Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by jefferiestubes8, Jun 19, 2014.
Daren himself, from what I recall; I think it was somewhere buried on Trekmovie?
What he means is, the models/textures COULD hold up if rendered at 1080p, but at the time, for the DVD, they only rendered them in 480. Apparently nobody at Paramount thought ahead and asked/paid for a 1080p rendering as well.
I'd be curious what it would have cost back then to render them in 1080p.
No doubt a lot less than they'd make now if they could put a TMP DC on Blu-ray
I'm interested in the whole "Is Physical Media Doomed?" debate more than anything, and its the end of that article that I agree the most with:
I think there's a genuine different in customer base between people who just want the product NOW and with no strings attached (which is what internet media gives you) and don't care about a trade-off in quality, versus those who wish to have movies in a good a presentation as is practicably possible. Only physical media can provide the latter at the moment. And as much as we talk about everyone being on the internet these days, the fact is this ISN'T true, there are large sections of the world and social classes where internet connectivity is patchy (sometimes even only dial-up) and that hasn't been solved, so any industry willing to let physical media die is basically cutting out a potential profit base in people who can't rely on internet streaming to provide them with entertainment. That Microsoft backtracked on their original plan to make XBone a console with games only available via download, something trumpeted in early press releases but quietly dropped before it went to market, indicates to me that someone had a thought-bubble about the future of media, but then saw market research on the subject and realized that the market simply isn't in a position (at the moment at least) to sustain it.
So while everybody proclaims doom and gloom about physical media, I feel the truth is that it still has a part to play.
The other aspect with physical media is that you have the version of a film that you want, and it isn't subject to any revision that should happen to get implemented, be it colorization, CG or a different sound mix, or even editorial censorship. If you look at VIDEO WATCHDOG it is easy to see that lots of films have various versions, many of which diminish the original significantly. I'm very happy now to have a version of CLOSE ENCOUNTERS that actually shows Roy & Jilllian and the other guy push out of the copter and escape towards Devil's Tower, as opposed to the 'they're just free and nobody is chasing them' version we've had to live with since 1980 (even the supposedly 'original' version on CAV laserdisc didn't put that back in.)
These things aren't a factor for most casual viewing (netflix doesn't have to lose any sleep over this unless they start editing films wholesale), but certainly on films that are important in some fashion, this will be a factor for some.
That's one of the advantages of Blu ray, having the ability to seamlessly branch and vastly more GB storage capacity.
Including the Director's Edition with the theatricals, shouldn't take up any more room than that previously devoted to Special Features transferred over from the earlier DVDs.
I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that we'll never get a properly colored version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly -- I think it's doomed to live forever on DVD. All the Blu-rays have been horrific.
Bill Hunt from the Digitalbits talked to the PHV people and advised them that demand exists for better editions of the original 6 movies.
The main focus of the article is how after he complained about the screwed-up release for STID they decided to come out with a set of both the JJ movies with all the various features combined into one set along with some new features.
It's not any kind of a big boost in the likelihood but at least they have been made aware and are "considering it".
That's good to know. I usually look at blu-ray.com for their reviews before upgrading (which is why I still don't own the DePalma M:I, have been waiting for a BR after skipping the DVD) and they seem to think highly of two different versions of TGTB&TU, but I'll defer to you on this and just hang onto my DVD for now (wonder what color version is on the netflix streaming version?)
I don't know if this is a sign of my faculties eroding or not, but I actually watched about a half-hour of 5thELEMENT on netflix today without turning off the no-blur ... something about that movie actually seems to work better with the crazy clear look, though I think I'd rather go back to watching movies on AUDIO than ever watching ALIEN with the no-blur turned on (especially now that I really love it, after decades of rewatching it only for the art direction.)
According to Daren's own comments to articles on TMP at his personal blog back circa 2009 when the disappointing BD release came out it wouldn't be hard to re-ender at 1080p.
Yep, DVD was the target resolution, and that's all they paid for. The VFX team apparently repeatedly told Paramount Home Video that it was a shortsighted idea, but this was circa 2001, the majority of people didn't have HDTVs back then (it took another 5 years for mass market penetration of HDTVs), so they took the quick buck route, imagine that...
There is a blog somewhere of one of the VFX artists who was at Foundation back then, he did a render of some of the TMP elements at something approximating 1080p, it doesn't look spectacular, but it looks decent. The fact that it's not spectacular is more due more to it needing to have some updated/higher resolution textures here and there, than anything else. Which would be pretty darn easy to do. The meshes seem like they'd do fine.
EDIT: Found it, Lee Stringer's blog: http://www.leestringer.com/gal_sttmp1.html
As someone who hates the TMP DE with a passion, I am quite happy about the 2009 TMP BluRay release ...
I'm conflicted about Director's Cuts. While I appreciate the thinking behind them, the idea that sometimes a movie can be improved by recutting it years later, I am also of the belief that the theatrical versions not be lost to history as a result. I'm wary that Director's Cuts can sometimes be cases where the persons behind the camera have taken liberties with material that they personally have never been entirely happy with, but they've failed to take into account the subjective opinions of their audiences who might like the theatrical versions perfectly fine thank you very much.
I mean, for one example: Sam Raimi hates the theatrical ending of 'Army of Darkness', he makes no excuses for replacing it with his prefered ending on the Director's Cut because ultimately he feels he was shackled by the studios insistence that he give his movie a less bleak ending... but for me, as a viewer, I subjectively prefer the theatrical cut. I like the studio mandated ending better, I like Ash getting home and then getting kick ass on a Deadite, and I would be bitterly disappointed if somebody suddenly said to me "Actually, screw you, the Director's Cut is all we're gonna give you".
Of course as long as the theatrical versions remain available then I say "bring it on".
This should never be an issue going forward as the technology exists to give consumers multiple movies on a single disc/download. But it will.
My comment was less about the lack of an HD version of the DE per-say, and more about the terrible handling of all the movies by Paramount.
On that we can agree!
I love that we live at a time when multiple versions of films are offered in the same package. The prime examples being CLOSE ENCOUNTERS and BLADE RUNNER. I never even watched the Special Edition or Director's Cut of the former, but at least I have the option available. The handling of TMP in all formats has so far been underwhelming. There was no reason the theatrical and director's edition couldn't be on the DVD via seamless branching, and having that director's edition only mastered at 480i was short sighted. Didn't that actually get a limited screening in theaters? I know tons of flicks from that era that got a "director's cut" had something like that at least.
For visual illustration:
Shitty 2009 US Blu-ray:
Apparently because it's a Western, it must be yellow.
I agree that physical media still has life in it, although maybe not for more than another three to five years. I like to have my movies in hand. I don't want my movies in a cloud, where they're subject to the whim and moreover the survival of a company.
That CBS has done so well with TV Trek and PHV has been so inconsistent and questionable with their treatment of the feature films frustrates me. I do think we'll get another release on BluRay, as a 4K physical format won't be ready for prime time in 2016 (if ever), but I am not confident Paramount will give us the all-in, make-everyone-happy releases we're longing for.
When I die, I want Paramount to be my pall bearers, so that they can let me down one last time.
It's so strange. Reading the review, it says they did a lot of referencing from original prints to get the colors right for the new release and that the previous blu-rays were all wrong. Is that just a lie by the studio or did it really look like that in the 1960s? It's not a look I'm used to, but if it IS accurate then I'd have to try to get used to it I guess.
No doubt this is sending the blu-ray.com forums to a frenzy. "It doesn't look like my old laserdisc!"
Separate names with a comma.