Star Trek TAS: The Remake

[chardman]

Dirt cheap is not the legal department headaches of relicensing the music and the vocal performances for 22 episodes for syndication, home video release, digital download, future media, etc.

Does re-licensing even need to happen? (I don't remember it being an factor in TOS-R) I'd think repackaging the eps with new visuals only wouldn't affect whatever deals are in place for any other aspect of production, such as the audio work, and wouldn't be any more complicated than for a standard re-release of the original product. (As I believe was the case w/ TOS-R). Those involved would simply be paid the same as they would for any re-release. And I'd imagine that paying them residuals would be hugely cheaper than paying for new performances with all new cast, crew, etc at current SAG/AFTRA rates.

How about repurposing those music scores and relicensing them too? They would have to pay residuals to every musician...

Already addressed, Paying residuals to the original musicians, techs, etc for reusing the old score would be far cheaper than paying modern scale to a group of new musicians, techs, etc to perform and record an entirely new score.

Dirt cheap is not CGI for 24 minutes for 22 episodes= 528 minutes = 8.8 hours of 1080p CGI.

It is compared to the cost of generating an entirely new soundtrack for 24 minutes for 22 episodes= 528 minutes = 8.8 hours, in addition to all that CGI you mentioned.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I'd imagine that the reason they'd do it is that they've already paid for the audio portion of the show, so that's one major aspect of production where they would save big bucks by recycling. They'd pay only small residual fees to all involved to simply repackage the old audio with new visuals, which would be dirt cheap compared to the cost of generating an all new audio track, with an all new cast, crew, musicians, etc, all of whom would have to be paid current scale.

CBS who owns the rights to the Trek franchise on television including (I would think) TAS is not going to make new Trek using the old actors. They will release new products of the old 6 TV series and feature films (like when they re-release the Trek I-X films for a deluxe edition with more restorations around 2016).

Dirt cheap is not the legal department headaches of relicensing the music and the vocal performances for 22 episodes for syndication, home video release, digital download, future media, etc.
Dirt cheap is not CGI for 24 minutes for 22 episodes= 528 minutes = 8.8 hours of 1080p CGI. Check the budget of Tron Uprising on Disney XD airing this summer which should be 22 minute episodes.
Since TAS has not come out on Blu-ray I can see only a possibility of doing a CGI version of it by CBS Digital as a way of selling TAS on Blu-ray "with all new 1080p CGI VFX in full 16x9!". Of course on the Blu-ray there would be an option to watch the original animation in HD (or upconverted standard definition). Otherwise it is going to be a harder sell for 22 episodes with very repetitive music and some actors voicing multiple characters in an episode. Could you see them redoing the music score too with a modern sounding VOY/ENT score for every episode? How about repurposing those music scores and relicensing them too? They would have to pay residuals to every musician...

Can you think of a single example of that ever having been done with an old animated series in the history of tv?

As far as repurposing a cartoon series:
Space Ghost Coast to Coast

The second season of Space Ghost saw a boost in production values that made the first season feel like repurposed animation. Featuring more than 328 CGI sequences and an actual, live dinosaur, this was the season that made Adult Swim think differently about budgeting.

which is sold by Adult Swim.

Can you think of a single example of a TV series being re-edited from edited takes with 10 second handles from the original filmed camera negative to match the original episodes? That is what TNG-R did for 7 seasons of a TV series.
Trek is a very profitable franchise for CBS and TNG being a particular property that has still a large audience and a future audience and they wanted to really capitalize on that.

In reply to my questions, you cite two examples which I don't think have any bearing. Firstly, you cite the example of the second season of a show having greatly increased budget from its first. That's totally different from going back and remastering a show that's nearly 40 years old.

Secondly, the comparison between TNG and TAS is not appropriate, IMHO. TNG is one of the most financially successful of the Trek shows and relaunched modern Trek. TAS is nowhere nearly as successful or acclaimed and I can't see how it would ever attract such an investment. I doubt very much that a blu-ray boxed set of TAS would sell like that of TNG.

Besides, you were basically talking about re-doing the whole show afresh, apart from the voiceovers. That's a hell of a lot different from the remastering for the TNG Blu-rays.

 

[M-Red]

Two comments and one question:


1. I'd love to get a new CGI Trek. I don't think the TAS-remake would happen, and wouldn't want that anyway.


2. If it's done right, it wouldn't even have to be a CGI version. I still think the Clone Wars micro-series is the best thing Star Wars has done since the classic trilogy. I'd prefer CGI, but I'd mostly just want a new Trek series to be good.


3. If CBS is soooo disinterested about Trek on TV, why don't they just sell the property? If they're not going to use it....why not?

 

[AviTrek]

3. If CBS is soooo disinterested about Trek on TV, why don't they just sell the property? If they're not going to use it....why not?

CBS is making plenty selling their old content and licensing the brand for consumer products. Just because they're not interested in a new show doesn't mean they don't see value in the brand. You don't see people saying CBS is not remaking I Love Lucy so it should just sell that show.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

TAS is nowhere nearly as successful or acclaimed and I can't see how it would ever attract such an investment. I doubt very much that a blu-ray boxed set of TAS would sell like that of TNG.

Besides, you were basically talking about re-doing the whole show afresh, apart from the voiceovers.

Here's an idea.
Take the original audio recordings done in 1998 by
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Walter Koenig, and Nichelle Nichols in their original roles from a story written by D.C. Fontana and make a 45 minute CGI new TAS episode around this Secret of Vulcan Fury story as a major feature along with the original TAS episodes to sell on Blu-ray.
This was 5 years after ST:Generations feature film when they all last worked together while shooting. Truly the last project they all did together.

To be able to use the recorded voices of all the actors would be awesome for a animated episode or special for a TAS blu-ray as a major feature to purchase TAS. See the new thread in Future of Trek:
resurrecting Star Trek: Secret of Vulcan Fury as a animated TOS story
It has a link to a video trailer featuring those recordings.

even the first reply in that thread tells you people would buy it (maybe added to TAS on Blu-ray)

I don't usually buy animated movies or audio dramas but I'd shell out for this in a second.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ The first reply in the other thread was actually, er me. Or hadn't you noticed?

But while I'd shell out for the chance to hear or see a brand new story featuring the last time the original crew got together, I wouldn't spent tuppence on a rehash of TAS. Just so we're clear.

 

[The Overlord]

They could always remake TAS with new CGI animation and use the voice tracks from the original TAS.

They could in theory. In reality, I don't see them doing it. Why on Earth go to all that trouble when they could make an entirely brand new series?

What trouble? I'd imagine that the reason they'd do it is that they've already paid for the audio portion of the show, so that's one major aspect of production where they would save big bucks by recycling. They'd pay only small residual fees to all involved to simply repackage the old audio with new visuals, which would be dirt cheap compared to the cost of generating an all new audio track, with an all new cast, crew, musicians, etc, all of whom would have to be paid current scale.

Plus... It also gives them performances by original cast members that simply are no longer available.

Well the problem is that wound sound like a poorly dubbed anime from the 60s. Also only hardcore Trekies care about this old cartoon from the 70s, kids and adults today wouldn't have much interest in seeing revamped episodes of this show.

Plus frankly there any cartoons from the past 20 years that are better not only in terms of animation, but in terms of writing that are far superior to TAS.

I think a new Star Trek cartoon should built for the audience of today, not the audience of the 70s. So a new cartoon would need a script and vocals to appeal to today's audience.

I think the best thing to do, is to have one or two Star trek veterans in the cast and have the rest of the cast be professional voice actors, who will work for scale and are not super expensive. Plus if you have a good voice actor, they can do up to 3 voices with no additional charge.

So, just for example, if they made a cartoon about Star Trek Titan, they can have Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis in the cast and have other roles go to professional voice actors, like Frank Welker or Jennifer Hale, for example.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

Corloff also check out this thread:

Poll Should There Be A Blu Ray Of The Animated Series?

 

[Bixby]

I think the best thing to do, is to have one or two Star trek veterans in the cast and have the rest of the cast be professional voice actors, who will work for scale and are not super expensive. Plus if you have a good voice actor, they can do up to 3 voices with no additional charge.

So, just for example, if they made a cartoon about Star Trek Titan, they can have Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis in the cast and have other roles go to professional voice actors, like Frank Welker or Jennifer Hale, for example.

I highly doubt Welker and Hale would agree to work for scale pay. In fact, Welker's salary is probably as high as Frakes and Sirtis, if not higher.

Also, as much as we might want him to, it's likely Welker would only agree to voice more than one character if he were paid separately for each voice (likely the same kind of arrangement he has for Scooby Doo where he plays both Fred and Scooby currently). Welker and many other animated voice talents had a strike back in the early 90's for the express purpose of getting paid for each specific character played. This is why, apart from the Simpsons actors who get paid a king's ransom, most animated shows since the 90's have an army of actors to play their cast, rather than the 4 to 8 who used to play multiple roles for shows made during the 60's to the 80's.

 

[The Overlord]

I think the best thing to do, is to have one or two Star trek veterans in the cast and have the rest of the cast be professional voice actors, who will work for scale and are not super expensive. Plus if you have a good voice actor, they can do up to 3 voices with no additional charge.

So, just for example, if they made a cartoon about Star Trek Titan, they can have Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis in the cast and have other roles go to professional voice actors, like Frank Welker or Jennifer Hale, for example.

I highly doubt Welker and Hale would agree to work for scale pay. In fact, Welker's salary is probably as high as Frakes and Sirtis, if not higher.

Also, as much as we might want him to, it's likely Welker would only agree to voice more than one character if he were paid separately for each voice (likely the same kind of arrangement he has for Scooby Doo where he plays both Fred and Scooby currently). Welker and many other animated voice talents had a strike back in the early 90's for the express purpose of getting paid for each specific character played. This is why, apart from the Simpsons actors who get paid a king's ransom, most animated shows since the 90's have an army of actors to play their cast, rather than the 4 to 8 who used to play multiple roles for shows made during the 60's to the 80's.

I think you are misinformed, there is a union standard on how much a voice actor gets paid (non union work is different, but irrelevant to this discussion, a Star trek animated series would be union).

http://voiceactors.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/how-much-do-voice-actors-earn/

The normal union salary for voice actors is 800 dollars for a 4 hour recording session.

Also union rules say that a voice actor has to do up to 3 voices without charging extra, so you voice 3 characters voiced for the price of one.

 

[AviTrek]

I think the best thing to do, is to have one or two Star trek veterans in the cast and have the rest of the cast be professional voice actors, who will work for scale and are not super expensive. Plus if you have a good voice actor, they can do up to 3 voices with no additional charge.

So, just for example, if they made a cartoon about Star Trek Titan, they can have Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis in the cast and have other roles go to professional voice actors, like Frank Welker or Jennifer Hale, for example.

I highly doubt Welker and Hale would agree to work for scale pay. In fact, Welker's salary is probably as high as Frakes and Sirtis, if not higher.

Also, as much as we might want him to, it's likely Welker would only agree to voice more than one character if he were paid separately for each voice (likely the same kind of arrangement he has for Scooby Doo where he plays both Fred and Scooby currently). Welker and many other animated voice talents had a strike back in the early 90's for the express purpose of getting paid for each specific character played. This is why, apart from the Simpsons actors who get paid a king's ransom, most animated shows since the 90's have an army of actors to play their cast, rather than the 4 to 8 who used to play multiple roles for shows made during the 60's to the 80's.

I think you are misinformed, there is a union standard on how much a voice actor gets paid (non union work is different, but irrelevant to this discussion, a Star trek animated series would be union).

http://voiceactors.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/how-much-do-voice-actors-earn/

The normal union salary for voice actors is 800 dollars for a 4 hour recording session.

Also union rules say that a voice actor has to do up to 3 voices without charging extra, so you voice 3 characters voiced for the price of one.

There are union rules for film actors too. That doesn't mean Tom Cruise or Will Smith work at union standard rates.

 

[Bixby]

I think you are misinformed

Somehow I doubt that

there is a union standard on how much a voice actor gets paid (non union work is different, but irrelevant to this discussion, a Star trek animated series would be union).

http://voiceactors.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/how-much-do-voice-actors-earn/

The normal union salary for voice actors is 800 dollars for a 4 hour recording session.

I completely agree with AviTrek on this matter. If all actors were paid the same, then explain to me why Frank Welker, who used to be in most every well-known show in the 70's and 80's, now mostly does feature films (Garfield, Azrael from the SMURFS movie...) or well-known characters for the big studios (Road Runner, Scooby Doo, Fred)? Because his salary is deservedly higher than most of his peers...

Also union rules say that a voice actor has to do up to 3 voices without charging extra, so you voice 3 characters voiced for the price of one.

Sorry, but I really don't consider glorified Wallas as ''characters''. They are actually incidental bit parts in any given show episode such as ''kindergarden teacher'', or ''cop #2'', or ''plumber'', hardly the same as it was years ago when Daws Butler and Don Messick used to voice a dozen characters each for Yogi Bear & Friends, all recurring parts...Those days are long gone, and pretty much every show will have many actors for the most part playing one, perhaps two stand-out characters within one episode. I give you BATMAN: BRAVE & THE BOLD as a recent example.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I would love to see a CGI remake of the existing TAS series. Ptrope's work has been amazing. And I can see the logic of doing it this way.

I see it like this...either they make new visuals, write new stories, and pay new voice actors, or (if they remake TAS) simply make new visuals. They wouldn't have to write again, or pay any new actors to do voices - only residuals for existing voice tracks. I don't see how it WOULDN'T be more cost-effective to CGIfy TAS vs. making an all new series....

 

[Bixby]

I would love to see a CGI remake of the existing TAS series. Ptrope's work has been amazing. And I can see the logic of doing it this way.

I see it like this...either they make new visuals, write new stories, and pay new voice actors, or (if they remake TAS) simply make new visuals. They wouldn't have to write again, or pay any new actors to do voices - only residuals for existing voice tracks. I don't see how it WOULDN'T be more cost-effective to CGIfy TAS vs. making an all new series....

The main problem with redoing the original ST:TAS in CG is that nothing really happens!! Action-wise, I mean.

Most of the show is 96% dialogue with tiny , tiny bits of action. It would be necessary to have the new storyboard artist with the help of an adapter (a writer who adapts the old script for use on a more action-needy show) pad out each episode with more action, since pacing nowadays is often a lot faster than in the 60's and 70's.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I think that if viewers are reminded that this *is* a CGI version of the original animated series, they won't expect any more action. We all know how little action TAS had, we won't expect any more from a CGI version of the same show.

 

[Bixby]

^ I think that if viewers are reminded that this *is* a CGI version of the original animated series, they won't expect any more action. We all know how little action TAS had, we won't expect any more from a CGI version of the same show.

If we are thinking practically, Mr. Laser Beam, you are asking a studio to remake a show with CGI, asking them to pay for the rights and residuals for the original actors (I am assuming), and to spend a minimum $10 million dollars on the lower end of quality CGI production, to perhaps as much as $25 million for the higher-end japanese CG studios.

But you're asking them to spend that much money to please only the fans of the old series, instead of adapting it for a more mainstream audience. By that I mean both adults and kids, the same kids who will make parents buy Star Trek DVDs, and related merchandise that will bring some profit to the investors for their initial 10 to 25 million investment...

I'm not implying TAS has no chance in the format you suggest, but personally speaking, as a lifelong heavy consumer of animated programs, TAS is very much on the lower end of my personal scale of favorite shows...

 

[The Overlord]

^ I think that if viewers are reminded that this *is* a CGI version of the original animated series, they won't expect any more action. We all know how little action TAS had, we won't expect any more from a CGI version of the same show.

But besides hard core Trekies would want to see a CGI version of TAS? I can't imagine kids or adults wanting to see remake of a cartoon from the 70s, that is mostly forgotten and a cartoon that is mostly dialogue seems like a bit like a no sell in this day and age.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

^ I think that if viewers are reminded that this *is* a CGI version of the original animated series, they won't expect any more action. We all know how little action TAS had, we won't expect any more from a CGI version of the same show.

But besides hard core Trekies would want to see a CGI version of TAS? I can't imagine kids or adults wanting to see remake of a cartoon from the 70s, that is mostly forgotten and a cartoon that is mostly dialogue seems like a bit like a no sell in this day and age.

Okay let's think about possibilities.
There are 22 episodes [CGI for 24 minutes for 22 episodes= 528 minutes = 8.8 hours of 1080p CGI]
CBS was already looking at conversion technology for TOS episodes.

What about if they wanted to do a TAS 3-D Blu-ray release and make all-new-fully-CGI of the TAS series and include the original 35mm film telecine dustbusted on the release for purists?

Add new sound fx. repurpose TOS music cues.

It would be ready for 3-D release and also sell as a 2-D release.

8 hours is a minimal investment compared to a new series.

 

[The Overlord]

^ I think that if viewers are reminded that this *is* a CGI version of the original animated series, they won't expect any more action. We all know how little action TAS had, we won't expect any more from a CGI version of the same show.

But besides hard core Trekies would want to see a CGI version of TAS? I can't imagine kids or adults wanting to see remake of a cartoon from the 70s, that is mostly forgotten and a cartoon that is mostly dialogue seems like a bit like a no sell in this day and age.

Okay let's think about possibilities.
There are 22 episodes [CGI for 24 minutes for 22 episodes= 528 minutes = 8.8 hours of 1080p CGI]
CBS was already looking at conversion technology for TOS episodes.

What about if they wanted to do a TAS 3-D Blu-ray release and make all-new-fully-CGI of the TAS series and include the original 35mm film telecine dustbusted on the release for purists?

Add new sound fx. repurpose TOS music cues.

It would be ready for 3-D release and also sell as a 2-D release.

8 hours is a minimal investment compared to a new series.

TOS is far more popular then TAS ever was though, the expense is justified, no one expect hard core trekies remember TAS. Besides it seems like adding a few effects for TOS is less expensive then creating new animation for TAS, with the former you still using the old footage, just enhancing it. What you seem to be suggesting is reanimating the old TAS series, but keeping the same scripts and audio track. That's more expensive, because you can't use the existing animation footage. I don't see how that would appeal to anyone besides hard core Trekies.

Also you are going to make new animation, I don't why you would try to dub in the old audio track from the 70s, instead of making a pre-lay new audio track. Dubbing in the old audio track would make it sound like Speed Racer. It would sound force and stilted, it wouldn't sound very good at all.

If they are going to make a Star Trek animated project, they should go through the effort of having a new pre-lay audio track and new script that is comparable to cartoons from today, not from the 70s.

Frankly something like Avatar the Last Airbender would blow TAS out of the water, in terms of animation and story telling.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Is TAS releasable on Blu-Ray right now?