Looks like DS9 will not get Blu Ray
- Thread starter IronMaiden
- Start date
I bought a new copy of R1 season 4 a few months ago and had issues with one disc the first time I watched it. I had them professionally cleaned and while it wasn't as bad the issue remained. (It went from freezing as Odo was breaking Sisko out of the brig in Paradise Lost, and as while Bashir and Garek are tied up in Our Man Bashir to freezing just after Sisko breaks into Leyton's office in the former and while Bashir is about to fire the lasers in the latter.)
I will tentatively agree that the packaging was a little Over The Top in hindsight, and certainly the price point of those DVD sets at original retail was insane. But I'd ascribe the boxes to changing tastes: a decade ago, when the Trek shows were released on DVD, there was still a fashion for bulky boxed sets, maybe because there was a perception that we were getting a collector's piece or it looked like more value for money. Even things like Seinfeld came out in bulky boxes, when there was no Godly reason they couldn't have been slimline. Nowadays, most of us appreciate our TV shows being in slimline packaging with entire seasons in a single amaray case, because we value our shelf space more than we do the packaging. Although, of course, the even more recent trend is to forego discs and packaging altogether and just keep things on a hard drive...
It's a shame, I too would buy it on blu-ray straight away! But if that never happens at leave I've got all of the DVDs and that one TNG episode where you see DS9 in HD and you can actually tell it has yellow parts on it, which I never noticed in SD 
DS9 is far too underrated, personally for me it's the best series out of all of them.
DS9 is far too underrated, personally for me it's the best series out of all of them.
For me, it's the special features that would make me buy the Blu-ray; I remember one of the Blu-ray producers mentioning some interesting making of material he had found.
Problem being, if there was some type of restoration, such special features would likely never be made to help make the numbers work.
Although we don't have specific numbers, I strongly suspect the VAM for the TNG-R BDs was a tiny fraction of the overall project cost. VAM is mainly designed to enhance the appeal of packaged media (hence "Value Added"), if you subscribe to the idea that consumers still browse physical packaging on retail shelves and weigh their purchases based on such things in this age of online ordering and distribution of content.
Since this content is designed to boost sales of the physical media, I'd bet the compensation of the TNG-R VAM producers (RMB, the Okudas, et al.) was tied to sales numbers, which is why we saw them pumping it up on social media and later lamenting the (allegedly) poor sales of the BDs.
I for one love quality VAM (and the TNG-R stuff was particularly good, if not always relevant to the main feature), although I rarely have time for it these days (I'm lucky to have time to watch the main feature!). As it doesn't mesh well with the online distribution model (providers want you purchasing more different programs, usually on impulse, not drilling deeper into what you've already purchased), we're lucky to get trailers online. VAM and OAR are almost certainly casualties of the new paradigm as packaged media slowly fades away.
Last edited:
I will tentatively agree that the packaging was a little Over The Top in hindsight, and certainly the price point of those DVD sets at original retail was insane. But I'd ascribe the boxes to changing tastes: a decade ago, when the Trek shows were released on DVD, there was still a fashion for bulky boxed sets, maybe because there was a perception that we were getting a collector's piece or it looked like more value for money. Even things like Seinfeld came out in bulky boxes, when there was no Godly reason they couldn't have been slimline. Nowadays, most of us appreciate our TV shows being in slimline packaging with entire seasons in a single amaray case, because we value our shelf space more than we do the packaging. Although, of course, the even more recent trend is to forego discs and packaging altogether and just keep things on a hard drive...
In a related anecdote, demonstrating just how clueless the business can be, many years ago I was up for a role at Fox Home Entertainment where (among other things) I would have been responsible for focus-grouping various home video packaging designs. Not to say I would've been an influencer on such designs, I would have put the various designs in front of consumers, recorded their responses, and presented them to the producers. I didn't get the job, but I took some perverse pleasure when I saw the packaging for the Alien Quadrilogy DVDs that was released not long after. I can't imagine anyone choosing or even not hating a design where you have to unfold the thing to over four feet wide just to get to the last disc in the set. Not to mention the questionable word "quadrilogy", but that's a completely different thing.
The word "quadrilogy" has been used on recent blu-ray combos of the first four "Mission Impossible" movies.
When I got TOS Season 2 on blu ray and saw that "Trials and Tribble-ations" was a special feature, I naively assumed that it would be in remastered HD for the occasion. But it wasn't. However, the included TAS episode "More Tribbles, More Troubles," was in pristine HD. 
Kor
When I got TOS Season 2 on blu ray and saw that "Trials and Tribble-ations" was a special feature, I naively assumed that it would be in remastered HD for the occasion. But it wasn't.
However, the included TAS episode "More Tribbles, More Troubles," was in pristine HD. Kor
That's a great start; do you have the VideoScan numbers for TNG-R?
As I mentioned in another post, as a producer on the VAM his perspective might be somewhat different. Not saying he's not being truthful, but his pay may very well have been directly tied to sales, and although the sales might have been okay for CBS, maybe he didn't make a bonus or something. Pure speculation, but again I'd prefer -- if possible -- to compare some objective, externally-compiled sales numbers to other contemporaneous and comparable (genre, price, etc.) releases.
As I've said several times, those other revenue streams are now the name of the game; I personally don't think we'll ever see a TNG-R style release of DS9 on BD. I think you'll agree BD sales were never going or intended to justify the TNG-R remastering project.
DS9 not currently being stripped in broadcast syndication is not necessarily an indication of unpopularity (although I agree it was never as popular as TOS or TNG and is widely lumped in with VOY as "'90s Trek"); I'm pretty sure TOS and TNG aren't getting blockbuster ratings in weekly or strip syndication either. Most syndication programming doesn't get a lot of viewership; it's mainly designed to complement the brand and the lineup of the channel. As I mentioned before, TNG is on BBCA because of Patrick Stewart. Of course these brands fluctuate regularly and wildly, which personally drives me nuts. "Pick a format and stick with it!", I'll think. MTV is the most often-cited example of this but there are many more. I threw in the towel when Sci-Fi (or Syfy or whatever) started showing WWE. I get the trademark reasons for the wonky spelling, but the brand itself is now completely meaningless and irrelevant. From Wikipedia: "The channel features supernatural, fantasy, paranormal, wrestling, reality, drama, horror and science fiction programming." Why not just name it USA2 and call it a day?
I digress, but the point is maybe DS9, in addition to being SD only, as a dark, moody, semi-serialized science-fiction series -- however highly-regarded -- simply doesn't fit in with the lineups and brands currently out there. That could change any time if Food Network decides to morph into the Dystopian Future Channel.
Perhaps the lack of recent exposure could work in DS9's favor as well, if it's been off-the-air long enough to actually be considered "fresh". Again, I feel it's not only a great show, but it would withstand the test of time both visually (especially with a nice HD polish) and narratively.
Although I believe that's one factor, I agree; I wouldn't greenlight a multimillion dollar project on that assumption and I'm sure CBS wouldn't either. Still, a beautiful HD remaster would be a great bulletpoint in a sales presentation, leveraging DS9's multiple-award winning VFX, makeup, and art design (although strangely not cinematography, particularly when compared with the flat lighting of TNG's later years).
Agreed!
Although I'd be happy with a full-on TNG-R style HD remaster for streaming with recreated CGI (hey if these fans on YouTube can do it in their spare time, likely with consumer gear, I think CBS-D can profitably put something together) and 16:9 (begrudgingly on that last point, but I just don't think 4:3's gonna fly in this brave new world).
Last edited:
The correct word, if there is one, would I imagine simply be 'Quad'. Although as you say, 'Saga' is a much more broad and satisfying term. I notice my version of the Blu Ray opts for the much more sensible term ''Alien Anthology'' instead.
Yeah, I do often wonder if 16:9'ing TNG would've made a difference to convincing more people to buy it. I notice that Fox have done it with the new X-Files set, and I'd be very surprised indeed if Buffy wasn't mastered in 16:9 for a BD release also (even against the specific wishes of it's own creator).
On the point of amateur home effects versus the 'real thing': what people do in these Youtube videos is amazing, but I guess it's the difference between somebody working on it for nothing in their spare time because they've got a passion for the material, versus CBS having to pony up ''real money'' for the professionals to do it with commercial grade equipment and within a tighter time schedule.
Yeah, I do often wonder if 16:9'ing TNG would've made a difference to convincing more people to buy it. I notice that Fox have done it with the new X-Files set, and I'd be very surprised indeed if Buffy wasn't mastered in 16:9 for a BD release also (even against the specific wishes of it's own creator).
On the point of amateur home effects versus the 'real thing': what people do in these Youtube videos is amazing, but I guess it's the difference between somebody working on it for nothing in their spare time because they've got a passion for the material, versus CBS having to pony up ''real money'' for the professionals to do it with commercial grade equipment and within a tighter time schedule.
Last edited:
I personally doubt it would've made a difference on the BD; I lean towards most BD buyers wanting OAR. I do think 16:9 will be essential to sell TNG-R and future projects to providers for mass-market broadcast and streaming. Can't have them bars at the sides!
I know the TNG-R producers went to great lengths to demonstrate why they went with 4:3 for the BDs -- safe areas, etc. -- and I know DS9 was not protected for 16:9 or even shot with it in mind. As much as I hate to say it, they'll just have to open up the sides a little and "tilt-and-scan" for future projects like they do for every other 4:3 show these days.
Hey, CBS should hire those guys right? Just kidding; union rules alone would put the brakes on that, but with this as a rough guideline of what can be done with current technology I'd hope CBS-D can pull off with pro gear and a real budget what fans can do in their spare time.
I've just decided to get the X-Files set !
When it get's cheap. I've got the DVD's anyway...
Seems really short-sighted that they weren't protecting these shows for 16:9. Though it was Paramount, they were also short-sighted with the effects for Star Trek: The Motion Picture DE.
Ugh, no thanks. I don't really want to see 4:3 television shows in the wrong AR any more than I want to see 2.35:1 movies in the wrong AR.
Isn't the correct word actually "tetralogy"?
My vague recollection, and I'm thinking back to the mid-90s Star Trek: The Magazine here, so I can't vouch for it's accuracy, but I do seem to recall reading that they at least did camera tests for 16:9 of some kind, possibly of the empty sets rather than during the actual filming. But I can't really remember now. For curiosity's sake I'd love to see it confirmed or denied. Out of all the Classic TV Trek sets, Voyager's bridge set seems to have been the one that would have benefitted the most from being in widescreen, having been built quite wide and with lots of extra detail on either side of it. Nooks and crannies everywhere.
Babylon 5 and Stargate both filmed 'safe' for widescreen, even though it was years before that aspect ratio became common, which is why true widescreen versions of the episodes are available today. (The actual actors were still staged for full screen 4:3 broadcast, so whatever action takes place in the widescreen versions is kept carefully in the middle of the image.)
Widescreen versions of Buffy exist too, but the action wasn't appropriately staged for it, so there's lots of little mishaps on the widescreen episodes, like actors standing off to the side waiting for their cue, or bits of the set that weren't finished being visible on the screen. In other words, they weren't staged 'safe' for widescreen broadcast. Joss Whedon stipulates that he'd prefer the widescreen versions weren't out there at all, but in today's TV climate I'd say that's almost impossible. My understanding of the TNG situation at least is that they could have struck off widescreen versions, but that they'd have had similar problems as the Buffy episodes do, in other words things like set dressing being visible when it shouldn't be and so forth.
So yeah. It's got more to do with the way the action is ''blocked'' than it does with anything more techical. The directors tended to block their scenes according to the 4:3 ratio, which meant that there's all sorts of off-screen badness that would become obvious if they ever struck off 16:9 prints. They'd have to digitally alter every frame to remove this stuff, which would be a whole headache of extra cost in itself...
Similar threads
