What's that got to do with anything? My favorite movie's Wrath of Khan, and that's not part of the TV show's remastering project.
do you think TOS should have been remastered?
- Thread starter Clym
- Start date
What's that got to do with anything? My favorite movie's Wrath of Khan, and that's not part of the TV show's remastering project.
You have heard of thread drift, haven't you? It happens and then things drift back to topic.
My, my. There are some rather hostile people in this group, you can't make a statement without it being ripped to shreds.
I'm sorry if my 2 cents offended you
It was one of the reasons why I and my family didn't bother to purchase those TNG Blu ray because it just didn't appear CBS was installing anything new to the dated FX shots. I wanted a full CGI spectacle of TNG and like Star Trek Blu Ray have a side version of the old stuff. I'm not interested in a studio wasting a lot of person time in mimicking the limited variety of shots done from the late 80's and early 90's. Frankly, besides Encounter at Farpoint I was never impressed by the effects from that great series.
Last edited:
Oh dear. So you'd rather they George Lucased it.
I wouldn't go that far, Lucas did a lot of tinkering to keep selling his product.
I apologize. My comment wasn't intended to be hostile. WebLurker actually inspired an idea, hence the "There's an Idea," remark. Again, I apologize if it sounded like I was ripping anyone to shreds. It was a meant as a sincere comment.
Guess what? Trials and Tribble-ations used physical models. Greg Jein, DS9's model maker, built brand new physical models of the Enterprsie and the Klingon, just for that episode.
Beyond cleaning up footage or inserting clean versions of said f/x footage it is a challenging decision to decide when/if something new should be added.
Referring again to "Charlie X." The Captain's Log narration specifically mentions the Enterprise pulling alongside the Antares. So it does feel off if we don't see this. So if you elect to insert such a shot then it's a question of what the Antares should look like.
No matter what you do it becomes a degree of retconning because we have never had any idea what the Antares could look like. If you use something from TAS you can make an argument for aiming for a measure of continuity with another production. And if failing to come up with something else a reuse of the Huron style freighter design could be supported.
But the first thing I would do is search through whatever sketches Matt Jefferies or Wah Chang might have made during TOS' production in the hope of finding something to give us direction--some general idea or concept that could be properly fleshed out.
Another resource could be the fans. Over the following decades fans have designed numerous TOS inspired ships. Yes, many of then have taken the Franz Joseph route of cut-and-paste design, but there have been some genuinely authentic looking designs as well. If something suitable were found during a net search then certainly some accreditation could be arrived at.
There is, of course, the recourse of an in-house design or, failing that, finally resorting to using the design from TAS.
The final component would be to make the shot look like something TOS could have filmed assuming they had the required Antares model to film alongside the 11 footer Enterprise. The trick is to make it look like it has been there all along rather than something that is so obviously not of the same production era.
And this is the general approach I would take through every episode. The one thing I would studiously avoid would be adding things like blinking eyes on the Gorn and other such nonsense.
Another thing to be aware of is knowing how detailed planet shots could be made in the 1960s. Here a film like 2001: A Space Odyssey could be a guide since it represents 1960's f/x pretty much at its peak. But that needs to be balanced with TOS' overall aesthetic. The key isn't to make it look as real as possible, but as authentic to the show as possible.
Referring again to "Charlie X." The Captain's Log narration specifically mentions the Enterprise pulling alongside the Antares. So it does feel off if we don't see this. So if you elect to insert such a shot then it's a question of what the Antares should look like.
No matter what you do it becomes a degree of retconning because we have never had any idea what the Antares could look like. If you use something from TAS you can make an argument for aiming for a measure of continuity with another production. And if failing to come up with something else a reuse of the Huron style freighter design could be supported.
But the first thing I would do is search through whatever sketches Matt Jefferies or Wah Chang might have made during TOS' production in the hope of finding something to give us direction--some general idea or concept that could be properly fleshed out.
Another resource could be the fans. Over the following decades fans have designed numerous TOS inspired ships. Yes, many of then have taken the Franz Joseph route of cut-and-paste design, but there have been some genuinely authentic looking designs as well. If something suitable were found during a net search then certainly some accreditation could be arrived at.
There is, of course, the recourse of an in-house design or, failing that, finally resorting to using the design from TAS.
The final component would be to make the shot look like something TOS could have filmed assuming they had the required Antares model to film alongside the 11 footer Enterprise. The trick is to make it look like it has been there all along rather than something that is so obviously not of the same production era.
And this is the general approach I would take through every episode. The one thing I would studiously avoid would be adding things like blinking eyes on the Gorn and other such nonsense.
Another thing to be aware of is knowing how detailed planet shots could be made in the 1960s. Here a film like 2001: A Space Odyssey could be a guide since it represents 1960's f/x pretty much at its peak. But that needs to be balanced with TOS' overall aesthetic. The key isn't to make it look as real as possible, but as authentic to the show as possible.
I agree with this.
Which makes this discussion entertaining but also kind of unimportant.
I hate it when someone says "this looks more realistic" The first time I read something like that was when they, might have been Okuda, was talking about comparing the Klingon ships in TMP to in Star Trek and claimed they were more realistic. Because he looked at the real Klingon battlecruisers and these models looked more like the real one than the original, right? It's a freakin' imaginary thing, there is no realistic! There's a good job and a bad job, like the original and the poor cg ones, respectively, but there's not "realistic" version. I don't care if it's hot pink and has feathers, it's not anymore or less realistic depiction of an imaginary thing.
Hell yes, I can't agree with that more. Don't dumb down the masterpiece with that spinoff crap. That goes ten times for that prequel crap.
Eh that's a bit of a simplification. You could very well argue that the TMP cruisers look more realistic because the added detailing is better at providing the viewer with the sense of scale and size of the ships. The design is made up, but the materials used in the fictional ship's construction are real (or with similar properties to existing materials). I think you can make an objective case that they are more realistic.
To me, the lack of surface junk on TOS designs makes everything seem more sleek and advanced, like something from a far future setting. It's as if the thing was almost grown organically into a big uniform hull, rather than having a bunch of panels and pieces bolted together.
Kor
Kor
I'm not so sure. They had a TOS ship interacting with more realistic and detailed ENT ships in "In a Mirror Darkly, Parts I and II" (ENT) and they all looked like they belonged to the same world (and they have had TOS movie ships interacting with TNG/DS9/VGR ships in the TNG and DS9 TV shows just fine, too).
Just to go back to the OP and answer with my own two cents...
I do think that remastering the Original Series for modern release had hit the point of being necessary. I'm not happy with everything Mike did, of course, but I think it made the series far more approachable to contemporary audiences. I also respect that the remastered versions came out alongside another release of the original versions.
I do think that remastering the Original Series for modern release had hit the point of being necessary. I'm not happy with everything Mike did, of course, but I think it made the series far more approachable to contemporary audiences. I also respect that the remastered versions came out alongside another release of the original versions.
Similar threads
