Original Star Trek Getting CGI Makeover 378
Tony Pascale writes "Star Trek is the latest sci-fi classic to get the CGI 'special edition' treatment. According to rumors picked up by
TrekMovie.com, CBS and
Paramount have been secretly working on a new version of Star Trek: The Original Series for HDTV. The shows will feature the original episodes with brand new state-of-the-art CGI visual effects, including a a redone title sequence (with re-recorded music). The effects are likely to be limited to the space scenes and not effect the live action scenes, so Edith Keeler will not shoot first. The HDTV Star Trek series will begin broadcasting this fall just in time for the 40th Anniversary of Star Trek."
City on the Edge of Woodspock (Score:5, Funny)
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Want it to go opposite direction. (Score:3, Funny)
Things like that. Let's do something COOL with the technology.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That is what wikipedia says anyway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-generated_i
Plus CGI reminds me of SGI. They once were pretty sweet...
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe the cheesy effects were part of what made it great. (See old Dr. Who episodes for a better illustration.)
Next thing you know, they'll want to go back and "fix" The Wizard of Oz because the effects are too "primitive" and the studio "wants to upda
Re:Obligatory (Score:4, Interesting)
Wait, I thought copyright protection was evil and that an artist really should have no control over his work once he releases it? Or are mash-ups and re-cuttings only fair when they are posted to YouTube instead of released on DVD?
Re:Obligatory (Score:4, Insightful)
Another thing entirely is whether the marketing company should have these rights.
In some countries, certain rights of the artists are inalienable. I think this is a good thing.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
They deserve a swift kick in the groin, is what they deserve.
Gorram sports and "reality"-TV watching maroons... Why in my day [we apologise for the curmodgeon, your regularly scheduled thread will now resume]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Other popular enhancements:
Replace communicators with Mototola Razr v3 Verizon Media Edition
News ticker on bottom of view screen
Red and yellow alerts replaced by green, blue, yellow, orange and red (don't worry, we'll never see green or blue)
Tribbles replaced by next-generation Furbys
Enterprise limited to Warp 2 due to concerns about "galactic climate change"
The Klingons shoot first
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Obligatory (Score:4, Insightful)
After all, it's about money, not entertainment.
But don't blame the Hollywood establishment, blame the viewing public for paying over and over to see the same hackneyed ideas and insultingly shallow plots.
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, I for one enjoyed "Spock's Brain"!
"'Brain' and 'brain'... what is 'brain'?!"
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"'Brain' and 'brain'... what is 'brain'?!"
"Ooooh the eggs... the children... the eggs... the children..."
"200 Quatloos on the newcomer!"
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
BTW, the "quatloos on the newcomer" line didn't actually appear in the episode. There was bidding "for the newcomers" at one point, but IIRC you never heard the Providers betting on the outcome of the games.
It's Dead Jim (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Going Boldly (Score:5, Funny)
KHAN (Score:2)
Whoops. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
history repeating itself (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:history repeating itself (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm guessing they learned that fans will line up to be fleeced even while they complain about the originals being spoilt.
*sighs* if people put their money where their mouth was, we wouldn't have to put up with this shit.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:history repeating itself (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you mean the Star Wars debacle that generated hundreds of millions of dollars in ticket sales and sold tens of millions of videocassettes and DVDs? If they're going to learn anything from that, it's that pissing off whiny SciFi geeks is an easy way to get free publicity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not wholly true (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to mention the lens flare. Lot's 'o lens flare! Get some better coatings on those virtual lenses, boys.
Re: (Score:2)
So, basically... (Score:2)
And so while ship-scale phasers will be beautiful, hand phasers and transporters will still look like cotton candy?
interesting idea, my favorite ... (Score:5, Insightful)
I love the original series as is, but this would be a neat reason to re-watch them.
boxlight
Re: (Score:2)
You need a reason (besides "it's on")!?!?
Apocolypse Trek Redux (Score:2)
Screw CGI updates. Practical effects FTW.
Kilt (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Old news, surely? (Score:3, Interesting)
It looked fine but really, why? I LIKE the way the SFX clips of the Enterprise are complete with nose hair, fluff and other sundry gunk. It's supposed to be like that!
New Voyages did it. (Score:4, Informative)
That said, though, I really hope they won't try to replace the originals like when Red Dwarf tried to. It's an interesting novelty, but it's not worth trashing the original for.
And in another 10 years (Score:3, Funny)
Although I do look forward to the re-mastered space hippies.
Remakes? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Remakes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop Complaining (Score:5, Interesting)
So long as the effects changes have no real impact of the story or the idea of the show I do not see a huge problem here. If the shows old film is getting cleaned up too, then that is also something to cheer about. I personally would feel better knowing that they are actually caring for the old film and not letting it just rot in some warehouse.
Re: (Score:2)
Might not be such a good thing - without the rose tinted specs, the original series was pretty suspect. In the UK, they showed it again after TNG was about 5 years in and we were all pretty steeped in TNG fluffy-trek (I sense you feel sad) with Picard being a nice gentle sort of guy with a tea fixation.
The first episode of TOS they showed (order? we don't need no steenking episode order) had Kirk, McCoy and a bunch of red shirt
Easily explained. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
At least the Enterprise wasn't armed with 'Democracy bombs'.
As an aside, I can highly recommend Shatners last CD, it's actually rather good. None of your 'Mr Tamborine Man' stuff, this is a fine album of poignant songs about life, love and fame. It's worth it just to hear the cover version of Pulp's 'Common People' but the rest, all original material is great.
Re: (Score:2)
It's worse than that; they have to cut runtime. (Score:3, Interesting)
No, not an hour runtime -- unless you're counting commercials. The thing is, back in the 60s they didn't show nearly as many minutes of commercials per hour as they do now. It has become very obvious as various TV shows are released on DVD -- more recent ones run to about 42 minutes per show, from 10-15 years ago it
And in other news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Famous Hollywood producer and director Steven Spielberg will include a new crew member to the enhanced version of the "Jaws". "Jar Jar" will be a computer generated addition to the fishing boat Orca. Spielberg said 'Jar Jar will give a much needed contrast between the updated action scenes in the film' and promised that the film would be suitable for wider audiences.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If we get to see him devoured by the shark, then it's all good.
Re:And in other news... (Score:5, Insightful)
This new 8 disk box set will include the new 20 minute feature and 5 days of Spielberg rabling about various topics.
Crushed childhoods not included for those under the age of 25.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:And in other news... (Score:5, Funny)
In addition to this, the new CGI shark will have a frickin laser beam attached to its head.
Insider sources claim that a Special Edition of this re-release is also planned in which the laser beam will be replaced by a walkie-talkie.
In a word, why? (Score:2)
Once again, technology triumphs over common sense -- did anybody ask the casual fan if this was a good idea? Why is it necessary to somehow "fix" things that aren't broken. The Original Series does not need Next Generation-like effects; it will lose all its charm and character, not to mention the historical context. It was a 60's show -- making it look like something from the turn of the new century destroys its technical merit for being ahead of its time in the 60's. The Star Trek franchise continues to si
Re: (Score:2)
In short, because we can. (Score:4, Interesting)
I recently rented the remastered DVD of "The Day The Earth Stood Still", which to this day is one of the great science fiction movies of all time. What makes it a great science fiction movie? It is credible. It presents the story in a way that compels you to believe it on some level.
The producer was Julian Blaustein. He says in an interview that he decided to do a sneak preview, a Hollywood practice that allows the filmmakers to find and tweak problem spots in a movie. Blaustein's biggest concern: Gort's knees. Gort the robot was just a very tall man in a foam rubber suit. It was very convincing, except when Gort walked away from the camera: the backs of his knees didn't look robotic, they looked like a man trying to walk in a stiff foam rubber suit. Every time he looked at a scene in which Gort walked away, it bothered him.
A few minutes into the movie, there is a scene where tank after tank skids around the corner, racing to confront the flying saucer. The audience reacted in a completely unexpected way to this: they laughed. Blaustein recounts sinking lower and lower in his seat until his eyes were level with the seat in front of him. He knew to the precisely how many seconds it would be until the audience would see Gort, and exactly how many seconds after that Gort would turn around and the world would see his cheesy foam rubber knees. If they laughed, he was finished: no Gort, no movie.
Naturally, nobody laughed. He found out later that the reason the audience laughed was the absurdity of confronting the advanced technology of the flying saucer with tanks and guns. Nobody every thinks Gort's knees are cheesy. Lesson learned: the audience will accept anything once you make them believe. Ang Lee did a movie of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility in which Emma Thompson played a character almost twenty years younger than she was when she made the movie. Lee managed this by avoiding closeups until well into the movie, after Thompson had managed to sell the audience on her performance.
So -- I'd conclude this. If a TOS episode works, it doesn't need CGI rework. The CGI work might help a less credible episode.
As a side note, Robert Wise, the director of The Day The Earth Stood Still, died last September. So far as I know this was not commemorated on
It's worth noting that nobody says the special effects for the theatrical version were wanting. On the contrary, they were excellent, but there was too much of them and not enough story.
In a word: apathy. And hubris. Ok, two words... (Score:2)
Yay! Like StarWars and ET! (Score:2)
Because this worked so well in Britain... (Score:4, Interesting)
Red Dwarf Remastered (Score:2)
I haven't even bothered looking at which versions are on the later seasons. (hell, it'd cost 'em how much extra to put both versions on there? A few cents to press a disk, and some extra for a different container to fit 'em in?
Now, that's not to say that the remastered stuff wasn't funny in context w/ the
A proof of concept CGI update for TOS (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HSYC6Wlbv8 [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You can't go back to Eden... (Score:2)
Yeah, brother.
[queue groovy Spock harp jam]
*slams head on desk* (Score:3, Interesting)
I was over at the starwars.com yesterday looking for information about the release of the unedited versions in a week or so. They have a side by side comparison of many frames they changed from the film. With something along the lines of "Many people don't realize the technical capabiltiy that went into this!"
Stop right there. I'm an engineer and I appreciate technical achievement as much as the next geek. But you're trying to SELL ME ON YOUR TECHNICAL MERITS?
Most people who don't like the edits don't like them for one of two reasons. 1) You're messing with something they remember and liked. This almost always pisses people off. 2) The CGI doesn't look right in the movie with late 1970s effects.
Star Wars was one of the highest grossing movies of all time without any mucking about. Star Trek is insanely popular. I think it's pretty arrogant to go messing with a historical show that's stood up for 30-40 years and expect people to like it (or not be outraged) because it's a technical feat.
I guess I better run buy a copy of the original series DVDs before someone at Paramount decides I don't have the privilidge to see them in their original form again.
*beats head on desk some more*
Technical feats? (Score:2)
The wrong approach (Score:2)
There's only one thing to say about this... (Score:2, Interesting)
Now that we've gotten that out of the way, this might actually be cool. If they don't change the charater acting any, and only focus on effects, it really won't harm the show. Of course, sometimes the 60's effects technology is what makes the show good, so I guess we'll just see.
Six Words Of Warning: (Score:5, Insightful)
If I see anything other than that rubber suit with irridescent eyes that terrified me when I was eight, I swear I will burn my Starfleet Academy underpants.
I don't want to see any crap like that goofy thing wrestling with mirror-Archer.
And nobody crack wise about me burning the underpants with me in them.
"Can you fashion a rudimentary lathe?"
Re: (Score:2)
Well, maybe... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Eh? No it wouldn't.
The difference was explained in Enterprise. There's a whole multi-episode story arc on it...
It wouldn't make any sense to retcon them since there being two different kinds of klingons is part of the story line.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Changeling Special Edition (Score:5, Funny)
Rumours have it that the producers were a little upset about Kirk shooting his mouth off at Nomad and killing it with its own logic. After the Special Edition edit, Nomad is shown to self-destruct due to a hardware error and not by Kirk's cruel mind games.
Capt. Kirk: I am the Kirk, the creator?
Nomad: You are the creator.
Capt. Kirk: You could be wrong....
Nomad: Oh no, not again...my capacitors are leaking, and I feel a sudden power surge. Please hold on Kirk, I must reboot...
Cut to Nomad being beamed into deep space and exploding with a ring of fire.
JarJar the Hut? (Score:2)
It would be a pity if, instead of just using the opportunity to "clean up" some of the cheesier effects, if they instead used the opportunity to tweak the story line, insert new characters, added ridges to Klingons, etc. I don't say this as a "historical society of Star Trek" member or any such thing, it's just that such manipulation tends to stick out like a sore thumb and distract more than enhance.
Oh, wow (Score:4, Funny)
Leave. It. Alone. (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously - leave it alone so that anyone in the distant future who stumbles across it can actually learn about the ones who wrote it. While Trek isn't exactly a classic like, oh, something by H.G. Wells, it may someday become something akin to a classic, given its popularity. We can learn a lot about Wells' time and society from our century-plus future vantage point by reading the stories and seeing period sketches and prints illustrating it, if possible. Sure, it's not exactly eye candy, but it's worth it.
Too much volence... (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. (Score:2)
replace sound stages with rich backgrounds (Score:2)
on a sound stages with cheap plaster rocks and coloured lights. They
could matt out the actors and superimpose a richer appearing planet surface.
All right. . . (Score:2)
In the words of... (Score:2)
Noooo!!... ohhh who the hell cares?? (Score:3, Insightful)
HDTV Star Trek sounds cool to me anyway.
Makeover vs New Stuff (Score:2)
It's much easier and better to remake special FX in an old good movie/serial than producing new ones with higher quality (in the contents I mean), as we've seen in Star Wars episodes 4 to 6.
Wolrd is getting worse.
won't work (Score:3, Interesting)
Question (Score:2)
More CGI! (Score:2)
Come up dudes, get your imagine on!
Additional Star Trek CGI ideas... (Score:3, Funny)
How about some CGI boobs for Tasha Yar to go with that smokin ass?
Can they CGI Troy looking like she can actually walk in heels without tripping?
CGI Force Fields that if touched more than once, start burning off fingers.
Can we get a CGI of Wesley Crusher's head flying off, thanks to Worf's Batlef after fucking up the Enterprise computer once again?
CGI Borg sex! "Can you assimilate THIS, baby?"
CGI Data killing everyone in a cyber-dream: "Why the fuck do I keep saving these people, when they never let me drive the ship?"
CGI some sweaters for the crew that dont require constant readjustment.
Please, PLEASE CGI Picard kneeing Dr. Crusher in the groin for disobeying orders. I would PAY to see that.
Next thing you know... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
:-)