Star Trek

Post by **Ben** » May 11th, 2009, 3:00 pm

The long known comments on the bad image quality is what's kept me off these releases:

Ben wrote:Yep...that's not what bothers me though...check out the comments on picture quality, and that it seems only Khan has been restored for "true HD", even going by Paramount's own publicity wording. What does that mean for the image quality on the others? Apparently these are basically screening prints transferred to BD as opposed to proper clean-up/remasterings.

As this Gulliver disc has confirmed, there's nothing like looking at a <I>bad</I> source in high definition.

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » May 11th, 2009, 4:17 pm

Well,

If The Bits confirms these stories about the HD quality I'm just going to hang on to my two-disc standard-def DVD sets after all.

An HD upgrade isn't worth it if Paramount can't be bothered to do this right!

I remember what happened with the last Trek movie releases. The first DVD releases had next-to-no extras and then we got the 2-disc releases just a few years later. Of course, again there were image quality problems in spite of this being the best presentation of the films on home video. I was among the people not happy to see that the theatrical cuts AND aspect ratios were mismanaged for at least half the films.

I know people are getting sick of this double-dip treatment. Bad enough to skimp on extras but when the masters haven't been cleaned in over 20 years that's not good!

People who not obsessive-compulsive collectors are just going to take a wait-and-see attitude (the safest to approach this) and not buy the films until they're done right.

I have VHS copies of the bulk of these films and quite a few of them exhibit dirt, mild scratching, and film shifting (it's really bad in the title sequences for Star Trek III).

Paramount has made more than enough money on Star Trek to pay for quality restorations. Don't believe all the hype about TOS being the sole preserve of geekdom or that Paramount has lost money on Star Trek --

These films did well on VHS and the DVD sales weren't that bad, either.

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » May 11th, 2009, 6:37 pm

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents (Monday, 11 May 2009)

Reviews are up on The Digital Bits about the quality of the Star Trek feature film Blu ray releases.

Depending on your POV, the glass if half-full or half-empty.

Not a great way to watch the films if you have a large set...

Most pertinent quote -- "These are EXACTLY the kinds of titles high-end Blu-ray and home theatre enthusiasts crave on the format, and many of them are going to buy these discs and (with the exception of Khan) be disappointed."

<Sigh>

Again, Paramount?

Post by **Randall** » May 11th, 2009, 10:22 pm

I'm the "half-full" guy, so I felt better when Bill said, "As I said, they're not bad. They're definitely better looking than the DVD versions and very watchable, with generally great color and contrast. And the new TrueHD audio mixes are fantastic."

OK, so they're better than the DVDs. They could be better, but they're still the best I can get in my home theater. I got a decent price selling off the 2-disc versions, so nothing lost. Might be re-done later on, but for now I'll be satisfied with these.

Post by **eddievalient** » May 12th, 2009, 9:48 am

Immediately after viewing the film, I knew I liked it but I wasn't sure what to make of it but now that I've had time to sleep on it and think about it, I've come to realize how truly brilliant this film is. The idea of alternate timelines has a basis in scientific theory and, as written, the film pulls off a tricky balance of being both a restart and a sequel to Roddenberry's universe. My mom thought the film would be a simple prequel to the original series and afterward asked me how it could be, given the events of the story. I tried (several different ways) to explain the concept of time travel and parallel universes and she didn't get it, even though she enjoyed the film a lot. Anyone who says this film isn't cerebral obviously wasn't paying attention. In many ways, this is the ultimate Star Trek film and I believe it can stand proudly next to the best of the original series (City on the Edge of Forever in particular, since the basic idea for the story shares some similarity to that episode). The writers know exactly what they're doing and I eagerly anticipate seeing what they come up with next.

Post by **Dacey** » May 12th, 2009, 10:56 am

I thought it was great. The story worked for me and the cast was spot-on. Special effects were top notch as well. I'm very much looking forward to the next one.

Post by **OriginalGagBonkers** » May 12th, 2009, 11:12 pm

If you want my opinion of this movie see the post on my blog

<b>[LINK REMOVED BY MODERATOR FOR OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE]</b>

be warned that minor language is on the blog.

Post by **eddievalient** » May 12th, 2009, 11:20 pm

Gee, I was talking to someone just the other day who HATES Star Trek, absolutely loathes it, but they liked the new movie. I guess that means the the fans are the majority and people like you are the minority (probably an extreme minority). Your loss since you obviously don't like intelligent entertainment. Death Race might be more your speed (no pun intended). It's an entertaining movie where you don't have to actually, ya know, think. Knock yourself out.

Post by **Randall** » May 13th, 2009, 12:03 am

OriginalGagBonkers,
Usually, a review actually discusses why one loves or hates a movie. All I saw was a lot of simpleminded vulgarity (not "minor language"), with obvious typos. Please don't bother posting links to dreck like that again.

Post by **Ben** » May 13th, 2009, 9:07 am

After reading Rand's comment, I looked at OGB's link and agree fully with him. As such, I've removed the link from your post for offensive language and a review which, basically, brought nothing to the table.

Post by **eddievalient** » May 13th, 2009, 9:24 am

Just a reminder: Amazon's Star Trek sale ends on Friday. Fortunately, I was able to afford to get the rest of Deep Space Nine so I'll have the whole series. For anything else, I'll have to wait for the dvds to go on sale again.

Post by **James** » May 13th, 2009, 2:18 pm

Just bought the BD set! I've only had a chance to watch about 10 minutes of the first film. I'm using a 6.1 DD setup and the sound is amazing. As for the picture quality on my 60" screen: I have to admit I'm more distracted by how bad the effects look than any other video quality issues. We'll see how that changes as I watch the later films and he effects get better.

Post by **Whippet Angel** » May 13th, 2009, 10:43 pm

I just got back from seeing it. I'm not a Star Trek fan, and I only went because my boyfriend wanted to see it.

My god, it was awesome!!!

They seem to be accomplishing their goal of bringing in new fans...

Post by **Ben** » May 14th, 2009, 5:16 pm

I still can't bring myself to buy the BD set knowing that I'll buy them all again when a "proper" set comes out, but I am sorely tempted. Should I do it? The sale ends tomorrow...!

Grrrr....bah to temptation.

Looking on the flip side of it, this is probably the only treatment these will get for a long while, and it's true they will look better than DVD. Man, I'm torn. If they go and put out a Director's Cut edition at the end of the year with the other movies or the new one or something...arrrgghhh!!

I think I'm going to wait. If I have to pay more in the long run at least I won't have wasted money on this set to start with. One thing I'm going to try and be very good about is not starting to double dip on BD sets.

Apart from all that...finally my take on the new movie:

http://animated-views.com/2009/star-tre ... iny-toons/

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » May 15th, 2009, 1:03 pm

Might I make a suggestion about BD upgrades?

If you have a set or projector less than 50", the digital scraping on the image/loss of grain probably won't upset you.

However, if you have anything on the order of 100" you'll see what the loss of grain does to the detail in the images.

Keep that in mind for purchases.

The other film released recently(?) or soon to be re-released is Terminator 2. It's already been said that the previous BD release has better picture quality even though the newer release is packed with the extras.

Again, the visual image issue is the lack of grain/grain removal by digital sharpening/restoration.

This is not new and is something that I harped on well over a year ago and something that was predicted to be an issue by several well-known home video sites.

It is definitely beginning to affect some of the newer releases of pre-digital films. I hope the learning curve to deal with the issue is fast otherwise there are going to be a lot more complaints than there already are.