a waste because it was UNNECESSARY. The original effects were fine. Many of the new ones were way too cartoony. I prefer the realism of the original.

[FalTorPan]

As I've opined in other threads of this type, the remastering is unnecessary, but so is TOS... or almost anything, for that matter.

I've enjoyed what little I've experienced of TOS-R, and I enjoy and prefer the original versions of the episodes. Both are fun, and neither version looks at all realistic. Each version is a different flavor of "stylized reality," and that's okay.

[Steven Of Nine]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

(Warning! Disappointed fan’s rant and rave)

Having seen a few episodes of TOS-Remastered (only now finally on in the UK, to coincide with the DVD release of STXI), and ‘skipped ahead’ and seen FX clips of later episodes on YouTube, I have reached a conclusion: It’s a complete waste of time and effort. If you’re gonna keep everything so close to the original, why bother at all?

Dude. Where were you in September 2006?

The effects were done so they wouldn't look ridiculous on HDTV. And they do, if you use the option on the Blu Ray to watch the video with the original effects.

It was a solid project, done well. Could it have been better? Yes, but not doing even more doesn't mean nothing should have been done.

Don't like it? Don't buy it. Oh, and watching the effects on YouTube does not do justice to seeing them on a 1080p television.

[Captain Robert April]

As has been stated repeatedly on this very thread, what looked perfectly fine on a 19" RCA set in 1967 doesn't hold up very well on a set made after 1992, and looks downright comical on an HDTV. If someeone was to magically produce the original elements of the effects footage, then perhaps that footage could be remastered and, essentially, cleaner high def versions of the original effects could've been produced, but that stuff is long gone.

[Hober Mallow]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

(Warning! Disappointed fan’s rant and rave)

Having seen a few episodes of TOS-Remastered (only now finally on in the UK, to coincide with the DVD release of STXI), and ‘skipped ahead’ and seen FX clips of later episodes on YouTube, I have reached a conclusion: It’s a complete waste of time and effort. If you’re gonna keep everything so close to the original, why bother at all?

Yet another fan who doesn't know what "remastered" means.

You start a threat about how the "remastered episodes" disappointed you, yet don't actually mention anywhere in the post the remastered film. You know, the part actually remastered. The new FX are new FX. They have nothing to do with the remastered video. I watch remastered Star Trek on blu-ray with the original special FX.

"Remastered" and "new FX" are two different things.

It’s *far* too slavish to the original. Where’s the detail on the Enterprise? Where are the phaser banks? Torpedo launchers? Thrusters? Blemishes? Hull plating? I’m not saying re-imagine the ship, but a little bit of USS Kelvin-style hull detail would have made the world of difference.

The point wasn't to change anything. The point was to, except for a few indulgences, make what basically amounts to high-definition versions of the original FX. The point was to keep all of the original intent.

And, for that matter, the new FX were not the point of remastering the series. The series was remastered to preserve the film. The new FX were added just to spice it up, certainly not to be the main course. The whole point of Star Trek remastered was the HD transfer, something you're not going to see from youtube clips. Everything else was just icing on the cake.

[trevanian]

Hober Mallow wrote:

---

And, for that matter, the new FX were not the point of remastering the series. The series was remastered to preserve the film.

I thought I just addressed this in another thread, but the film didn't need preserving. Properly stored, film is THE medium for long-term preservation. Digital storage needs to be shunted round to avoid signal decay, and actually costs more given the amount of hands-on to keep that decay from occurring. The outlay for proper storage on film is initially high, but is now practically a fire-and-forget, because unless you have a major trauma, the film is going to remain viable and not decay. (They no longer store stocks that turn from blue to pink in good conditions, like was the case in the JAWS era.)

[milo bloom]

trevanian wrote:

---

I thought I just addressed this in another thread, but the film didn't need preserving. Properly stored, film is THE medium for long-term preservation. Digital storage needs to be shunted round to avoid signal decay, and actually costs more given the amount of hands-on to keep that decay from occurring. The outlay for proper storage on film is initially high, but is now practically a fire-and-forget, because unless you have a major trauma, the film is going to remain viable and not decay. (They no longer store stocks that turn from blue to pink in good conditions, like was the case in the JAWS era.)

Not disagreeing with what you say (mostly because you seem more on top of the technical stuff regarding film than I am), but sometimes the films do need to be re-transferred to keep them on good, current stock, but they also need refreshing from time to time to make new syndication master tapes. Not even considering overuse of physical tape copies, there's also leaps in transfer technology, and like it or not there are many people that will change the channel if a show is in black and white, or even if in color, is faded and overly grainy. That was likely a major reason for this project, and they happened to include the new FX as a way to help sell them into syndication. Let's face it, many of the FX were groundbreaking for their time, and were the product of hours and hours of blood, sweat and tears, but many of them were also victims of insufficient time and resources, and they can hurt the overall feel of the story. The quality of the writing can help people look past the day glo bridge sets and primary color uniform shirts, but when they cut to an exterior shot to show the enemy spaceship, and it looks like a kitbashed ERTL model, it just takes too many people out of the story.

The fact that both versions are available shows that Paramount is aware of difference of opinion, and that they're not going trying to cram their new vision down our throats whether we like it or not (unlike somebody else I won't mention by name, but his initials are George Lucas).

[Chrisisall]

Milo Bloom wrote:

---

The quality of the writing can help people look past the day glo bridge sets and primary color uniform shirts, but when they cut to an exterior shot to show the enemy spaceship, and it looks like a kitbashed ERTL model, it just takes too many people out of the story.

Yep.
This from a 60's fan.

[JoeD80]

Captain Robert April wrote:

---

If someeone was to magically produce the original elements of the effects footage, then perhaps that footage could be remastered and, essentially, cleaner high def versions of the original effects could've been produced, but that stuff is long gone.

No need for magic, the TOS EFX were photographic and existed on film. I hadn't heard that the EFX footage was lost at any point.

trevanian wrote:

---

Unless you have a major trauma, the film is going to remain viable and not decay. (They no longer store stocks that turn from blue to pink in good conditions, like was the case in the JAWS era.)

But the rats can still get it.