This is now available on the 'spleen.
That makes sense.
Going the “human aliens” route probably didn’t help.
I’m not even talking about costuming, (although some of that is weird), but like:
Ignoring the ship effects, these are both scenes of people bouncing around in ships. First Contact’s is shot, lit, and blocked much more dynamically. Insurrection has some nice stuff in it, but on the whole it has a much more conservative production design.
Even this scene, from the climax, lacks the gravitas of the First Contact stuff.
I don’t know anything about Hollywood budgets, did the ensemble cast’s salaries just eat into the budget more? (I assume they increase per film).
Mike O said:
I’ve always kind of wondered what the rationale of hiring him was, especially given that Frakes was chosen instead of some bigger-name directors, apparently on the last two.
I think he was brought in because Berman wanted to “liven things up” with an action director, and Baird was who he came up with.
I imagine this was probably in response to Insurrection, which feels cheaper and more like TV than the the first two films.
Does anyone know why that is? I know they didn’t go with ILM, so that’s why the effects work isn’t great, but Insurrection has the same director, cinematographer and a larger budget than First Contact but looks worse.
Because they are not fans of Trek. They do not understand why people would like DS9 because they never watched it.
The season’s arc was written by Bryan Fuller, who wrote for DS9 and VOY. (Fuller left production, but he’s still credited for the story on the first 3 episodes.) And there’s still plenty of fans working on Discovery. Kirsten Beyer wrote Voyager books before writing for it; Jonathan Frakes will supposedly direct an episode. And I’m sure most of the writers have seen lots of Trek.
Also, the idea that good Trek can only be made by fans of the old shows is silly. Bragga and Berman were not big fans of TOS and TNG is good. And Roberto Orci is a huge fan of TOS and I don’t think Into Darkness is very good or understands TOS very well. There is also plenty of room for a Star Trek show to be different from the hundreds of hours of existing Star Trek.
I liked the 3rd episode alright and I’m interested to see where it goes. The tone of it doesn’t really match with just 10 years before TOS, but this is more in the “responding to the present” mode of Star Trek, rather than then “socialist utopia” mode that TNG often did.
Most of the bluray set is correct, but some episodes have 5.1 folddowns to mono by mistake. Someone would have to compile a list of which ones those were (you can easily tell from the recording of the opening theme.) Then they would have to dig out the single episode DVDs or the laserdiscs.
The idea that anyone could enjoy a Seth McFarland show is beyond me.
They had a budget and time to do some accent couching for Discovery so the enunciation of Klingon you hear is actually much closer to how Marc Okrand designed it. The previous series would usually just write some Klingon words (without any real grammar), and have the actors do their best with what was on the page. The movies were better in this regard. The reason it sounds different than before is because Klingon is designed to use lots of sounds not found in English enunciation. (It has a weird consonant aragment which is dissimilar to most human languages).
No. Because they removed it from the DVD, so I would have to have used VHS footage.
Okay, I’ll send you the links.
I think pittrek might be doing that eventully. I sent him the HD theatrical cut that I used as the source for this edit.
Duel was originally released on TV with a 70-minute runtime. For its European theatrical premiere, Spielberg added more footage to get it to a required 90 minute runtime. Some of this is new car scenes and some of it is more obvious padding (the opening credits and the conversation with Mann’s wife.) In addition to the new footage, additional directorial changes were made, including a new, dynamic mono sound mix and the removal of much of David Mann’s redundant inner monologue to great effect.
This fan edit mostly follows the original, tighter TV edit of the film, while also using the theatrical sound mix and removing the inner monologues. It also includes the further edits made to the film for the DVD and Bluray release (which removes more inner thoughts). I also created some new opening and closing title cards to match the TV edit.
I used a 4:3 HDTV copy as the base because the Blu ray is unfortunately only available in cropped 1.85:1. Special thanks to DrDre’s ColorMatch tool which was incredibly useful to help match the different sources and make the older scan look a little nicer.
Duel 4:3 HDTV (primary video)
Duel Blu ray (primary mono audio and color reference)
Duel NSTC DVD (used to patch out logos in the HDTV)
Duel 16:9 Cropped French Digital SD TV airing (two brief shots)
Duel TV VHS Recording (some audio)
Duel SD extras documentary (partial opening shot which was blended with the French Digital source and the Bluray)
Columbo Blu ray (pilot episodes) (opening and closing Universal logo)
Sample Images: https://imgur.com/a/lwopT
Video: 7.05 GB 1080p HD MKV
Audio: 2.0 Mono FLAC
Version 2 changes:
- No more VHS footage (Footage from the TV cut is now sourced from a cropped French digital airing, with a custom matte to “uncrop” the opening shot.)
- A different, more balanced color grade.
- patched out the HDNet logos with DVD footage.
- English Subtitles
Available via the 'spleen or PM.
I released my HD edit of the Director’s Edition: http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Star-Trek-The-Motion-Picture-Directors-Edition-HD-Recreation/id/56390
It’s nice to have the best cut of the film in HD.
This is an HD recreation of the director’s cut of Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which was completed at SD resolution and only released on DVD. It’s primarily sourced from the HDTV, which uses the same transfer as the director’s cut DVD. The HDTV is low detail and has lots of compression, but it does have more grain and much better contrast than the Blu-ray. The unique footage from the director’s cut DVD is upscaled. Color-corrected Blu-ray footage is used for some shots with alien subtitles. I have also recreated some of the director’s cut changes in HD by combining SD and HD footage.
This edit is available in two versions:
The main version uses the new DVD effects when appropriate, but also uses the original theatrical unaltered effects to preserve HD quality (for this reason I’m calling it a fan edit; I mostly prefer the original effects when they were fully realized).
This image gallery shows which unique DC effects were included as well as a general overview of the picture quality: https://imgur.com/a/K0EhF
The purist edition includes most all of the shots altered for the director’s cut DVD. For many of these changes I’ve combined HD and SD footage while others were simply upscaled from the DVD. The purist edition currently also has four foreign dubs (Italian, French, Russian and German) and a host of subtitles from two different European dvd releases. (The main project will be updated with these at a later date).
Sample frames: https://imgur.com/a/ALontqP
Now available on myspleen or pm me (click my user name and then select “create a private topic”) for a link.
Video: 1080p MKV - 12 GB
Both the video and audio are BD-compliant if you want to remux this for a Blu-ray.
Track 1: AC3 Dolby Digital - This is the same 5.1 as the DVD, but I replaced the end credits music that was looped for the director’s cut and replaced it with the original cue from the remastered CD. The file is not re-encoded, and cuts to the different end credits at the end seamlessly.
Track 2: AC3 2.0 Dolby Surround from the DVD.
Track 3: AC3 The commentary from the DVD.
Track 4: AC3 This is a commentary originally released as a podcast for startrek.com with visual effects supervisor Daren R. Dochterman, restoration supervisor Michael Matessino, and producer David C. Fein.
(For included subtitles read the read me file)
I listened to the startrek.com podcast. It’s fairly interesting and I was very impressed that they tracked down the original production team and consulted with them on the edit. They even talked with Jerry Goldsmith about how they were cutting the music.
I’m currently working on an HD cut of the Director’s cut with the HDTV as a base (although while I include the new SFX shots, I mostly don’t include the altered shots to keep them in HD). The HDTV does have noticeable compression and it’s not very high detail, but it does have more grain and a much better contrast than the BD. One thing that’s interesting is that in the director’s cut they removed a lot of frames that had splice lines, but not consistently, so it’s a pain match that in the edit.
I have it and can send it via PM. It will take awhile to upload, as I’m not on great internet right now. You can throw it on Myspleen if you want, too. All the Star Trek HDTV caps are only on Usenet and they are ancient posts at this point.
The SD deleted scenes will cut in better with the HDTV, which is an ancient scan, but has a much more natural contrast than the BD and less DNR.
I’ve noticed that the 1997 changes are often the most degraded shots in the film, which is strange because, as they are much more recent than the 1977 film, they should be in better shape. But more often than not I’m having to repair the color. I guess these additions were even more shoddily preserved than the original elements.
The 2004 master is a 2k scan that has then been denoised with a bunch of DNR and then regrained to hide that fact. For the original negative and stuff recomposited in 2004, this is the only stage of detail loss. But for all the shots composited in 1997, it’s:
film, to a 2k scan, add CGI (possibly denoise based on the shot), print back to film, to another 2k scan, aggressive denoise, regrain.
The '97 stuff suffers more generational loss due to Lowery’s process.
Right, but they are pretty close. The scanned project print overall is biased toward yellow compared with the other (which is the result of the scans or print variance.) It matches with those Angelfire images much more than it does the DVD.
A quick contrast adjustment of the Angelfire one gets you to this:
Which looks like a greener version of the scanned project. A push in the greens can match one to the other from there.
Compare with the dvd, which has weird gamma and a different tint:
Simply adjusting the DVD’s contrast won’t get you close to the prints.
The 35mm print does have a ton of green in many scenes, but not the brown-greenish wash the DVD has. The DVD looks very different from what was in theaters.
The scanned print is actually more green than the DVD in many places. (And it’s greener than the VCD that NeverarGreat was color matching to).
Well, I can’t say that I caught the green when I saw The Matrix in the theater, but when I saw the two sequels in the theater, I very much noticed it. I can’t say that the extent of tint in the blu-ray is accurate, but I would say the DVD is accurate. And it is possible that the prints were not done as accurately as they wanted and what you are seeing on the print is actually an error rather than the correct colors. But I absolutely did notice it the theater when I saw the third movie. In my experience and knowledge, distribution prints are not done with the care and accuracy of color that the many talented people on this site tend to have. I’m more inclined to believe the scanned print is in error than there was some drastic change in artistic direction between the first and third movies.
You are right that one print isn’t a definitive record of the director’s choices, but there’s no reason to suspect it’s radically wrong. The print has a cohesive style, in that the scenes in the Matrix have a bleached out look compared to the real word (and quite a bit of green as well). It also has normal contrast and looks good, while the first DVD is weirdly washed out with it’s green-browns, which I think were quickly introduced during the telecine.
The two sequels (which were shot and produced together) do have a different style. They were also mastered on a Digital Intermediate, giving them a greater control of color, while the first one was colored optically.
I think the Wachowskis wanted to make the Matrix scenes more blanket green then they could satisfactorily do for theaters (or they changed their mind in time for the DVD). When the DVD/Laserdisc came out they took the opportunity to tint it during mastering. They then used a more blanket green for the sequels and then further revised the first film’s color to better match the sequels (The blu ray/2nd DVD is a full regrade with better contrast and control than the brown-green of the first dvd).
The LD is very close to the DVD. The theatrical print looks a lot different from all of the home media releases. I would love a shot-for-shot color correction of the Blu ray to the theatrical print.
I assume the original hd masters of 5-9 were lost, or lower res to bad I can’t provide screenshots at the moment.
Seasons 5-9 were originally mastered in SD 16:9. They were never mastered in HD.
I think the first HD mastering and broadcast for a US prime-time drama show was an episode of Chicago Hope on CBS in 1998.
Is anybody else a fan of TOS only? Or do you even know anybody else who is?
I don’t like TNG, DS9 or… that other show I saw 2 episodes of… I think the Quantum Leap guy was in it?
The only Trek film I’ve liked is TWOK. I haven’t seen all of the films though.
Anyways, I’ve never met anybody who only likes the original Trek. Am I all alone?
I like the films and both TNG and DS9, but I think I ultimately prefer TOS by a fair degree. It’s what I think of when I think of Star Trek. (Though I do need to actually watch more DS9.)