For Blu-Ray, will TMP have to have all new FX?

[Luke Lightsaber]

itunes has the Special Longer editon for download. They don't have the Director's cut.

 

[Maurice]

^^^Of those 3, only 3 was worth keeping. 1 was unnecessary, and 2 was dumb, especially cause Uhura's setup line was bad. She says, "It could have a crew of tens of thousands" when she oughta have said "tens of millions" given how honking huge the sucker was.

 

[Good Will Riker]

^^^

Well, some writers just aren't good with numbers.

Case in point for DS9's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume?" where Bashir mentions Khan Noonien Singh having been a conqueror of Earth 200 years ago rather than the precise fictional date of 400 years ago. Chalk that up to Ronald D. Moore's admittedly bad math.

 

[Data Holmes]

^^^Well the "Blu-ray version" will likely be the Director's Cut version so since those line are not in the Director's version they will not be included.

Unless they include the 'Special longer version' which is the ONLY version that had those lines you're out of luck.

So since they sure as hell aren't going to make a FOURTH version---you won't hear those lines on the Blu-ray unless they include the SLV.

Of course they will likely include all the cut stuff in a separate section as the did in the standard release--so at least you'll be able to see it there.

I much prefer the Director's cut but they left out 3 exchanges that surely should have been left in:

1. The one you mentioned
2. McCloy's beautiful, "Or a crew of a thousand ten miles tall" and
3. Decker's, "Of course, we all create god in our image"

whoever was advising Wise (or if he made the decision himself) they just blew it be leaving those bits, which would have added about 50 seconds to the movie.

You never know, they could pull a "Blade Runner box set" move and realese one four or five disk set, with all versions, pluse the new "definitive" version, and include all the "previously missing but newly discovered" lost footage like the probe in engineering, the zapped security guards on the bridge, the entire missing but filmed kirk and spock explore the interior of v'ger and memory wall sequences, as well as a ton of phase II materials, and TMP preproduction materials including the many matt paintings and design sketches, and the pre work done by RAA on the effects which was tossed out at the last moment.

Toss in a few more documentaries, maybe some fan works and a collector statue and some prints in a special box...


I could see that selling.

 

[Oso Blanco]

itunes has the Special Longer editon for download.

Where? I only found the theatrical cut!

 

[guardian]

I'd be surprised if the SLV is available anywhere at this point.

when was it's last official release. the 1990s?

I love that guys idea of a Blade Runner style box set though. I just don't think Paramount will ever do anything quite that classy for Trek.
Hell, TWOK deserves the same treatment as well.

 

[Cyrus]

I heard that the new special effects done for the Director's Edition DVD were only made at standard resolution, and so the film can't be released as-is on Blu-Ray. Does this mean they will have to redo the effects all over again for a Blu-Ray release (or to air the film in HD)?

(This is the same reason why TNG, DS9 and Voyager must be redone from scratch if they are ever to be aired in HD or released on Blu-Ray, since all of their effects and editing were done on videotape which has a very low resolution.)

Videotape? The effects are of DVD quality, so I doubt the effects were done on videotape.

i believe that was a reference to TNG, DS9, and most of early Voyager.

The TNG/DS9/VOY editing was not done on a regular videotape. They used professional tapes that have the DVD level (480 lines) quality.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

I'd be surprised if the SLV is available anywhere at this point.

when was it's last official release. the 1990s?

I love that guys idea of a Blade Runner style box set though. I just don't think Paramount will ever do anything quite that classy for Trek.
Hell, TWOK deserves the same treatment as well.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the SLV?

 

[Indysolo]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the SLV?

Special Longer Version, the 1983 television edit of Star Trek - The Motion Picture that had 12 minutes of deleted footage cut back into the feature. It was first shown on ABC and then released to video.

Neil

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the SLV?

Special Longer Version, the 1983 television edit of Star Trek - The Motion Picture that had 12 minutes of deleted footage cut back into the feature. It was first shown on ABC and then released to video.

Neil

Ah, yes. I've got it on VHS somewhere.

 

[Philo]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the SLV?

Special Longer Version, the 1983 television edit of Star Trek - The Motion Picture that had 12 minutes of deleted footage cut back into the feature. It was first shown on ABC and then released to video.

Neil

And why people like it better than the theatrical I'll never know. The VHS tape I had growing up claimed to be the SLV but it wasn't. When I finally saw it for the first time I thought it was neat to see the deleted scenes but it was obvious why most of them were deleted. There are a few good moments added, but for the most part they're embarassing to an already flawed movie.

 

[ATimson]

That'd be technically impossible, considering how virtually every scene had a new audio mix, or shots trimmed down by a few frames, or some other modification. Seamless branching is only worth the trouble if most of the movie is identical between the different versions that are being branched.

A new audio mix wouldn't be a problem, as that could just be present as another audio track. The bigger problem would be any smaller trims, as you mentioned.

As for the visual effects, I remember that the people responsible made all the models and scenes with enough quality to be rendered at film resolution, because a theatrical rerelease was a possibility. They were rendered only at DVD quality because Paramount cheaped out, but assuming good archives were kept, it wouldn't be any trouble at all to take the new special effects assets and rerender them in HD.

Assuming good archives were kept.

Which I'd not be willing to bet on, after what happened to Babylon 5.

 

[trevanian]

Videotape? The effects are of DVD quality, so I doubt the effects were done on videotape.

i believe that was a reference to TNG, DS9, and most of early Voyager.

The TNG/DS9/VOY editing was not done on a regular videotape. They used professional tapes that have the DVD level (480 lines) quality.

They were done in different formats. Most of the time they worked on D1 I think, but it was still with NTSC standards in mind (Cinefex 37 has a heavy-duty article on the first two years of TNG and how it was done in post, with predominantly film elements but occasional and obvious shotonvid stuff as well, like the horrible LOUD AS A WHISPER phaser hits.) Finishing on a 525 or less format isn't the same as finishing higher and broadcasting at that level, it is clearly inferior (look at frame grabs from WAY OF THE WARRRIOR in CFQ, they look horrible.)

I don't know what you mean by effects being of DVD quality, the TMP cg ship stuff doesn't look very good next to the original model shots.

Comping the ModernTrek TV stuff electronically basically did away with matte lines, but substituted a kind of mushline instead. You can see the same kind of wrongness if you look at the antenna fight at the end of GOLDENEYE .... just cuz there ain't a LOGAN'S RUN looking matte line doesn't mean it looks good, just different.

 

[ST-One]

I don't know what you mean by effects being of DVD quality, the TMP cg ship stuff doesn't look very good next to the original model shots.

Yeah...

 

[trevanian]

Thanks, but it'd be even more clear (not that that is your intention) if you'd go from say the rear shot as they go to impulse to the CG from the rear shot you have up there. That'd show the contrast and richness of the model shot that is lacking to some degree in the CG, which has a faux level of detail in the textures, one that feels applied rather than reflected by a real lighting situation.

 

[ST-One]

Just to that we are clear, that last image IS the real model.

 

[Indysolo]

Oh BURN!

Neil

 

[trevanian]

Just to that we are clear, that last image IS the real model.

Just to be clear, I'm referring to the top 2 cg images (don't I say 'up there' someplace in my post?)

 

[trevanian]

INDYSOLO you of all posters damned well know I know better than to misID a miniature shot ... as for the other guy, I don' t know him except to think his avatar sucks.

 

[ST-One]

INDYSOLO you of all posters damned well know I know better than to misID a miniature shot ... as for the other guy, I don' t know him except to think his avatar sucks.

Very nice.

Maybe you could tell us (a bit more detailed) what exactly is wrong with the CG shots.