Original, or Remastered?

[Mr_Homn]

Why?

Because it doesn't look any less fake than the original. You were saying it looks less fake than the original and I disagree. They both look very fake to me, in different ways. I don't really think there are "degrees" of looking fake. Something either looks real or it doesn't. It convinces you or it doesn't. CGI is almost always easy to spot, and that's especially true when it's rushed and low budget, which it was in the case of these special editions. That said, I don't think the intention of the CGI was to look as real as possible.

I already said I like both versions and think there are pros and cons to both. They both still look incredibly fake, though, and that's okay with me. I don't need it to look real. It never looked real in the first place. I'm glad I can enjoy both versions though, as it gives me twice the trek. I think those who are choosing one side or the other are kind of missing out on some of the fun. If I had to choose one though, I would choose to watch original versions, just because I think there's something more charming about them... and it's definitely not nostalgia, as the first time I actually sat down to watch this show was with the CGI versions.

 

[Rojixus]

Why?

Because it doesn't look any less fake than the original. You were saying it looks less fake than the original and I disagree. They both look very fake to me, in different ways. I don't really think there are "degrees" of looking fake. Something either looks real or it doesn't. It convinces you or it doesn't. CGI is almost always easy to spot, and that's especially true when it's rushed and low budget, which it was in the case of these special editions. That said, I don't think the intention of the CGI was to look as real as possible.

I already said I like both versions and think there are pros and cons to both. They both still look incredibly fake, though, and that's okay with me. I don't need it to look real. It never looked real in the first place. I'm glad I can enjoy both versions though, as it gives me twice the trek. I think those who are choosing one side or the other are kind of missing out on some of the fun. If I had to choose one though, I would choose to watch original versions, just because I think there's something more charming about them... and it's definitely not nostalgia, as the first time I actually sat down to watch this show was with the CGI versions.

Well, that's as good an explanation as any.

 

[RAMA]

http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x03hd/thechangelinghd0147.jpg
http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/2x03hd/thechangelinghd0147a.jpg

 

[RAMA]

 

[Vonstadt]

I dunno I sorta like both, I have both versions and both offer great things. For me the originals are the best we could get at the time and were pretty darn good. I always had a feel that the Ent was a real ship, and yet in the remastered version of the Doomsday machine I got to see my Connie in action (yeah it looked CGI but it was kinda neat to see the strafing runs...

I can take either or leave it...the remastered offered a degree more depth in the feeling of the universe but the Originals...well they built the universe that i ve come to love.

So...for me both work just nicely.

Vons

 

[Trekker82]

When I first got into Star Trek I watched originals on TV; then they released the remastered version and read that they cleaned up a lot of the PQ (scratches, off colors, sound blips) and added new effects. The new effects didn't really bother me as they were essentially a better looking direct replacement of the original effect- they didn't try to make the Doomsday machine look like a Borg ship for example.

 

[OverJoyJackson]

This is a no brainer. I have a new 240HZ HD TV, and wow, the remasters are incredible. They look like they were made this year, that is how good they look. Maybe too good. I had never noticed the fact you can see a freeway in the background when Kirk is fighting the Gorn. But yes, there it is, in the distance, with cars driving on it...a fricking freeway.

Some of the new CGI effects are iffy...but over all, I like them and it gives the show a modern look to it that I think people under the age of 80 years old (<<<< the average age of TOS fans) can appreciate.

 

[BillJ]

Some of the new CGI effects are iffy...but over all, I like them and it gives the show a modern look to it that I think people under the age of 80 years old (<<<< the average age of TOS fans) can appreciate.

Thirty-nine here and for the most part I like both the original and the new effects.

 

[Uxi]

Mid 30's, grew up with TOS in syndication. Most of the SFX look ok on a smaller TV, but in HD and on a big screen, yeah... not so much. It usually evokes laughter and not of the good kind.

The new effects are pretty damned cool. I don't like all of them but many of them look really good and I'm very satisfied with my BD set.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Mid 30's, grew up with TOS in syndication.

I'm 52 but missed TOS in first run. Saw random TAS in b/w, and a few random "in colour" TOS when colour TV arrived in Australia in 1975. Became an avid fan with TMP and spent several years catching everything I'd missed.

Anything that doubles the number of TOS episodes to watch, after all this time, is A Good Thing.

 

[Bones]

46 and grew up on syndication starting in 1st grade. I can remember the moment when Star Trek became my favorite series, replacing Speed Racer.

I was buying TOS-R in HD from iTunes until Amazon started putting it out for free for Prime customers. Nothing better than free, especially HD on a 52" LCD TV. I'm rewatching starting with my favorite episodes and working down the list.

The remastered effects are pretty good. My main gripe is that they didn't take it far enough. I look at the effects in The Doomsday Machine and wonder why they didn't take it that far in other episodes, such as the disappointing battle scenes in The Ultimate Computer.

 

[KirksStuntMan]

When the remastered versions came out I was surprised at the quality of special effects. For most of the episodes, it was cool to watch what the CG technicians had accomplished. Then I watched the remastered "Doomsday Machine", and I was somewhat dismayed that recreation of the alien planet killer was less than perfect. I was also disappointed in the "new" Enterprise, because it appears too much like an animation compared to the original blue screen process used in the 1960's.

 

[Warped9]

When the remastered versions came out I was surprised at the quality of special effects. For most of the episodes, it was cool to watch what the CG technicians had accomplished. Then I watched the remastered "Doomsday Machine", and I was somewhat dismayed that recreation of the alien planet killer was less than perfect. I was also disappointed in the "new" Enterprise, because it appears too much like an animation compared to the original blue screen process used in the 1960's.

A dissenting viewpoint. Fancy that. Welcome to the dark side.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Both, I guess. Depends on my mood. I never have, and never will, let the quality of dated SFX color my opinion of any TV show or movie. That's how I can enjoy watching the 1933 King Kong as well as Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

Star Trek's effects were of their time and I am able (quite unconsciously) to watch anything in their proper context. I can't understand people who don't do this, but there ya go. However, I also like to watch the new effects just to see some shots with more freedom of movement. I'm very impressed with a number of episodes, but aside from the shows that lean on the effects (TDDM and Tomorrow is Yesterday type shows) most of the episodes only had stock shots of the ship in flight or in orbit. So really, how much of a difference does it make overall?

But I can switch from one to the other and not have it diminish my enjoyment. I'm simply not that picky. EXCEPT - when it comes to sound. I always watch the Blu-Rays with the mono sound, even the new FX, because I hate what they've done to it. Too many changes that pull me out of it and I really can't stomach the new recording of the theme. This is probably because I grew up audio taping the episodes and had every sound memorized. Thus I still have the VHS and Laserdisc runs. They're as close to the original sound mix as we've gotten (the first season BD mono track being the exception).

I read a lot of people criticizing other who prefer the originals as being "purists" or overly nostalgic. But honestly, if Star Trek's 1960's effects truly ruin the episodes for some people, how are they any different? They are just as closed minded as those they berate.

Makes me wonder if many folks here could even sit down and enjoy an episode of Blakes 7. Trek's effects were never that bad.

 

[Neutral Zone]

I have the remastered version, not intitialy through preference. When I purched my set it was there. My sister has an untouched version and after comparing them I have to say that I prefer my set.

 

[22 Stars]

You can't treat TOS-R as a single entity unfortunately. The early episodes completed (and title sequence in every episode sadly) used an inferior and cartoony Enterprise mesh.

Look at episodes like Space Seed, Court Martial and Amok Time for the best TOS-R accomplished. I find it hard to nitpick this work, it is exceptional. I wish they could fix the first batch of episodes done, but that is life...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Both, I guess. Depends on my mood. I never have, and never will, let the quality of dated SFX color my opinion of any TV show or movie. That's how I can enjoy watching the 1933 King Kong as well as Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

Yep.

 

[Davros]

Give me the originals. If you want new effects buy a new show.

 

[Wil has a posse]

I think the Enterprise looked more "real" in the original effects.

But I love some of the wide planet surface shots.

So, it's a mixed bag for me.

 

[Maximara]

Give me the originals. If you want new effects buy a new show.

I understand the feeling but I also realize that while the effects looked "good" on a small SD I suspect that they would have looked horrid in HD on a large screen TV.