Dingleberries.
The youth of ages past grew up to engage in the Crusades. More recent youth grew up to vote for George Bush. Twice.
Todays youth is in no greater peril. Fear not.
What do kids think about TOS remastered?
- Thread starter Cheapjack
- Start date
The youth of ages past grew up to engage in the Crusades. More recent youth grew up to vote for George Bush. Twice.
Todays youth is in no greater peril. Fear not.
Showed my 14 y.o brother the TOS remastered DVDs. He likes em. He's never been a big Trek fan before. He wants to see more TOS and DS9 (his two favourites).
My work is done!
My work is done!
Have I shown you my mind scanner?Thank you John Colicos.
I hate hate HATE remastered most of the time. I am 16, and think that TOS is the coolest thing around! And I mean the better, non Remastered version.
I haven't watched Star Trek with any kids lately, but I know my Girlfriend and Brother have found the remastered episodes easier to swallow.
I watched TOS for years before remastered came around, and I'm happy about the change. I think the new visuals in many cases benefit the stories and make it more visually interesting.The originals aren't going away, but after seeing the new effects, I doubt I'll personally ever go back.
EDIT
As an interesting aside, I was in Military Basic Training for most of 2006, the year remastered began. I had missed the annoucement and of course didn't have access to any trek news. I finished my training and practically went in my pants upon logging on to startrek.com and seeing that cgi'd versions of TOS were airing in three days :-)
I watched TOS for years before remastered came around, and I'm happy about the change. I think the new visuals in many cases benefit the stories and make it more visually interesting.The originals aren't going away, but after seeing the new effects, I doubt I'll personally ever go back.
EDIT
As an interesting aside, I was in Military Basic Training for most of 2006, the year remastered began. I had missed the annoucement and of course didn't have access to any trek news. I finished my training and practically went in my pants upon logging on to startrek.com and seeing that cgi'd versions of TOS were airing in three days :-)
how do you remaster a gem of an episode like "whom gods destroy"? by fixing the pathetic overacting, changing the absurd plots, and replacing cartoonish aliens by proper ones? it might be that kids love this childish stuff, but what about us grown ups? the later franchises produced some creepy stuff, say tng's "masks", but by a long way not as pathetic as too many tos episodes. half of them should be banned and hushed up.
I thought, as a 17 year old, I should reply on this thread. I love Star Trek, period. TOS is undoubtedly my favourite, remastered or not. I like the remastered, because it restores, for the most part, the show to its original colours and brightness. I think the new effects don't add or take away. And I really like the little extra "scenery clips" such as the bridge on Vulcan in Amok Time. They were fabulous little surprises!
Lonely Squire: Don't fret, there's hope in us yet! We are in as sorry a state as any other generation was, perhaps a little sorrier than most, but we have so much potential! Look to the artists, the nerds, the revolutionary-minded intellectuals on the rise. I promise you we aren't all the superficial mindless drones that the majority of us seem to be.
We just need a bit of caffeine to get us going...
Lonely Squire: Don't fret, there's hope in us yet! We are in as sorry a state as any other generation was, perhaps a little sorrier than most, but we have so much potential! Look to the artists, the nerds, the revolutionary-minded intellectuals on the rise. I promise you we aren't all the superficial mindless drones that the majority of us seem to be.
We just need a bit of caffeine to get us going...
So you'd rather watch a bad copy of a series than what it actually looks like on film? Do you prefer the postcard version of Mount Rushmore to the real thing as well? Do you consider a color print of the Mona Lisa superior to the original painting. As a Star Trek (I call it Star Trek, not "Tee Oh Es") purist, I can't understand how any other purist wouldn't want the show to look as close to the original film as possible. It doesn't make sense. The worse quality the better? Just trying to understand where you're coming from.
The remastered Star Trek is closer to what the actual film looks like than any other version you've ever seen. Tell me how that's not a good thing?
The trouble is few people here know what the word "remastered" means. All you have to do is reread what Klingon Empire said:
The "remastered version" is exactly the same as the "nonremastered version." It's the same show, only one looks clearer, more vibrant, and closer to the actual film. The new special FX have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the show being remastered. I've been watching the remastered version with all the original special FX. It's still Star Trek remastered.
I don't mean to pick on you in particular, Klingon Empire. I'm glad you're a Star Trek purist. As a purist, shouldn't you want the best quality version of the show you like, the most "pure?" Star Trek remastered is as close to what the show really looks like as we've ever seen. The mass misunderstanding of the term "remastered" makes people think it's the exact opposite.
Cpt Cullison
Ensign
i'm 16 my dad is user green shirt hand he has been showing star trek my whole life, and i love the orginal way it but the remastered is good o coudln't chose which one is better
Really, it's the CGI that gets me, I grew up on reruns of TNG, First Runs of Voyager, and First Runs of Enterprise, up until Enterprise, they used studio models for the effects shots instead of CGI, and I think that is why I like the bad copies better. The bad ones look more realistic to me because of the use of studio models, and the CG looks really fake to me because they don't use studio models.
Besides, I like to watch the original broadcasts (Not Remastered) cause that is how they looked when they aired, and to me, that just adds to the Star Trek experience.
I thought, as a 17 year old, I should reply on this thread. I love Star Trek, period. TOS is undoubtedly my favourite, remastered or not. I like the remastered, because it restores, for the most part, the show to its original colours and brightness. I think the new effects don't add or take away. And I really like the little extra "scenery clips" such as the bridge on Vulcan in Amok Time. They were fabulous little surprises!
Lonely Squire: Don't fret, there's hope in us yet! We are in as sorry a state as any other generation was, perhaps a little sorrier than most, but we have so much potential! Look to the artists, the nerds, the revolutionary-minded intellectuals on the rise. I promise you we aren't all the superficial mindless drones that the majority of us seem to be.
Or a coffee flavored protein drink in my case.
I'm a 30 yr old, and I see much promise in your age group. I can relate better to yas than people my age or older.
Even when TNG was brand new for me in the 1980's, it was the TOS stuff that I always looked foreward to seeing.
My kids run fleeing from the room anytime I put on modern Trek (TNG, Voyager or Enterprise). But if it's TOS (remastered or otherwise), they stick around. They call that the "good Star Trek"...
They did like the Abrams film though...
But if I tell them I am going to watch Trek on DVD they always ask -- "which one? The good one or the bad ones?"
OMG thats amazing! How old are they?
9 and 7...they like Lost in Space and Ultraman and Godzilla too. Hey, if you're gonna hang with Daddy Quasar, you have to learn to love the classics...
What? No Johnny Sokko and His Flying Robot?
OK, well, my birthday wish was granted, i was given Season One on Blu-ray with the updated effects. I haven't had a chance to watch any of it yet, what with the new movie out yesterday...but i WILL be giving the updated ones a try! I PROMISE!
Welcome to the BBS!
Welcome to the BBS!
Thanks Lil Brother!
Ok, so i didn't get to watch any episodes yet, but i did watch the info on how they did the upgrading (so to speak) so i saw little bits and pieces of episodes......still not sure how i feel about it all. Will let you know once i get an ep or two under my belt.
Ok, so i didn't get to watch any episodes yet, but i did watch the info on how they did the upgrading (so to speak) so i saw little bits and pieces of episodes......still not sure how i feel about it all. Will let you know once i get an ep or two under my belt.
I enjoy the remastered prints and the redone effects. I also love the original effects and the beat-up old, non-remastered prints. As a fellow "purist" I love the Trek I grew up watching. All the new prints and effects are after-the-fact. And even if they get video to look 100% exactly like the original film prints, remember that way back when, nobody ever expected the audience to see the show that clearly. The more sharpness and detail you provide, the more flaws and cheats you expose. They knew a lot of picture detail would be lost en route to TV screens, so they used that when doing effects and whatnot, to hide certain weaknesses. Honestly, I think much of Star Trek looks worse today not because of the old effects and cheap sets, but because the video technology has progressed far beyond the standards they used then.
Sure, there are times I want to see crisp as Pringles picture and newly rendered effects. But there are even more times I want to see the show I fell in love with, with the mono sound, faded colors and AMT model kits heading towards paper mache cones. Not that I expect anyone else to enjoy it this way, but I often watch old TV shows in context, or at the very least with a nostalgic eye. Thankfully, I have the show in a zillion different formats to indulge my moods.
I tell ya, there's nothing more deflating than watching Space:1999 on your new HD set and seeing the wires lifting the Eagles, or the rod holding up the Galactica. Sometimes, I prefer to watch older shows on my cathode ray tube set in the den, just to preserve the illusions lost in the scraping away of the years.
Or I just could have said "I agree with you" because you hit exactly what I was saying with a lot fewer words. :-)
Last edited:
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but something that always bothered me with the original effects was the motion of the stars in the background. They are clearly on different "layers" of film and flying every which way, like the first break in a game of billiards. The overall effect loses all sense of scale, depth, and motion.
I can't believe this incredibly unrealistic and distracting effect was NOT corrected in the remasters. The foregrounds look decent and in keeping with the original concept, but they're ruined by the dated and distracting backgrounds.
I can't believe this incredibly unrealistic and distracting effect was NOT corrected in the remasters. The foregrounds look decent and in keeping with the original concept, but they're ruined by the dated and distracting backgrounds.
I rather like those old starfields.
Similar threads
