# Star Trek: The Original Series - with upgraded CG effects and new "corrections"



## Skittles (May 25, 2002)

TV Guide and The Digital Bits are reporting that Paramount is working on a new "upgraded" version of Star Trek: The Original Series.

The newly upgraded show is going to have updated CG shots to replace the special effects from the series' original run. In addition, they're going to be fixing some of the goofs & bloopers from the series, changing some of the backgrounds to make them more animated and life-like, and updating some scenes to make them more accurate (like shots of Earth from space, for example).

Oh, and they're also re-recording the original theme, using a larger orchestra and a new singer for the "vocals".

All of these changes, including the special effects, are being done in-house at Paramount. Theoretically, this work is being done in anticipation of TOS's release in one (or both) of the High Def DVD formats. The show's going to premeire in about two weeks in syndication. The episodes are going to air out of order, starting with Balance of Terror

Here's a screenshot of the new CG work.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

Bah. Looks like a Pixar cartoon to me.

And showing them out of order? That's just stupid.





But I'll watch (at least a few)...


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Hey, now that there's precedent, can we get them to redo the first 2-3 seasons of the Simpsons with new drawings and voices? Those episodes are borderline unwatchable.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

I'm sure I'll watch a few, if not all of them, but I can't say I'd buy them. I'm not a fanatical purist, but I'll prefer to own them as they were.

I'm not surprised they are doing this. There are lots of Trek fans who say they just can't watch TOS because it's so dated.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

serumgard said:


> Hey, now that there's precedent, can we get them to redo the first 2-3 seasons of the Simpsons with new drawings and voices? Those episodes are borderline unwatchable.


What you don't like the African American Smithers?


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

After Enterprise's shocking failure, I didn't see how Paramount could get anymore blood out of this particular stone. I guess I was wrong. 

That said, I may watch some of them to see if the updated FX change things any.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Because updating Star Wars was such a big success with the fans, I guess Paramount wanted to do something for their sci-fi camp as well. :down:


----------



## mrpantstm (Jan 25, 2005)

hah. I'm reminded of the Family Guy bit where Neil is examing a Star Trek episode and one of the things he points out is Shatner's stunt double in the background taking his coffee break. Might be something they'd want to correct.


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

This idea is about 8 flavors of awful.


----------



## Big_Daddy (Nov 20, 2002)

I guess when you can't come up with any new, good ideas, you have to do something to make money.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

You know, now that I think about it...

The new movie is supposedly supposed to deal with younger versions of Kirk & Spock and take place in the classic series timeframe.

It makes sense to make the TOS more "accessible" to more (re: younger) people now to broaden the possible audience for the upcoming movie.

No?


(still think it's a bad idea for the show, but a good idea business-wise, I guess)


----------



## windracer (Jan 3, 2003)

So are they going to replace all the paper mache' rocks and red skies with CGI?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Sirius Black said:


> Because updating Star Wars was such a big success with the fans, I guess Paramount wanted to do something for their sci-fi camp as well. :down:


Yep.
It's George Lucas syndrome.

So will the episodes be horribly butchered to fit in a 60 minute time slot?


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

cwoody222 said:


> And showing them out of order? That's just stupid.


This was picked up in USAToday today also. The out of order premise was based on fans voting for their favorites. That's where Paramount is starting.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

I never watch TOS episodes anymore, but this would get me to watch the good ones. I think it's kind of a cool idea. To me this is not quite like the Star Wars trilogy, which had very good effects to begin with. The TOS effects were pretty bad. I just hope they don't put any CGI characters in there. That would be a bad idea.

Do you think they will redo the transporter effect?


----------



## amishpriest (Aug 20, 2006)

This has got to be some kind of joke...TOS was so endearing, at least to me, because of the cheesy effects (among other things).


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Not the worst idea in the world, I suppose. The biggest problem I think will be the meshing of the old 1960's era lighting and camera work with the 21st century CGI graphics... I'd think it'd be rather jarring to switch back and forth like that.

If they were somehow able to mate the original actors into new footage filmed on the rebuilt sets (they've rebuilt three times now - DS9 ["Trials and Tribbleations"], once for TNG ["Relics Pts. 1 & 2"] and once for ENT ["In A Mirror Darkly Pts. 1 & 2"] that would be interesting. Of course, they've never COMPLETELY rebuilt - ENT's rebuild was probably the most extensive set rebuild, including hallway sets, most of the bridge, and even a portion of Engineering. They could only replace scenes set on those sets.


----------



## Mr2sday (Jul 8, 2005)

The thing that really bugs about that is the vocals for the song. The messed up Enterprise's song when they changed the style of the vocal and now they're gonna mess up one of the most famous theme songs two years after the composer died. Jerry Goldsmith RIP.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

_*Kirk shot first!!*_

But Spock was right behind!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Mr2sday said:


> The thing that really bugs about that is the vocals for the song. The messed up Enterprise's song when they changed the style of the vocal and now they're gonna mess up one of the most famous theme songs two years after the composer died. Jerry Goldsmith RIP.


[geek mode]
Jerry Goldsmith, fine composer that he was, did not write the Original Star Trek theme.
Alexander Courage did.
Goldsmith did not enter the Star Trek franchise until the Motion Picture.
[/geek mode]


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

Mr2sday said:


> The thing that really bugs about that is the vocals for the song. The messed up Enterprise's song when they changed the style of the vocal and now they're gonna mess up one of the most famous theme songs two years after the composer died. Jerry Goldsmith RIP.


Jerry Goldsmith did not compose the original Star Trek theme. Alexander Courage did.

Goldsmith created the theme used for _Star Trek: The Motion Picture_. This was later recycled for "Star Trek: The Next Generation" and _Star Trek V: The Final Frontier_.

<edit>
Or, what JYoung said. 
</edit>


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> ...TNG ["Relics Pts. 1 & 2"] ...


"Relics" wasn't a two-parter.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

DLiquid said:


> The TOS effects were pretty bad. I just hope they don't put any CGI characters in there. That would be a bad idea.


The effects were state of the art in 1966.

And I'd prefer to leave them as they were to see how the field has evolved.


----------



## mikesay98 (Aug 26, 2006)

DougF said:


> There are lots of Trek fans who say they just can't watch TOS because it's so dated.


If this is true, they can't be true Star Trek fans. What another person said here, is that is why these episodes endure. They are the classic. The reason why they are so good is because the effects weren't everything; it was the STORY that mattered, and that's why they always had such good episodes. I agree that the picture looks like pixar. Personally, I felt the demise of Star Trek came with the computerization of the ships because the models look SO real.

While most of me is pissed at this news, a small part of me wonders if it will help bring younger people (I'm 22, but a fan since childhood) that aren't necessarily that interested in Star Trek into watching it a little. The franchise is failing, and I guess you need to take risk to revive it. Problem is, it could also destroy a classic and turn off a lot of fans while they're at it.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

mikesay98 said:


> If this is true, they can't be true Star Trek fans...


I wouldn't say that. Lots of people came on board with the movies or some of the later shows. Many of them are young and have only ever known "better" special effects. They didn't live the 60s. I didn't either (born in '71) , but I started watching Star Trek in the last 70s.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

The real editing magic is one that will allow them an extra minute or two per episode for additional commericals without removing any content.

They'll just remove the empty spaces from Kirks occaisional monologues. By re-connecting the sentances into continuous streams the episode will go by quicker without removing any dialog.


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

"BUT..................................Spock.................surely......you can see.............the error......of.....your ways!!!" LOL


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

The real challenge will be replacing those aliens (people in monster suits) with believable monsters. i.e. Gorn, furry white beast, cyclops things, green women , etc.


----------



## mikesay98 (Aug 26, 2006)

Perhaps I spoke too soon...if they can do something like this, it wouldn't be too bad...

Link


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> The real challenge will be replacing those aliens (people in monster suits) with believable monsters. i.e. Gorn, furry white beast, cyclops things, green women , etc.


Because that worked sooooooo well on Enterprise.


----------



## Mike10 (Mar 1, 2006)

I spoke to someone who knows... Paramount is attempting to clean up the prints. Apparently the layering of film trapped dirt, dust, hair, etc. The DVDs look ok now, but when remastered in high definition they look positively filthy. This is beyond a normal clean-up job. Apparently it's easier just to reproduce elements than try to clean them


----------



## DLL66 (Oct 21, 2002)

You know deep down that all of you will watch it...........right along with me!!


----------



## mportuesi (Nov 11, 2002)

I actually like this idea, and think it will open up classic Trek to a new audience that's accustomed to glitzy effects.

I saw the test reel of an updated TOS episode that went around a month or two ago (http://www.trekenhanced.com/) and really liked what I saw. (though this Paramount effort is done by a different group of people than the demo reel on trekenhanced.com)

But I emphatically _don't_ like the idea of them being shown out of order.


----------



## sketcher (Mar 3, 2005)

mportuesi said:


> But I emphatically _don't_ like the idea of them being shown out of order.


Hopefully they will just do a few of the fan favorites first (to generate interest I guess), then go back and get the rest in series order.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

There are a few episodes I wouldn't mind if they left out altogether. Miri, And the Children Shall Lead, The Savage Curtain, The Way to Eden, and Spectre of the Gun, for a few examples. Star Trek was interesting in that they could mix some real awful episodes with some astonishing examples of some of the best science fiction ever on television. And it is so broad spectrum, that I'm sure at least one of the episodes I listed as some of the worst in my opinion, are on some peoples best episodes list.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

SparkleMotion said:


> Relics was a single part episode. And they only actually constructed a sliver of the bridge for that...the rest was done (quite seamlessly, I'd say) with F/X.


Good catch by the two of you on the one part/two part mistake. And yeah, as I mentioned, they've been progressively making more and more of the TOS sets... for Relics, it was pretty much just a small sliver; for DS9, they made some hallway segments; and for Enterprise, they made a Engineering portion, a long hallway section, and a nearly full bridge.


----------



## jmoak (Jun 20, 2000)

redo Star Trek??!?!? Bah!!

Let's start a "Leave Our Trek Alone!" club.

maybe we can give away free hats........



_They've killed Kirk! You bastards!_


----------



## Dignan (Jan 27, 2002)

They should consider maybe doing a colorized version of Casablanca....


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

I don't mind them redoing the original episodes. It's not like people don't have the chance to buy the original format right now if they don't like the idea of someone tampering with the classics.

But if these will be priced similarly at $85/season, then count me out. (Amazon has an offer for all 3 seasons at $175 right now).


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

5thcrewman said:


> _*Kirk shot first!!*_


Damn, beat me to it!


----------



## jones07 (Jan 30, 2001)

I'll watch


----------



## Bsteenson (Jul 30, 2000)

That's why choices are so great.

Think this is sacrilage and an outrage? Don't watch.

Interested in what it will look like? Give it a try.

Will eagerly watch anything with the words "Star Trek" in it? Then your key word Wish List in the No. 1 priority spot will grab it as soon as it appears.

BS


----------



## appleye1 (Jan 26, 2002)

serumgard said:


> Hey, now that there's precedent, can we get them to redo the first 2-3 seasons of the Simpsons with new drawings and voices? Those episodes are borderline unwatchable.


I liked this clip but I didn't think this was worthy of its own thread. Mentioning the Simpsons gives me the perfect opening to post it in this thread.  
Slight hijack - Simpsons vs. Star Trek


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

JYoung said:


> The effects were state of the art in 1966.
> 
> And I'd prefer to leave them as they were to see how the field has evolved.


Yes, we need to be reminded that phaser beams didn't always originate at the end of the phaser.

They could do a lot just adding modern surround sound, the throb of the warp drive spinning up or status reports coming from all around the bridge for example.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

I'll definitely give it a shot. My only gripe is how the ship looks in the OP by Skittles. It looks like they need to do another texture pass on it. It looks a little flat.


----------



## MarkL (Jul 1, 2005)

Church AV Guy said:


> There are a few episodes I wouldn't mind if they left out altogether. Miri, And the Children Shall Lead, The Savage Curtain, The Way to Eden, and Spectre of the Gun, for a few examples. Star Trek was interesting in that they could mix some real awful episodes with some astonishing examples of some of the best science fiction ever on television. And it is so broad spectrum, that I'm sure at least one of the episodes I listed as some of the worst in my opinion, are on some peoples best episodes list.


To each their own. Personally, Curtain and Spectre were a couple of my favorites. Miri could definitely have some traction with today's interest in bioscience, gene therapy, stem cells, etc. The other two .. perhaps they will do those last.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Church AV Guy said:


> There are a few episodes I wouldn't mind if they left out altogether. Miri, And the Children Shall Lead, The Savage Curtain, The Way to Eden, and Spectre of the Gun, for a few examples. Star Trek was interesting in that they could mix some real awful episodes with some astonishing examples of some of the best science fiction ever on television. And it is so broad spectrum, that I'm sure at least one of the episodes I listed as some of the worst in my opinion, are on some peoples best episodes list.


+1 on the "to each his own".

I'd agree that "Spectre of the Gun", "And the Children Shall Lead, and "Way to Eden" were weak episodes. However, IMHO, "Savage Curtain" was fine, and "Miri" was one of the best episodes of the series! The kids came off as truly menacing and dangerous, not just annoying as hell like in "And the Children Shall Lead". In Miri, they even had a 27 year old actor, Michael J. Pollard, convincingly playing a pre-teen kid! (Jahn) That's television history! 

My vote for the two lamest episodes of the entire series:

First runner up (second lamest): "Spock's Brain"

Lamest: "Turnabout Intruder"

"Turnabout Intruder" was the series finale (if you could call such a horrible episode that). Talk about going out with a fizzle, rather than a bang!


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

While they're at it maybe they can touch up some of the plot, dialog, over-acting, etc.?


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

"Miri" was the first episode of ST I ever saw (during its first run) and I also think it's a great episode!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

vman41 said:


> Yes, we need to be reminded that phaser beams didn't always originate at the end of the phaser.
> 
> They could do a lot just adding modern surround sound, the throb of the warp drive spinning up or status reports coming from all around the bridge for example.


And that's important to the story how?

This reminds me of when Turner tried colorizing all those old B&W movies and shorts and that didn't go over well.

Unfortunately, we seem to be an audience now that prefers style and glitz over substance (to wit: The Phantom Menace).
This is the kind of like not wanting to watch the original King Kong because it's a stop motion figure or not watching Citizen Kane because it's in Black and White.

And we should not support productions of Shakesphere because they use paper machie sets.

I'm not totally against this idea though, if it was done with the care of the Trek Enhanced guy but this is Paramount here.
It may be more of "since Enterprise wasn't the cash cow we thought it would be, let's make a few cosmetic changes to TOS and get those stupid fans to double dip."


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

JYoung said:


> And that's important to the story how?


It doesn't improve the story, it improves the telling of the story, enhancing the verisimiltude just as good background music enhances the drama.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

I just noticed that Deep Discount DVD has the complete series on sale for $137.

http://www.deepdiscountdvd.com/dvd.cfm?itemid=PRD005538

Z


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

Anyone locate a list of the stations that will be airing this?


----------



## fergiej (Oct 9, 2002)

JYoung said:


> And that's important to the story how?
> 
> This reminds me of when Turner tried colorizing all those old B&W movies and shorts and that didn't go over well.
> 
> ...


But, they aren't charging US for it. This is from the Startrek.com website:
The first question we can already answer for you: 


> There is no confirmation as yet if, or when, these episodes will eventually appear on DVD, HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. This is likely to change at some point.


So, there isn't the motivation of more $$ from the fans driving this (yet). I believe the are trying to revive it to bring the characters to a younger, much more critical (effectswise) audience to prepare them for the movie. And, i'm not such a huge fan of the TOS that I won't be able to tolerate this. I think...it'll...look...pretty good.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

bootedbear said:


> Anyone locate a list of the stations that will be airing this?


If you have DirecTV and get your distant networks from NY, you may be able to see it on September 16 on WNBC/4-NY.

My newspaper just had an article on the Trek enhancements, so I'm really hoping Channel 4 does present it in HD.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

One question I have about this:

Will they be edited for time, or time compressed?

I'm enjoying the Star Trek marathons on G4 where they run them 1:10 so that they can put the typical 2006 number of commercials in them yet not have to edit or time compress the show. (However, G4's Star Trek 2.0, with the boarder of moving text all around the picture is an abomination!)

Anyway, if they plan to release this revamped Star Trek in syndication as a 1 hour show, they'll have to trim about 10 minutes out of the show either by time compression or by delating scenes/shots, or by a combination of both. Commercial TV stations are going to demand 18 minutes worth of commercial time in a 1 hour show. They're not going to accept the 1966 standard of 8 minutes.

I sort of like the idea of updating the look of the space shots, planet backgrounds, and special effects. But, if the syndicated version is edited for time or time compressed, that will royally suck, and kill my interest in the revamped program.


----------



## mportuesi (Nov 11, 2002)

JYoung said:


> I'm not totally against this idea though, if it was done with the care of the Trek Enhanced guy but this is Paramount here.


On his site, the "Trek Enhanced" guy says he knows the people involved with the new production, and has confidence they will also treat the series with care.


----------



## Bondelev-1 (Nov 27, 2005)

bootedbear said:


> Anyone locate a list of the stations that will be airing this?


I noticed that TV LAND will be airing a bunch of episodes on 9/14 which they have labelled as STAR TREK 40th ANNIVERSARY. I had assumed these were the updated version. But maybe not, they don't seem to mention it.

TV LAND


----------



## ParadiseDave (Jun 8, 2000)

But what about the Klingons? Will we get wrinkled heads or bushy eyebrows?


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

JYoung said:


> Yep.
> It's George Lucas syndrome.
> 
> So will the episodes be horribly butchered to fit in a 60 minute time slot?


More like a 45 minute time slot, the rest of the time is for commercials.


----------



## purple6816 (May 27, 2003)

amishpriest said:


> This has got to be some kind of joke...TOS was so endearing, at least to me, because of the cheesy effects (among other things).


OK. I cant figure out the TOS acronym. I know we are refering to the original season.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

purple6816 said:


> OK. I cant figure out the TOS acronym. I know we are refering to the original season.


TOS = The Original Series


----------



## purple6816 (May 27, 2003)

PJO1966 said:


> TOS = The Original Series


The answer just dawned on me. I went to delete my post and you had posted and locked it in. Thanks. A senior moment. Like Bill I think I have mad cow.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

fergiej said:


> So, there isn't the motivation of more $$ from the fans driving this (yet). I believe the are trying to revive it to bring the characters to a younger, much more critical (effectswise) audience to prepare them for the movie. And, i'm not such a huge fan of the TOS that I won't be able to tolerate this. I think...it'll...look...pretty good.


Syndication still brings them money on this with low overhead.
Plus, I believe that they are hedging their bets concerning Blu-Ray/HD-DVD.
I personally believe that BR/HD is going to be a harder sell to Joe Sixpack and they are going to need additional enticements to make people double dip or maybe even single dip for BR/HD.



mportuesi said:


> On his site, the "Trek Enhanced" guy says he knows the people involved with the new production, and has confidence they will also treat the series with care.


What else can he say? He works in the industry and wants to continue to do so.
Reading between the lines, I believe that one of the reasons that Rick Sternbach left the franchise was due to the lack of caring about the quality of the work.
(i.e. the Delta Flyer was actually too big to fit through Voyager's Shuttle Bay door.)



byte_me123 said:


> More like a 45 minute time slot, the rest of the time is for commercials.


It's worse than that. Enterprise was clocking in at just under 40 minutes of content, including credits!

TOS episodes run 50:15 to 50:30 so that's over 10 minutes over material that would have to be cut to fit in a "stardard" 1 hour time slot.
(or God forbid, run less commercials)

I wonder how TVLand is going to handle this on Friday.

(and does anyone find it disturbing that over one third of any program you watch is dedicated to commericials? Thank God for TiVo.)


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

JYoung said:


> It's worse than that. Enterprise was clocking in at just under 40 minutes of content, including credits!


A standard program these days is usually 42 minutes +/- 1 minute.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

It's been quite awhile since I've watched TOS and since I am so hard up for some Star Trek right now, I'm actually looking forward to seeing this.

I do hope the effects look better than that CGI screen shot though.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> A standard program these days is usually 42 minutes +/- 1 minute.


Sorry, I forgot that I almost never included the credits to Enterprise due to the God awful theme song.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

The Guide Data on my boxes has finally reached the 16th and for Time Warner Cable in Austin, KNVA, the WB affiliate, has a listing for Balance of Terror.

There's nothing to indicate whether this is an airing of the original TOS episode, or the re-vamped version.


----------



## cwbaker (Aug 5, 2002)

Does anyone know which (if any) Boston station might carry this? Alternatively which Comcast or DirectTv channel? Looks like G4 is running TOS & TOS 2.0 now, so maybe it will be them.

I'd prefer a Boston station in HD though!


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Fish Man said:


> First runner up (second lamest): "Spock's Brain"


... which inspired one of the best episodes ever of _The Wonder Years_.

Thus is equilibrium maintained. 

As someone who watched the show on its original run, my vote is to leave the effects alone. The creators did the best they could with the resources at hand. The effects were, in many cases, the most expensive done to date. If I'm going to buy DVDs, I want the show I saw when I was a kid, not some tarted-up substitute.

Edited to add: when I do Save to VCR, I include the opening and end credits as well as the main part of the episodes. Most current shows come in around 45 minutes. So that's 3/4 of the timeslot for the show vs. 1/4 of the timeslot for commercials.

Jan


----------



## cwbaker (Aug 5, 2002)

cwbaker said:


> Does anyone know which (if any) Boston station might carry this? Alternatively which Comcast or DirectTv channel? Looks like G4 is running TOS & TOS 2.0 now, so maybe it will be them.
> 
> I'd prefer a Boston station in HD though!


Found episode information for "Balance of Terror" on 9/17 at 2:35am on Boston channel 5. Show is listed as 60 minutes in the Comcast channel guide.

Nothing to indicate if is the new version or if it is to be broadcast in HD, but it is the right episode on the right weekend.


----------



## MarkL (Jul 1, 2005)

I don't have "Terror" but I do have "Plato's Stepchildren", "City on the Edge of Forever", "The Trouble with Tribbles" and "Man Trap", all showing in consecutive hours on 9/8. Again, no indication if they are the enhanced eps or not. Guess we'll find out soon enough!


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

MarkL said:


> I don't have "Terror" but I do have "Plato's Stepchildren", "City on the Edge of Forever", "The Trouble with Tribbles" and "Man Trap", all showing in consecutive hours on 9/8. Again, no indication if they are the enhanced eps or not. Guess we'll find out soon enough!


The enhanced episodes start on 9/16 or later. So your 9/8 ones aren't them.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

MarkL said:


> I don't have "Terror" but I do have "Plato's Stepchildren", "City on the Edge of Forever", "The Trouble with Tribbles" and "Man Trap", all showing in consecutive hours on 9/8. Again, no indication if they are the enhanced eps or not. Guess we'll find out soon enough!


Those are probably the TV Land episodes airing on the 40th anniversary.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Unfortunately, I don't think any of the local stations have purchased equipment to record syndicated HD programming for later rebroadcast... which means that I doubt we'll see the HD versions here at all.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

If anyone finds the Los Angeles area airing, please let me know. I have guide data for the 16th now and nothings shows up yet. 

I would have thought the second largest market in the country would have it immediately.


----------



## cthomp (Dec 24, 2001)

Detroit area: Sept 17th 2am channel 7.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

mportuesi said:


> I actually like this idea, and think it will open up classic Trek to a new audience that's accustomed to glitzy effects.
> 
> I saw the test reel of an updated TOS episode that went around a month or two ago (http://www.trekenhanced.com/) and really liked what I saw. (though this Paramount effort is done by a different group of people than the demo reel on trekenhanced.com)
> 
> But I emphatically _don't_ like the idea of them being shown out of order.


I'll be watching

the order of shows is not so important to me. TOS was important because it brought good Stories to television that were decidely Science Fiction in an era when Sci-Fi or any type of deep storytelling was not considered commercially viable. To me TOS is interesting in the trade off of made for TV characterization and interplay vs the "serious" Sci-Fi story telling. 
There is the Star Trek timeline to work within but TOS had no real intro, middle or end to the whole series - it was simply a good Sci-fi story each and (most) every week


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

DougF said:


> Those are probably the TV Land episodes airing on the 40th anniversary.


Exactly.

Starting at 8 eastern time, a four hour mini-marathon.

TV LAND will be running the original version of TOS, and this is the first taste of that.

I'm not sure what the regular start date is tho', or the regular timeslot.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

gastrof said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Starting at 8 eastern time, a four hour mini-marathon.
> 
> ...


I think it starts sometime in November on TV Land.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

mikesay98 said:


> Perhaps I spoke too soon...if they can do something like this, it wouldn't be too bad...
> 
> Link


Very cool...I like what I saw, it helps that "The Doomsday Machine" is one of my favorite episodes...


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

Well, I finally have guide data through 7 PM on 9/16, and despite what Newsday wrote, I don't see any listings for any variation of Trek on WNBC-NY-4 that weekend. I'm disappointed, because WNBC-4 is in HD on DirecTV and I was hoping to catch this ...


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

I see Balance of Terror listed on NBC here for the 18th at 12:05am...


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

Found some updated info here.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

I suppose if this is a ratings and money winner, then we can expect other series to follow suit? I wouldn't mind Mission Impossible, The Man from U.N.C.L.E., all of the classic Doctor Who, but I draw the line at Lost in Space and Gilligan's island. 

Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind these being released on regular DVD.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Well, that confirms it - I won't be seeing the HD version. The station that currently shows Enterprise in strip syndication is WMLW, a low-power independent not currenly broadcasting in HD. They're owned by the local CBS affiliate, and they do broadcast in digital - but only on a sub-channel of the CBS digital channel.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> Found some updated info here.


Thanks, Paul.

A couple of things that I noted:



> All 79 episodes are being done, plus the pilot. 35-40 episodes will be done for weekly broadcast syndication airing this year, and another 35-40 for next year. The entire length of the episode is being done, not just the 43-minute syndication length (broadcast stations choose how much they wish to show of the episode). There are somewhere between 15-70 effects shots per episode, and the total length of enhanced footage per episode could be as little as a minute and a half (depending on the episode).


Yiiikes!  So it's going to be up to the individual stations as to how much to chop out?
 
(and it is less then 43 minutes these days)



> Masters are apparently being created in both 4x3 and 16x9. [Editor's Note: We're working to determine EXACTLY what this means, and how the specific footage is being handled.] Eventually, the producers expect that there will be a DVD release of the new versions [and presumably high-definition HD-DVD and Blu-ray Disc versions as well], but not right away, as it's going to take at least a year to get all the work on all the episodes done.


How are they going to convert to 16:9? Crop the top and bottom?



> In terms of which specific stations will be showing the new versions, The Original Series is apparently replacing Enterprise in syndication. So if your local station has been showing Enterprise in recent months, that station will now be showing the new enhanced Original Series episodes. Enterprise is being moved to strip syndication on Sci-Fi Channel and HDNet.


Translation, Enterprise didn't make as much money as they hoped in syndication.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Translation, Enterprise didn't make as much money as they hoped in syndication.


For what it's worth:

Enterprise Wasn't Bumped for Trek, Says Nogawski


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> For what it's worth:
> 
> Enterprise Wasn't Bumped for Trek, Says Nogawski


What else are they going to say.
If they say it was under producing, Sci FI channel may very well decide that they don't want to pay what Paramount asked of them.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

To add insult to injury, the episode I saw on TiVo's guide was listed as 58 minutes. I was hoping that since it was airing at midnight that they would air the uncut episodes and let it run for 75 minutes or whatever it turned out to be, keeping all the original footage and still making time for the commercials. Seriously, what would they have to lose by doing such a thing at midnight?


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

I finally found it listed on NY WNBC Channel 4 for Monday 9/18 at 3:35 AM with a running time of 55 minutes for "Balance of Terror". Looks like WNBC is being a tad less generous than the LA station ...


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

At that hour they should run them commercial-free.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

drew2k said:


> I finally found it listed on NY WNBC Channel 4 for Monday 9/18 at 3:35 AM with a running time of 55 minutes for "Balance of Terror". Looks like WNBC is being a tad less generous than the LA station ...


Asking any TV station to air a 40 year old show that has been seen for the 1000th or so time, in prime time IS asking a lot, for them.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

byte_me123 said:


> Asking any TV station to air a 40 year old show that has been seen for the 1000th or so time, in prime time IS asking a lot, for them.


Who's asking for it to be in prime time? I was comparing the length of the NY airing 55) to the length of the LA airing 58). Guess which city will see less Star Trek and more commercials?


----------



## PeternJim (Sep 25, 2004)

I can't speak for any other area, but in our area Enterprise was in "syndication" -- but only the final season, showing over, and over, and over. I certainly would have watched the rest of it, but how often do they expect people to watch the same episodes before the viewship drops?


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

drew2k said:


> Who's asking for it to be in prime time? I was comparing the length of the NY airing 55) to the length of the LA airing 58). Guess which city will see less Star Trek and more commercials?


Sorry my bad. Some thing else I thought of, CBS now owns Star Trek, I wonder how that will play on an NBC Station?


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

It looks like these won't be distributed in HD right away. I don't have a link to the original article, but here's a link to the thread on AVS where I saw it.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Original Article


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

In HIGHDEF Every pimple, seam in Spocks ears, hicky, you name it will now be visible. Remember the makeup use back then was for low res 60's TV. Hell you can already see it in the new DVDs.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

I was getting psyched for this in HD, but an SD facelift isn't nearly as appealling. I think I'll skip this until the HD version comes along.


----------



## HTH (Aug 28, 2000)

JYoung said:


> How are they going to convert to 16:9? Crop the top and bottom?


I did a comparison of SD and downconverted HD Super Bowl ads this time around. Most of the HD ads were reframed from the 4:3 aspect. I even did overlays of some widescreen ads across the SD ads, and they don't always cut the same amount above and below and they sometimes sweep across the frame. Some elements were relocated to fit the tighter framing.

Of course, I'm talking about ads, so they made sure no essential graphics would get cut off, and were shot with 4:3 and 16:9 both in mind.

There are other methods too. Analysis of adjacent frames can provide detail to fill in the spaces on either side of a 4:3 image to make it 16:9. Though you can't always get that information; it would be _a lot_ easier to make the animated series (now available for pre-order) widescreen.


----------



## HTH (Aug 28, 2000)

BTW, this could still be terrible. Remember what they did to _Red Dwarf_?


----------



## cthomp (Dec 24, 2001)

HTH said:


> BTW, this could still be terrible. Remember what they did to _Red Dwarf_?


No. What did they do to Red Dwarf?


----------



## HTH (Aug 28, 2000)

cthomp said:


> No. What did they do to Red Dwarf?


They went back and updated the effects sequences, changing the Blue Midgets and the Red Dwarf to match their apperances in the last season, first episode even overlaid a couple scutters in the first scene, badly. They cut jokes out of the show to make room for them, reshot scenes of Holly, and changed the first two season openings completely.

This revamped version was what was shown on BBC America. The DVDs proclaim they are the original versions.


----------



## Skittles (May 25, 2002)

HTH said:


> They went back and updated the effects sequences, changing the Blue Midgets and the Red Dwarf to match their apperances in the last season, first episode even overlaid a couple scutters in the first scene, badly. They cut jokes out of the show to make room for them, reshot scenes of Holly, and changed the first two season openings completely.
> 
> This revamped version was what was shown on BBC America. The DVDs proclaim they are the original versions.


FWIW, I have the DVD releases of Red Dwarf, and they're all the original edits... none of the Updated effects, cuts, or anything like that. They even use the original theme song without the montage of clips.

HUGELY refreshing. I hated the updates.


----------



## cthomp (Dec 24, 2001)

HTH said:


> They went back and updated the effects sequences, changing the Blue Midgets and the Red Dwarf to match their apperances in the last season, first episode even overlaid a couple scutters in the first scene, badly. They cut jokes out of the show to make room for them, reshot scenes of Holly, and changed the first two season openings completely.
> 
> This revamped version was what was shown on BBC America. The DVDs proclaim they are the original versions.


That explains it. I don't get BBC America.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

Well, I don't think I'll mind updated special effects. Actually, I think I'd like to see them. I mean seriously, I've seen those episodes a thousand times. I owned the entire series on VHS, and even started buying the DVDs when they were released with two episodes per disc. In other words, I'm an old Trek fan and have seen those shows sooooooo many times, updated special effects will only make them a bit more interesting to me.

I wouldn't compare it to what Lucas did with Star Wars though. I supported using CGI to remove the visible matting from the space scenes, but he went so far as to reedit the original movies and add in completely new scenes.

One of my favorite episodes of Deep Space Nine was when they went back in time and put themselves on the original Enterprise. The thing I liked most about it was the exterior shot as the camera slowly panned over the ship. NCC-1701 *never* looked that good!

Back in the 60's, special effects in prime time were extremely rare. The audience didn't have many standards to compare them to, so they saw them differently than they do today. Today, we look at them and think they're quaint and remember how incredible we thought they were back then and smile when we see the rubber costumes and wires. We simply don't view the same shows the same way we did back then. What was realism _then_ is merely nostalgia now. If a few scenes are polished up to bring us back to that level of immersiveness, then it's OK with me. Like I said, I've seen them a thousand times. If a new generation of people get exposed to them, it'll be nice if more than just a couple young viewers with an odd penchant for old films likes them.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

FINALLY... It's listed locally.

WVUE "FOX8" New Orleans has "Balance of Terror" listed for 11:00 PM Sunday Sep. 17 and "Miri" listed for Midnight, immediately following.

Now a bit of sad irony.

The one local station that has the capability to show a syndicated show that they _originate_ in HD is WVUE! And, alas, it's not available to them that way. (Sigh!)



And another  that these episodes will certainly be edited for time...


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

bobcarn said:


> Well, I don't think I'll mind updated special effects. Actually, I think I'd like to see them. I mean seriously, I've seen those episodes a thousand times. I owned the entire series on VHS, and even started buying the DVDs when they were released with two episodes per disc. In other words, I'm an old Trek fan and have seen those shows sooooooo many times, updated special effects will only make them a bit more interesting to me.
> 
> I wouldn't compare it to what Lucas did with Star Wars though. I supported using CGI to remove the visible matting from the space scenes, but he went so far as to reedit the original movies and add in completely new scenes.
> 
> ...


Funny thing about that is, it and the station were NOT CGI, but real models.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

Take two movies as an example, one The Thing, the original, and 2001. There was very little or no SP effects in The Thing. Yet it held you spell bound. Plus good acting, on the other hand 2001 had tons of SP effects and very little of anything else that it put some people to sleep. So unless a proper balance is found it could be a disaster.


----------



## WinBear (Aug 24, 2000)

Here's a site with a complete list of stations picking up the remastered Trek and some air times. I would say this list is not completely accurate. It lists "KTEN" as "Denton, Tx" but that is "Denison, Tx" about 70 miles northeast.

http://trekmovie.com/tos-in-hd/hdtv-star-trek-tos-channel-list/


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

byte_me123 said:


> Take two movies as an example, one The Thing, the original, and 2001. There was very little or no SP effects in The Thing. Yet it held you spell bound. Plus good acting, on the other hand 2001 had tons of SP effects and very little of anything else that it put some people to sleep. So unless a proper balance is found it could be a disaster.


Not quite sure what you're trying to say: these are the original episodes with original actors, dialog, etc. etc. There is no redubbing or recreation or anything like that: it's purely tweaking the easy-to-change special effects (external shots of Enterprise, etc.) I don't think there's any way this kind of updating could swing any balance.

They're going to redo _Miri_? Excellent. That episode scared the ever-lovin' beejeezus out of me when I first saw it (I was pretty young  ). So naturally it's one of my favourites now


----------



## MassD (Sep 19, 2002)

Mr2sday said:


> The messed up Enterprise's song when they changed the style of the vocal and now they're gonna mess up one of the most famous theme songs two years after the composer died. Jerry Goldsmith RIP.


I wouldn't be so sure. I read that the redone theme is going to be totally following the original composition... they dug up the original score and notes, and are following it religiously, from the orchestra, to the vocals...

The aim was to make an exact replica of the original performance, not a modern interpretation of it.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

SparkleMotion said:


> Heh...the Boston affiliate has tons of confidence in Star Trek. 2:35am Sunday night/Monday morning.


Mines on at 5 and 6 pm on Saturday.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

madscientist said:


> Not quite sure what you're trying to say: these are the original episodes with original actors, dialog, etc. etc. There is no redubbing or recreation or anything like that: it's purely tweaking the easy-to-change special effects (external shots of Enterprise, etc.) I don't think there's any way this kind of updating could swing any balance.
> 
> They're going to redo _Miri_? Excellent. That episode scared the ever-lovin' beejeezus out of me when I first saw it (I was pretty young  ). So naturally it's one of my favourites now


About the only effect is of the Enterprise orbiting "another Earth" a cloudless one, what other things are they going to "Redo"?


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

MassD said:


> I wouldn't be so sure. I read that the redone theme is going to be totally following the original composition... they dug up the original score and notes, and are following it religiously, from the orchestra, to the vocals...
> 
> The aim was to make an exact replica of the original performance, not a modern interpretation of it.


This trailer for the remastered episodes confirms that.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

DougF said:


> This trailer for the remastered episodes confirms that.


Well done trailer... I'm ready.


----------



## JSM522 (Jan 13, 2005)

I'm a direcTV user in the Dallas Fort Worth area. From what I've read it's supposed to be on ch. 21, Sunday at 3am. So far the only thing in the guide data at that time is "Paid Programming". Anyone else seen it listed?


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

DougF said:


> This trailer for the remastered episodes confirms that.


oh my I think I just had a nerdgasm...


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

"One week from today ... the ship hits the fans!"

 :up:


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

According to above listing KTXA / KTVT in Dallas is supposed to air it at 3AM on sunday, but only listing on TiVo is G4 and not episode "balance of Terror" which is the 1st episode they will show.


----------



## dylking (Jul 20, 2003)

my stupid station is only showing BoT, not Miri.  12:35am on a Sunday, you'd think they could bump "Maximum Exposure"....


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

MassD said:


> I wouldn't be so sure. I read that the redone theme is going to be totally following the original composition... they dug up the original score and notes, and are following it religiously, from the orchestra, to the vocals...
> 
> The aim was to make an exact replica of the original performance, not a modern interpretation of it.


Well, except for the fact that the First Season credits had no vocals.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Well, except for the fact that the First Season credits had no vocals.


I don't remember that.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

The first season credits had no vocals and the opening credits were yellow instead of the blue used for seasons two and three, IIRC.


----------



## JSM522 (Jan 13, 2005)

I set my box to manually record at 3am on sunday Morning on channel 21. I keep forgetting that is how we use to have to program our VCR's. It felt wierd to record by time and channel and not by show! Of course my wife keeps asking me why I'm recording "Paid Programming".
Hopefully they will have the guide fixed by next week so I can set up a season pass.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Why not just set a manual recording on your TiVo?


----------



## JSM522 (Jan 13, 2005)

That's what I did. I was just saying that I felt like I was programming a VCR.

I made the manual recording every Sunday but I would have rather use the season pass to keep from getting duplicates.


----------



## Bondelev-1 (Nov 27, 2005)

DougF said:


> The first season credits had no vocals and the opening credits were yellow instead of the blue used for seasons two and three, IIRC.


Season 2 credits were also yellow.

<ashamed that I know this>


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

Wow, guys. You need to get out a little more often


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

PJO1966 said:


> I don't remember that.


He was talking about the woman singing not the Spacethe final frontier. Of course in "Where no man has gone before there was no Space the final frontier.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

Figaro said:


> Wow, guys. You need to get out a little more often


Your right...


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

byte_me123 said:


> He was talking about the woman singing not the Spacethe final frontier. Of course in "Where no man has gone before there was no Space the final frontier.


I knew what he meant. I'm now having vague memories of strings handling the part otherwise done by the soprano.


----------



## timr_42 (Oct 14, 2001)

Well, I'm watching Balance of Terror. Funny our local station cut the opening credits. All that new CG work for the opening and they cut it. LOL


----------



## DLL66 (Oct 21, 2002)

Figaro said:


> Wow, guys. You need to get out a little more often


EXACTLY!!!


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

heh, the guide data is flipped for my two episodes. Miri was first then Balance of Terror.


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

Ugh, severe weather watch has ruined my recording... damn map and bug at the bottom the entire time.


----------



## dylking (Jul 20, 2003)

SnakeEyes said:


> Ugh, severe weather watch has ruined my recording... damn map and bug at the bottom the entire time.


Well, at least you got some of the show.

I got over an hour of gospel music. I sent their programming folks a nasty gram. Even their website was showing it was supposed to be on at 12:35am. I'm sitting here fastforwarding through a gospel hour.


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

Hopefully it shows up online.


----------



## sonnik (Jul 7, 2000)

For some reason KASW (Phoenix) aired the retouched "Miri" on Saturday, with "Balance of Terror" airing on Sunday.

It is pretty subtle for "Miri" at least. The only thing that caught my eye (and it wasn't painfully obvious) was how clear the planet shots were. The Enterprise looks great too.

I then bounced to the opening credits... the red planet the Enterprise always orbited was almost too detailed. Still looked good, but a lot of purists won't like it. In my opinion, they DID go out of their way to stay as true as they could.

I think they missed a ship "swoosh" also, at the first fly-by.

I think some people will complain about the font they used for titling (episode title, closing credits). I know the font changed throughout the series, but I think they used a plain Sans Serif font.

Overall, I think it works. I'm looking forward to see other treatments.

I'd be willing to say if they could do something like this to early episodes of TNG, it would be worth it also. Some of those early mattes they did look horrible, even for 1987 technology.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Which "The Thing" are you talking about? The "original" would be the 1951 film called "The Thing from Another World" by Howard Hawks. John Carpenter did a remake (it was based on the same short story) called "The Thing" in 1982. I liked that one quite a lot, actually; I've never seen the 1951 version in its entirety. I was not aware of any 2001 remake, and I don't see one listed on IMDB. In fact, the Wikipedia entry for "Who Goes There" lists only these two adaptations.

On re-reading the post, I am now wondering if you are talking about two different movies (not an original and a remake of the original). In that case, are you talking about "2010: The Year We Make Contact" as compared to "The Thing"?

Sorry, I'm notr trying to be difficult, just trying to understand the point being made.



byte_me123 said:


> Take two movies as an example, one The Thing, the original, and 2001. There was very little or no SP effects in The Thing. Yet it held you spell bound. Plus good acting, on the other hand 2001 had tons of SP effects and very little of anything else that it put some people to sleep. So unless a proper balance is found it could be a disaster.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

wprager said:


> Which "The Thing" are you talking about? The "original" would be the 1951 film called "The Thing from Another World" by Howard Hawks. John Carpenter did a remake (it was based on the same short story) called "The Thing" in 1982. I liked that one quite a lot, actually; I've never seen the 1951 version in its entirety. I was not aware of any 2001 remake, and I don't see one listed on IMDB. In fact, the Wikipedia entry for "Who Goes There" lists only these two adaptations.
> 
> On re-reading the post, I am now wondering if you are talking about two different movies (not an original and a remake of the original). In that case, are you talking about "2010: The Year We Make Contact" as compared to "The Thing"?
> 
> Sorry, I'm notr trying to be difficult, just trying to understand the point being made.


WTF??? I'm talking about effects in movies, The thing from another world made in 1951, and 2001: a Space Odyssey. One with no effects, Thing, and the other full of effects, 2001, Thing good stoy full of suspense and action, 2001 pit you to sleep after a while. All the wizbang effects in the world mean nothing with out a story to go with it.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

timr_42 said:


> Well, I'm watching Balance of Terror. Funny our local station cut the opening credits. All that new CG work for the opening and they cut it. LOL


I think thats just because other then the sex up effects its still the same Star Trek they or others have shown for the 10000th time nothing new, not that it's bad or anything, just there is really nothing new.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

No need to use obcenities (even if only using the first letter). I was genuinely not sure what you meant. You mentioned one movie by name, using the term "original" then, for the second movie, you only mentioend a year (the full name is "2001: A Space Odyssey"). I don't think it was completely strange for me to assume you were talking about the origianl "The Thing" and a 2001 remake.

That said, although I'll agree that "2001: A Space Odyssey" is on the slow side, I was never put to sleep by it, and I never thought anyone would confuse this classic with an effects-laden, story-less movie.

"My God, it's full of stars!"



byte_me123 said:


> WTF??? I'm talking about effects in movies, The thing from another world made in 1951, and 2001: a Space Odyssey. One with no effects, Thing, and the other full of effects, 2001, Thing good stoy full of suspense and action, 2001 pit you to sleep after a while. All the wizbang effects in the world mean nothing with out a story to go with it.


----------



## timr_42 (Oct 14, 2001)

One question about "Miri" that always bugged me. I'm not putting spoilers tags on a 40 year old show 

What was the big deal when the children stole the communicators? They went days without contacting the ship. Who was running the ship, Scotty? You would have thought that the Enterprise would not stay out of contact that long. They knew where they were, they had beamed things to them. Could they not have just beamed in new communicators or send some type of device to find out what happened????


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

timr_42 said:


> What was the big deal when the children stole the communicators?


It was clearly stated that without the communciators, contact with the ship's computers was lost -- contact necessary to establish the veracity of the vaccine.

In "Balance of Terror" the shots of the Romulan ship were fantastic!

My partner, a life-long fine-scale modeler who specializes in Sci-Fi ships (especially of the Trek variety), gives the CGI Enterprise model a pretty good review. He of course had a long laundry list of things that weren't quite right, but on the whole he thought they did a really good job of trying to get it accurate.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

bootedbear said:


> My partner, a life-long fine-scale modeler who specializes in Sci-Fi ships (especially of the Trek variety), gives the CGI Enterprise model a pretty good review. He of course had a long laundry list of things that weren't quite right, but on the whole he thought they did a really good job of trying to get it accurate.


What did they do about the fact that some details of the ship varied over time? I'm thinking in particular of the back end of the nacelles.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

Here's what he said (paraphrased by me, so I hope I'm getting it right):

They are using the production version of the Enterprise -- the one created after the first two pilots. He suspects that when they go back to the early pilots, that they will use CGI models that are appropriate to those episodes.

With specific regards to the backs of the nacelles, there were three versions:

The Cage: flat rear caps with rectangular plating
Where No Man Has Gone Before: flat rear caps with holes
Production: spheres

As you probably know, in many of the episodes they mixed and matched shots. For example in the Doomsday Machine there are shots of the pilot model as well as the production model. He suspects that they will use the same model consistently as approriate to the time-frame of the episodes.

He had tons more to say, but I cut him off at that point...


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

bootedbear said:


> Here's what he said (paraphrased by me, so I hope I'm getting it right):
> 
> They are using the production version of the Enterprise -- the one created after the first two pilots. He suspects that when they go back to the early pilots, that they will use CGI models that are appropriate to those episodes.
> 
> ...


It was also because of money they had to use older shots. Plus it took quite a while to film, develop not one but four masks of the ship plus what ever it was moving against. The only new shot that I can thingk of is the one taken in the first season was the Enterprise and the Botany Bay. That is why NBC had reversions about the show in the beginning. Could they deliver a show on time week after week with all those effects.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

I just saw the remastered "Balance of Terror" last night. The colors were really vibrant -- maybe too vibrant, in some cases. I'd always known that Spock was supposed to be slightly green, but last night is the first time I _saw_ it. Other than that, it was pretty subtle (which is good). I was surprised at what they _didn't_ clean up: some bouncing (noticeable when they're viewing the map) and brightness variation. I realize it's incredibly tedious to fix that, but I thought that was the kind of work they were doing. Also, it wasn't quite as sharp as I expected.

The comet was beautiful. The effects used for the phasers looked more like what I usually associate with photon torpedos, but I don't remember how they were originally done in this episode.


----------



## timr_42 (Oct 14, 2001)

bootedbear said:


> It was clearly stated that without the communciators, contact with the ship's computers was lost -- contact necessary to establish the veracity of the vaccine.


I know, but, think about this, you are in command, your Captain, First Officer, Ships doctor and a red shirt or two are on the planet. You have lost communication for a couple of days, do you not try and do something????

I know that Kirk and company needed the communicators, but if they didn't find them and died, would the ship just set in orbit forever?


----------



## Charon2 (Nov 1, 2001)

wmcbrine said:


> The effects used for the phasers looked more like what I usually associate with photon torpedos, but I don't remember how they were originally done in this episode.


From a Q&A at StarTrek.com :


> In "Balance of Terror," Kirk orders the ship to fire phasers, but we see photon torpedoes. Are you going to fix this?
> You know, this is the first thing that we wanted to do when we started working on this episode. But then we started studying the episode more closely and discovered a number of things. First, Kirk orders "proximity phasers" to be used. This is the only time in the entire series where he does so. Second, the phasers behave differently than normal. They fire into space, then explode like depth charges. This is clearly the intention of the writer and director [Paul Schneider and Vincent McEveety respectively], since the episode is based on submarine movie metaphors.
> 
> Finally, the sound effects clearly dictate the timing of the weapon firing, and we very early decided that we did not want to mess with the soundtrack. As a result, we thought the best approach was to use a different phaser effect than is seen in the rest of the series. The new proximity phasers will have longer bolts than they did in the original "Balance of Terror," but they will still be tied to the original sound effects.


Balance of Terror was the only one I saw listed for our market area, and I haven't watched all of it yet, but for the most part I am pleased. They didn't Lucas it much at all. Outside of more detail on the planets, I thought most of the other work was fairly subtle. The ships still look like models, and move like models, perhaps a bit smoother, but no complicated moves that would stand out as them using CGI.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

wmcbrine said:


> I just saw the remastered "Balance of Terror" last night. The colors were really vibrant -- maybe too vibrant, in some cases. I'd always known that Spock was supposed to be slightly green, but last night is the first time I _saw_ it. Other than that, it was pretty subtle (which is good). I was surprised at what they _didn't_ clean up: some bouncing (noticeable when they're viewing the map) and brightness variation. I realize it's incredibly tedious to fix that, but I thought that was the kind of work they were doing. Also, it wasn't quite as sharp as I expected.
> 
> The comet was beautiful. The effects used for the phasers looked more like what I usually associate with photon torpedos, but I don't remember how they were originally done in this episode.


[Geek mode]
When Balance of Terror was written and filmed, Photon Torpedoes had not been conceived yet.
We first saw Photon Torpedoes in Arena which was filmed after Balance of Terror.
[/Geek Mode]



timr_42 said:


> I know, but, think about this, you are in command, your Captain, First Officer, Ships doctor and a red shirt or two are on the planet. You have lost communication for a couple of days, do you not try and do something????
> 
> I know that Kirk and company needed the communicators, but if they didn't find them and died, would the ship just set in orbit forever?


Well what else could the ship do?
Beam someone down who would promptly get infected?

(It's not like a spaceship would have spacesuits  )


----------



## Charon2 (Nov 1, 2001)

Slightly off topic:
Seeing how beaming technology seems to work, why did the the red suit guy or anyone else for that matter need to die? Especially by TNG where it advanced to the point it could supposedly quarantine anything off a person that wasn't supposed to be there.
My understanding of how it works is that it stores the information about you in a buffer as it "scans" you and takes you apart. It then uses this information to reassemble you at the other location. Now to know if person is coming back with a virus or something, the buffer most hold information about your last state at least until you return. So why not just beam the dead body back, but restore them to the state before they beamed away? They would loose any new memories they had from the time they beamed away, but they would still be alive. Heck, one could really abuse it and use it as a simple regeneration system for eons. This was the basis of a Star Trek story I kicked around in my head for years, but couldn't decide if I should base it early on in the Universe, showing adverse affects and that is why they didn't don't do it on the show, or after Voyager in my Final Generation Universe where they finally get bold enough to try it, or even in one of the shows/book series. Could you imagine if you could remember your death each time they resurrected you? BSG touched on it a bit with the Scar storyline...

Anyhow, I return you to your regular topic.


----------



## iDriveX (Jun 3, 2003)

Let me start out this post this way:

Hi, I'm 25.

This is the first time I have ever seen a Star Trek: The Original Series episode.

When I was younger and first taking an interest in Trek was right around Best of Both Worlds, Pt. 1 + 2 and then I was hooked. Sure there were some stations showing reruns of TOS, but I had Next Gen what did I need these old shows for. Then Voyager and DS9 came on almost immediately after TNG, still didn't need TOS. Enterprise came and went and finally I had the maturity to say "Ya know what? Let's take a look at these old TOS episodes". Then I heard about the remastering and thought it would be a perfect time to take a peak.

I just watched Balance of Terror....Dude Sarek's a Romulan! Just kidding. But it was interesting to see that actor play the Romulan Commander when he plays Spock's father every episode after that. Much like a lot of actors have played a lot of different Trek roles. The whole premise behind the Romulans and the history of the war, etc. make a lot more sense.

I can also see why true Trek continuity people got all P.O.'d when Enterprise encountered a Romulan vessel. In this episode they CLEARLY say that when the Romulan/Earth war occured, there were no ways of visual communication with each other, they were using nuclear weapons on each other and the treaty was carried out over a subspace channel.

In Enterprise, the Romulans are mentioned twice. Once when Captain Archer is in that futuristic library and is all like "What is the Rom-a-lan Star Empire" and the second time when the ship decloaks along side the Enterprise. Knowing that Archer had no clue who the Romulans were, this completely clearly breaks with continuity and it's a shame they went and did that. Enterprise had so much potential to lead up to so many conflicts and answer so many questions, they just went about it completely wrong. Shame.


----------



## MScottC (Sep 11, 2004)

Okay... So I have to say I'm Totally Pissed at WNBC TV in NYC... When I woke up this morning to watch ST:TOS-Redux on TiVo, all I caught was the last act. Apparently they broadcast it 50 minutes or so earlier than scheduled. What kind of BS is that?? I must say, I liked what I saw, but NOT enough to come up with a valid opinion.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

timr_42 said:


> I know, but, think about this, you are in command, your Captain, First Officer, Ships doctor and a red shirt or two are on the planet.  You have lost communication for a couple of days, do you not try and do something????
> 
> I know that Kirk and company needed the communicators, but if they didn't find them and died, would the ship just set in orbit forever?


Well lets see,

1 go to the radio station that first brought you there in the firsat place, and contact the ship by Morse code, if you know it.

2 on the ship side beam down a person in a space suit to find them.

3 do all of the above and there goes the story.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

iDriveX said:


> Let me start out this post this way:
> 
> Hi, I'm 25.
> 
> ...


True they had no direct face to face visual communication. But that did not mean they did see that the ships were painted like a Giant Bird of Pry.


----------



## PeternJim (Sep 25, 2004)

Charon2 said:


> So why not just beam the dead body back, but restore them to the state before they beamed away? They would loose any new memories they had from the time they beamed away, but they would still be alive.


As a franchise, they bit their tail on this one so often that it would be really hard to come up with an answer. The whole "take things apart and reassemble them" idea is SO far out from the rest of their technology that there are constant problems with it. They should have gone with a different explanation -- something regarding warping space, rather than the whole "our computers are slick enough to know where every atom was and put it back" thing.

There is something different between transporting and replicating, so you are left with the conclusion that something like the soul has to be involved, and whent that's gone, you're out of luck. That would even fit when the transporter accident split Kirk and the pekinese into two bodies each -- half a soul just doesn't cut it. But then TNG goes and duplicates Riker. But regardless, the best they've ever done with the transporter only works on people who are still alive.

Don't ask me. I'm still wondering why you can't take holodeck matter outside the holodeck or it evaporates, but you can eat holodeck food. What happens to the food you ate while you were there?

Umm... ick. Or else a VERY high-tech form of bulemia.


----------



## iDriveX (Jun 3, 2003)

byte_me123 said:


> True they had no direct face to face visual communication. But that did not mean they did see that the ships were painted like a Giant Bird of Pry.


Right but here's the thing....Nuclear Weapons were not on board the Enterprise. The enterprise was not a long tube/submarine like vehicle. The war had not happened yet. So for continuity to actually happen. We need to believe that the Romulans struck earth first and destroyed the Enterprise, Columbia and any other high-tech star ships, and then Earth built a bunch of submarine-like warships with no face-face communication, that were capable of Warp Drive. A battle ensued and then for whatever reason the treaty was "signed" via subspace message and then 100 years went by and no one ever saw a Romulan or an Earthling until this episode.

"What's a Rom-a-lan star empire?"


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

PeternJim said:


> As a franchise, they bit their tail on this one so often that it would be really hard to come up with an answer. The whole "take things apart and reassemble them" idea is SO far out from the rest of their technology that there are constant problems with it. They should have gone with a different explanation -- something regarding warping space, rather than the whole "our computers are slick enough to know where every atom was and put it back" thing.
> 
> There is something different between transporting and replicating, so you are left with the conclusion that something like the soul has to be involved, and whent that's gone, you're out of luck. That would even fit when the transporter accident split Kirk and the pekinese into two bodies each -- half a soul just doesn't cut it. But then TNG goes and duplicates Riker. But regardless, the best they've ever done with the transporter only works on people who are still alive.
> 
> ...


I know the books aren't canon, but I remember reading in at least one novel that early transporters actually killed the original and created a duplicate. I also imagine that this bit on non canon history was the basis for Bone's dislike of the transporter.


----------



## Kevin L (Jan 10, 2002)

MScottC said:


> Okay... So I have to say I'm Totally Pissed at WNBC TV in NYC... When I woke up this morning to watch ST:TOS-Redux on TiVo, all I caught was the last act. Apparently they broadcast it 50 minutes or so earlier than scheduled. What kind of BS is that?? I must say, I liked what I saw, but NOT enough to come up with a valid opinion.


Noticed that this morning, too. Damn. Guess I'll have to get the torrent.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

PeternJim said:


> Don't ask me. I'm still wondering why you can't take holodeck matter outside the holodeck or it evaporates, but you can eat holodeck food. What happens to the food you ate while you were there?
> 
> Umm... ick. Or else a VERY high-tech form of bulemia.


My understanding is that the holodeck is tied to the replicator. That is, (at least some of) the stuff that they interact with inside the holodeck is real, not a hologram, created (and destroyed) by the replicators as necessary. So, the food they eat in the holodeck is real food, or at least just as real as the food they eat in 10-forward.

However, I have to say I didn't watch every episode of TNG and I've never read any of the books, etc. I could well be wrong!


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

I got Balance of Terror in LA. I hadn't watched much of TOS in a long time, but years ago I could name the episode in three seconds or less. That was a long long time ago. I had forgotten that there were some really good episodes among the high camp ones. This one definitely was an example of quality. As for the restoration, I was really impressed. The opening credits looked amazing. I noticed they used unrestored shots for the closing credits, which I found interesting. Watching the episode on a 50" screen (unstretched) it was pretty clear how shoddy the construction of the uniforms was. Kirk had a hole on his left shoulder. On 1960's TVs, nobody would have noticed that. Of course it has no bearing on the story, so who cares? It was just interesting to notice such a thing. Also, I think they did a pretty good job of cutting the episode for syndication. Sometimes you really feel like you've missed something, but this was pretty clean. Hopefully all the episodes will be edited so well.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> Hopefully all the episodes will be edited so well.


And hopefully, when they come out on DVD they will be uncut.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

PeternJim said:


> As a franchise, they bit their tail on this one so often that it would be really hard to come up with an answer. The whole "take things apart and reassemble them" idea is SO far out from the rest of their technology that there are constant problems with it. They should have gone with a different explanation -- something regarding warping space, rather than the whole "our computers are slick enough to know where every atom was and put it back" thing.
> 
> There is something different between transporting and replicating, so you are left with the conclusion that something like the soul has to be involved, and whent that's gone, you're out of luck. That would even fit when the transporter accident split Kirk and the pekinese into two bodies each -- half a soul just doesn't cut it. But then TNG goes and duplicates Riker. But regardless, the best they've ever done with the transporter only works on people who are still alive.
> 
> ...


Of course the real reason for the transporter was, cheaper to go from ship to planet. Cost to much in time and money to have a shuttle go from ship to planet and visa versa.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

bootedbear said:


> And hopefully, when they come out on DVD they will be uncut.


No "hopefully" needed. They've already said they're restoring the entire episodes for the DVD release. :up:


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

I'm sure this has been said before. I can't believe that Paramount has handled this this way. By giving it to the networks and airing it at 12:00 am there are not going to be a lot of people who see it. Not only that, the channel that is carrying it hear is the one and only channel with constantly bad reception even through our cable company. While I can get an HD signal from them that looks great since TIVO doesn't record HD I guess I 'm not likely to catch many of the shows. 

If they had syndicated normally, they might not have had the station coverage, but it would have air a reasonable time.


----------



## sonnik (Jul 7, 2000)

kmccbf said:


> I can't believe that Paramount has handled this this way. By giving it to the networks and airing it at 12:00 am there are not going to be a lot of people who see it.
> 
> ...
> 
> While I can get an HD signal from them that looks great since TIVO doesn't record HD I guess I 'm not likely to catch many of the shows.


The time scheduling Paramount, it's your local station. I think you'll find that depending on locale, the episodes may have appeared at a reasonable time.

Also, last I read, the episodes aren't being distributed in High Def. There's a lot of finger pointing going on on that issue also.


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

sonnik said:


> The time scheduling Paramount, it's your local station. I think you'll find that depending on locale, the episodes may have appeared at a reasonable time.
> 
> Also, last I read, the episodes aren't being distributed in High Def. There's a lot of finger pointing going on on that issue also.


From what I've read above there are an awful of stations running it late at night then.

Too bad about the high Def. The channel here is running all their programing on their high def feed and the picture is much clearer even when it isn't high def. than the feed that the our cable provides for SD. And I haven't broken down and asked for the HD card so the the box can switch to the HD channels. Since I bought set with a tuner in it, I get the ones they provide for free.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> No "hopefully" needed. They've already said they're restoring the entire episodes for the DVD release. :up:


w00t!


----------



## sonnik (Jul 7, 2000)

kmccbf said:


> From what I've read above there are an awful of stations running it late at night then.


In Phoenix, we get two unique episodes a week. Saturday at 9pm local time, and Sunday at 3pm local time.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

PJO1966 said:


> I got Balance of Terror in LA. I hadn't watched much of TOS in a long time, but years ago I could name the episode in three seconds or less. That was a long long time ago. I had forgotten that there were some really good episodes among the high camp ones. This one definitely was an example of quality. As for the restoration, I was really impressed. The opening credits looked amazing. I noticed they used unrestored shots for the closing credits, which I found interesting. Watching the episode on a 50" screen (unstretched) it was pretty clear how shoddy the construction of the uniforms was. Kirk had a hole on his left shoulder. On 1960's TVs, nobody would have noticed that. Of course it has no bearing on the story, so who cares? It was just interesting to notice such a thing. Also, I think they did a pretty good job of cutting the episode for syndication. Sometimes you really feel like you've missed something, but this was pretty clean. Hopefully all the episodes will be edited so well.


The hole was where the pull tap for the zipper of his shirt was hidden.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

sonnik said:


> In Phoenix, we get two unique episodes a week. Saturday at 9pm local time, and Sunday at 3pm local time.


You will find that was for the first week only.

To kick the revamped series off, Paramount released "Balance of Terror" and "Miri" simultaneously.

Most stations chose to show them back to back. But, apparently, a few (like Phoenix) chose to show them on subsequent days.

From now on, Paramount will only be releasing one per week.


----------



## dtivouser (Feb 10, 2004)

iDriveX said:


> Dude Sarek's a Romulan! Just kidding. But it was interesting to see that actor play the Romulan Commander when he plays Spock's father every episode after that.


Mark Lenard also played a klingon once ... bonus points if you know which show...


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

dtivouser said:


> Mark Lenard also played a klingon once ... bonus points if you know which show...


He played a klingon in Star Trek the Motion Picture.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> As for the restoration, I was really impressed. The opening credits looked amazing. I noticed they used unrestored shots for the closing credits, which I found interesting. Watching the episode on a 50" screen (unstretched) it was pretty clear how shoddy the construction of the uniforms was. Kirk had a hole on his left shoulder. On 1960's TVs, nobody would have noticed that. Of course it has no bearing on the story, so who cares? It was just interesting to notice such a thing. Also, I think they did a pretty good job of cutting the episode for syndication. Sometimes you really feel like you've missed something, but this was pretty clean. Hopefully all the episodes will be edited so well.


    
(Does spit take)

Did we watch the same show?

I watched it this morning and my reaction was "Not Impressed".
(I'm probably going to take some flack for the following.)

While some of the new angles were interesting and I liked the fact that they added a little bit of roll to the Enterprise's "changing course away from the camera" shot and they added some list to the "Enterprise disabled" shot, I still found the CGI models lacking.
The original 11 foot model had more detail than these.
And they really don't seem to be getting the nacelle ends right.
The Big E's caps kept bothering me as did the rear ends of the Romulan's nacelles.
And the lighting of the Enterprise seemed off as well in several shots.

And the cloaking effect, blah!
What was with this misty cloud that just winked out?

I will grant that the comet looked much better though.

With the ballyhoo of the updated effects, you'd think that they do better work than my 4 year old nephew would do.
Unfortunately, this appears to be a typical half assed Paramount effort.

Maybe I've been spoiled but I thought that In a Mirror Darkly showed that this could be done well.

Something more along the lines of this:










(More here.)
As for the syndication cuts, they were annoying.
They cut half of the Kirk "Why Me?" scene as well as the only scene that showed any of Tomlinson and Martine's character motivation.

(Not to mention cutting the effect of the Romulan ship listing on the viewscreen after the Enterprise has disabled.)

Not impressed so far.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Well, since I haven't seen them here yet, I can only go on what I read in advance... but I thought they said that they were reproducing, shot for shot, the original model work in higher quality CGI. They even said that they were reducing the quality of the reproduction to more accurately match the original.

Now - you're saying that they didn't so much do this? Are you sure? Have you compared the original to the new version?

As far as the shot you included in your post - the above is the reason they didn't do this, because they didn't want to pull a Lucas and add a whole bunch of CGI shots that weren't in the original.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

The colors were definitely Technicolor punchy, bright and clear. The Enterprise CGI was underwhelming though. They may have taken all the measurments from the model in the Smithsonian, but the images were pretty flat and plain. It looked more like a college freshman in art school doing the model. I wouldn't want them to add lots of stuff stuck all over the hull just to cast shadows, but a little texture would have been nice. 

I saw the clips on StarTrek.com an the clean up does look good. I was surprised they re-recorded the theme music and the soloist. Curiously, I didn't see any credits referring the restoration, at least on the SF area channel 50 showings.


----------



## Bondelev-1 (Nov 27, 2005)

Read my comments about the updates on my blog at the link below.


----------



## kenr (Dec 26, 1999)

Bondelev said:


> Read my comments about the updates on my blog at the link below.


There was no link "below"


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

kenr said:


> There was no link "below"


I presume he means in his signature. You might have signatures turned off.


----------



## kenr (Dec 26, 1999)

LoadStar said:


> I presume he means in his signature. You might have signatures turned off.


Yup. I had signatures turned off. I turned them back on and quickly saw why I had them off. I got tired of seeing everyone's add and lists of how many TiVos they own.


----------



## kenr (Dec 26, 1999)

I tried emailing WNBC in New York to let them know I was disappointed in their scheduling change. Their web page lists an email address of [email protected] as the contact address.

Too bad email to that address bounces. Does anyone have a contact email address at WNBC?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> Well, since I haven't seen them here yet, I can only go on what I read in advance... but I thought they said that they were reproducing, shot for shot, the original model work in higher quality CGI. They even said that they were reducing the quality of the reproduction to more accurately match the original.
> 
> Now - you're saying that they didn't so much do this? Are you sure? Have you compared the original to the new version?
> 
> As far as the shot you included in your post - the above is the reason they didn't do this, because they didn't want to pull a Lucas and add a whole bunch of CGI shots that weren't in the original.


I'm sure.
For some shots they did an actual reproduction of the stock shots of the Enterprise but they replaced other ones with different angles or movement that were the same time length.

As for the example picture I included, I picked that one because it's a CGI redo on an existing stock shot that EdexFX did.











Bondelev said:


> Read my comments about the updates on my blog at the link below.


Interesting that you mention Daren Dochterman (VFX Supervisor on ST:TMP Director's Edition).

Here's his thoughts on the subject.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

I watched "Balance of Terror" this morning and enjoyed it very much. It helps that this episode is one of my top-five. 

The redone effects were really good, IMO. I was concerned ahead of time that they would be very distracting, but they fit in very nicely. 

I'm very excited to see more.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Not impressed so far.


Me either! Indeed, after all of the hype, I was *hoping* for something more along the lines of a "Lucas Redux."

The shots of the Enterprise Flybys....I kept thinking "Bran Ferren." Something about the way the ship strobes slightly...looks like bad motion control (although, yes, I know, it's not).

"Star Trek: Enhanced" is much more impressive.

But, like those involved said, they were just tweaking what was already there, not really changing it.

They've succeeded.

I've yawned.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

Bondelev said:


> Read my comments about the updates on my blog at the link below.


Come listen to my comments by the coffee pot tomorrow at 9:30


----------



## Bondelev-1 (Nov 27, 2005)

LoadStar said:


> I presume he means in his signature. You might have signatures turned off.


Stop talking about me like I'm not here!

I'M RIGHT HERE!


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Well, I've now had a chance to watch the two episodes.

Previously, my complete collection of "Star Trek: TOS" consisted of VHS tapes that I had faithfully made from a special series that the Sci-Fi channel ran about 7 - 8 years ago in which they aired each episode in a 90 minute time slot. They were 100% uncut and interspersed with interviews with cast and crew.

That collection of tapes was lost to Hurricane Katrina. I've never purchased the DVD collection, and now, I may be glad I didn't. In fact, I may be tempted to wait for the HD versions.

I also used to own 6 episodes on Laser Disk (disks and player lost to Katrina).

The color saturation and contrast was clearly superior to that even of the laser disks. Spock's greenish makeup was clearly apparent for the first time in the history of the series. Actually, the color definition was so good that it was rather too apparent that _all the actors_ were wearing theatrical makeup! Clearly, television makeup budgets and techniques have improved since then! I just wish they had made it available in HD _now!_ WVUE, the station showing it in New Orleans, has the capability to originate syndicated programming in HD (feeding it from the Emmis Centralcasting Center in Orlando FL).

In fact, I thought the most impressive improvements were in the non-CGI stuff. This was clearly the most detailed and high-quality transfer to date from the original 35 mm films.

I thought Enterprise and the Romulan ship looked fantastic too. In "Miri", the shots of the "earth" looked great even though, IMHO they still had an unrealistically low number of clouds in the atmosphere. However, this was a creative choice, no doubt, so that the continental shapes were obvious to the viewer. At least it had SOME clouds (my recollection is that the original had none).

I disagree with those who wanted something "more". A Lucasization of Star Trek would have pissed me off!

The idea of this re-mastering is not to re-imagine the show, it is to clean up this 40 year old TV show for the HDTV era. The flat mono sound would have sounded like you were listening through a telephone on a modern surround system, and the flaws in the space shots would have been jarring in HDTV. This is simply an effort to fix those problems, and as such, it's a big success, IMHO.

This is a worthy effort, and I may be rewarded for never having bought the series on DVD. I might get this one when it comes out, or wait for the HD-DVD or BlueRay versions.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Bondelev said:


> Stop talking about me like I'm not here!
> 
> I'M RIGHT HERE!


Boy, he gets annoyed quickly, doesn't he?


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

atrac said:


> I was *hoping* for something more along the lines of a "Lucas Redux."


No disrespect, but thank goodness you were disappointed.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

atrac said:


> Me either! Indeed, after all of the hype, I was *hoping* for something more along the lines of a "Lucas Redux."
> 
> The shots of the Enterprise Flybys....I kept thinking "Bran Ferren." Something about the way the ship strobes slightly...looks like bad motion control (although, yes, I know, it's not).
> 
> ...


Would you also like to give the Mona Lisa a new hairstyle?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

atrac said:


> The shots of the Enterprise Flybys....I kept thinking "Bran Ferren." Something about the way the ship strobes slightly...looks like bad motion control (although, yes, I know, it's not).


That is an artifact of the time compression used on these time-compressed versions for syndication. Time compression is applied to the final video after the remastering.

On the uncut versions (as would be released on DVD, for example) this effect will not be present.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Fish Man said:


> .
> 
> I thought Enterprise and the Romulan ship looked fantastic too. In "Miri", the shots of the "earth" looked great even though, IMHO they still had an unrealistically low number of clouds in the atmosphere. However, this was a creative choice, no doubt, so that the continental shapes were obvious to the viewer. At least it had SOME clouds (my recollection is that the original had none).
> 
> I disagree with those who wanted something "more". A Lucasization of Star Trek would have pissed me off!


Except I'm one of the people who has always been against a "Lucasization of Star Trek" (and I'm not to thrilled with what he's been doing to his films either) and the CGI models weren't even up to the original's detail level.
Plus the lighting was off.
And the nacelle animation was crap. It looked like cartoon animation.
In A Mirror Darkly got it right with their Constitution Model.
Why can't we see that here?

(And the stars were all white as well. TOS would throw in the occasional red or blue one.)

I agree that the live action transfer looked very good though but with all the fuss that the CBS/Paramount marketing has been making over the new effects, I think we should have gotten better than Babylon 5 Season 1 CGI.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

I watched "Balance of Terror" and I was pretty entertained. The effects were very subtle, which is good, but I agree it didn't really look up to the caliber of DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise.

If it was HD I think I might watch all of them, which I haven't done since I was a kid. I hope they air it in HD in the future.

Spock really did look green, huh?


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Figaro said:


> Would you also like to give the Mona Lisa a new hairstyle?


Nope. I wouldn't add a third nacelle to the TOS Enterprise either. But like JYoung is saying, the effects didn't look that good.

I was expecting the quality of "Star Trek: Enhanced." That's all.  I wasn't expecting added or altered sequences that changed the intent of the original production. So my "Lucas-Redux" comment was a poor description on my part.


----------



## FreakyD (Oct 15, 2004)

atrac said:


> I wasn't expecting added or altered sequences that changed the intent of the original production. So my "Lucas-Redux" comment was a poor description on my part.


Hmmm, indeed. I can just imagine watching next week's episode and seeing Jar Jar Binks pop out of a turbolift.

"Yousa say da red shirt's gonna die??"

<ducks to avoid the inevitable Photoshopped stills>


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

atrac said:


> Nope. I wouldn't add a third nacelle to the TOS Enterprise either. But like JYoung is saying, the effects didn't look that good.
> 
> I was expecting the quality of "Star Trek: Enhanced." That's all.  I wasn't expecting added or altered sequences that changed the intent of the original production. So my "Lucas-Redux" comment was a poor description on my part.


Oh Ok, cool. Nerd rage subsiding now.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

I don't see "Miri" in the guide data for Los Angeles. Did I miss it?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Nope, hasn't shown in LA yet.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Not in Boston, either, unless it somehow wasn't caught by my SP. Bummer


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> I don't see "Miri" in the guide data for Los Angeles. Did I miss it?


Yikes, I hope we haven't been stiffed! Geez, and here in Los Angeles too. We should all go down to Melrose and protest!


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

JYoung said:


> Except I'm one of the people who has always been against a "Lucasization of Star Trek" (and I'm not to thrilled with what he's been doing to his films either) and the CGI models weren't even up to the original's detail level.
> Plus the lighting was off.
> And the nacelle animation was crap. It looked like cartoon animation.
> In A Mirror Darkly got it right with their Constitution Model.
> ...


Is it me, or did they chop up Balance even more that usual? At this rate in another 40 years, its airtime will be 1 min.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

madscientist said:


> Not in Boston, either, unless it somehow wasn't caught by my SP. Bummer


In MA Miri was shown before Balance of Terror. At least in my part of MA.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Figaro said:


> In MA Miri was shown before Balance of Terror. At least in my part of MA.


Hm. If so it wasn't in the guide; I was going through the guide an hour at a time and BoT was the first showing listed (I'm watching on Boston stations).


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

atrac said:


> I was expecting the quality of "Star Trek: Enhanced." That's all.


Are we looking at the same "Star Trek: Enhanced"? Because to me, ST:E didn't look that good.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

madscientist said:


> Hm. If so it wasn't in the guide; I was going through the guide an hour at a time and BoT was the first showing listed (I'm watching on Boston stations).


I can't remember which channel it was on for me. I do get some CT channels as I am closer to Springfield than I am Boston. For me the two episodes were back to back but the guide data was flip flopped for them.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

byte_me123 said:


> Is it me, or did they chop up Balance even more that usual? At this rate in another 40 years, its airtime will be 1 min.


It's not you.

I'm kind of excited about "Star Trek: Remasterd" because it will eventually lead to good sounding HD-DVD/BlueRay releases with a great picture, that will not chopped up.

A big :down: to the edited versions, however!


----------



## trausch (Jan 8, 2004)

What channel is this on and when? I can't find it in my guide data.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

trausch said:


> What channel is this on and when? I can't find it in my guide data.


It's syndicated. There's a list somewhere earlier in this thread of where and when this is on in various markets, but in general, if you have a station that used to play "Enterprise" in strip syndication, it now plays this instead.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

I didn't see any of the eppys yet. I'm going to spend some quality time with Tivo this weekend and update my season passes and schedule so I can record some of them.



Charon2 said:


> Slightly off topic:
> Seeing how beaming technology seems to work, why did the the red suit guy or anyone else for that matter need to die? Especially by TNG where it advanced to the point it could supposedly quarantine anything off a person that wasn't supposed to be there.


He was wearing a red shirt, so he had to die. Even though they had advanced technology, the vaccine to prevent Red Shirt Death disease was in high demand and only used on important people like Scottie or his close assistants.


> My understanding of how it works is that it stores the information about you in a buffer as it "scans" you and takes you apart. It then uses this information to reassemble you at the other location. Now to know if person is coming back with a virus or something, the buffer most hold information about your last state at least until you return. So why not just beam the dead body back, but restore them to the state before they beamed away? They would loose any new memories they had from the time they beamed away, but they would still be alive. Heck, one could really abuse it and use it as a simple regeneration system for eons. This was the basis of a Star Trek story I kicked around in my head for years, but couldn't decide if I should base it early on in the Universe, showing adverse affects and that is why they didn't don't do it on the show, or after Voyager in my Final Generation Universe where they finally get bold enough to try it, or even in one of the shows/book series. Could you imagine if you could remember your death each time they resurrected you? BSG touched on it a bit with the Scar storyline...
> 
> Anyhow, I return you to your regular topic.


My understanding is that you're not "digitized". The process is very analog. In TNG, when they found Scottie after all those years in a transporter loop, it was because he set up the transporter signal in some kind of loop, suggesting it was an analog signal. Degradation over time prevented them from saving his assistant who was also in the loop. The lack of a Red Shirt vaccine prevented his assitant from surviving the signal degradation.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Stumbled across these comparisons earlier today.

I stand by my statements that the CGI Enterprise didn't look better. It looks cartoony while the original shots while grainier, still look more realistic.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Stumbled across these comparisons earlier today.
> 
> I stand by my statements that the CGI Enterprise didn't look better. It looks cartoony while the original shots while grainier, still look more realistic.


pictures no worky for me.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

JYoung said:


> Stumbled across these comparisons earlier today.
> 
> I stand by my statements that the CGI Enterprise didn't look better. It looks cartoony while the original shots while grainier, still look more realistic.


Of course the originals were of a real model so I guess it would look realistic.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> It's syndicated. There's a list somewhere earlier in this thread of where and when this is on in various markets, but in general, if you have a station that used to play "Enterprise" in strip syndication, it now plays this instead.


I presume there is something in the credits which would indicate the enhanced version (if nothing else, copyright notice changed to MIMLXVII, MMVI).


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

Nope. Still retains the current copyright notice at the end of 1978, Paramount (which runs after the DesiLu production logo).


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Figaro said:


> pictures no worky for me.


Try these links instead
http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14255balanceofterror231122335lotx5.jpg
http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14259balanceofterror268122390loko4.jpg
http://img46.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=14270_balanceofterror296_122_403lo.jpg


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Try these links instead
> http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14255balanceofterror231122335lotx5.jpg
> http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14259balanceofterror268122390loko4.jpg
> http://img46.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=14270_balanceofterror296_122_403lo.jpg


Call me crazy (I know you want to), but I prefer the new images.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Try these links instead
> http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14255balanceofterror231122335lotx5.jpg
> http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14259balanceofterror268122390loko4.jpg
> http://img46.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=14270_balanceofterror296_122_403lo.jpg


Thanks!

You are correct. Old school is better. Way more detail. A lot more windows and lights.
New school looks rubbery. It is missing some texturing and shading.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

Figaro said:


> Thanks!
> 
> You are correct. Old school is better. Way more detail. A lot more windows and lights.
> New school looks rubbery. It is missing some texturing and shading.


I definitely agree that the new versions would be improved by a couple extra passes using texture and shading.


----------



## Tracy RainH2o (Nov 18, 2005)

Well all this is news to me. I have been "off board" for a while.
Season Pass is now set.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

Figaro said:


> Thanks!
> 
> You are correct. Old school is better. Way more detail. A lot more windows and lights.
> New school looks rubbery. It is missing some texturing and shading.


One thing I have noticed is the lack of "Weathering" on the CGI Enterprise. The final version of the filming model had weathering added to it. The CGI also has the "New Car Lot" look to it.


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

I missed "Miri" locally, but I'm watching "Devil in the Dark" right now. I'm not liking the new f/x at all. The guy who was proposing the enhanced series early in this thread was so much more artful in his enhancements than CBS/Paramount has been.


----------



## Carfan (Aug 9, 2003)

madscientist said:


> Not in Boston, either, unless it somehow wasn't caught by my SP. Bummer


I cought them on Comcast on 805 and 809 - ABC affliates in Boston and Manchester, NH


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

Just watched The Naked Time. I had just seen this episode recently, so I noticed how they cut it differently from the last time it was cut for sindication. For one, they never showed the lab tech on camera,

Did anyone else think the planet was spinning too fast when they were still in a stable orbit? That just jumped out at me. One subtle effect they added was replacing the chronometer with a digital readout.

I really would love to see the HD DVD versions of these when they come out.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The old vs. new comparisons are here.

Likes: 

The new Psi 2000. TOS was a little weak on how planets looked. 
The station in the Ice Storm. Subtle but effective. 
The viewscreen orbit view. The old one always bothered me. 
The flames at the edge of the viewscreen when the ship is plunging into the atmosphere. 
The new chronometer. 

Dislikes 

The added beam for Scotty's phaser. They deliberately decided not to put that beam in originally. 
The CGI Enterprise. Still insufficiently detailed when compared to the original, lit wrong, and the nacelle animation is still crap.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

Yeah the CGI Enterprise looks like ass.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

JYoung said:


> The old vs. new comparisons are here.
> 
> Likes:
> 
> ...


I agree with everything except Scotty's phaser. The lack of a beam, even if it were intentional originally (I rather doubt it, actually, do you have a link?) _looked_ like an oversight. This is the _only_ time a phaser was ever depicted operating with absolutely no visible effect. If it was deliberate, it constitutes a continuity error IMHO. They did well to "fix" it.

A few additional comments:

The new chronometer was mandatory. The mechanical wheels with numbers painted on them and blatant mid-60's era toggle switches just had to get updated.

My favorite of the above was the flames at the edges of the viewscreen.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

As grotty as the old chronometer was, the new one was a terrible mistake, because of the label "SHIPBOARD". If the clock was supposed to be measuring _ship's internal time_, then it would run the same for people -- and they could never perceive that it was running backwards. (Now, don't ask me how the chronometer measures "external time", or what that would even mean. But that's the only way for it to run backwards, other than malfunction.)


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

wmcbrine said:


> As grotty as the old chronometer was, the new one was a terrible mistake, because of the label "SHIPBOARD". If the clock was supposed to be measuring _ship's internal time_, then it would run the same for people -- and they could never perceive that it was running backwards. (Now, don't ask me how the chronometer measures "external time", or what that would even mean. But that's the only way for it to run backwards, other than malfunction.)


In the original series at some point it was mentioned that time was broadcast from a subspace beacon. Of course that wouldn't explain the times they went back before the beacon was deployed, so perhaps it's based on a calculation in the distances and periods of certain pulsars.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

The Sinclair Broadcast Group in Columbus is showing Star Treks a week behind what their guid data says. Last week the guide said "City on the Edge of Forever" and they showed "The Nake Time". This week the guide had "I, Mudd" and they show CEF, arghh.

They seem to have cut the part where the bum vaporizes himself with McCoy's phaser.


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

Hey, I finally caught one of these and the improved versions look great!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

IndyJones1023 said:


> Hey, I finally caught one of these and the improved versions look great!


You're kidding, right?


----------



## fergiej (Oct 9, 2002)

Figaro said:


> Yeah the CGI Enterprise looks like ass.


But, who's ass, exactly? I've seen some pretty great looking ass...


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

JYoung said:


> You're kidding, right?


Compared to 40-year old effects? Nope. I like the improved colors and upgraded CG.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

IndyJones1023 said:


> Compared to 40-year old effects? Nope. I like the improved colors and upgraded CG.


Some of the effects are improvements but the problem is that the CGI Enterprise looks inferior to the original model (with the possible exception of the one beauty pass at the end of Devil in the Dark)
And that's a big problem since the Enterprise is the centerpiece of the show.
If you don't sell that, you have a much harder time selling the rest of the effects.

I suggest that you read Daren Dochterman's comments on the CGI Enterprise.
As well as taking a look at this CGI Enterprise that he knocked out on his G4. (Quicktime required)
Superior to the CBS version, I think.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

IndyJones1023 said:


> Compared to 40-year old effects? Nope. I like the improved colors and upgraded CG.


I'm with you, Indy.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

JYoung said:


> Some of the effects are improvements but the problem is that the CGI Enterprise looks inferior to the original model (with the possible exception of the one beauty pass at the end of Devil in the Dark)
> And that's a big problem since the Enterprise is the centerpiece of the show.
> If you don't sell that, you have a much harder time selling the rest of the effects.
> 
> ...


Wow. I disagree with him on almost every point he makes, because most of the points revolve around "that's what it looked like in the original footage."

For instance, he complains about the color of the Enterprise not being blueish... he recognizes that the blue was not inherent to the ship model, but the bluescreen effect that they used and couldn't correct for. Even though he knows that the blue is not natural, and not what was intended, he still wants it, because it's "the way it was."

He complains about the stars, preferring the comic-book orange, blue, yellow, etc bright blotchy stars of the original to the new, more accurate representation of a starfield as seen from space.

He complains about the way the Bussard Collectors (ramscoops) are lit, even though the lighting he prefers would make it look more "model-like" and less "full-scale" like. He wants little lamps in the front of the nacelles, even though they're not SUPPOSED to be lamps. They're supposed to be some futuristic hardware designed to collect interstellar matter.

Frankly, the only thing I can say to people like this is: if you want it looking like the original, watch the original.


----------



## Tersanyus (Jun 27, 2004)

I don't know what some of you are watching but I think this remastered looks great. The new Enterprise compared to the old at

http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14255balanceofterror231122335lotx5.jpg

The old Enterprise is kinda blue/green. The new Enterprise needs a little bit more detail. You can make out the lighting in the windows of the old ship. A little hard to see in the new CGI Enterprise. I also think it could be darkened a little bit too. I always thought there were way too many starts present on screen during the original scenes.

I think the best evidence of the new CGI looking better is when you'll see the old footage that was reused too many times that looks like a film that's way too dirty. There were specks of dirt, dust and such on the film.

Most of what was on the viewscreen needed to be redone. Most planet shots from the old version did look rather dull. The planet from Naked Time was pretty bad.

If you prefer the originals the way they were then don't watch the remastered ones. Now if we could just get the remastered is full 16x9 HD that would rock!

What's really gonna get me in like 10-20 years when everyone has a 16x9 TV and all these old shows air they'll see how bad some of them look. Of course, all my friends with HD sets stretch out SD to widescreen. One of them even commented how fat and short everyone looked.

I for one look forward to watching TOS Remastered. They aren't changing the story line or anything. Most all I have seen is a redo of the shots as they originally were. Some are redone though. I mean do you really want to see that crappy model of the Constellation fly into the doomsday machine? We all know that was store bought kit that was mangled with a soldering iron.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> Wow. I disagree with him on almost every point he makes, because most of the points revolve around "that's what it looked like in the original footage."


And you're one of the people I wouldn't have thought that I'd have such a wide disagreement with.
I don't know if you've actually watch any of the enhanced episodes since the last time you posted in this thread you indicated that you hadn't but since one of the stated goals was to make the effects unobtrusive and like it fits, the point "that's what it looked like in the original footage" has some vaildity.



LoadStar said:


> For instance, he complains about the color of the Enterprise not being blueish... he recognizes that the blue was not inherent to the ship model, but the bluescreen effect that they used and couldn't correct for. Even though he knows that the blue is not natural, and not what was intended, he still wants it, because it's "the way it was."


No, he said "The Enterprise should be a cool gray" and pointed out that it's too dark. I'll will state that I'm not sure it should be "bluer" but it's certainly too dark the way it is and contributes to it looking two dimensional in spots.



LoadStar said:


> He complains about the stars, preferring the comic-book orange, blue, yellow, etc bright blotchy stars of the original to the new, more accurate representation of a starfield as seen from space.


Because all stars are white?
I look into the sky at night and I can see the occasional red star and the like.
It would be nice to see something other than a plain jane white star.



LoadStar said:


> He complains about the way the Bussard Collectors (ramscoops) are lit, even though the lighting he prefers would make it look more "model-like" and less "full-scale" like. He wants little lamps in the front of the nacelles, even though they're not SUPPOSED to be lamps. They're supposed to be some futuristic hardware designed to collect interstellar matter.


Uhm, and you know this how?
The current nacelle animation looks like crappy cartoon animation. Iit can be done better _and has been_.
Need I point out "In a Mirror Darkly". And if you looked at the model I linked to, it's much better than what CBS video is putting out.



LoadStar said:


> Frankly, the only thing I can say to people like this is: if you want it looking like the original, watch the original.


uhhhhhh, did you bother checking out the rest of the Trek Enhanced site?
Dochterman's been one of the people campaigning to redo the TOS effects.


----------



## cwerdna (Feb 22, 2001)

vman41 said:


> The Sinclair Broadcast Group in Columbus is showing Star Treks a week behind what their guid data says. Last week the guide said "City on the Edge of Forever" and they showed "The Nake Time". This week the guide had "I, Mudd" and they show CEF, arghh.


The guide data here in the SF Bay Area was also kinda messed up for the first weekend.

I also later realized that they've actually changed around the broadcast schedule too (nationwide). CEF wasn't originally scheduled for this past weekend, but it suddently did and they switched around the order at http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/25835.html?page=0 w/o warning.

I had a printout from 9/14/06 and CEF was originally going to air ~11/25/06.


----------



## appleye1 (Jan 26, 2002)

vman41 said:


> The Sinclair Broadcast Group in Columbus is showing Star Treks a week behind what their guid data says. Last week the guide said "City on the Edge of Forever" and they showed "The Nake Time". This week the guide had "I, Mudd" and they show CEF, arghh.


Count yourself lucky. At least you got to see a show that was in the guide at some point. Here the guide last week said _City on the Edge of Forever _ and they show _The Naked Time_. Then this week it said _I, Mudd _ and they showed _The Naked Time _ again. _The Naked Time _ has never been in the guide and they've showed it twice. Hopefully it will be in the guide next week so they'll show something else.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Not a lot of visible differences in "I, Mudd", to me, although it was painfully obvious on my 42" that when "Norman" was throwing guys around, it was a stuntman. Probably just as obvious in the original, though. But the shot at end, with the rings, was awesome.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

In "I, Mudd," I noticed when the male android pulls up his shirt to reveal his mechanical inner workings, it was a cool CGI upgrade.

Unfortunately they didn't bother to clean up the pock marks on his face.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The rings were pretty good.
Too bad the Enterprise herself wasn't.


















The usual comparisions here.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

JYoung said:


> The rings were pretty good.
> Too bad the Enterprise herself wasn't.
> 
> 
> ...


Trouble is with the Old version, you would see the cabling needed to light up the 
warp nacelles in the heavily modified 11 foot Enterprise model used in the TV show. Plus the Starbord side was never finished.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

JYoung said:


> ...
> 
> uhhhhhh, did you bother checking out the rest of the Trek Enhanced site?
> Dochterman's been one of the people campaigning to redo the TOS effects.


Who is this Dochterman person? I don't think he even _knows_ what he wants! Here's two excerpts from the same blog posting....



> I thought this week was ok... but I want more. The space shots are getting better... although they still dont look like TOS. Come on, guys... fix those nacelle caps! And why are we looking at the guardians planet with oceans? Seems to me that the original was pretty barren. Why the big change? I can see putting some better atmosphere on there... but really. I think the dramatic license is being a little stretched for non important reasons





> Is it too much to ask for a more interesting reveal of the landing party in the valley of the guardian? Even in the Animated series we get a much more interesting ruins. With a little creativity a very engaging vista could have been generated with the elements that exist... just something more... The producers fear of changing anything is really making each episode of this remastering seem needless


Correct me if I'm wrong (or even if I'm right, I'm sure someone will), but he starts out complaining that the new enhanced version just doesn't look like the original series (duh!) and that they're making too many changes. Then he ends his posting complaining that they're not making changes because they're too afraid.


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

Was this the first non-season 1 episode? The theme with the soprano vocal is a MUCH better mix than the theme without her.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

bobcarn said:


> Who is this Dochterman person? I don't think he even _knows_ what he wants! Here's two excerpts from the same blog posting....
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong (or even if I'm right, I'm sure someone will), but he starts out complaining that the new enhanced version just doesn't look like the original series (duh!) and that they're making too many changes. Then he ends his posting complaining that they're not making changes because they're too afraid.


Dochterman is a visual effects person who was the visual effects supervisor on ST:TMP Directors Edition.

And I believe he's saying that showing more of the ruins is more important than oceans on a barren planet.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

It seems I wasn't the only one who was complaining that the CGI Enterprise wasn't up to snuff.

http://trekmovie.com/2006/10/18/trek-remastered-is-getting-a-new-enterprise/



> Rossi says the new ship will be cut down the render time dramatically and free up time to do some of those cool things that they have wanted to do. "We will have time time to test lighting, coloring, and yesthose nacelle caps," says Rossi, "it is going to totally change the process, we are very excited about it." The team is so up on their new model that they hope to go back to some previously done shots and redo them. It is a welcome sign that the team is willing to make these improvements going forward (and backward). Many of those early shots get re-used throughout the series (an example would be the plastic-looking left turn shot seen last week in I,Mudd, which is a reuse of one of the first shots the team made for Miri). Due to the lead time in putting together an episode, the new Enterprise wont be making its debut until November.


I applaud his candidness in admitting that there are issues with the model and that they are working to fix them.
I take back half of the bad things I said about Paramount and greed.

But......


> This weekend keep your eyes on the Gorn in Arena for another one of these touches.


They better not be replacing the Gorn with with a crappy CGI!


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

JYoung said:


> It seems I wasn't the only one who was complaining that the CGI Enterprise wasn't up to snuff.
> 
> http://trekmovie.com/2006/10/18/trek-remastered-is-getting-a-new-enterprise/
> 
> ...


I bet his eyes will be different.


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

Yeah, they'll alter something in the way they made Norman #1's access panel look seamless. The zipper will be gone...

And I could see some new eyes or something.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

They had said that they wouldn't be replacing any actors in rubber suits. It'll be interesting to see what they do.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

They probably don't have the time to totally CGI the Gorn.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

OK. I finally got off my lazy butt and tried to schedule a recording of one of these eppys. But I can't find any that I know are the enhanced ones! I see TOS shows listed, but none of them have anything designating that they're enhanced or anything.  Where can I find out when and where these particular enhanced shows are airing?


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

My DirecTV guide didn't state anything special about the episodes, either. Just record a few and see.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

JYoung said:


> Dochterman is a visual effects person who was the visual effects supervisor on ST:TMP Directors Edition.
> 
> And I believe he's saying that showing more of the ruins is more important than oceans on a barren planet.


But then it becomes a purely subjective point of view. Some people feel strongly that *no* changes should be made. Others feel strongly that it's OK to change only some visuals/sound effects as long as nothing is reedited, while some may feel minor reediting is OK (by "reediting", I mean anything that is done in the final editing process where the invidual clips are trimmed and pieced together to make the final print). Dochterman is now complaining basically because the changes that were made weren't changes _he_ would've made, making it purely subjective.

Myself? I don't mind enhancing sound or visuals, but don't want actual shots added or removed. The director is in charge of how he wants the final piece to look, and I'd rather see the director's vision rather a fanboi's who happens to have expterise with a digital toolbox on a PC.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

Fish Man said:


> I agree with everything except Scotty's phaser. The lack of a beam, even if it were intentional originally (I rather doubt it, actually, do you have a link?) _looked_ like an oversight. This is the _only_ time a phaser was ever depicted operating with absolutely no visible effect. If it was deliberate, it constitutes a continuity error IMHO. They did well to "fix" it.
> 
> A few additional comments:
> 
> ...


I really wracked my memory trying to recall a TOS scene where Scottie was firing a phaser and you didn't see the beam (I didn't see the enhanced one you're talking about). This is the scene where Scottie is trying to cut his way into the engine room, right?

I think I can understand why they made a conscious decision to _not_ show the beam. The phaser is held very closely to the wall and sparks are flying off of the wall as he cuts through it working his way down. For one thing, a visual beam may distract from the sparks flying from the door, but that's just minor. I think the real reason they didn't show the beam is because that scene has one thing that no other phaser scene in the series had.... a moving point of origin and destination. Think about it. Every phaser blast you see is from a ship or handheld unit that's basically stationary. The special effects department just had to insert a beam travelling between two points. But in that scene with Scottie, both points are moving. It is very likely that it was simply impossible to do within the budget they had and the time constraints.


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

bobcarn said:


> I really wracked my memory trying to recall a TOS scene where Scottie was firing a phaser and you didn't see the beam (I didn't see the enhanced one you're talking about). This is the scene where Scottie is trying to cut his way into the engine room, right?
> 
> I think I can understand why they made a conscious decision to _not_ show the beam. The phaser is held very closely to the wall and sparks are flying off of the wall as he cuts through it working his way down. For one thing, a visual beam may distract from the sparks flying from the door, but that's just minor. I think the real reason they didn't show the beam is because that scene has one thing that no other phaser scene in the series had.... a moving point of origin and destination. Think about it. Every phaser blast you see is from a ship or handheld unit that's basically stationary. The special effects department just had to insert a beam travelling between two points. But in that scene with Scottie, both points are moving. It is very likely that it was simply impossible to do within the budget they had and the time constraints.


That or the angle was off.


----------



## Dmon4u (Jul 15, 2000)

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6383231.html?display=Breaking+News

Star Trek's Syndication Rating of (1.2) topped

Stargate: Atlantis (1.1); 
Stargate SG-1 (1.0);
and Outer Limits (0.4).

"It also beat the off-Si Fi Channel Farscape at a .8, though that show is classified as a general drama rather than sci-fi. "


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

bobcarn said:


> OK. I finally got off my lazy butt and tried to schedule a recording of one of these eppys. But I can't find any that I know are the enhanced ones! I see TOS shows listed, but none of them have anything designating that they're enhanced or anything.  Where can I find out when and where these particular enhanced shows are airing?


You're in Trenton, so I don't know if you get NYC channels or Philly. If you get NYC, look at 2:45am Monday on WNBC.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

bobcarn said:


> OK. I finally got off my lazy butt and tried to schedule a recording of one of these eppys. But I can't find any that I know are the enhanced ones! I see TOS shows listed, but none of them have anything designating that they're enhanced or anything.  Where can I find out when and where these particular enhanced shows are airing?


You check the affiliate page at startrek.com?
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/25835.html?page=1


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

bobcarn said:


> OK. I finally got off my lazy butt and tried to schedule a recording of one of these eppys. But I can't find any that I know are the enhanced ones!


I may be off base here, but I think that if you find it anywhere on a broadcast (OTA) channel in the U.S. right now, it should be the updated version. While G4 is still showing the originals, AFAIK.


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

I'm just frustrated because of the local affiliate(s). There were two locals that showed up on the TiVo with the appropriate 'enhanced' TOS schedules. I picked the one that was officially listed in the affiliates list (which also happened to have a conflict-free timeslot). But after the second week, they started showing the same episode over and over again! By the time I had figured it out I had missed about three episodes (been doing lots of traveling lately).  I set up a new SP for the other channel, but now I have a conflict to worry about...


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

wmcbrine said:


> I may be off base here, but I think that if you find it anywhere on a broadcast (OTA) channel in the U.S. right now, it should be the updated version. While G4 is still showing the originals, AFAIK.


TVLand will start showing the originals in November as well.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

so I just watched Arena. The only difference in the Gorn that I noticed was that it blink in one shot.


----------



## anom (Apr 18, 2005)

Figaro said:


> so I just watched Arena. The only difference in the Gorn that I noticed was that it blink in one shot.


They improved the cheesy rubber lizard suit by making it blink once? This is progress?
Sometimes you have to just enjoy something for what it is.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Dmon4u said:


> http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6383231.html?display=Breaking+News
> 
> Star Trek's Syndication Rating of (1.2) topped
> 
> ...


Not surprised about Farscape, particularly if all markets are like WGN, who moved it to 2 a.m. on Sunday morning, if I recall correctly.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

Figaro said:


> so I just watched Arena. The only difference in the Gorn that I noticed was that it blink in one shot.


Actually, it blinked a number of times. I thought it was well done. I was afraid they'd replace the whole creature with some cheesy Enterpise-esque CGI rendering.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Usual comparisons here.

I liked the blinking Gorn. I think that with a little more time, they could have used it to great effect when Kirk is debating on whether or not to finish him off.

I also liked the hint of the Gorn ship on the viewscreen there as well and redone Cestus III beam down.

The dislikes, well we all know about my complaints with the Enterprise herself.
The "screensaver" warp field on the viewscreen.
And it's a shame they didn't have time to fix the viewscreen matte when the crew is watching Kirk fight the Gorn.

The syndication edits are getting extremely annoying though. They practically gutted Kirk's entire argument for mercy.

Next week is supposed to be Catspaw (just in time for Halloween) and there, I wouldn't mind if they replaced the puppets with CGI.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> Not surprised about Farscape, particularly if all markets are like WGN, who moved it to 2 a.m. on Sunday morning, if I recall correctly.


I don't think that Trek Remastered is doing much better in that regard.
A number of stations are showing it in the wee hours of the weekend as well.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

All you might want to know about the different versions of Trek Remastered.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Usual comparisons here.

The CGI Enterprise model shows up in this episode and it is much improved.
The Nacelle caps are much better as is the color.
Still needs some more work with the lighting and the texturing but this is what I wish they had started out with.

I liked the ending flyby pass as well.

Thought that the small model of the Enterprise was too indistinct in the long shots though.


----------



## Bondelev-1 (Nov 27, 2005)

I am slightly pissed that they didn't insert the DS9 characters SOMEWHERE in the background.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Besides the fact they'd have to pay the actors in order to use their likenesses (cause Paramount always spends top dollar), why do they have to be there?


----------



## Bondelev-1 (Nov 27, 2005)

JYoung said:


> Besides the fact they'd have to pay the actors in order to use their likenesses (cause Paramount always spends top dollar), why do they have to be there?


We now know, they WERE there!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

After Darvin tried to change history.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

JYoung said:


> The CGI Enterprise model shows up in this episode and it is much improved.
> The Nacelle caps are much better as is the color.
> Still needs some more work with the lighting and the texturing but this is what I wish they had started out with.


My partner, the fine-scale-modeler quasi-expert-on-Enterprise-details, said pretty much that almost word for word.

We spent much more time rewinding and slow-mo-ing through the scenes showing the ship than in actually watching the episode.

Such is life with a modeler.


----------



## HTH (Aug 28, 2000)

Bondelev said:


> I am slightly pissed that they didn't insert the DS9 characters SOMEWHERE in the background.


 Now that I have a copy of the redone episode on the TiVo, I plan to try to edit the DS9 scenes in, but not anything that reveals the DS9 plotline or detracts from the original episode. Just for fun.


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

That would be fun! Post your results!


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

One of the comparison shots on trekmovie.com is captioned "Old Klingon ship by K7  notice there isnt one" I have to say, this is another thing I think they got wrong in the update. Even as we're looking at the ship orbiting the station, Kirk's voice is saying that it's 100km away. But the distance shown is nothing like 100km. (I know the ships are big, but they're not _that_ big.)


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

bootedbear said:


> My partner, the fine-scale-modeler quasi-expert-on-Enterprise-details, said pretty much that almost word for word.
> 
> We spent much more time rewinding and slow-mo-ing through the scenes showing the ship than in actually watching the episode.
> 
> Such is life with a modeler.


He might be interested in this link:

http://trekmovie.com/2006/11/07/review-trouble-with-tribbles-remastered/#more-295


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

JYoung said:


> He might be interested in this link:
> 
> http://trekmovie.com/2006/11/07/review-trouble-with-tribbles-remastered/#more-295


Thanks!

He said he visits that site almost daily, but to thank you for pointing it out in case he hadn't known about it.


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

Wow...I was disappointed at first with "The Corbomite Maneuver" because it looked liked they used the original footage of the space buoy (they did), but when they showed an exterior shot where it was casting light on the Enterprise, I was genuinely astonished. Nice work. :up:


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

Wow...it's been a while.

"Death has little meaning to us. If it has none to you, then attack us now. We grow annoyed at your foolishness."

Great writing. Good story. THIS is why this show is iconic. :up:


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

And I'm slightly embarrassed to admit I said the line "This is Tranya. I hope you relish it as much as I." right in chorus with Balok. Sheesh!


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

has anyone checked out the hd versions on xboxlive?


----------



## SparkleMotion (Feb 2, 2004)

No one is curious why it took me almost 3 hours to watch this episode?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I meant to update this thread but got bogged down in the minutia of work and every day life. 

Mirror, Mirror: 
It was an interesting choice to use the pilot version for the ISS Enterprise but it did look good with the spiked nacelle caps. 

Space Seed: 
This episode really shined. When I saw the new scene of the Enterprise approaching the Botany Bay, I exclaimed "that's more like it!" 
Beautiful work with that and the scene where the Enterprise leaves the Botany Bay behind. 

The Menagerie: 
Not an effects heavy episode but I thought that the first shot of Pike's Enterprise on the viewscreen with the drop zoom through to the Bridge was a top notch effort. 
Also liked the cleanup on the Talosian effects and the Rigel matte. 

Not sure how I feel about them overlaying the series phaser and transporter sounds effects on Pike's stuff though. 

I probably won't get to the Corbomite Maneuver until next weekend though.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

SparkleMotion said:


> No one is curious why it took me almost 3 hours to watch this episode?


A lot of freeze framing?


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

I wish I had the original to compare, but if someone does, did they update the countdown timer on the _Enterprise_? My fuzzy memory has it being an old-style digital display like an car odometer where the numbers spun by. This update episode had LCD or just LCD-looking CGI of a type I think wasn't around in the '60s.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

Yes; they used the same revised chronometer in "The Naked Time" (when time reverses). They also fixed a glitch the old one had. It would read

2:02
2:01
1:00
1:59
...


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The Corbomite Manuever

Comparisions here.
Loved the opening shot of the Enterprise and I think that they did a faithful recreation of the Cube.
I loved how the Cube colors washed over the Primary hull in the beginning.
The Fesarius wasn't bad either.

I always liked this episode. When you consider that this was the first regular production episode, it shows that Trek can be good out of the gate. None of this "it takes three seasons for a Star Trek show to get good" crap.
It also has some of the most memorable episode music.
I actually bought this episode off of iTunes to see the unedited version.

Friday's Child

Comparisons here.

Some good angles of the Enterprise here and I really liked the first leaving orbit scene, but I wish that they had stuck with the lighting setup they were using in the Corbomite Manuever.
The real problem is that they are relying to much of the lighting behind the model when the original model was lit from the front (or behind the camera).
This contributes to the "less colored" look of the Enterprise.
I still wish that they would do another texture pass as well. They also need to reduce the size of the rear nacelle balls a little and detail them and the Shuttlebay more.
(but these are more minor complaints, they have addressed the major ones)

The syndication edits are still annoying. This time, they dropped the whole second distress call and Scotty's "Fool me once" response.

I didn't like this episode that much when I was a kid as the whole baby angle was "yucky" but I learned to appreciate this episode more as I grew older.

You have a good mix of action, humor, and seriousness and a good subplot with Scotty in command of the Enterprise. If he wasn't such a good engineer, he'd have made a fine Captain.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

startrek.com has put up some images of the new effects for the Doomsday Machine.










The preview can be found here.

And it you want to see a different take on it.


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

Seems like the alterations are becoming more pronounced & ambitious as it goes along... Or maybe I'm just noticing more? I guess they're getting more confident in their work.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

dcheesi said:


> Seems like the alterations are becoming more pronounced & ambitious as it goes along... Or maybe I'm just noticing more? I guess they're getting more confident in their work.


They are getting much better as they go along.

My partner, the fine-scale-modeler-enterprise-expert, points out things that they've "fixed" on the Enterprise model during each subsequent episode and notes that it's just getting better and better.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

JYoung said:


> And it you want to see a different take on it.


So much talent out there. How did B&B get a job?


----------



## dylking (Jul 20, 2003)

Watched Journey to Babel this weekend. Thought the attacking orion ship was nifty (even slo mo'd it to see the details - and when they blew it up...coooool!)


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

dylking said:


> and when they blew it up...coooool!


Yeah, I liked how things kept "spinning" as they flew apart. That got a lot of replay and slo-mo.

How do people without TiVos appreciate these sort of things?


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

bootedbear said:


> They are getting much better as they go along.
> 
> My partner, the fine-scale-modeler-enterprise-expert, points out things that they've "fixed" on the Enterprise model during each subsequent episode and notes that it's just getting better and better.


Kind of makes me wish they'd saved episodes like "Balance of Terror" until later...


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

dcheesi said:


> Kind of makes me wish they'd saved episodes like "Balance of Terror" until later...


Supposedly (rumor mill only), they're going to improve the effects in the first handful of episodes that were aired when they get released on DVD.

Where's the smilie for "crossed fingers"?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I did think that it was rather cool that we saw pieces blasted off of the Orion ship.
The Shuttlecraft looked much better here than in The Menagerie.

The thing is, I've realized that the average viewer isn't going to care.
I was having dinner with my father a few weeks back and he mentioned that he had been watching Original Star Trek late Sunday night.
When I explained to him how they were redoing the Special Effects, he said to me that he didn't notice a difference.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

"The Doomsday Machine" -- Incredibly well done! Too bad that they had to cut so many scenes for time. I'll really be looking forward to the DVDs that show the entire episodes.

Some high points that I really appreciated:

- The texture of the planet killer that made it look more metallic than the original
- The damage to the Constellation, incredible detail
- The erratic flight path of the Constellation
- The anti-proton beam


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

Were shows back in the 60s longer than an hour?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

IndyJones1023 said:


> Were shows back in the 60s longer than an hour?


Star Trek wasn't.

But, the standard when it was being made, for an hour TV drama was 53 - 54 minutes of episode, and 6 - 7 minutes of commercials.

Today the standard is 40 - 42 minutes of episode, and 18 - 20 minutes of commercials, hence the editing.


----------



## byte_me123 (May 8, 2006)

bootedbear said:


> Supposedly (rumor mill only), they're going to improve the effects in the first handful of episodes that were aired when they get released on DVD.
> 
> Where's the smilie for "crossed fingers"?


Translation: "We rushed it thorugh to get in the 40th annv. stick."


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I thought it was a pretty good effort on CBS Digital's part.
I still have some issues with the lighting though. It's still too dark and would it kill them to put a little more color in there?
(Maybe it will be brighter in HD?)

I still think that Doctorman's lighting is better but he doesn't do motion as well as CBS.

This episode has always been one of my favorites. I remember being scared witless when I was 8 and watching it for the first time.


----------



## dylking (Jul 20, 2003)

I was kind of surprised by Amok Time - I was thinking "It takes place on a planet, what can they do with that?"

The ship flyby at the opening (after the credits), was nice, and the newly inserted views of the planetary surface were very evocative of Star Trek III and IV...which is what I imagined they were going for.

I was pretty impressed! Unfortunately, the channel that shows it here had bad reception or something - the colors kept fading in an out...although since I was watching it on my old series 2, it could be the TiVo


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The closeup of the Enterprise fly by was nice as was the new arena shots.
However, they are treading a very fine line here with the removal of live action shots in order to show more special effects.
Admittedly that it was just a shot of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy walking to the arena but..... careful.

I'm not sure I prefered them cutting to the FX shot during Spock's beam out either.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Although it's about 10 days off, Startrek.com has put up some previews of the Tholian Web.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

The last one I watched was Wolf in the Fold. They're starting to do something that is getting on my nerves. When they restore and color correct the episodes, they don't correct any shots that begin and end in a dissolve. This is really lazy restoration work. There are ways of correcting within dissolves. It's really jarring when they cut from one corrected shot that's bright and vibrant to one that's still dull.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Not happy with the Tholian Web from an artistic point of view.

I think they stepped over the line when they changed the design of the Tholian ship.

Here are some preview caps for the Immunity Syndrome.


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

So, are these playing in Dallas anywhere? I've got a SP for Trek on 14 (KFWD) and TV Land, but they don't seem to be the remastered ones.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Startrek.com says KTXA?

Google says this is Channel 21, the former UPN affiliate?


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

Yeah, doesn't show up on that station.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The Immunity Syndrome Sun, Apr 8
9:00 PM KFWD 52
The Immunity Syndrome Sun, Apr 8
9:00 PM KFWD-DT 52.1
The Tholian Web Sun, Apr 8
10:00 PM KFWD 52
The Tholian Web Sun, Apr 8
10:00 PM KFWD-DT 52.1
And the Children Shall Lead Sun, Apr 15
9:00 PM KFWD 52

Looks like the remastered schedule to me.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

A check on Zap2It seems to show Trek on KFWD at 9 and 10pm on Sunday.


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

JYoung said:


> The Immunity Syndrome Sun, Apr 8
> 9:00 PM KFWD 52
> The Immunity Syndrome Sun, Apr 8
> 9:00 PM KFWD-DT 52.1
> ...


Cool, thanks.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I think I know what the source of confusion is.
Tribune did not set a new Show ID number for Remastered and I'm guessing that you thought that Remastered would be a separate entry?


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

Immunity Syndrome has one of the greatest lines ever.

"Brace yourselves, the area of penetration will no doubt be sensitive."

Oh Spock I love it when you talk dirty.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Figaro said:


> Immunity Syndrome has one of the greatest lines ever.
> 
> "Brace yourselves, the area of penetration will no doubt be sensitive."
> 
> Oh Spock I love it when you talk dirty.


Then this will be right up your alley.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Then this will be right up your alley.


 :up: :up: :up:


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Then this will be right up your alley.


I think I peed myself a little bit at around 1:30 on the time line when Doc McCoy smiled.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I think I'm still the only one watching Star Trek Remastered but here's a nice cap from the upcoming "Charlie X".


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

JYoung said:


> I think I'm still the only one watching Star Trek Remastered but here's a nice cap from the upcoming "Charlie X".


I still watch every week. I generally end up napping during it, but I think it counts as watching. Charlie X was always one of my favorite episodes. Maybe I'll stay awake for that one.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

I'm still watching every week too. 

Are there any plans for "Assignment Earth" any time soon?


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

There are four episodes left in the current "season": "Return to Tomorrow", "Charlie X", "The Squire of Gothos", and "This Side of Paradise". I think the second season will start in mid-September.


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

Still watching! Wouldn't miss one!


----------



## jimborst (Aug 30, 2001)

Really enjoy these, is there plans to put them out on DVD?


----------



## drcos (Jul 20, 2001)

trekmovie.com lists the 'first season' as being available 'winter 2007' on HD/DVD combo discs (DVD on one side, HD-DVD on the other).

Whenever these are available, these are supposed to be the entire uncut episodes, not the edited for commercial time episodes shown on tv.
Would be nice if they had the new trailers too, with that 'movie trailer guy' doing the voice overs 

And the bumpers, they gotta put those in.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Galileo 7 aired this weekend:









And the two men killed on screen weren't redshirts.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

I'm more than a month behind in my viewing of these. I have some serious catching up to do.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

drcos said:


> trekmovie.com lists the 'first season' as being available 'winter 2007' on HD/DVD combo discs (DVD on one side, HD-DVD on the other).
> 
> Whenever these are available, these are supposed to be the entire uncut episodes, not the edited for commercial time episodes shown on tv.
> Would be nice if they had the new trailers too, with that 'movie trailer guy' doing the voice overs
> ...


I just noticed this. 

Anyone know if the HD DVD version is going to be widescreen, or side-panel HD?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> I just noticed this.
> 
> Anyone know if the HD DVD version is going to be widescreen, or side-panel HD?


It will be OAR.
I hear that they are working on a 16:9 version though....


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I just watched the remastered version of Day of the Dove.
I'd comment more on the effects except that the syndicators apparently decided to cut out the entire first act.

Nice job, guys.


----------



## mrdbdigital (Feb 3, 2004)

bootedbear said:


> "The Doomsday Machine" -- Incredibly well done! Too bad that they had to cut so many scenes for time. I'll really be looking forward to the DVDs that show the entire episodes.
> 
> Some high points that I really appreciated:
> 
> ...


It always bothered me in the original version that the neutronium hull of the planet killer was transparent enough to see stars through. I'm glad to see they fixed it.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

JYoung said:


> I just watched the remastered version of Day of the Dove.
> I'd comment more on the effects except that the syndicators apparently decided to cut out the entire first act.
> 
> Nice job, guys.


It's been a good 20 years since I saw that episode last time--what was cut?

I'm still watching every week, although I, like someone above, often wind up falling asleep during them. There's the occasional good episode, but a lot of them are not the high end television that I once thought they were.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> It's been a good 20 years since I saw that episode last time--what was cut?


It appears to be an LA only issue but they showed the teaser which ended with Kang backhanding Kirk and telling him they were prisoners of the Klingon Empire and the Enterprise was forfeit.

Roll opening titles then commercials.
Come back from the commercial break and Kirk and three security guys are in the lounge holding swords while the Klingons are grabbing the other swords.



doom1701 said:


> I'm still watching every week, although I, like someone above, often wind up falling asleep during them. There's the occasional good episode, but a lot of them are not the high end television that I once thought they were.


It *was* the 60's and the art has evolved since then.
Still better than Enterprise though...... 

ETA:
Oh, and the LA 1080i feed is gorgeous.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I would love to record these but locally they never air when they are scheduled. 2:00am ends up being 2:12am or 2:35, or whatever. Oh well.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

JYoung said:


> It appears to be an LA only issue but they showed the teaser which ended with Kang backhanding Kirk and telling him they were prisoners of the Klingon Empire and the Enterprise was forfeit.
> 
> Roll opening titles then commercials.
> Come back from the commercial break and Kirk and three security guys are in the lounge holding swords while the Klingons are grabbing the other swords.


Yup, that must have been local. Ours went into them still on the planet after the credits, with Kirk trapping the Klingons in beam-up.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Well, I'll TiVo the repeat next weekend at 4AM to see if they fixed it....


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Looked good here in NY! 

Edit: The Klingon ship blowing up looked TOTALLY fake and video-gamey.


----------



## robpickles (May 19, 2005)

doom1701 said:


> It's been a good 20 years since I saw that episode last time--what was cut?


Syndication over the years butchered all TOS episodes. I was surprised to see scenes or parts of scenes in a lot of episodes that I haven't seen in a long time.

Rob


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

What was the original play time for the episodes? 52 minutes? I editted the commercials out of an airing of the Squire of Gothos and got 44 minutes (including intro and closing credits).


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

The original runtime was 51 minutes, plus a one minute teaser for the next episode.

So 7 minutes, or around 13% of the episode is being trimmed out.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

robpickles said:


> Syndication over the years butchered all TOS episodes.


Syndication butchers ALL TV shows in the same way!

That's why I essentially never watch syndicated reruns.. (I once in a while make an exception when I know I'm missing ONE episode and will put up with the hacked up version to avoid renting [even 'free' via netflix] for just one episode.)

I would love for there to be a premium-level channel that aired "reruns" that weren't edited. I'd catch up on more older shows that way. Luckily most are being released to DVD nowadays so that's another method.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> Looked good here in NY!
> 
> Edit: The Klingon ship blowing up looked TOTALLY fake and video-gamey.


That was cut from the Los Angeles feed as well. Wow, they really did blow it (so to speak).


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

A special thanks to KTLA Channel 5 in Los Angeles for starting this a HALF hour late and thus giving me only 30 mins or so of the latest episode, "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield."



Anyone in LA going to the Star Trek Tour in Long Beach? It runs through February 17th...


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

They had live Clippers basketball that night so I padded my recording.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

JYoung said:


> They had live Clippers basketball that night so I padded my recording.


Wow, I totally dislike sports but it looks like I'll still have to follow them to keep my shows fully recorded.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

atrac said:


> Anyone in LA going to the Star Trek Tour in Long Beach? It runs through February 17th...


Did anyone go to this yet? My friends and I went today and were very disappointed in it.

TIP: CARPOOL. They charge $15 just to park.

TIP: EAT FIRST. The food prices are outrageous too.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

atrac said:


> Did anyone go to this yet? My friends and I went today and were very disappointed in it.
> 
> TIP: CARPOOL. They charge $15 just to park.
> 
> TIP: EAT FIRST. The food prices are outrageous too.


I've been looking forward to when it comes to Chicago. What precisely were you disappointed in?

(Maybe this should be it's own thread over in Happy Hour, since it's not directly related to this thread...)


----------



## robpickles (May 19, 2005)

mattack said:


> I would love for there to be a premium-level channel that aired "reruns" that weren't edited.


I remember some station a while back trying this, but eventually it too got greedy and ruined it. I can't remember what station that was.

Rob


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> I've been looking forward to when it comes to Chicago. What precisely were you disappointed in?
> 
> (Maybe this should be it's own thread over in Happy Hour, since it's not directly related to this thread...)


It probably should be. 

The sets and costumes did not seem like they were the real thing. I know up close they don't look as good as on camera (I've seen them at paramount), these felt like they were built specifically for the tour. The costumes did not look like the real ones at all (Janeway would never have fit into that little frock they had on display!).

The flight simulator effects were VERY cheesy. The fan made Star Trek films online have better effects (even the latest "Of Gods and Monsters"). Both "different" simulators used the same video footage.

The final short film was laughable.

Finally, the Star Trek Quiz that you could play was wrong! It said that Starfleet Headquarters is NOT in San Francisco.

The Vegas one was a LOT better. And don't get me wrong, I really wanted to like this. I went in rooting for them. I left wanting a refund.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

atrac said:


> It probably should be.
> 
> Finally, the Star Trek Quiz that you could play was wrong! It said that Starfleet Headquarters is NOT in San Francisco.


Technically, during the original series, wasn't StarFleet HQ in orbit _above_ San Francisco?

-- Don


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

atrac said:


> Finally, the Star Trek Quiz that you could play was wrong! It said that Starfleet Headquarters is NOT in San Francisco.
> (


I've never thought of it as in San Francisco. Most every image I've seen has shown it on the north side of the Golden Gate Bridge would put it out of San Francisco. (Call it Sausalito, Ft. Baker or just Marin County )

Here's someone with too much time on their hands, but the bulk of the images shows the headquarters to be on the north side of the bridge:

http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWcities-sanfran.html


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

mattack said:


> Syndication butchers ALL TV shows in the same way!
> 
> That's why I essentially never watch syndicated reruns.. (I once in a while make an exception when I know I'm missing ONE episode and will put up with the hacked up version to avoid renting [even 'free' via netflix] for just one episode.)
> 
> I would love for there to be a premium-level channel that aired "reruns" that weren't edited. I'd catch up on more older shows that way. Luckily most are being released to DVD nowadays so that's another method.


The Sci-Fi channel ran the original series uncut several years ago. I was very diligent in recording it. There were scenes that I never saw, or at least never rememberd seeing.

I have thought that it would be a good selling point, or advertising tool, to say that they were showing two series, like Star Trek:TOS and Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, unedited, two shows in a 2.5 hour block. There are a bunch of shows that could be done that way. Putting one show in a 1.5 hour slot would be much but two in a 2.5 hour block seems like a fair compromise. I don;t care so much about the quantity commercials as long as the content is unaltered.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The Ultimate Computer airs this weekend and it's a very effects heavy show with two instances of Starship combat.

Here's some sample pics:



















Full story at Trekmovie.com


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Wow! I'm looking forward to it! Thanks for posting those pics JYoung!


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Idearat said:


> I've never thought of it as in San Francisco. Most every image I've seen has shown it on the north side of the Golden Gate Bridge would put it out of San Francisco. (Call it Sausalito, Ft. Baker or just Marin County )
> 
> Here's someone with too much time on their hands, but the bulk of the images shows the headquarters to be on the north side of the bridge:
> 
> http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWcities-sanfran.html


Shatner's daughter played the trivia quiz at the tour and she picked SF and got it wrong too! The funny thing is she thinks she got it right. I guess the real question is regarding the President of Starfleet's office? So confusing!

http://bulletins.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=bulletin.read&messageID=5375655770

(hope that link works -- its myspace)


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Can't see the link, but the _Federation_ President's office is in Paris.

And Trouble with Tribbles was on this weekend. Not an FX heavy episode, but they took the time to purty up the fx and add a couple of things as well.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> Can't see the link, but the _Federation_ President's office is in Paris.


Sorry about the bad link, but thank you for the information! You've cleared it up for my friends and I. 

In terms of this show, I have read that "Assignment: Earth" is due to air in May. I can't wait! It's one of my favorite episodes and I wish there really had been a series from it. I always like when futuristic devices/technologies are used in present day situations (like on Stargate SG-1 when they had the whole story arc about that group of people stealing the alien technology and using it against SG-1).


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Elaan of Troyius aired this weekend and I was very disappointed with it as the Klingon Battlecruiser model only appeared to be half finished.

The low polygon count does hurt the Klingon model by giving it a lack of detail. They needed to do at least one more pass on it.

The Enterprise did look sweet firing it's Photon Torpedoes though. At least they got that one right.

Usual comparisons:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/31/elaan-of-troyius-remastered-review-video/#more-1808


----------



## TheSlyBear (Dec 26, 2002)

Yeah, that was the weakest model I've seen in the whole series. Not only was the polygon count low, all the surface detail was missing and a lot of the shapes were incorrectly proportioned.

Looks like someone ran out of time. Hopefully, that'll be finished by the time the DVD transfer takes place.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Preview pic of The Enterprise Incident.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Church AV Guy said:


> The Sci-Fi channel ran the original series uncut several years ago. I was very diligent in recording it. There were scenes that I never saw, or at least never rememberd seeing.


Though when the Sci-Fi channel ran it "uncut", they put new commercial breaks in where there weren't originally.. sometimes cutting in very strange places.. I think literally sometimes in the middle of a conversation. (I think I videotaped all or almost all of this.. it was that long ago IIRC..)

I just wish the Trek shows would come on DVD for a reasonable price (i.e. $20 or less per season). I admit I don't even _rewatch_ things very much, but Trek is one of a few things that I would buy for "collector" value. (Not collector value in that it will go up, but that *I* am a collector/packrat of things I like.) I keep wondering if people are going to dump a lot of DVD sets when the BluRay version comes out. IMHO, DVD is 'good enough'.. though one advantage of BluRay *I* would want would be to put it on fewer discs.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

atrac said:


> In terms of this show, I have read that "Assignment: Earth" is due to air in May. I can't wait! It's one of my favorite episodes and I wish there really had been a series from it. I always like when futuristic devices/technologies are used in present day situations (like on Stargate SG-1 when they had the whole story arc about that group of people stealing the alien technology and using it against SG-1).


This airs tonight! I'm padding the hell out of it...just in case. There probably won't be much new effects, but I loved the concept of this "pilot" and wish it had been made into a series.


----------



## appleye1 (Jan 26, 2002)

Ahhh, one of my favorites. I had such a big crush on Teri Garr!








.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

I'm actually watching now. 

I wonder if anyone's done a guide to the different headwear that Spock has used to hide his ears?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> I'm actually watching now.
> 
> I wonder if anyone's done a guide to the different headwear that Spock has used to hide his ears?


Not that I'm aware but someone has done a guide to all the Leslie appearences.

This is a great episode for Mr. Leslie.
First we see him on the bridge in at the Engineering station. Kirk even asks him for a sensor scan.

Then when Kirk is addressing the ship, we see him walking down the corridor, wearing Command Gold.

Then we see him in Engineering, in the background while Scotty talks to Kirk, wearing Engineering coveralls!

Then, Leslie is back in Support Services Red and is on duty in the Transporter Room when Gary Seven escapes and Seven puts him to sleep.

Then, Leslie appears as a security guard waiting to apprehend Seven when Scotty tries to beam him aboard.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Not that I'm aware but someone has done a guide to all the Leslie appearences.
> 
> This is a great episode for Mr. Leslie.
> First we see him on the bridge in at the Engineering station. Kirk even asks him for a sensor scan.
> ...


Are you sure they haven't populated the Enterprise with Clones?

I just deleted the last 6 episodes that were sitting on the DVR. This one, I'll watch. :up:


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Man, "Assignment: Earth" was just as good, if not better than I remember it. Robert Lansing was terrific and well cast as Gary Seven while Teri Garr shined as Roberta Lincoln. I really really REALLY wish that it had been made into a series!

I wonder if this could make it today as a series? Forget about "Earth Final Conflict" and "Andromeda," why doesn't somebody "remake" this one? I'm fairly sure they'd have to leave out any references to Star Trek, but I feel if they cast it right and had decent writers, they could really do something with this.










I was reading about this episode on IMDB and was quite saddened to see that Robert Lansing passed away from cancer in 1994. I never even realized that he played General McAllister in my favorite "Bionic Reunion" movie, "The Bionic Showdown" -- which interestingly enough was also a quasi "pilot" and also featured a young actress who had not reached mass appeal -- Sandra Bulloch. I really really REALLY wish that concept had been made into a series as well.

SO many missed opportunities by NBC!


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

The only real change is swapping the globe for a more realistic Earth from orbit. On the other hand, this episode also had the most realistic orbital shot from any episode -- the actual NASA footage from Apollo 4.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

While the concept for a possible series was pretty good, I've just never been able to get past the "Star Trek" connection to "Assignment: Earth". So the Enterprise just happens to have travelled back in time to do some research?


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Not that I'm aware but someone has done a guide to all the Leslie appearences.
> 
> This is a great episode for Mr. Leslie.
> First we see him on the bridge in at the Engineering station. Kirk even asks him for a sensor scan.
> ...


That site is awesome. I like how they point out even death can't keep Leslie down!


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

doom1701 said:


> While the concept for a possible series was pretty good, I've just never been able to get past the "Star Trek" connection to "Assignment: Earth". So the Enterprise just happens to have travelled back in time to do some research?


Hey, it had the most important connection of all -- same producer.  There have been far more tenuous connections for a spin-off, like "Mork & Mindy". It's a sitcom about a funny alien in modern Denver, and is a spin off of... "Happy Days", a sitcom about life in the 1950s?!


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

atrac said:


> Man, "Assignment: Earth" was just as good, if not better than I remember it. Robert Lansing was terrific and well cast as Gary Seven while Teri Garr shined as Roberta Lincoln. I really really REALLY wish that it had been made into a series!


I think it was.... It was called Dr. Who... After all both have a human looking guy that travels through time uses a blue light sonic thingy....

I'm convinced that Gary Sevin is a Time Lord!!!!


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Doctor Who was already on-air at the time, but yeah, there are certain similarities. Roberta Lincoln would fit as a pretty typical "companion", as well.


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

doom1701 said:


> While the concept for a possible series was pretty good, I've just never been able to get past the "Star Trek" connection to "Assignment: Earth". So the Enterprise just happens to have travelled back in time to do some research?


It had been years since I had seen this episode, but when they made the explanantion that they used the "orbital slingshot" thing (or whatever they called it) to go back in time to "do research", my WTF meter pegged at maximum! Like, man - that was out of the blue! Silly premise in my mind.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

alansh said:


> The only real change is swapping the globe for a more realistic Earth from orbit. On the other hand, this episode also had the most realistic orbital shot from any episode -- the actual NASA footage from Apollo 4.


One peeve of mine is that in the 60s and 70s, *every* rocket launch used the same stock footage of a Saturn V. It couldn't have been that hard to get Titan III footage from the Air Force (which would have been appropriate for a satellite).


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Craigbob said:


> I think it was.... It was called Dr. Who... After all both have a human looking guy that travels through time uses a blue light sonic thingy....
> 
> I'm convinced that Gary Sevin is a Time Lord!!!!


I considered that too, especially since Gary Seven's "pen" was very similar to Dr. Who's cosmic screwdriver.

The only thing is I don't think it was ever mentioned that Gary Seven was a time traveler; he was just raised and trained on an alien planet "hidden" across the galaxy.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Indeed, he explicitly says that he's from that time. However, he appears to have knowledge of future events, in a general way (although not at the level of detail the Enterprise crew was able to find in their library).


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Well, if the planet that he was "from" was so much more advanced than even the Federation, they've probably got the "Let's use the slingshot affect to go back and forth in time and do some research" thing down pretty well.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Star Trek is shown by my local FOX affiliate.

Thanks to Nascar running over, they joined "Assignment: Earth" "already in progress".

We got the final 10 minutes of it.


----------



## jimborst (Aug 30, 2001)

Fish Man said:


> Star Trek is shown by my local FOX affiliate.
> 
> Thanks to Nascar running over, they joined "Assignment: Earth" "already in progress".
> 
> We got the final 10 minutes of it.


Well at least you got the end, for me it was the first half, and it was on my local CBS station.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

On topic--MeTV showed "Mark of Gideon" this past weekend. Believe it or not, it's (I think) the only episode of the original series that I had never seen--at least, I hadn't seen it all the way through.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> On topic--MeTV showed "Mark of Gideon" this past weekend. Believe it or not, it's (I think) the only episode of the original series that I had never seen--at least, I hadn't seen it all the way through.


It's funny that you should say that, because I realized the same thing with this episode. The only thing I remember is the eerie image of the alien race peering in through the window of the Enterprise. But in terms of plot, I was pleasantly surprised to watch an episode that I had no idea how it was going to play out. 

The bits with Spock and the alien ambassador playing a quasi "who's on first" was terrific!

I wonder if this wasn't played as often when it was syndicated. Or you and I both chose to do other things every time it happened to air.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

atrac said:


> It's funny that you should say that, because I realized the same thing with this episode. The only thing I remember is the eerie image of the alien race peering in through the window of the Enterprise. But in terms of plot, I was pleasantly surprised to watch an episode that I had no idea how it was going to play out.
> 
> The bits with Spock and the alien ambassador playing a quasi "who's on first" was terrific!
> 
> I wonder if this wasn't played as often when it was syndicated. Or you and I both chose to do other things every time it happened to air.


That's really odd--because that's exactly what I remember about the episode. All of the people staring into the ship. But you're right--it's kinda fun watching an episode of a 40 year old show and actually not knowing how it's going to turn out.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> That's really odd--because that's exactly what I remember about the episode.


I remember the episode, but every viewing it makes less sense. Replicating the Enterprise with enough verisimilitude to fool the ship's Captain is an awfully big stretch and doesn't have any purpose except to save on set budget.


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

vman41 said:


> I remember the episode, but every viewing it makes less sense. Replicating the Enterprise with enough verisimilitude to fool the ship's Captain is an awfully big stretch and doesn't have any purpose except to save on set budget.


Most all of their decisions back then were to save on budget. Thank you transporters!


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

vman41 said:


> I remember the episode, but every viewing it makes less sense. Replicating the Enterprise with enough verisimilitude to fool the ship's Captain is an awfully big stretch and doesn't have any purpose except to save on set budget.


Definately. I also don't buy that Kirk didn't immediately realize that he was somewhere else. But then he couldn't have followed the girl around for the entire episode.

I also don't buy that Spock, who heard both sets of coordinates, didn't immediately say "That's a different location"--or, at least, when beaming the Gideon councilmember back down, tell Scotty to beam him back to the coordinates they sent Kirk to.

It really wasn't a very good episode--but now I can say that I've seen it.


----------



## anom (Apr 18, 2005)

doom1701 said:


> Definately. I also don't buy that Kirk didn't immediately realize that he was somewhere else. But then he couldn't have followed the girl around for the entire episode.
> 
> I also don't buy that Spock, who heard both sets of coordinates, didn't immediately say "That's a different location"--or, at least, when beaming the Gideon councilmember back down, tell Scotty to beam him back to the coordinates they sent Kirk to.
> 
> It really wasn't a very good episode--but now I can say that I've seen it.


As I recall it was a terrible episode, but I do remember one bit of trivia about it: it was written by the guy who played the drunken tribble salesman on a much better episode!


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

And this week's episode, "The Lights of Zetar" was co-written by Shari "Lamb Chop" Lewis.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

I read that Lewis was originally also supposed to play Mira, but it didn't wind up working out.

I guess there are quite a few episodes that just don't stand up too well anymore; I still don't know how they went from Spock not knowing any way to stop the alients to shoving Mira in a pressure chamber, and being certain that it would kill the aliens.


----------



## flaminio (May 21, 2004)

alansh said:


> And this week's episode, "The Lights of Zetar" was co-written by Shari "Lamb Chop" Lewis.


And what a great steaming pile of dung it is.

Cool Memory Alpha effect, tho'. Still, I gotta think that storing all the knowledge of the galaxy in one undefended place is a bit of a dumb idea. And why would people need to go there to do research? You'd think that they'd have some kind of "INTERconnected NETwork" that would allow people to do research from the comfort of their own planets.

What's the latest status of "the girl" anyway? Seems everyone wants to know...


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

alansh said:


> And this week's episode, "The Lights of Zetar" was co-written by Shari "Lamb Chop" Lewis.


Talk about throwing a dart at the board and getting a random name to write a story for you!

Was she one of his flings?


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

Who knows, but probably not -- the co-writer of the episode was also Shari's husband.


> Still, I gotta think that storing all the knowledge of the galaxy in one undefended place is a bit of a dumb idea. And why would people need to go there to do research? You'd think that they'd have some kind of "INTERconnected NETwork" that would allow people to do research from the comfort of their own planets.


Hey, they have to put the tape in deck H.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

flaminio said:


> Still, I gotta think that storing all the knowledge of the galaxy in one undefended place is a bit of a dumb idea. And why would people need to go there to do research? You'd think that they'd have some kind of "INTERconnected NETwork" that would allow people to do research from the comfort of their own planets.


Gar and Judith Reeves-Stevens wrote a really good book (Memory Prime) that actually addressed this. Of course, it's a novel, so it's not cannon--but it was a really enjoyable read.


----------



## anom (Apr 18, 2005)

flaminio said:


> And what a great steaming pile of dung it is.
> 
> Cool Memory Alpha effect, tho'. Still, I gotta think that storing all the knowledge of the galaxy in one undefended place is a bit of a dumb idea.


Don't worry. They backed everything up on Memory Beta.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

flaminio said:


> And what a great steaming pile of dung it is.


Don't be a Herbert! Next week's is "The Way to Eden". You reach?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> I read that Lewis was originally also supposed to play Mira, but it didn't wind up working out.


I read an interview with Fred Freiberger where he said that Shari wrote the story to play Romaine and Freiberger thought that the idea was ridiculous and cast Jan Shutan instead.



doom1701 said:


> I guess there are quite a few episodes that just don't stand up too well anymore; I still don't know how they went from Spock not knowing any way to stop the alients to shoving Mira in a pressure chamber, and being certain that it would kill the aliens.


It was the Third Season "I don't give a damn" attitude.
Nimoy tells a story about the previous episode, "Whom Gods Destroy" about the climax where Spock confronts Kirk and Garth-disguised-as-Kirk.
Originally, Spock walks in on the two Kirks and starts asking them questions, determining through logic which one is the fake and stuns Garth.
Freiberger rewrote that scene so that Garth-as-Kirk jumps Spock and knocks him out! 
The two Kirks fight and Spock wakes up to a victorious Kirk.
Freiberger didn't care about logic or character integrity, he just wanted to two Kirks to fight so he could excite and fake out the audience.

Nimoy finally got Freiberger to relent somewhat though the compromise included Spock allowing himself to be hit on the head.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

It's interesting how the third season almost didn't happen, but the show was un-cancelled because of fan reaction. So, while they still put it back on, the quality fell drastically--did anyone even care when it didn't come back for season 4?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Only the relatively few hardcore fans.
Besides, NBC always felt that Roddenberry orchestrated the letter writing campaign.

Star Trek only really got popular in syndication.
(Although the show always scored well in key demographics, which NBC didn't really start using until the 1970 season.)


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

alansh said:


> Who knows, but probably not -- the co-writer of the episode was also Shari's husband.


LOL! In that case, forget I mentioned it.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Looks like I lied--apparently I've never seen "The Cloud Minders" all the way through, either. This one wasn't too bad. Some cheese, but nothing too serious. I will also add that the redone FX for this episode fit very, very well; perhaps because the main "Stratos" set actually looked pretty decent to begin with. So often the updated FX clash with some pretty terrible looking sets.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Actually, they've been doing this for awhile now. You can see it in the syndicated episodes that run on local stations. TVLand is still running the original eps.

For instance, in establishing shots with the E in orbit, the ship is digital instead of a wooden model. The planets are more three dimensional looking, some with orbiting moons. The original planet shots looked like colored blobs by comparison.

Also, the effects shots have been upgraded. The phasers and torpedos are much cleaner now. Most of the shots through the view screen have been updated as well.

I've been watching Trek since the third ep aired in '66. (Yes, I'm THAT old). Seeing the new versions is sort of akin to hearing a Beatles record on my old mono record player, then hearing it again later when I finally got a stereo receiver and floor speakers. The basics are the same, just much cleaner. 

Bob

EDIT: Nevermind. (Note to self - Never post to the first page of a thread that's two years old). D'oh!


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

I used to keep up with the Remastered airings. But once "Ellaan of Troyious" and "Enterprise Incident" aired, I've tuned out completely. 

All the good eps that could stand the VFX improvement ("Doomsday Machine," "Ultimate Computer,") have already come and gone, and there's nothing more to look forward to. CGI isn't going to improve "Gamesters of Triskelion" or "Spock's Brain."

And I still can't bring myself to buy TOS (remastered or not) on DVD. A lot of classic Trek is just abdominal-pain inducing bad.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

I'm curious how many episodes there are.
I'm currently saving the *remastered* episodes off a local station and 77 is the highest episode number I have so far.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

79 if you don't count The Cage.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

Actually, "All Our Yesterdays" which aired in April 2007 was #78.

Other than "The Cage", there are three remastered episodes left: "Spectre of the Gun" (56), "The Empath" (63), and the last episode of the original series, "Turnabout Intruder" (79).


----------



## flaminio (May 21, 2004)

steve614 said:


> I'm curious how many episodes there are.


It depends on how you count them.

If you consider the two-part episode "The Menagerie" as one episode, there are 78. Or 79, if you count "The Cage". Or, if you consider "The Menagerie" as two episodes, there are 79 total (or 80 with "The Cage").


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Saturn_V said:


> I used to keep up with the Remastered airings. But once "Ellaan of Troyious" and "Enterprise Incident" aired, I've tuned out completely.
> 
> All the good eps that could stand the VFX improvement ("Doomsday Machine," "Ultimate Computer,") have already come and gone, and there's nothing more to look forward to. CGI isn't going to improve "Gamesters of Triskelion" or "Spock's Brain."
> 
> And I still can't bring myself to buy TOS (remastered or not) on DVD. A lot of classic Trek is just abdominal-pain inducing bad.


They've bounced around some, though; I'd say that Cloud Minders worked very well with the updated FX.

That stinker with Abraham Lincoln, though? I want to wipe that out of my memory.


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

doom1701 said:


> They've bounced around some, though; I'd say that Cloud Minders worked very well with the updated FX.
> 
> That stinker with Abraham Lincoln, though? I want to wipe that out of my memory.


"Help me Spock, help me!"


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

The remastered version of Season 3 is now out on DVD. Like Season 2, it's regular DVD. (Season 1 was released on the now defunct HD-DVD format.) No word on any BluRay releases.

It also includes a full remastered version of "The Cage".


----------



## Gowan (Apr 13, 2005)

I'd bet that you'll see BD versions of the season sets come out right around May 2009.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

How about late April 2009?  The Blu-Ray set for Season 1 came out Tuesday. It's very nice. It includes both new and old effects (you can toggle between them using the "angle" feature), and a new punched-up soundtrack along with the original monaural soundtrack. Selected episodes have video commentary (requires Blu-Ray 1.1). The Blu-ray Live feature requires 2.0. It currently has some short extra videos, and currently features some pictures and video from this weekend's Fedcon 2009.

Also, the remastered version of "The Cage" premieres this weekend. This is the original version of the original pilot, not "The Menagerie" which incorporated footage from it.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

alansh said:


> Also, the remastered version of "The Cage" premieres this weekend. This is the original version of the original pilot, not "The Menagerie" which incorporated footage from it.


The problem with the syndicated version though is time.
The original running time of The Cage was 65 minutes.
That means that they have to cut close to 25 minutes worth of material to fit in a one hour syndication slot.
That's one third of the material!


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

alansh said:


> Also, the remastered version of "The Cage" premieres this weekend. This is the original version of the original pilot, not "The Menagerie" which incorporated footage from it.





JYoung said:


> The problem with the syndicated version though is time.
> The original running time of The Cage was 65 minutes.
> That means that they have to cut close to 25 minutes worth of material to fit in a one hour syndication slot.
> That's one third of the material!


I got to see that one last nite and enjoyed seeing what was supposed to have been the pilot (or as close as they could wind up airing now). I'd like to see what might have been cut since it did fit in the 60 minute window (with commercials). Eventually I'll catch it on Blu-ray, though it won't be available (reportedly) until the season 3 set is released.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

I watched the updated 'The Cage' yesterday and am still wondering why they didn't cast Ray Liotta as Pike for the new movie.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Now this is interesting, it looks like the first syndication deals have expired.
The local Oldies UHF station here has started stripping TOS 5 days a week.
I took a quick look at The Man Trap tonight and it's the new CGI effects version.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

BTW, I still think it's too expensive, but the 1st season is $65 at Amazon on BluRay.. and you can *choose* the old version or new version. (If it were only the new version there's no way I'd ever get it.. Though mostly I'm hoping people get rid of their old DVDs and I can finally get Trek on DVD cheap..)


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

There was indeed tons cut from "The Cage". You probably see more of it watching "The Menagerie". The entire sequence at the Orion fortress was cut, for example. Also cut was the funky "warp speed" sequence, with the transparent bridge and loud music (the helmsman has to give a hand signal to the captain -- the music is too loud!).

I actually think $65 is dirt cheap for 29 hour-long episodes -- that's $2.25 each, and includes both the old and remastered version, plus the bonus features. The "old" versions are still cleaned up, with the faded film prints brightened up. And they include the full, uncut episodes (around 10 minutes gets cut for syndication these days).


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

One man's "dirt cheap" is another's "I wouldn't pay that in a million stardates!"

MAYBE if it were HD. But IMO the remastering is pretty much one last sad attempt at wringing a few more bucks out of fans. Though they'll probably repackage it AGAIN when the next video format comes along. Then remaster the repackaging.


----------



## anom (Apr 18, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> One man's "dirt cheap" is another's "I wouldn't pay that in a million stardates!"
> 
> MAYBE if it were HD. But IMO the remastering is pretty much one last sad attempt at wringing a few more bucks out of fans. Though they'll probably repackage it AGAIN when the next video format comes along. Then remaster the repackaging.


It is HD.


----------



## MikeekiM (Jun 25, 2002)

Wow... Just got my ST-TOS1 BD set and have to say that I really like what they've done with the CGI effects... Very tastefully done... I was skeptical when I first heard about what they were planning...but now that I I've seen it...I am sold...


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

Looks like the syndicated run ends next weekend with "The Cage". The Season 2 Blu-Ray discs come out 9/22.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

I watched one of these upgraded episodes a couple of weeks ago and it looked really good. I can't remember the name of it but there was some sort of thing flying around and eating planets for energy. The fx were spectacular.

I hated hated hated the shrill vocals in the opening theme. It was like bad opera on helium.


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

Bob_Newhart said:


> I watched one of these upgraded episodes a couple of weeks ago and it looked really good. I can't remember the name of it but there was some sort of thing flying around and eating planets for energy. The fx were spectacular.


Check out season 2 episode "The Immunity Syndrome". CBS/Paramount composed the vfx in 16:9 widescreen instead of 4:3. Watching the E go into that amoeba on a 50" TV is pretty dang impressive.


----------

