The original effects shots were done on film which exceeds 1080p in terms of resolution.
Neil
do you think TOS should have been remastered?
- Thread starter Clym
- Start date
Neil
Yeah, but what choice did we have with just broadcast tv? Now if someone doesn't want to see anything older than ten years they'd still have more than enough to watch.
It will be harder and harder for younger viewers to connect with it, anyway, the more time passes. New VFX can be made over and over, but they can't change the pacing, directing style, acting style, cultural changes etc. Which are all "obstacles" in the way of younger viewers.
What happens, though, is that the older the material gets the less appeal it has as mainstream entertainment and the more it has for an audience (much smaller) who places a premium on historical value and authenticity. Someday, the early 2000s revised versions will be a footnote and have an even smaller audience than the originals.
Good to know that my point "whooshed" right over your head.
I can't believe this thread has gone 13 pages.
Don't like the remastered effects? Press a button and switch back to the originals.
Don't like the old and dated effects? Well then watch the remastered versions in 1080p!
Don't like the remastered effects? Press a button and switch back to the originals.
Don't like the old and dated effects? Well then watch the remastered versions in 1080p!
We've been inspired by the Axanar discussion to go for 1000 pages.
But before the remasters, there seemed to be little interest in airing TOS. Not that there is much now, the only place I can find it is on MeTV. So one had to buy the DVD's if they wanted to watch them.
Is anybody else wondering why the CGI Enterprise is such a dark shade of gray?
Because CBS Digital are CGI Wizards and we shouldn't question their choices.
IDK - Growing up in the 1960ies and 1970ies - TV satations in my area routinely ran 'Laurel & Hardy', 'Three Stooges', 'Little Rascals'/'Our Gang' and TONS of early 1930ies stuff like the Marx Brother and the Flash Gordon and Buck Rodgers film serials; and I routinely watched and enjoyed that growing up.
(Yes, that was 30 - 40 years old - not 50; but I kinda doubt TV stations of the day would broadcast many silent era films.)
So, I honestly don't see why there would be some interest by a few of the current 'younger generation' as it were; but who knows, maybe I am giving Millennials too much credit.
Compare a '30s show with a '60s show.IDK - Growing up in the 1960ies and 1970ies - TV satations in my area routinely ran 'Laurel & Hardy', 'Three Stooges', 'Little Rascals'/'Our Gang' and TONS of early 1930ies stuff like the Marx Brother and the Flash Gordon and Buck Rodgers film serials; and I routinely watched and enjoyed that growing up.
(Yes, that was 30 - 40 years old - not 50; but I kinda doubt TV stations of the day would broadcast many silent era films.)
So, I honestly don't see why there would be some interest by a few of the current 'younger generation' as it were; but who knows, maybe I am giving Millennials too much credit.
Now compare a '60s sci-fi show with a '10s sci-fi show.
If you can't tell the difference between the change in production value, you're blind. The switch from the '30s to the '60s isn't even all that noticeable outside of colour TV and better music.
So, this is my first time watching the remasters (because I'm traveling for work and was streaming them on Netflix). I actually got used to it after awhile and it is fine, even at times nicely done.
I'm only in my 30s but I watch plenty of older things (I used to watch Gunsmoke and the Rifleman with my dad as a kid, so yeah) so maybe the "dated-ness" doesn't bother me so much as it might other people.
I will say though, just philosophically, my problem with the idea of it is that if you can't appreciate anything that isn't brand new, I think you're missing out on a lot of wonderful things, and adding new graphics is a little like buying a leather jacket and motorcycle because your having a midlife crisis. If it gets more people to try it, then it is a good thing I would think. But if your imagination is limited to what they show you, I don't know why you would like Star Trek in the first place. There are plenty more flashy shows. I had a tiny toy Enterprise when I was a kid. Let me tell you, that little ship went on a hell of a five year mission while I was growing up. The graphics provided were pennies, sometime playdough, sides of tables and once, as my mother likes to remind me, a salt and pepper shaker one of the first times they took me out to eat in a restaurant. I guess my point is, if you were going to look at everything as "modern" or "not modern" you could splice JJ Abrams space scenes into the Original Star Trek and it would still not be a modern show. Doesn't mean it isn't still painfully relevant to life.
I'm only in my 30s but I watch plenty of older things (I used to watch Gunsmoke and the Rifleman with my dad as a kid, so yeah) so maybe the "dated-ness" doesn't bother me so much as it might other people.
I will say though, just philosophically, my problem with the idea of it is that if you can't appreciate anything that isn't brand new, I think you're missing out on a lot of wonderful things, and adding new graphics is a little like buying a leather jacket and motorcycle because your having a midlife crisis. If it gets more people to try it, then it is a good thing I would think. But if your imagination is limited to what they show you, I don't know why you would like Star Trek in the first place. There are plenty more flashy shows. I had a tiny toy Enterprise when I was a kid. Let me tell you, that little ship went on a hell of a five year mission while I was growing up. The graphics provided were pennies, sometime playdough, sides of tables and once, as my mother likes to remind me, a salt and pepper shaker one of the first times they took me out to eat in a restaurant. I guess my point is, if you were going to look at everything as "modern" or "not modern" you could splice JJ Abrams space scenes into the Original Star Trek and it would still not be a modern show. Doesn't mean it isn't still painfully relevant to life.
I'm 31 and have a decent collection of black and white movies and shows. I know quite a few people a decade younger that still watch a lot of it as well, maybe there's a drop off in numbers but it's not like everyone has given up on them even now.
Scifi, fantasy and horror in particular tend to have people watching catalogues going back decades.
Scifi, fantasy and horror in particular tend to have people watching catalogues going back decades.
Very true.
^While I'm inclined to agree as well, the problem is convincing people who aren't inclined to try older things to give them a try in the first place.
I could convince my newer-things friends to watch the remastered effects; they weren't interested in the originals in the brief exposure they had.
I could convince my newer-things friends to watch the remastered effects; they weren't interested in the originals in the brief exposure they had.
I don't understand the mindset that automatically rejects anything old, as I tend more toward the opposite. My collection of movies, TV shows, music, novels, etc. is replete with stuff from the sixties and before. TOS is the only version of Star Trek that fits that milieu.
And I'm a millennial.
Kor
And I'm a millennial.
Kor
Actually if you can't see a difference between say the original 'King Kong' (1933) and the Flash Gordon serials (circa 1936) and either '2001 A Space Odyssey' (1969) or the original TOS effects (1966-69) I don't know what to say.
[IE to say they was really no difference other then the earlier works weren't in color and had worse music... wow, just wow.]
We weren't talking movies, no shit they improved a lot. We were talking television.
Stop changing the subject to fit your agenda.
2001: A Space Odyssey seems to be the exception, as that film still looks stunning to this day. It's actually unbelievable.
Last edited:
It's not a "millennial" problem, it's idiotic to think like that.So, I honestly don't see why there would be some interest by a few of the current 'younger generation' as it were; but who knows, maybe I am giving Millennials too much credit.
I'll just leave it to Marty...
Similar threads
