STAR TREK V DIRECTOR´S CUT

[Qonundrum]

Yeah. All depends on how you focus this edition, if you want to make something with a modern looke, as "how ST V would have looked with modern VFX" or if you want to make some kinf of retro restoration. I think they would choose the 1st option as is easier and could be more appealing for general public. The bad point about that is it could not fit very well between the other classic ST movies if it has a CGI Enterprise. As i said, the look of modern CGI does not pretend to be realistic. Check this pictures:

Discovery shoot looks like a Star Trek online graphic. ST III shoot looks real because everything is real. And the touch feeling is evident when you see that scene. The models have weight and dimensions sense that makes them look much more realistic. I am not saying CGI is crap or anything, just that the models worked perfectly in the classic films and no new CGI ships have looked better than those models. That´s part of reason about why scenes like the one with the Enterprise in TMP or the Reliant vs Enterprise battle are so amazing. So... i would definitely do a ST V recovering the Enterpise A model and film with it, adding CGI when neccesary, specially for exterior shoots like the ones with the barrier and Sha Ka Ree. (Modern use of models is impressive as it was proved in the new Star Wars films that made use of real models).

Good modelwork will even improve the best CGI (and that new take on 1701 looks rather good, regardless if it's "25% different" or not.)

The question is, does the CGI still sell the scene in way practical/model effects can not? Exhibit A is TOS-R. "The Doomsday Machine", "Space Seed", and others have CGI that's clearly CGI, but the little details thrown in with asteroid bits bouncing off of ship hulls, dispatching the Botany Bay, et al, more than make up for it. IMHO. Granted, those stories also have stronger if not wildly different plotlines... again, IMHO - YMMV.

Also, TMP showed close-ups of people next to the ship or even looking out of a window - something not really done much before, or since (oddly). That alone imprints "feels real so it must be". But TMP's models were so good and looked realistic to begin with... the amount of CGI shading to render, especially with the varying amount of lighting everywhere... the episodes are expensive enough; to give them that much more rendering time is silly. The new 1701 looks robust enough, and effects only accentuate and complement a story. And not be it. This isn't 1990 anymore when VHS copes of "The Mind's Eye" were selling like hotcakes and watched three dozen times per year. CGI isn't that new or novel anymore.

 

[Jayson1]

I already like Star Trek 5. Super underrated filled with great moments like Kirk ,Spock, McCoy camping. Sybok helping McCoy deal with his dad's death and Spock seeing his father's early rejection and Kirk's "I Need my Pain." Plus some antics with the flying boots in the turboshaft. Meeting God and Kirk asking what I God needs with a Starship. The whole concept of Nimbus III was interesting and I have been wanting Trek to go back to that planet ever sense. Plus the shuttle making a tight docking in the shuttlebay. Plus the music is really good.


Jason

 

[Kor]

The rock creatures would have been a nice callback to TOS. Oh well.

Kor

 

[Jayson1]

The rock creatures would have been a nice callback to TOS. Oh well.

Kor

They weren't creatures. They were a highly advanced self aware species that just liked to watch people fight in order to learn the difference between good and evil. I'm sure if we learned more about them though they would have a very advanced and sophisticated culture that we simply don't get to see.


Jason

 

[Maurice]

They weren't creatures. They were a highly advanced self aware species that just liked to watch people fight in order to learn the difference between good and evil.

creature, n
1: something created either animate or inanimate: such as

a: a lower animal

especially : a farm animal​

b: a human being
c: a being of anomalous or uncertain aspect or nature

creatures of fantasy​

2: one that is the servile dependent or tool of another

Still a creature.

 

[Captain Atkin]

It was announced today that Warner Bothers is releasing the "Snyder Cut" for HBO Max.
CBS Digital and Paramount could easily do something similar with Star Trek V, at a fraction of the cost.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...lans-revealed-it-will-be-an-new-thing-1295102

 

[RAMA]

It was announced today that Warner Bothers is releasing the "Snyder Cut" for HBO Max.
CBS Digital and Paramount could easily do something similar with Star Trek V, at a fraction of the cost.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...lans-revealed-it-will-be-an-new-thing-1295102

Well, except STV isn't remotely as good as any JL movie cut, even if you cut it with a gold and bejeweled blade...which preferably would be used in stabbing all copies of it.

RAMA

 

[Grant]

Clever

 

[Maurice]

It was announced today that Warner Bothers is releasing the "Snyder Cut" for HBO Max.
CBS Digital and Paramount could easily do something similar with Star Trek V, at a fraction of the cost.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...lans-revealed-it-will-be-an-new-thing-1295102

Barring any archive of unused footage—which I suspect does not exist based on the shooting script—I don't think you could change much about the film other than the VFX and cutting stuff out.

 

[Grant]

For the most part that sounds correct. But if you take out the worst of the comedy that would be about six or seven minutes of footage. And if you look carefully at the script there are some bits of dialogue throughout the movie of the NON comedic variety that could be added back in to bring the movie up to about what it is -- an hour and 45 minutes.
There is a scene extension on the Klingon ship where Klaa and Vixis discuss a bounty being on Kirk's head and she quote the Klingon ambassador from the previous movie about no peace while Kirk lives. Klaa says he both admires and hates Kirk. There's a bit at the end between Spock and McCoy discussing the creature before Kirk walks up to them in the observation room party. There's a scene where McCoy works on the Federation soldier who got shot in the leg by the Gatling gun type weapon. There's a couple of lines of dialogue where Spock explains that Skybok's pain removing technique is a forbidden ritual from Vulcans past history. There's some dialogue during the hostage tape where Spock notes that the weapons of Syboks people appear to be primitive and that Koord"s assignment 2 nimbus is a form of banishment and there's a line by McCoy during that scene where he comments that the three counsels appear to have hostage mentality or what we call Stockholm Syndrome.

So you fix the special effects and you remove some of the more egregious comedy and you add back in a little bit of more serious interesting material that was sacrificed in the first place so that they could put in some of that comedy stuff and you have yourself a marginally better movie which why not? Lot of people love the movie. And people love to see alternate versions of movies. If they love them they want to see them improve the little bit and even people who dislike the movie probably will get great pleasure from watching it and then restating their opinion that the movie was unsalvageable

 

[FormerLurker]

The problem with just removing the comedy elements from STV, without considering why, is the danger of making a film that, while marginally better in the joke department, is suddenly And The Children Shall Lead style confusing and frustrating. Far too many of the jokes that people hate the most are plot elements. Sulu can't send Scotty to sickbay if he doesn't hit his head, for instance. And how do our heroes distract the remote outpost and steal their horses without Uhura's dance? Admittedly, that one would have been far better received across the board if there had been one or more lines of dialog explaining that it was Uhura's idea (such lines are in the novelization, for instance).

 

[arch101]

For the most part that sounds correct. But if you take out the worst of the comedy that would be about six or seven minutes of footage. And if you look carefully at the script there are some bits of dialogue throughout the movie of the NON comedic variety that could be added back in to bring the movie up to about what it is -- an hour and 45 minutes.
There is a scene extension on the Klingon ship where Klaa and Vixis discuss a bounty being on Kirk's head and she quote the Klingon ambassador from the previous movie about no peace while Kirk lives. Klaa says he both admires and hates Kirk. There's a bit at the end between Spock and McCoy discussing the creature before Kirk walks up to them in the observation room party. There's a scene where McCoy works on the Federation soldier who got shot in the leg by the Gatling gun type weapon. There's a couple of lines of dialogue where Spock explains that Skybok's pain removing technique is a forbidden ritual from Vulcans past history. There's some dialogue during the hostage tape where Spock notes that the weapons of Syboks people appear to be primitive and that Koord"s assignment 2 nimbus is a form of banishment and there's a line by McCoy during that scene where he comments that the three counsels appear to have hostage mentality or what we call Stockholm Syndrome.

So you fix the special effects and you remove some of the more egregious comedy and you add back in a little bit of more serious interesting material that was sacrificed in the first place so that they could put in some of that comedy stuff and you have yourself a marginally better movie which why not? Lot of people love the movie. And people love to see alternate versions of movies. If they love them they want to see them improve the little bit and even people who dislike the movie probably will get great pleasure from watching it and then restating their opinion that the movie was unsalvageable

Sounds like the novelization (which was much better than the finished film). Only part missing is Syboks shield redesign that allows passage through the barrier, instead of it just magically happening.

 

[Phoenix219]

Is this dialogue all actually recorded? I had no idea.... are there a lot of deleted scenes with footage?

 

[Grant]

Yes the dialogue was recorded but it wasn't entire scenes or long extensions that would be fit for a deleted scenes section. The only large deleted scenes were the ones that they included on the DVD and Blu-ray release -- the one with sybok and Spock acting as if they were very Young and the much longer scene with the counsels.
For whatever reason in 1989 the studio was convinced that the humour was made Star Trek 4 successful and therefore Star Trek 5 must have humor.
And it's been stated that the studio Wanted the movie to come in at around an hour and 45 minutes. So since they were determined to keep in the humor they made little trims here and there and a bunch of scenes to keep both the running time that they wanted and the humor that they wanted. If you look at the script which you can read over at trekcore, you can see that there are very little if any jokes or gags that were cut out but there were numerous lines of dialogue that were serious that were cut out. So therefore in a re-edit they could reverse that situation by cutting out a few minutes of silly stuff and adding back in a few minutes of serious stuff.

 

[Grant]

Here's the link to the script over at trekcore. If you were to watch the movie and compare the dialogue to the script you can easily spot the deleted lines and although it's nothing earth-shattering or groundbreaking it is decent dialogue that just fell victim to the Studio mandated running time. Shatner did not believe that the movie could have anything further cut out of it when it got down to 2 hours. Which is stated in the making of Star Trek V book. He just didn't see where any more Cuts could be made. But if the studio was determined to get the running time down and determined to keep in all the so-called funny parts then he clearly lost that battle and he was bitter at the time according to the book. Actually in the book it says the movie Ran 2 hours without the end credits so since the end credits are about 5 minutes long there was actually 20 minutes of material that was cut. From reading the script it looks like the majority of that 20 minutes was action based stuff the two battles at Paradise City --- the one in the beginning in the one in the middle. Because there's not that much dialogue cut out maybe only 5 or 8 minutes of dialogue was cut out of the movie. The rest apparently was the action stuff that Shatner was so proud of. I wouldn't be in favor of adding back in the action but the dialogue scenes seem pretty good. Last note, one of The Producers actually had to call up the Deforest Kelly and break the news to him that they were cutting the scene where he attended to the wounded soldier. Because if you notice it's the only scene in the movie where he actually acts as a doctor. Not including the scene where he euthanizes his father which kind of has him acting as the opposite of a doctor.

http://movies.trekcore.com/finalfrontier/finalfrontier.txt

 

[JonnyQuest037]

It was announced today that Warner Bothers is releasing the "Snyder Cut" for HBO Max.
CBS Digital and Paramount could easily do something similar with Star Trek V, at a fraction of the cost.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...lans-revealed-it-will-be-an-new-thing-1295102

I think Warner Bros. is going to discover that "Hey! We've made this movie more like those other two movies that weren't especially good or popular!" is not a big selling point outside of a few hardcore Snyder cultists.

Likewise, I don't think there's much interest in a Director's Cut of STV with new special effects outside of a few hardcore ST fans. It doesn't have the novelty value of being the first ST movie like TMP, it wasn't directed by a legendary director like Robert Wise, and it's had a reputation of being an unintentionally campy flop for 30+ years by this point. That's a lot to overcome. Plus, the problems with STV go a lot deeper than just its special effects, so it's not like a Director's Cut would fix everything that's wrong with it.

 

[Ssosmcin]

The problem with just removing the comedy elements from STV, without considering why, is the danger of making a film that, while marginally better in the joke department, is suddenly And The Children Shall Lead style confusing and frustrating. Far too many of the jokes that people hate the most are plot elements. Sulu can't send Scotty to sickbay if he doesn't hit his head, for instance. And how do our heroes distract the remote outpost and steal their horses without Uhura's dance? Admittedly, that one would have been far better received across the board if there had been one or more lines of dialog explaining that it was Uhura's idea (such lines are in the novelization, for instance).

Well, in those instances, you can cut from Kirk telling Scotty he;s amazing to the three guys reaching the turboshaft. You can lose all of the scenes of Scotty in sickbay - which drops the Uhura fawning bit - and you don't really miss any story.

As for losing the fandance, that's not hard either. We can have Kirk saying "wait a minute.....perfect..." over a different shot and suddenly they're on horseback ("wow Kirk found horses!"). A lot of the larger gags really don't have as much bearing on the plot as all that. The only thing you can't really cut is the one thing that really gets the biggest eye roll from me and that's the mounting climbing sequence. Too many references to it and Kirk's arc are rooted in that stupid climb.

 

[Phoenix219]

A lot of that has already been done in the Jack Marshall fanedit... it flows very nice.

 

[Grant]

Well, in those instances, you can cut from Kirk telling Scotty he;s amazing to the three guys reaching the turboshaft. You can lose all of the scenes of Scotty in sickbay - which drops the Uhura fawning bit - and you don't really miss any story.

As for losing the fandance, that's not hard either. We can have Kirk saying "wait a minute.....perfect..." over a different shot and suddenly they're on horseback ("wow Kirk found horses!"). A lot of the larger gags really don't have as much bearing on the plot as all that. The only thing you can't really cut is the one thing that really gets the biggest eye roll from me and that's the mounting climbing sequence. Too many references to it and Kirk's arc are rooted in that stupid climb.

The infuriating thing about Kirk's stupid climb and fall from the mountain is that with five minutes of thought they could have fixed it somewhat by showing that Kirk has some kind of an anti-grav safety device on his person so that if he falls he can hit the device with so then prevent him from smashing into the ground. Then they can show as he falls he whacks it against an outcrop or a rock and damages the device and Spock has to save him as in the final movie.
That would remove the insanely moronic idea that a 50 something year old captain of a Starship who just got his command back and his ship back would risk throwing away his life by free climbing a mountain with no safety apparatus.
McCoy could still be angry at him for risking his life and he could still Proclaim that he knew he wasn't going to die because he wasn't alone and it would imply that people would not be so reckless with their lives in the future that they would climb a mountain without any safety apparatus. Of course in today's world people do free climb a mountain without safety apparatus but I'm sure when they're falling to their death they kind of wish they had 23rd Century safety device that's not now available.

 

[Nightowl1701]

No studio likes to admit, even decades after the fact, that their meddling in post-production is what led to a movie's failure. Let alone what Grant's talking about, that Paramount (or, rather, Harve Bennett at their behest) ripped the movie out of Shatner's hands and hacked it to pieces in the editing room. And that's after the special effects fiasco which, to be fair to both Shatner and Paramount, was not entirely the fault of either. (Or even of Bran Ferren's - he simply wasn't given the budget or time needed.) There were a LOT of FX-heavy blockbusters lining up at the starting gate for summer '89, and only so many effects houses to go around. The Writer's Guild strike of '88 didn't help much as far as fixing script problems either.

I think JonnyQuest037 has got it right. Any other studio, maybe you'd have a shot, but penny-pinching Paramount isn't going to bother revisiting a film that was just snake-bit from start to finish.