• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

ST:TMP DC HD Fan Rebuild?

But per the dialogue in that scene, the huge cloud had dissipated, reducing V'ger to the central ship. Still huge, but small enough to sit in Earth orbit without the cloud taking up the entire solar system.

Right, I'm just talking about the physical "body" or whatever. You could see pieces of it, with the tiny Enterprise for comparison, but never the whole thing. The scale implied was more impressive than seeing the whole thing in the DE, which was a letdown; it just looked like some weird alien ship design.
 
Right, I'm just talking about the physical "body" or whatever. You could see pieces of it, with the tiny Enterprise for comparison, but never the whole thing. The scale implied was more impressive than seeing the whole thing in the DE, which was a letdown; it just looked like some weird alien ship design.
The design I thought was fine - it was intended to be in the film all along, they just ran out of time and money. But it was one of the weakest bits of CGI in the film. I wouldn't exactly say it improves on the theatrical cut.
 
What the Robert McCall concept art of that V'Ger reveal had that the CGI didn't was 1) Something else in Earth orbit for size comparison. The concept art had the orbital space complex; I'd have Spacedock itself, maybe under construction. 2) The sun behind V'Ger, causing it to cast a HUGE shadow across the sunny part of Earth. One can only imagine what the reaction on the ground would be.
 
I'd be good with an HD rebuild of the Special Longer Version, but I think the deleted scenes on the Blu-ray have some kind of aspect ratio or frame rate issue that ruins that.
 
What the Robert McCall concept art of that V'Ger reveal had that the CGI didn't was 1) Something else in Earth orbit for size comparison. The concept art had the orbital space complex; I'd have Spacedock itself, maybe under construction. 2) The sun behind V'Ger, causing it to cast a HUGE shadow across the sunny part of Earth. One can only imagine what the reaction on the ground would be.

V'ger is listed in Ex Machina (based on the scale of the CGI model for DE) as 93 miles long, or the width of the island of Maui.

That wouldn't cause any significant shadow across a portion of the planet, you'd have to be directly between it and the sun to see a dark spot in the sky.

I know TMP made it seem big but, it's a speck compared to the Earth.

Infact, here's Maui superimposed over one quarter of the state of Arizona.

http://www.alandersen.com/galleries/landscape-travel/hawaii/maui/
 
^I assume that's V'ger sans cloud?
Yes, if you go by the dialog in the theatrical release, the cloud is about as big as our solar system. If you go by the modified dialog in the DE release, it's as big as the orbit of the Earth around the sun.
 
Either way, it's monstrously, galactically vast, but you never really get a sense of the scale in the film.
 
No need. According to David C. Fein, they have all the CG models/assets to do a 4K/HD release.

Hi Guys... I just stumbled onto your thread and I appreciate the conversation, so I thought I'd offer a few thoughts.

There is only one reason that Star Trek: The Motion Picture–The Director's Edition is not out on Blu-Ray yet. Paramount has yet to green light the project. We've had some discussions, and it'll happen, the only question is when are we going to go ahead with it.

"One member at the Home Theater Forum claims to have checked with a Paramount person and said that the individual film elements that were used for all the effects shots are missing." - This is completely false. We have all that we need. Would I like a few more pieces... sure. But we have everything we need.

"I mastered the "director's cut" for Paramount in 1980, and it was never commercially released. Wise cut the film down to 110 minutes, and the assistant editor on the picture told me he was livid when the studio overruled him and cut 12 minutes of the V'Ger VFX sequence back into the film. Wise was smart enough to know it dragged the film down, and he was right. But because the film had gone so grossly over budget, the studio was determined to see "all their money up on the screen," so it went out at 132 minutes." I've had many discussions with Bob about the film and the final days of Post, and I can not see how any of this statement could have happened under those extreme circumstances.

"Most of the issues revolve around redoing the new visual effects for the director's cut--they were rendered in SD not HD and it would be fairly expensive to do from scratch. They could upscale them but they wouldn't look great at 4K much less 2K. It's certainly possible that the film elements for the DC were mislabeled." All of the shots in the film were created with HD in mind so the quality of the models and elements were much higher than the SD renderings. We have everything, and when the time is right, we'll use them. Again, there is no truth that anything is missing.

"You are very much correct about the low lighting on the bridge set to accommodate the CRT displays used on the bridge." This is almost correct, there were projectors, projecting film onto the displays on the bridge, not CRTs. The low lighting was to accommodate the projector displays, but also to set a far more intimate mood. The color timing for the Director's Edition is exactly right, whereas the Blu-ray of the theatrical is very inaccurate.

"As I understand it, the TMP bridge console displays at one point were animations displayed by rear projection via 16mm projectors. One article I read several years ago regarding TMP's production seemed to suggest that the ambient noise on the bridge set from the 16mm projectors was so loud as a result that recording the crew lines on the bridge set ranged from difficult to impossible." Yep, I didn't see this was stated. Good job!

"Vidiot's thinking that Sumner Redstone is part of the issue is new to me and I had to read up on him to understand what the issue is. The Viacom CEO is trying to sell a minority stake of Paramount Studios and Sumner Redstone is blocking that. Sounds like lots of lawyers now are fighting it out with the Redstone family. This must be part of the turmoil. Though I can only guess why executives at Paramount are under pressure or getting fired. So the whole video department at Paramount is likely only concentrating on new releases and not worrying about the legacy films they have in their library. Shame given it's the 50th Anniversary of Star Trek and you'd think they'd treasure one of their golden gooses. And years earlier they were investing in the legacy films such as the Godfather and The 10 Commandments and so forth to give them proper restorations and preserving them." Immmm..... well put.

"Karl Urban likes Star Trek The Motion Picture a lot" - I like Karl Urban as McCoy!

Thanks, and I hope this helps and I really appreciate your support of the film and the project.

David C. Fein
Producer
Star Trek: The Motion Picture – The Director's Edition

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...is-not-on-blu-ray.542907/page-2#post-15841074
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kor
I never heard any rumours about them being missing, just that they were rendered to 720 at best and couldn't be upscaled. But then we never got an official word from the studio to what detail they were made, nice to finally know.
 
I never heard any rumours about them being missing, just that they were rendered to 720 at best and couldn't be upscaled. But then we never got an official word from the studio to what detail they were made, nice to finally know.
The assumption's always been that they were missing or corrupt. If they weren't, there's no reason why they couldn't render them at a higher resolution.
 
The assumption's always been that they were missing or corrupt. If they weren't, there's no reason why they couldn't render them at a higher resolution.

Yeah, there's been all sorts of speculation based on the movie not being worked on over the years. Looks like it's just another case of Paramount sitting on assets until they can turn a profit.

I wonder if they're waiting while they asses the other 4 of the TOS movies that don't have a UHD print out or ready to go, before going ahead with any sort of 4K boxset.
 
I heard the stuff was all lost when Foundation Imaging went out of business and all their hardware was wiped and sold on.

Great to hear that isn't the case, and that it's possible to remake the DC in glorious high definition.

Less gladdened to hear Paramount are stuck in financial/legal hell and it won't happen any time soon. But actually, don't the original ten films fall under CBS's remit? Paramount were left with distribution rights for new films after the Viacom split, and CBS held the legacy stuff.
 
Last edited:
Paramount holds the rights to all films, CBS owns everything else. Hence why there's a Star Trek Twitter account and a separate Star Trek Movies Twitter account.

I'd kill for a new Star Trek VI remaster, the Blu-ray's one of the worst-looking in my collection. I don't expect to see one anytime soon though.
 
Last edited:
No, that part at least was legit. I've seen an early mock-up photo he'd done showing what he'd had in mind.
Andy Probert's concept renderings for the officer's lounge were originally proposed for a partial reshoot of the scene, where they'd redo the shots where the wall with the portholes was in frame. But the idea was never pursued, and there's no indication it was anything more than a proposal (as was Andy's saucer separation ending sequence idea).

The problem with the V'ger reveal is they did it in the blandest manner possible: a very undramatic side view. There were MANY storyboards done for this sequence, and virtually all of them more dramatic than what Sharpline did.
 
V'ger is listed in Ex Machina (based on the scale of the CGI model for DE) as 93 miles long, or the width of the island of Maui.

That wouldn't cause any significant shadow across a portion of the planet, you'd have to be directly between it and the sun to see a dark spot in the sky.

I know TMP made it seem big but, it's a speck compared to the Earth.

I was actually making notes to do an HD fan rebuild of the DE as a possible future project. Well, mostly the DE, there were a few other tweaks I'd make, and a couple were related the the V'Ger reveal. I was thinking I'd do the revelation shot differently (my biggest issue is the camera movement doesn't match the majority of the other ship shots in the film; only the opening and ending shots move so much), but to solve the scale issue, I was thinking of replacing the shot of V'Ger's weapons orbiting the planet (theatrical/DE) with one from Starfleet HQ, with V'Ger hanging above the Golden Gate while the weapons streak across the sky like meteors.

I don't like the storyboarded shot, because it goes too broad with the scale. V'Ger would thousands of miles long (and the orbital office hundreds of miles tall) to get that perspective. And it's an unflattering angle.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't change the official scale though.
I'm sorry ... where is the official scale stated? It's not in the original theatrical release, nor in the Director's Cut. If you mean the excellent Ex Machina novel by Christopher Bennett, then I'd submit that as good as he is, he's not an official source on the matter at all.

In the absence of any such official statements, it's perfectly plausible for another crew to come along and make the ship a few hundred kilometers long, though much more than that would make it difficult to match with the passage as the Enterprise to do her flyby. Heck, they edited the audio to drop V'Ger's cloud from over 82 AUs to over two AUs.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top