Star Trek ... CGI making it special again
- Thread starter Plum
- Start date
trevanian
Rear Admiral
I haven't gone through the whole thread, but the stuff from NCC and RAMA (of course, RAMA) seems awfully familiar, as in, no dissenting opinions allowed, regardless of legitimacy of argument.
If TOS wasn't special enough to rewatch or readmire for you until they produced glitzier, though largely less photographically credible fx, then maybe the problem is not with the show, but with you and your questionable sense of taste. Now I don't confuse original 35mm TOS ship FX shots with the glorious (and STILL unmatched) stuff done for Kubrick's 2001, but neither does it read like a sparkler crammed up the ass of Buster Keaton's FLASH GORDON rocketship.
Some of the original TOS fx work looked better than the Allen shows of the period, some looked worse (usually relating to matte lines, something they could have addressed for the HD era WITHOUT resorting to somewhat cartoonish CG as they have.) But the number of fx shots in TOS that take me out of a story are a lot fewer than the NON-fx moments that are particularly lamentable, and impact the story a lot less as well.
Obviously that is as subjective a view as any other expressed here, but keep in mind ... I didn't need any outside help for TOS to be special again, cuz it always WAS. This flirtation with revisiting the fx is just a distraction from the content issue, but if it serves to bring new fans in, that might NOT be a good thing, since they'd be pretty superficial fans to let a factor like this decide their viewing preferences.
If TOS wasn't special enough to rewatch or readmire for you until they produced glitzier, though largely less photographically credible fx, then maybe the problem is not with the show, but with you and your questionable sense of taste. Now I don't confuse original 35mm TOS ship FX shots with the glorious (and STILL unmatched) stuff done for Kubrick's 2001, but neither does it read like a sparkler crammed up the ass of Buster Keaton's FLASH GORDON rocketship.
Some of the original TOS fx work looked better than the Allen shows of the period, some looked worse (usually relating to matte lines, something they could have addressed for the HD era WITHOUT resorting to somewhat cartoonish CG as they have.) But the number of fx shots in TOS that take me out of a story are a lot fewer than the NON-fx moments that are particularly lamentable, and impact the story a lot less as well.
Obviously that is as subjective a view as any other expressed here, but keep in mind ... I didn't need any outside help for TOS to be special again, cuz it always WAS. This flirtation with revisiting the fx is just a distraction from the content issue, but if it serves to bring new fans in, that might NOT be a good thing, since they'd be pretty superficial fans to let a factor like this decide their viewing preferences.
"It's a fad" isn't a legitimate argument. It's wishful thinking. He hopes it'll be a fad, so that everyone's forced to watch it the way he wants them to watch it.
It's quite weird really. God forbid people just watch the new version and criticise the individual bits they don't like, or ignore it and continue on as they were.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Note I said "regardless of legitimacy." I'm also talking about a couple of posters who don't register high on content themselves, since at least a couple of these replies are just one-line snipes, as if they can't leave a post alone and they can't be troubled to make a decent rebuttal.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
That wasn't my point either. I cited you and RAMA specifically because from what I saw of the thread (and now, having seen all of the thread), you guys seemed pretty obnoxious. With RAMA it is business as usual IMO, as he just repeats pretty much the same stuff every thread, regardless of whether the 'enhanced' shot in question is pretty or credible or rubbish, and his 'dream on' post is a perfect example of the waste of space incendiary snipe posting I am objecting to. With you the recently rementioned britney thing is a great example. You are presumably annoyed with a reference to cartoony cg but instead of responding with something containing content, you just TRY to deride the poster.
In fact, I've gone through some considerable explanations on specific issues in various threads, and its actually the incessant droning on of "purists" that don't take into account technical issues, and instead replace that with nostalgia and emotional issues that is tiresome. The "dream on" post was simply a summation of me feelings after reading post after post of the same people who somehow cannot muster the logic and sense to realize why the "remastering" is necessary, and why the new CGI actually looks better than toy interior models, grainy film, faded color, poor compositing, and some nice but outdated model work from TOS. Even the producers/creators of the original show agree on this point. If the new effects lack anything, it IS the fact that they could be even more modern....like the award-winning FX in Enterprise, but they have in fact, tried to make the FX look less like 21st century CGI in scope and precision and more like something from the 60s. It works amazingly well! I'd even prefer it to be more modern, but understand why they don't do it. I honestly don't think there are more than a handful of shots or FX that don't work in the whole series so why would I have to cliam some are "rubbish"?
RAMA
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Well, there's a difference here, in that THIS purist probably has more knowledge of the technical issues (as well as the aesthetic ones) than just about anybody else here.
And with that specific perspective, I have huge objections to the lighting and rendering of these things, as they are not anything approaching photorealistic IMO. It could be that they are well-modeled vessels, but given those other issues, it doesn't really matter, because in most of these instances you have still got the 'cartoony' effect, which to me is a huge step BACKWARD in credibility. It is like going back to the original PATTERNS OF FORCE and making everything look like the dumb little cartoon explosion in the teaser.
Holytomato said:
"The CG Enterprise looks faker than it did in the 60s."
The 60's model was a physical model. They were NOT using a CG model back then.
It still wasn't a real Starship.
ETA...nevermind, I see what you're saying, and I don't think he was trying to say the CG looked better in the 60's. Just that that model looked more real than the current CG version.
Man, all of this is great. In the end whether or not its the originals or the new version, CGI or models, grainy or crystal clear, I can't think of another show besides Andy Griffith thats still on 40 plus years later. Sure there is TV land but where I live the remastered TOS is on a regular channel. Regardless of the fact i think i am a purist too i love watching the Remastered just because i can and its on. Its the best sci fi show ever created and was way ahead of its time, alot of it has been used in modern shows today. People are watching it again or it wouldn't be on. Sure they re-did the effects and cleared up the picture but they haven't done much of anything else. It shows it is still popular with people after 40+ years and it hasn't been remade, which makes me kinda question the upcoming movie but thats a different thread. I just love the fact that i know people who will wait to go out to the bar on Saturday nights because it comes on at 10pm, the bar can wait until 11, and it is a show from almost half a century ago. I hope it will be on in 2017 or 2027. None of us would be debating here if it weren't for this show so i believe the Remastered is making it special again, even though i like the way it was originally.
I see I may be the only one who loves this post. The reason is shatastrophic enjoys Star Trek more than 99% of you fuckers out there.
I want one of you overly anal, nacelle-cap-examining, true-blue-Star-Trek-defenders-of-canon to show me ONE POST, just ONE POST, that you've written over the last year that expressed more pure joy and enthusiasm for Star Trek than shatastrophic shared with us in his grammatically incorrect but absofuckinglutely perfect way. This guy, and his buds who hang around to watch Star Trek before hitting the bars on Saturday night, truly and completely enjoy Star Trek. They are blown away by the 79 episodes for their adventure, fun and wisdom, getting them for the first time. Old farts like us haven't experienced this rush of discovery for years and frankly never will again. We're too jaded, too experienced. We go, that guy's gonna die fifteen minutes before he does. The ecstatic joy shatasrophic has for the series keeps Star Trek young. It's not new computer graphics. Those are just a crutch, a tool that will allow a younger generation to get past 1966. shatastrophic, through his joy, tells us he and his friends love Star Trek on a level much deeper than whether the lighting on the CGI model is right. They don't need the new effects. They get the stories. In fact, shatastrophic is totally amping out on Star Trek. That's why I love this post and God bless him for it. This kid keeps Star Trek alive.
Live long and prosper, shatastrophic.
I want one of you overly anal, nacelle-cap-examining, true-blue-Star-Trek-defenders-of-canon to show me ONE POST, just ONE POST, that you've written over the last year that expressed more pure joy and enthusiasm for Star Trek than shatastrophic shared with us in his grammatically incorrect but absofuckinglutely perfect way. This guy, and his buds who hang around to watch Star Trek before hitting the bars on Saturday night, truly and completely enjoy Star Trek. They are blown away by the 79 episodes for their adventure, fun and wisdom, getting them for the first time. Old farts like us haven't experienced this rush of discovery for years and frankly never will again. We're too jaded, too experienced. We go, that guy's gonna die fifteen minutes before he does. The ecstatic joy shatasrophic has for the series keeps Star Trek young. It's not new computer graphics. Those are just a crutch, a tool that will allow a younger generation to get past 1966. shatastrophic, through his joy, tells us he and his friends love Star Trek on a level much deeper than whether the lighting on the CGI model is right. They don't need the new effects. They get the stories. In fact, shatastrophic is totally amping out on Star Trek. That's why I love this post and God bless him for it. This kid keeps Star Trek alive.
Live long and prosper, shatastrophic.
Exactly, the stories--the meanings--are as intact as ever. The EFX helps get past 1966...I for one am really enjoying the new episodes (for me, as I haven't seen all of TOS).
I used to check out episodes from the library on VHS, but the tapes were worn and the EFX hard to get by at times. I still enjoyed the eps. But now it's even better...!
I used to check out episodes from the library on VHS, but the tapes were worn and the EFX hard to get by at times. I still enjoyed the eps. But now it's even better...!
True. But the whole concept of CGIing TOS has also created a lot of buzz about the TOS era itself, such as we've not really seen online before. For many in the Internet era of fans, they grew up on TNG and DS9 and VOY, with sometimes no respect for TOS and the TOS movies, and little knowledge of (or interest in) what ST stuff came before.
Over recent years, I've seen TMP seemingly gain a lot more respect than it ever got in the early 80s, probably due to buzz about the DVD Director's Edition. Like or love what they did with the DVD DE, it got people talking about TMP again. Quite fondly.
Ditto TAS, with the recent release of the DVD sets.
And now we have the TNG-ENT generations more interested in a JJ Abrams' ST XI, perhaps partly thanks to a new recognition of TOS via the current CGI remastering project. The overall positive vibe for TOS, as a concept, is being generated whether people like or dislike what's being done with TOS Remastered. There is passion for TOS.
But what do I know? I'm one of those TAS/TMP era fans who has liked most of what has come out under the ST umbrella.
well being a major TOS fan, i like it - TOS-R
and to be honest i think models alwasy look more real (cause they are physical objects afterall) but CGI has given the ability to get 90% of that plus 100% more movement, variation, depth and enhancment
the bottomline is most Modern trek fans bemoan the TOS FX as the reason why they can't watch it - as if that mattes more than the story telling and acting, well guess what the FX have been updated.... TOS is now got it all the story telling acting and imagination AND modern FX, can't wait to get the new HD-DVD's
what's not to love?
of course i'm still keeping my original disks but hey we all have our issues!
exactly. Imagine if CBS refused to fund the new CGI. In ten years time, when everyone loves their HD TV and expects HD quality in everything they watch, and no TV channel wants to buy or run syndicated TOS. The series falls by the wayside as another forgotten classic, like the b/w Season One of "Gilligan's Island".
Similar threads
