Star Trek TNG Seasons Remastered on Blu-Ray - Page 25

Thanks DrewL and Maxwell for some awesome posts!

I continue to hope that they will price these sets competitively vs other shows and not at $150-200 per season. I think they can easily make up the profit difference through volume if they keep the prices reasonable.

Profit through volume really only works when you have a highly-efficient assembly line production for creating the product (Stargate Atlantis is $120 for five seasons, no 4K scans, no recreated FX, for example). If these were 1080p upconverts, we would definitely see low(er) pricing, but I expect it to be similar to TOS in pricing (not MSRP). Those were about $90-120/season when they came out, right? Now they're down to about $60/season. I would expect somewhere around $90-100 for the 1st season, then maybe less for following seasons. That's purely my own guesswork, but I'd like to think it's educated guesswork.

The problem with that, though... is you would have to apply it the same way for older films too. Before TV, films were 4:3 or something close to that... because that's the way they were...

Widescreen films in theater really came about mostly to differentiate between theater and TV when movie studios wanted to give incentive to continue to go to the theater...

But I don't think you would make the case that Wizard of Oz or some other classic 4:3 movie should be reframed to widescreen now because "it was only done that way back then because of ..."

Some of us have said a few times... the people creating TNG could very well have shot the show on film and protected for a widescreen presentation if they wanted to do so. Widescreen and analog HD was being done in other countries at that time... and we were seeing DVD (and VHS) releases that preserved widescreen ratios even when the TV broadcast was not.

So... had they wanted to, they easily could have produced a show that was meant to be widescreen, but was aired as 4:3... There are lots of examples of shows like this that were shot and intended for widescreen but could not be broadcast that way at the time.

The fact that no one on the Star Trek production teams has come forward and said that they did frame for possible future widescreen distribution... should quell that thought. Clearly they did not frame the show or intend it to be seen that way.. and thus probably did not protect for it either. That really should be the end of the discussion.

IF anyone came forward and said "Yes, we had to frame the broadcast that way because that's how it was done BUT we did shoot and protect for widescreen as well" then that too would end the discussion and we could be happy with widescreen on new releases.

Well, as the only way I was able to watch the show was via the crappy connections available to me at the time I stand by my statement. I don't care how it was originally captured, only that to me the DVD looked as good because of the original circumstances behind my exposure to the show when it first aired. You can keep your merit comment to yourself.

The difference was that Oz was framed for a big screen and looks good the way it looks, The same thing couldnt be said of TNG.

Also I dont want them to make new special effects for Oz, but I do want it for TNG.

^ This.

The fact they are doing new SFX means that the whole 'original intent' argument is out the window anyway.

Thing is, the press release talks about the visual effects being "painstakingly" recreated based on original elements and the episodes appearing "exactly the way they originally aired." They pretty much archived everything that was filmed practically -- including things like 35mm slides used for planet textures. It remains to be seen how far they will ultimately deviate from that approach. We'll know for sure soon enough, but one thing's certain: This isn't going to resemble TOS Remastered with copious CGI spaceships and environments galore.

Every indication is that the episodes will be much the same as we have them now, just in 1080p. Even things that have to be redone like phasers, tractor beams, electricity, creature transformations, disintegration effects, sparks, holes burnt into walls, etc. will probably closely resemble what was done back in the day. They just won't have that frame-by-frame hand animated look anymore.

Hmmmmmm well if it's the same people working on this that did TOS then I dunno....

I actually never watched TOS remastered BD's - i watched a few episodes then gave up due to boredom. I never really liked TOS from what I've seen of it. TNG is miles ahead of it in my opinion. I love ST Movies 1-6 though. Maybe TOS is just a bit before my time I think that might be why I don't really like it - too corny for me

I am a massive fan of The Motion Picture though - but I think that had a lot to do with the director being Robert Wise who also made The Day the Earth Stood Still which is one of my all time favorite movies. Like that movie, The Motion Picture was ahead of its time when it came out.

But yes not long to wait now to find out

I think the reason CBS is using them once again is because they are "in-house", not because they will be doing the same things to the same extent they were done on TOS-R. I'm not saying they won't occasionally throw in a new CGI ship or landscape... but it just seems, to me, to be budgetarily impossible for them to -- on the one hand -- painstakingly restore the original VFX for HD and then ALSO create tons of new stuff with CGI to the same extent they did with TOS-R.


Mine too. But The Day the Earth Stood Still predates Star Trek by 15 years. Do you find that movie's FX corny? You should give TOS another shot... the writing is often just as high quality with the same sort of timely allegorical messages -- especially in the first two seasons.


I enjoy that movie too, don't get me wrong... though I'm not sure I'd describe it as ahead of it's time. It seemed to be behind the times in many respects -- trying too hard to be 2001 in an age that had just embraced the fast paced thrills and high adventure of Star Wars only two years prior.

I would say it was more out of its time. You cant make storys for the smaller audience aimed for the larger audience. Not in 1960 and not in 1990.

But the problem with the first movie is that it lacks the joy that existed in TOS. If the characters doesnt enjoy beeing on the Enterprise, how can the audience enjoy it?

And Vgear isnt the best antagonist for the big screen either.


They did correct this in ST2, the first was just a pilot turned into a movie.

Heh for 1951 I thought they were pretty good actually!

As for TMP it is certainly the most unique of all the ST films and that's why I like it. It is more 'Star Trek' to heart in terms of the exploration and the wonder of the movie - entering into the cloud and everything that follows. The deliberately slow pace of the movie also makes it very different to the others - but in a very positive way I think.

It feels very similar to 'Fantastic Voyage' in that regard - another great movie I would love to see on BD!

Michael & Denise Okuda are on as cosultants, both worked on the TOS remastered and long have worked in Trek making sure everything on the technical side meshed.

It's in good hands.

It wasn't an error: they were labeled in production order, not broadcast order.

The TNG Season 1 DVD set was the first time they were released in broadcast order. Previous VHS and LaserDisc versions were released in production order.

Symbiosis was shot before Skin of Evil, you can see Denise Crosby waving goodbye in the background at the end of Symbiosis as Picard leaves the cargo bay.

Wow. First off, a huge thank you to DrewL, Maxwell, and our other industry professionals for bringing in some really great knowledge to this thread. This is the kind of thing that keeps me coming back to the AVS forum on a regular basis!

Now, I would definitely classify myself as an OAR stickler... For movies. However, I really feel that TV is a different breed. Sure, TV still has directors, cinematographers, DPs, etc., but unlike a movie where a two hour film is shot over a period of months, all of the principal photography for a 40-45 minute TV episode generally has to be completed in one week or less. The idea that each shot is carefully scrutinized for composition seems a bit far fetched to me. I would think that it's more likely positions are roughly blocked out, and once a good take is in the can and doesn't go outside the safe zone they move on to the next setup. That's not to say that anyone who works on TV is unprofessional, or we shouldn't consider intent when making a new home video release, but I do wish that in this case we as consumers could have a choice between the 1.33 and 1.63 framings. Preserving the vertical framing seems like the best compromise to me, and I really think that opening to widescreen will pay dividends.

Speaking specifically about the DrewL/Maxwell example, the 1.33 DVD frame looks too tight to me, and the 1.66 frame, although it has extra dark space on the left, feels more natural. Most likely that's because of what MovieSwede said: In an era of 20" TVs viewed from across the room, closeups had to be uncomfortably close to capture the nuances of a performance. I really do think that on my 70" screen I'm going to want to see some breathing room on the sides.

I guess I just keep thinking back to that tweet saying that consumers should be allowed to see examples and vote on the choice between 1.33 and widescreen, and now I may just have to always wonder what could have been.

^
Agreed 99%

TOS 16x9 was done for the Japanese market. Released IDK. But seemed like some zoom had to be used to achieve it. I still would've liked to watch them.

TOS is shown in 16:9 on CBS Action over here. Live action stuff is cropped, new FX shots are 16:9 originals. It looks horrible, but that's mainly due to the godawful compression on the broadcast. I'd love to see it in HD.

And I agree with what Jamie E said above, mostly. I also feel that TV framing isn't as sacrosanct as it is for movies. That's not to impune the work of many fine professionals, but the reality is that most episodes of television are banged out within days, and opening up a 4:3 show into 16:9 (see: Buffy, ER, Friends) doesn't usually have tragic results as long as it's been adequately protected. Buffy S4 is an example of how not to do it, but they tightened up after that.

The framing can look a little empty at the sides of the image because everyone's usually crowded into the centre, but generally it's quite pleasant to watch. A 1.66 version would be an ideal compromise, yet it's quite an old-fashioned ratio so I doubt any studio would go near it.

Buffy S5 would like to have a word with you. I'm re-watching S6 at the moment though, and I haven't noticed any glaring faults yet. Remember though, that the later half of Buffy was made in a time when widescreen TVs were becoming common. TNG was around a decade before that, so I find it hard to believe they gave much thought to what was beyond the 1.33:1 safe area.

Sounds like what was shown on xbox, TOS original was hd 1;33 but new added fx was 16/9. I'm saying the entire show was 16/9 hd.

Xbox version was 16:9, pillarbox for live footage, widescreen for new FX shots.

Oh noes the sideways IMAX version

And they do not notice, that they lose picturecontent on the left and the right? Not to speak of the loss of sharpness.

watching season three last night in 4:3 and spotted at least three boom's

Nope. Totally defeating the purpose of HD in the first place. You can lead a horse to water... but you can't shoot him. Or something like that...

´

Actually, the purpose of HD is that people with out a clue buys new equipment. That it actually looks good, is just a bonus for nerds like us.

I said the live action stuff was cropped, with 16:9 effects shots, i.e. it's all in 16:9.

Heh. Throw in some woeful protection for the 16:9 safe area and you can appreciate why I will only watch Buffy S4 in 4:3 (I know you're talking about S3 in your post mike, but it's a good indicator of the occasionally slapdash nature of TV framing in general). The later seasons aren't quite so incompetent on all counts.

Live action is NOT cropped on the Xbox version. Original framing is still there, but they ADDED to the SIDES for new ship effects and such. So it was somewhat jarring to watch: 4:3 pillarbox one minute, 16:9 fullscreen the next.

Okay, what was so difficult to understand about my original post? Where the heck did I mention anything about the xbox?

Here's what I said: "TOS is shown in 16:9 on CBS Action over here. Live action stuff is cropped, new FX shots are 16:9 originals", i.e. it's in 16:9 from start to finish.

I can't make it any CLEARER than THAT, since we're PLAYING the emphasis using CAPITALS game.

Sorry, but that's what I meant: It's all 16/9 but the original parts have sidebars and the new fx shots fill the entire 16/9 - just like XBOX. The Japanese version I discussed had the original totally filling the 16/9 screen. I'll dig up some screen shots if I can but this was years ago and links may be dead. I mentioned this as the discussion was about OAR or not for Next Generation.