Star Trek, which show is better?

[Number Six]

The Original Series - Does NOT include the BUTCHERED updates version - I am a PURIST
The Next Generation - Very hard choice for #2
Voyager - Everything but the KAZON
Deep Space 9 - Jadzia Dax was the best, but I did like Ezri Dax too
Enterprise - ALL WRONG for too many reasons

[yoda313]

Does NOT include the BUTCHERED updates version - I am a PURIST

Well I'm glad its not just complaining about the STAR WARS special editions any more! Hollywood is an equal opportunity offender now!



FYI I'm moving this to the offtopic forum. This is much more appropriate for that as it is not directly related to any pressing video related issues.

[jagabo]

When are they going to update the special effects in Georges Méliès' Le Voyage Dans La Lune?

[yoda313]

When are they going to update the special effects in Georges Méliès' Le Voyage Dans La Lune?

Right after they colorize it

[Number Six]

I thought you might be interested in this little known fact about the ENTERPRISE-D

data.gif

[AlanHK]

The Original Series - Does NOT include the BUTCHERED updates version

I really don't have a problem with these. See this article which has links to a gallery of comparisons.

I don't think they changed any dialogue or live action.
There isn't a "Greedo shot first", "walkie talkies instead of guns" or other such messing with canon.

And for me the "original" version was black and white on an 18" screen. I don't really want to recreate that experience, though I was happy enough at the time.

[vhelp]

I loved the 60's series. Yeah, I grew up in TOS ERA.

I like every Sstar Trek franchise. Including the Enterprise. I gues there were many bias people that did not like this series for one reason or another. I think that those who didn't was because everyone else didn't. And that's tipicle but most discuraging and unfurtunate--for them.

But the one thing I hated was what they did to all these series. They tainted the quality aspects.

True, everything what orsetto stated. Also..

(for those who grew up in the 60's, may identify and appreciate)

In the 60's (and some 70's) shows, any shows, the special guest appearances or guest stars were always distinquished or well-known actors/actresses of there time/generation. There's a certain level of appreciation to this. And these guests were usually in the 40's or older, and they brang a certain something, loyaty, for lack of better defination. But, todays shows (and movies) just ain't the same in these regards. You have children or punky showoffs, who think they are gifts to women or showbusiness. All bluffs and foney's I tell ya.. foney. Anyway.

Also, 7of9, again, true also. unforgettable performances

she added depth (in some way, not expressable enough for me, to you all) among other unique gifts to the show--not just her body, as much as I (we) loved it, there was more to it than just that.

Voyager was pretty much my favorite. It had some great episodes, much like TNG did. One of my favorites were Jitrel. If you were really into it w/out bias, you could almost tear by the end.

Same for TNG, such as the episode, Tapestry, was an imotional experience. I can not put into words the experience I felt in that EP. It was a great ep for sure. Then there was, The Inner Light ep. I remember some awsome phrases: "timber, when the walls fell". "The river, tamar". and, "shokka, when the walls fell" -- I think was how they went this was a fantastic episode, too. And these two EP's can be found on, "The Jean-Luc Picard Collection" dvd--8 full episodes.

-vhelp 4952

:P *~*!*~*!~* HaPpY HoLiDaY *~*!*~*!~*

[Number Six]

The Original Series - Does NOT include the BUTCHERED updates version

I really don't have a problem with these. See this article which has links to a gallery of comparisons.

I don't think they changed any dialogue or live action.
There isn't a "Greedo shot first", "walkie talkies instead of guns" or other such messing with canon.

And for me the "original" version was black and white on an 18" screen. I don't really want to recreate that experience, though I was happy enough at the time.

No, they did not change any dialog, and live action would have been impossible to change. They used a technique called rotoscoping to cut out the background and dedicated display images that they replaced. I loved the weapon in The Doomsday Machine - it was so simple, pure and mysterious in the way that it worked and looked - They destroyed that for me when they made it metallic and machine-like looking, no longer mysterious - it was now a machine.

They are going to mess with canon though - I read that in the new upcoming movie, Spock's parents are both going to be Vulcan - SACRILEGE !!

I understand that you first saw Star Trek in black and white, but it was filmed in color - if it was originally black and white and then colorized, I would be very upset about it.

[AlanHK]

When are they going to update the special effects in Georges Méliès' Le Voyage Dans La Lune?

Right after they colorize it

They did that about 100 years ago.

a complete cut of the film was discovered in a French barn in 2002. Not only is it the most complete cut of the movie, but it is also entirely hand-colored. It was restored and premiered in 2003 at the Pordenone Silent Film Festival.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Kpnbl3tn58
(Includes cartoonish sound effects.)

And there was even a sequel, Voyage a travers l'impossible (1904):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPYyq9vB6fY

No prequels with animated Jarjars that I know of.

[AlanHK]

No, they did not change any dialog, and live action would have been impossible to change.

Not impossible. But expensive, and pointless.

They are going to mess with canon though - I read that in the new upcoming movie, Spock's parents are both going to be Vulcan.

Actually -- that always bothered me in TOS. It's completely impossible and absurd to imagine crossbreeding humans with aliens (especially ones with copper in their blood!). It's an idea from fantasy, (elves and such) not SF.
Anyway, there will be plenty of other changes too. It's a "reboot", that's clear.

I understand that you first saw Star Trek in black and white, but it was filmed in color.

I did know that.
My point was that even seeing it in colour was a novelty for me.
(We didn't have colour TV in Australia until 1975.)

The effects shots are what everyone is excited about, but in general the quality of the transfer has been improved greatly.

[jagabo]

I'm not excited about the new effects. I think they're pointless. Are Venus de Milo's tits too small? Do we have to enhance them too?

[AlanHK]

I'm not excited about the new effects. I think they're pointless.

By "excited" I meant exciting a response.
Which they certainly have done.

Are Venus de Milo's tits too small? Do we have to enhance them too?

Comparing a Trek matte painting with the Venus de Milo is a bit of a stretch.

And you're using "enhance" in a quite different sense.

[FulciLives]

I've seen a couple of the STAR TREK: TOS shows on local HDTV channels ... the episodes with the new CGI effects.

Truth be told I kind of like them and yes I am a big fan of the original having grown up with them on TV in the 70's and 80's syndication.

I've also seen websites with old scene pics vs new CGI scene pics. I think they did it all very tastefully.

Not to mention they kick ass in HDTV quality

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[gadgetguy]

I agree with all of your rankings EXCEPT enterprise. I couldn't stand the show. Too slow and annoying. Plus I just hate going BACKWARDS in a franchise. That is what worries me about the new Star Trek movie. They have all these other series they could move to a movie and they go backwards??????

FYI TNG is my favorite

You're entitled to your opinion, even if it is wrong... :P

[jagabo]

Are Venus de Milo's tits too small? Do we have to enhance them too?

Comparing a Trek matte painting with the Venus de Milo is a bit of a stretch.

And you're using "enhance" in a quite different sense.

Oh, you're right. How stupid of me! A pushup bra would be much more appropriate. I'm sure the sculpturer would have used one had the technology been available.



(Yeah, I'm unemployed and have time to waste.)

[SquirrelDip]

I agree with all of your rankings EXCEPT enterprise. I couldn't stand the show. Too slow and annoying. Plus I just hate going BACKWARDS in a franchise. That is what worries me about the new Star Trek movie. They have all these other series they could move to a movie and they go backwards??????

FYI TNG is my favorite

So... You hated Star Wars I, II and III ??

[jagabo]

So... You hated Star Wars I, II and III ??

I didn't care much for them.

[SquirrelDip]

Nor did I - but Yado???

[orsetto]

The Original Series - Does NOT include the BUTCHERED updates version

I really don't have a problem with these. See this article which has links to a gallery of comparisons.

A lot of people don't have a problem with it, and I can respect their enjoyment of these restorations and "upgrades", as well as their reasoning: its personal taste. What bothers me is when the originals of anything that was culturally significant are pulled from circulation and the world loses access to them: thats just plain wrong. Nobody asked Toshiba to pay off Paramount to make a big splashy box set to promote a new (and clearly doomed) HiDef format: now that the money is spent, it has to be paid off, and these restorations are all anyone will see for the next 25 years in syndication or home video.

While I can understand that many people consider the concepts of "pristinely clean" and "hi definition" to be joined at the hip, and they just can't enjoy anything with "flaws", I think this attitude sets a bad precedent. We have nearly 100 years of motion pictures and TV shows that were not made in HiDef, glossy, unrealistically smooth 1080p: should we just refuse to watch it all because it doesn't meet the standards required by the rigid, piss-poor LCD displays we're now stuck with? I remember when I heard about the Toshiba/Paramount restorations, I ran to get the originals before they went out of production. All the "reviews" said the first run of single-side DVDs were "terrible" and "looked lousy", that the current pricey Season Boxsets on DL discs were much better and the coming "HD-DVD restorations" would blow all of them away. Thankfully, I couldn't afford the Season Boxsets (the DL discs are glitchy anyway), and ended up with a used, complete set of the initial 40-disc release. To my eye, that "inferior" set looks incredible! It looks better than it EVER did in its original network run or in syndication or on the Paramount VHS tapes. Whatever little bits of occasional grime appear just reminds me this is "vintage" stuff I'm watching, that doesn't bother me at all. The colors leap off the screen and I see detail I never imagined. Almost as important, I *love* the cheezy F/X with the plainly visible traveling mattes and obviously repetitive planet paintings: *that* is the show as it was made to be, ahead of its time yet caught within it. Replacing that with "enhanced" CGI just kills the time-warp fun of it for me.

One could make an argument for an overall restoration project to bring old materials more in line with Hi Def expectations, but monkeying around with things like F/X that most of the audience already memorized and gets a kick out of seems like gilding the lily. Especially when it doesn't seem to accomplish anything for the studio: its not as if these remastered old Treks are drawing a huge audience in syndication, or preventing channel surfers from moving on: the mass audience is not interested in anything older than ten minutes, no matter how much eye candy you stuff into it, so why tamper with and destroy the integrity of classic material in an expensive, futile attempt to cater to those people? At the very least, make the intact versions available for special order or at a higher price. Put a coupon offer in the restored boxsets, or something: keep our options open.

[Number Six]

All the "reviews" said the first run of single-side DVDs were "terrible" and "looked lousy", that the current pricey Season Boxsets on DL discs were much better and the coming "HD-DVD restorations" would blow all of them away. Thankfully, I couldn't afford the Season Boxsets (the DL discs are glitchy anyway), and ended up with a used, complete set of the initial 40-disc release. To my eye, that "inferior" set looks incredible! It looks better than it EVER did in its original network run or in syndication or on the Paramount VHS tapes. Whatever little bits of occasional grime appear just reminds me this is "vintage" stuff I'm watching, that doesn't bother me at all. The colors leap off the screen and I see detail I never imagined. Almost as important, I *love* the cheezy F/X with the plainly visible traveling mattes and obviously repetitive planet paintings: *that* is the show as it was made to be, ahead of its time yet caught within it. Replacing that with "enhanced" CGI just kills the time-warp fun of it for me.

One could make an argument for an overall restoration project to bring old materials more in line with Hi Def expectations, but monkeying around with things like F/X that most of the audience already memorized and gets a kick out of seems like gilding the lily. Especially when it doesn't seem to accomplish anything for the studio: its not as if these remastered old Treks are drawing a huge audience in syndication, or preventing channel surfers from moving on: the mass audience is not interested in anything older than ten minutes, no matter how much eye candy you stuff into it, so why tamper with and destroy the integrity of classic material in an expensive, futile attempt to cater to those people? At the very least, make the intact versions available for special order or at a higher price. Put a coupon offer in the restored boxsets, or something: keep our options open.

I also have the original 40 disc DVD release - they were way more expensive than the season releases that came afterwards. I paid $600 for the 40 discs - if I waited, I could have purchased the season sets for $123, but that was about 2 years later. I searched for many reviews to find out if the season sets were better quality than the 40 discs - it seems that both sets were authored from the same restored masters with only a slight edge to the season sets, except that the season sets were dual layer and the 40 discs were single layer.

I also agree that they should have done the high resolution restoration of the episodes intact - some of the replaced material was very nice, but it is no longer STAR TREK - THE ORIGINAL SERIES anymore.

I feel the same way about colorization. The studios released Bewitched in 2 different versions - the first 2 seasons were B&W, but they colorized them and gave the public a choice. Now as far as I am concerned, colorization did not make 1 bit of difference for this show, but I chose to purchase them as they were - in B&W. The Twilight Zone would have been a butcher job if it was colorized. I do have to admit that there is 1 show that might be acceptable if it was colorized - that would be The Munsters ( I did not buy them anyway - I am partial to The Addams Family, which should never be colorized ).

I know that I went off topic - but I had to rant about these issues, and this was the perfect opportunity to do so. Thank you all for your patience

[zoobie]

captain kiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirk.................. ..go baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack
remember the currrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrse

[yoda313]

Yes I do like the Star Wars prequels....

The thing about Star Trek to me is that it is always about the FUTURE. Not the past of the future. I just felt like they were coping out.

And whats this about Spocks mother being vulcan in the new movie????? My god Rodenberry has got be turning over in his grave with that one!

Besides about Star Wars there were only 3 movies originally so not much was covered. Whereas Star Trek has so many hundreds of episodes I felt that any thing in the "future past" was documented to my satisfaction.

I would much rather have them go a hundred years in the future of the TNG timeline (ie 25th century for those keeping count) then going backwards.

[FulciLives]

I saw the new Star Trek trailer once or twice and I thought they had Spock's dad saying something about "how it will be hard living in two worlds" or something. Maybe he meant being Vulcan and living among humans but I thought he was talking about his mixed heritage.

Would be weird if they changed that ...

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
I'm at work where such things are blocked out but I'll have to watch the trailer again to see exactly what he says ...

[Number Six]

Is it possible that the producers got so many negative reactions that they backed off? Maybe Gene Roddenberry's spirit smited them. I certainly hope so! Either way, I don't think that I will have any interest in this movie.


I think that the current guardians of the Star Trek franchise need a trip to the village so that we can find out which side they are on

[gadgetguy]

I'm eagerly anticipating the movie, but I don't have high expectations. I am not at all impressed with the cast selections and it's always been my impression that there is too much difference in the crews ages to have them all at the academy at the same time, so I don't know how plausible that premise is. None the less, I will watch it in the theatre and buy the DVD when it becomes available.

@Number Six - is there a hidden reason why Riker was called Number 1?

[yoda313]

@Number Six - is there a hidden reason why Riker was called Number 1?

For shame! You should turn in your trekker badge right this minute!

First of I'm sure it had to be homage to the FIRST pilot THE CAGE. In it the first officer (Majel Barret by the way ) was called number one.

Second he is his second in command but first in rank after him.

Third,...... can't speculate beyond that but the original first pilot is my main reasoning for Riker being called NUMBER 1.

check wikipedia - I'm sure it's there.

EDIT - It sure is! Apparently it is a naval tradition to call the executive officer number 1:
In the Star Trek: Early Voyages comic book series she is called Lieutenant Commander Eunice Robbins.

Since the very first Star Trek episode, some have interpreted her title as being a proper name. As stated above, one of the novels even suggests she was called that because she was the prime example of her species. In fact "Number One" has always[citation needed] been a common term applied to the Executive Officer of a ship, particularly in the Royal Navy (although in the US Navy the Executive Officer is typically referred to as "X-O"). In Star Trek: The Next Generation, Captain Jean-Luc Picard frequently uses the title "Number One" to address his first officer, William T. Riker.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_One_(Star_Trek)

[zoobie]

zero was already taken by that egghead

[Number Six]

@Number Six - is there a hidden reason why Riker was called Number 1?

Actually, Number 6 WAS Number 1

Yoda is correct as to the Rank and Protocol for the chain of command

BUT, I think that you had a completely different meaning in mind - and I can think of some very funny, but completely obscene responses that I will not divulge at this time ( Yes - I know - I have a very twisted sense of humor )

[gadgetguy]

@Yoda - Believe me, I know all about the Star Trek use of the #1 shorthand, but my reference really didn't have anything to do with Star Trek or Riker's "position", but rather a reference to "The Prisoner" series from which our friend Number Six gets his moniker.

@Number Six - Actually, there's still a question as to whether Number 6 was actually Number 1, at the end of the final episode there are clues to indicate that he was still being manipulated by the controllers of the Village. I'd have to back and re-watch it to remember exactly what those clues are, but I do remember them being there. But of course, we're getting even further off topic here.

[Number Six]

@Number Six - Actually, there's still a question as to whether Number 6 was actually Number 1, at the end of the final episode there are clues to indicate that he was still being manipulated by the controllers of the Village. I'd have to back and re-watch it to remember exactly what those clues are, but I do remember them being there. But of course, we're getting even further off topic here.

There is no true answer, but I interpret it that he is Number 1 because it was his face that was revealed when the final mask was removed. He was able to leave the Village and return to what was supposed to be a normal life, but there are signs that he is still not free because the Butler went with him, the doors to his home were now automatic, and the Black Car that captured him in the beginning was there at the end.

But, now it is time to let this thread get back on track to Star Trek