• 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!

STAR TREK V DIRECTOR´S CUT

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would love to see a new Director's Cut with improved FX. As Covid-19 is causing productions to get delayed for months, it might be a good time for the studio to do something like this, as VFX work can be done from home today, even when working with a team of people. It could certainly help to bring people to CBS All Access.
 
Well the cut I saw of the movie with the replacement CGI is a blast to watch and a fascinating study of how the special effects for a given movie could be replaced. The version I saw only cut out about 18 seconds of live-action footage. One was the blue screenshots of Kirk's fall from the mountain and the other was a bit of the fight between sybok and Kirk in the shuttle Bay which was removed because of all the visible rigging that was holding Kirk up. Obviously if they were to do a professional redo of the movie they could digitally erase the wires rather than cut the scene down. Although 18 seconds of live action footage are cut from the movie the movie is actually about 20 seconds longer overall because some of the special effects have been inserted where they were originally intended to be that they either didn't have the time or the money to complete for the actual movie.
I think every single shot of special effects in the entire movie was redone and that may not seem like a lot of special effects at first blush but there is a ton of special effects you end up realizing as the movie moves along.
Not only did the person or persons involved in this cut of the movie replace virtually every single exterior special effect they also did some special effects for the live-action portions of the movie. Such as altering the appearance of the bars in the brig to be less obviously fluorescent tubes. Obscuring stagehands where they shouldn't have been seen with smoke in the shuttle Bay adding additional dust when the pillars Rise Up from the ground to form the Cathedral where they meet the alien and of course there's some scenes of The Rock creature. They actually use a couple of Snippets of footage of the rock man from the Blu-ray test footage and then in other scenes they create a crude CGI rock man.
The quality of the special effects range from pretty damn amazing to average but of course it was just a labor of love and not somebody's full time paying job. And by pretty damn amazing I mean for a non-professional entity. Not what would be done by of Hollywood effects house. And of course the project was started and finished many years ago.
I think combining new effects with editing out about six or seven minutes of the silliest parts of the movie if done by Paramount would produce a pretty serviceable fun Star Trek Adventure movie. Since the highlight of the movie is the camaraderie of Kirk Spock and McCoy that would still be the selling point for people who already like the movie in it even in its present state.
I would encourage anybody who likes the movie to hunt down this version of the movie.
 
Last edited:
No amount of CGI can fix the fundamental story problems with TFF. The script is bad. Unless you’re proposing reshooting the movie with a rewritten script, it’s a complete waste of time.
The movie has its flaws, but I still find it enjoyable. I think there are ways to fix parts of it through editing. It doesn't have to be perfect, but it would be great if the VFX were done better, in the way Shatner had envisioned them.
 
I think it's funny that some people who liked the movie say they don't care how lousy the special effects are-- it doesn't affect their enjoyment of the movie and then other people who don't like the movie say but no matter how good the special effects are it won't affect their opinion of the movie. As if special effects have no bearing on the perception of a science fiction Space Opera.
If in 1989 the movie had had top-notch special effects then the reviews would have said -- a flawed script but with a beautiful score and impressive special effects. It was the flawed script combined with the incredibly cheap looking special effects put the movie at the bottom of the barrel of Trek movies. To say that acting and directing and script and special effects and musical score don't ALL contribute to the perception of a movie is ridiculous. We know Shatner didn't get the script he wanted which would have been more serious in tone and he certainly didn't get the quality special effects that he wanted. He did get pretty good performances from Nimoy and Kelly and Luckinbill and his Direction was not terrible at all. Even most critics of the movie don't fault his Direction and most people think the musical score is top-notch.
Nobody who is in favor of improving the special effects and editing out some of the bad comedy parts are under the impression that the final result will be Lawrence of Arabia. Just and improved version of Star Trek V-- a movie they happen to like.
 
I could care less about STV's VFX. The story was silly and the acting was (mostly) crap. But I don't think it can really be changed enough to make the concept of "a Vulcan on a quest to find God which turns out to be an evil alien" any better.
 
It's been 30 years people's opinions are set -- if you say you're never going to like the movie fine that's great don't like it. On the other hand you're not going to change anybody else's opinion who likes the movie enough to want to see it improved. people just like to win an argument that's all this is about -- every time somebody talks about editing or changing the special effects for Star Trek V so that they might enjoy it better people have to come along with their proselytizing their pontificating they're bullying and their trolling to say how the movie is irredeemable. obviously it's not irredeemable in the eyes of the people who like it.
 
I could care less about STV's VFX. The story was silly and the acting was (mostly) crap. But I don't think it can really be changed enough to make the concept of "a Vulcan on a quest to find God which turns out to be an evil alien" any better.
I would love to see it with new sfx because I thought what there didn't look good and I thought hurt the overall aspects of the movie. The climax of the movie needed more and there were b&w photo shots of Shatner fending off a rock creature; to my knowledge the creature did not work but if there were footage of something I would love to see a good cg team to work on that as well. As for space, I never liked how the Enterprise moved in that picture and the choices made for the klingon ship were odd to me. The story had its issues and so did the plot but I think improved sfx would give the movie an injection in the arm, a boost to the look of it.
 
I've never felt the need to 'edit out the silly' from this film. I've long described it as good science fiction, and bad Star Trek. But the story has nothing to do with why I describe it that way.

I have two primary complaints about this film:

1) The editing is incessant, and choppy. There is so much effort in giving the rest of the cast "their moment" that it interrupts the flow of the storytelling. The Star Trek I watched as a child, and in previous films, progressed much more smoothly. Just one example of what I mean is the scene where the Enterprise arrives at Nimbus Three, and they begin their plans for raiding the settlement. Between "giving Uhura her moment" and putting each character front and center for line delivery, there are nine cuts in a two/three minute scene. The same scene would be much more economical with Uhura's line as a voiceover while Kirk and Spock are talking, resulting in a maximun of four cuts.

2) Bran Ferren and Associates annoying habit of having a prestige effect being something minor, while the big effect/s at the climax being done with baling wire and spit. A better set of SFX, preferably by a more reputable effects house, would do wonders for how this film is perceived.

The humorous moments are usually staged to make the studio heads happy, rather than the target audience, and that could be done better, but I don't think any of them need removed. The above is what frustrates me about what could have been a great movie.
 
Well I guess we agree and disagree I don't like the fan dance I don't like Scotty hitting his head which you didn't happen to mention but I can't imagine that you think it's great and I certainly don't like the scene in sickbay with Uhura coming on to Scotty.
So therefore I think the movie would be better without them. Same thing the Sulu and Chekov getting lost in the woods. It does not have to have anything to do with the film it's just like -- "Hey don't forget these two guys!"
but do I still enjoy the movie with these bad parts left in? Yes
 
Last edited:
I think it's funny that some people who liked the movie say they don't care how lousy the special effects are-- it doesn't affect their enjoyment of the movie and then other people who don't like the movie say but no matter how good the special effects are it won't affect their opinion of the movie. As if special effects have no bearing on the perception of a science fiction Space Opera.
I personally care more about the story then I do about the quality of the special effects. It doesn't matter whether they're fancy or cheap looking just as long as they convey what they're trying to convey.
 
I personally care more about the story then I do about the quality of the special effects. It doesn't matter whether they're fancy or cheap looking just as long as they convey what they're trying to convey.
The VFX were going to be done by ILM. The goal of a DC should be recreating what the film would have looked with ILM VFX in style of a 89 Sci-Fi movie. If this is done to look like modern CGI it will be shit.
 
Well I guess we agree and disagree I don't like the fan dance I don't like Scotty hitting his head which you didn't happen to mention but I can't imagine that you think it's great and I certainly don't like the scene in sickbay with Uhura coming on to Scotty.
So therefore I think the movie would be better without them. Same thing the Sulu and Chekov getting lost in the woods. It does not have to have anything to do with the film it's just like -- "Hey don't forget these two guys!"
but do I still enjoy the movie with these bad parts left in? Yes

Addressing your points in order:

The fan dance came out of nowhere in the film. It had a sensible explanation in the novelization that didn't make it to the screen, and suffered for it.

Scotty hitting his head was the one I was actually referring to in my earlier post. Hubris brings many a man low, and this was supposed to be that kind of joke. It didn't work because Scotty wouldn't have been knocked out by it. Sulu et al finding him sitting there nursing a sore noggin would have worked as well for that end of the scene. The scene in Sickbay works as is, with Uhura still under Sybok's spell and being unable to help herself.

Finally, Sulu and Chekov getting lost has been addressed on this forum before, with the consensus being that these two are great at navigating space, but put them in the MUCH smaller setting of Yosemite (or even some other park like Yellowstone) and they can't tell the forest for the trees (quite literally, apparently).

Like you, though, I find anymore I like the film. As I said before, it's good science fiction as is, it's just terrible Star Trek.
 
The funniest part is Sulu ordering J' onn to get an unconscious Scotty to Sick Bay
Yeah the destitute farmer who can't even walk without shuffling is going to drag 270 lb of Scotty all the way to sickbay on his back I guess.
Wait did you say the scene in sick Bay between Uhura and Scotty works?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top