The Star Trek Franchise

Guess I'll just start with the ranking.

TV:

STAR TREK: THE ORIGINAL SERIES
STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE NINE
STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION
ENTERPRISE
STAR TREK: VOYAGER

Films:

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN
STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT
STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY
STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME
STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE
STAR TREK: GENERATIONS
STAR TREK: INSURRECTION
STAR TREK (2009)
STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER
STAR TREK: NEMESIS


I would have put DS9 on top as that has the best consistent quality of all the shows, but the first two seasons of TOS are so iconic and well made that if I could only watch one of the five shows it would be that.

Man love star trek. Though for me my top shows would be next gen/voyager. Never really got into ds9. But I did watch it all the time. Enterprise had its ups and downs but towarfd the end was getting good. So I would probably rank the shows as next gen/voyager/star trek/ent/ds9. The films that is a bit harder for me. Seen them all. Been awhile since I seen most of the original crew ones. But def like khan, the wales one, and from next gen my fav was first contact. And nutrek film was good too. Can't wait to see the sequel. And all series wise my fav characters are kirk/spock/picard, data, archer, chip to name a few.

So, it looks like the next film is titled STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS. Heh.

Was just reading that. Interesting title. Not really feeling the title and odd they didn't add a : between star trek and into darkness. Plus you think it sounds better addding the before darkness?

The way it's phrased reminds me of TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON. Apparently they wanted to avoid using a colon because according to them "everything that people are turned off about when it comes to Trek is represented by the colon". Whatever, the lack of it still makes the title sound awkward. Despite the title of the franchise, it's not a phrase that's ever used because it would sound weird in the context of a sentence, which is why it was only ever uttered once in the entire franchise in one movie "you're all astronauts? On some kind of star trek?"

Ya : and/or adding the in the title would sound better. But in the end who cares on title as long as film is good. Also who knows title could change too for all we know.

Just bought the first season of TOS on blu-ray on the 46th anniversary, which was yesterday. Always great to watch and it makes me wish we had a TV show going on at this moment. It would be nice to just have a weekly Star Trek series every week. Watch the characters grow, see them go to a great many new adventures and in this day and age story arcs would be more approved by studios.

That's another thing, the best possible format for Trek is TV. Because the stories are so broad you're able to a great number of things on Trek from episodes about war, court martial, friendship, cosmic unknowns, comedies, allegories, ect. Rebooting it as a film series instead of a TV series I think was a mistake. How many movies are we gonna get with this crew? Three to four years between that's like what, three films? Maybe four? Kind of a waste. And because Paramount sees it as a tentpole film that means it's going to primarily be an action film with space battles, phaser fights, PEW PEW PEW. If they go a whole different route I'll be very relieved. But since this is being written by the TRANSFORMERS guys, I'll remain very skeptical.

Anyway, to TOS, the one that started it all, the most memorable, always the best:

To me, TOS always had a wonderful simplicity to it. I mean, I love TNG, I do, but if Picard was sent on a diplomatic mission to some backwater planet so that their queen can sign wtf she needs to sign in order for her planet to join the Federation, we'd have scene after laborious scene of Picard working towards a common understanding between the Federation and her people, probably saving her ass from some hardliner isolationists and thus helping her see that he truly is a man of peace representing a benevolent organization.

But if it was Kirk? He'd fuck her.

Sisko would only have to hit the negotiation table with his fist and the queen would sign in for the Federation.

Janeway would fuck it up and say "to hell with it, set a course to Earth."

And of course Archer would probably beg and say it's his first time.

Kidding!

Anyway, I liked some of the films, and I liked the original show. That's about as far as my 'Star Trek' fandom goes.

And I thoroughly enjoyed 'Star Trek '09'.

Apologist Puncher wrote:

Kidding!

Anyway, I liked some of the films, and I liked the original show. That's about as far as my 'Star Trek' fandom goes.

And I thoroughly enjoyed 'Star Trek '09'.

I'm pretty much right there with you. I've seen the first season of TOS, a liberal smattering of TNG episodes, all TNG movies and Abrams/2009.

EDIT- I should add that I'd probably like Star Trek more but I just find certain concepts to be hard to believe. The technology? Eh. Either you accept the technological/fuzzy science premise of the franchise or you don't. So that doesn't bother me. Nah, it's the shiny, happy almost utopia that the Federation represents. I just have a huge problem believing in that. The political landscape in America is unspeakably divided, and not on minor issues that ultimately mean nothing. These come down to fundamental differences in worldview. And this is not to speak of those who exploit/exacerbate those differences for commercial, political or whatever other gain. We're the "United" States in name only. It's therefore pretty hard for me to buy into the concept of not only mankind getting its shit together well enough to be a founding member-planet of the Federation but also that it would fit with alien races that would theoretically have even different worldviews from us. Not to sound misanthropic but I think division and disagreement are far more true of the human race than the ability to put aside our differences. The core premise of what Star Trek represents to me is just too hard to buy into.

DS9 is worth checking out, especially seasons 4-7.

Man i too would love is there was another tv series going. Maybe we can get another one after another film or two out of jj. And just cause the film universe was rebooted. Which it wasnt a full on reboot. Just an alternate timeline universe. Everything of old trek is still there if any writers/producers/directors wanted to go back to that timeline. No different then the many many series that had altered timeline or parallel dimensions episodes. I havent gotten any of the series sets on bluray yet. I want to some day, definately first want to get the remastered bluray set for next gen season 1 that just came out a month ago.

As for a future show i have no idea what direction or who i want to run it. I would hope who ever does get the chance to bring trek back to tv. Will do it right and know there trek verse well. Speaking of that michael dorn who played worf been talking up lately he like to make a new show and focus it around his worf character. As for other stuff have any of you guys seen the fan made stuff like phase 2. I seen a few of there episodes before. And i know a actor who just recently shot a few episodes for that fan thing that probably be online in a few months. I dont know that phase 2 crew schedule of posting new episodes.

non_amos wrote:I'd just like to point out that the pic of Kirk, Spock & McKoy from ST2, although at first glance you think they're wearing red uniforms, when you look again it's actually more of a burgundy color. Ya know, kinda like Singerman's suit. But Trek got it better of course.

As for the new Trek characters being out of character, I kinda agree and disagree. I think for the most part they 'got' the characters but some things happened I didn't necessarily agree with, like Spock having a relationship with Uhura. I mean, you might look at Zoe Saldana & think 'why not?' but remember, we're talking the nature of the characters in the original Trek. It's one thing for Kirk to be 'bedding' a green woman but Spock? Go back & watch the original series. Remember the episode AMOK TIME I believe it was called? Spock 'went into heat' for lack of a better term & had 'to mate' per Vulcan tradition. It's also the ep where he thought he'd killed Kirk. But when that whole thing was resolved, Spock no longer had the urge to mate. And there were very few eps other than that that even dealt with Spock's 'needs'. There was one where he got 'influenced' by spores on a planet they visited but that didn't last. There was also the attraction that Nurse Chapel had for Spock & he seemed at times to 'feel' it too but he obviously suppressed it & didn't act on it unless I'm forgetting something like another 'high' ep. So in the new Trek Spock being a 'horn-dog' with Uhura just seems out of character when you know your Trek. Now whether that's a major gripe or a minor quibble, you tell me.

thecolorsblend wrote:Yep. My understanding was that nothing was ever suggested for Spock and Uhura in TOS. It's one of those things that wouldn't likely have changed in an alternate timeline. It kind of makes me critical of the alternate timeline concept, actually. If they'd called it a reboot (which is basically what it is in practical terms), you could get by with that as new continuity isn't beholden to the old one. But it being an alternate timeline preserves the original, sure, but it doesn't necessarily offer this kind of latitude for the characters.

I'm not so invested in Trek that I really give a shit, mind you, I'm just saying...

It would have been a lot cleaner if they did just do a straight up reboot instead of trying to connect it in some way with the other continuity, but I guess Abrams felt he needed Prime Spock as sort of a validation for his film for fans, that it isn't too far removed from the old show. Initially I was weirded out by the whole Spock/Uhura thing in the 2009 film. I don't mind the idea too much now, but I do mind the way it was done in the film. When they have their first moment in the film it's in the turbolift and for the most part it stays true to the characters. Spock gets to have this one private moment with her and then tells her they need to get work done because there's a madman on the loose. Fine, I was initially peeved by the pairing but it's not so bad. They could have just used Nurse Chapel like in the TV show where she made her feelings clear to Spock, but I guess they wanted to keep the ensemble minimal for a two hour film. Then there's the scene where Spock's father admits to him that he did truly love his mother, that it wasn't all just cold logic. That's fine, because they're father and son speaking privately. Vulcans are deeply private about their feelings and try not to display them so openly because it might compromise matters.

However, it's when Spock is making out with Uhura on the transporter pad in front of everyone. Right there is all wrong. Vulcans, no matter the circumstances, would never do such a thing in public as that goes against their beliefs that have stayed strong for a thousand years. If anything Spock would try to be even more dispassionate during this crisis with Nero as a way of honoring the home planet he lost and help maintain their culture. Instead during the scene where Kirk offers mercy to Nero, Spock flat out says he's against it for personal reasons. WRONG WRONG WRONG. That's more of a Worf thing from The Next Generation, it does not fit in with Spock's character, even if Nero did kill his mother and his entire home planet he would still try to at least take a dispassionate stance and see that Nero gets tried for his crimes, not flat out condemn him in a black hole. But I guess that becomes moot as Kirk immediately blasts him away.

I see your "hate blinders" were on, and in full-effect when you watched the film.

Had they NOT been on, you would have noticed that not only was Spock half-human, but that they showed from CHILDHOOD he allowed his human emotions to take over in the heat of the moment. Which was reaffirmed when he turned down the Science Council invitation due to them "dissing" his mother. And then yet AGAIN when Kirk goaded him into almost killing him with his bare hands.

Those things you mentioned may have been out of character for TOS Spock, but, as was set-up throughout the film, not THIS Spock.

I simply dont believe in Abrams interpretation of Spock, hate blinders on or not. What made TOS Spock so unique was that he had emotions boiling inside him but being half human he didn't have nearly the same mental disipline that full Vulcans had so there was always a struggle and they would creep out at times. When you have him give into his emotions more expressively in NuTrek making out with Uhura and expressing a desire for vengeance, and have him throw aside logic, it feels as wrong as Superman stalking his girlfriend he led behind with a child. However, unlike SR, they can easily restore Spock's character in a follow up story and explain away his discarding of logic as the death of his mother and planet being the cause, since that doesn't happen everyday. Heck, I think nuTrek overall has a good mine of threads that you could follow up with a better story. The consequences of Vulcan's destruction. Kirk being thrust from cadet to captain is put in question. Spock trying to embrace logic more than ever as a way of preserving his culture. The once comical Scott put in a sistuation that hardens his character into the pro seen in the original series. Lots of potential, too bad we don't have a TV series to take advantage of all that.

I do hope the best for INTO DARKNESS, but the writers better step up and do something both bold and faithful to TOS.

James Stocks wrote:I simply dont believe in Abrams interpretation of Spock, hate blinders on or not.

Clearly. The Hate is strong with this one.

What made TOS Spock so unique was that he had emotions boiling inside him but being half human he didn't have nearly the same mental disipline that full Vulcans had so there was always a struggle and they would creep out at times. When you have him give into his emotions more expressively in NuTrek making out with Uhura and expressing a desire for vengeance, and have him throw aside logic, it feels as wrong as Superman stalking his girlfriend he led behind with a child.

Hoo-boy, I just REALLY want to cut loose on THIS little bit of ignorant hyperbole...... But I'm not going to.

Instead, I will state that they are NOTHING ALIKE. That Abrams included Nimoy's Spock for one very important reason, and it's a reason that totally escaped you and people with your mis-guided view:

He was hitting you over the head with the fact that "your" Spock is still there. That he has not been changed ONE iota. That Quinto Spock is HIS Spock.

I could understand your line of thinking if Abrams just did a total reboot. That he took Nimoy Spock and threw out EVERYTHING that made the character who he was. Cut & dry, Nimoy Spock is GONE.

Kind of like BS did with Christopher Reeve's Superman in Singerman.

But he didn't.

If you want Nimoy's Spock, watch Nimoy's Spock to your hearts content. Watch it knowing he grew to be a nearly 200 year old Vulcan, who spent his remaining years surrounded by his people. Because as Abrams has shown, he WILL.

However, unlike SR, they can easily restore Spock's character in a follow up story and explain away his discarding of logic as the death of his mother and planet being the cause, since that doesn't happen everyday. Heck, I think nuTrek overall has a good mine of threads that you could follow up with a better story. The consequences of Vulcan's destruction. Kirk being thrust from cadet to captain is put in question. Spock trying to embrace logic more than ever as a way of preserving his culture. The once comical Scott put in a sistuation that hardens his character into the pro seen in the original series. Lots of potential, too bad we don't have a TV series to take advantage of all that.

I do hope the best for INTO DARKNESS, but the writers better step up and do something both bold and faithful to TOS.

Ah, so in other words: Wait and see?

Yep.

Nah, I can't say hate. It's too strong an emotion. I've stated my feelings about Abrams' films, but never went beyond that. Heck, I wish him all of luck for STAR WARS as I feel he's better suited to that franchise than Trek. And if I truly did have hate in me regarding Abram's on Trek, wouldn't I likely be dreading INTO DARKNESS? I can only go as far as being skeptical about bits (like the Transformers writers, yay), but it's way too early in the game.

Alright, I was pushing it with the SR comparison there. I'll take that back. But I stand firmly on not agreeing with Quinto Spock, set up or no set up. He just doesn't work for me. Bringing Nimoy back doesn't change that either, as his Spock really isn't written like the character seen before. Given how a lot of the things about Abrams film doesn't align (and this is even before the Kelvin attack) I do kind of see this film as a total reboot in a sense. Nimoy appears, but he's not playing the Spock from 1966-1991, but rather "Spock Prime", a senile Vulcan rambling about his past and how a supernova can destroy a galaxy.

The remastering of TNG continues.



It never ceases to amaze me how "new" the show looks. They did a really good job not just remastering it but also keeping the original film elements in great condition like that. It's hard to believe the footage is over 20 years old now, but hey.

I don't care how tough you think you are, if The Inner Light doesn't bring a tear to your eye, you don't have a soul.

By the by, are those the original effects or does the remastering also include updating the effects? I remember the 5th season well enough to say it has great effects (most of which still look badass) but I don't know if the effects in that commercial are the originals or not. I only ask because rather notoriously the effects for TOS were "upgraded" a while back.

They are definitely the original effects. Because the post production was all done on SD video, the only way to get the show out in true HD quality was to go back to the original negatives and redo everything. It's like a second post-production work. As far as I know, this is the biggest restoration project any studio has ever done. It's one thing to do restoration on movies, but this is 176 episodes of a sci-fi show with f/x. Pretty massive, they've been working on this for two years and it probably won't be finished until next year. I think it's great because it not only brings new life to the show but the special features so far have been pretty awesome and very candid. I usually don't like bonus stuff because they're usually fluff pieces, but the candor on these new features really makes it worthwhile.

It's too bad the same probably can't be done with TOS. I'm not 100% sure, but from what I understand the original effects elements are lost so that's why they did the CGI upgrading instead because the original optical works didn't hold up on HD, too much grain and optical printer artifacts. It would have been nice to see the TOS effects, just digitally recomposited so it's all cleaned up, pretty much like what Lucas did with the original effects when he didn't replace them with CGI. With TNG, I think the new HD compositing looks even better.

This video is a good example of a restoration of a TNG episode, the most obvious improvement being the color correction.

I've read (and tend to believe) the same about the first season or two of Buffy. The effects they used were decent enough at the time but the shit was mastered on video for broadcast so to properly remaster all of it for HD (or fuck me, even DVD), they'd pretty much have to start from scratch and rebuild everything, and the thinking goes that it is (or was) cost-prohibitive to do so. That's why those seasons look so horrible even on DVD. You've got gradient banding, color smearing, crushed blacks, blown whites, shitty small object detail and basically everything else you associate with el cheapo video mastering. I think those DVD's (unavoidably) capture every possible flaw digital video is capable of. They're watchable (I guess) but they definitely won't win any awards.

Still, TNG demonstrates there's value to be had in putting in the extra effort. That video you posted proves it. I didn't watch the whole thing but my favorite example of what can be accomplished with this type of remastering job is at 00:53. The LCARS display Data is manipulating looks okay, I guess, but when you see the remastered still swipe across, you can see fine detail on the display, an overall sharper picture, more accurate colors and flesh tones, improved black levels/shadow detail (the original REALLY looks like dog shit by comparison), etc etc etc. All of this is noticeable in the video but common sense tells you that a true HD presentation will look even better since there's a limit to what a crappy YouTube video can bring across. It's good enough to get the gist of it but the Blu-Ray will obviously look that much better.

As you say, I think it's commendable that this amount of work is being put into a TV series. Given the costs and logistics, I truly believe some fans would have understood if they'd elected to present the material in remastered SD rather than rebuilding the whole shit for HD purposes.

EDIT- This just occurred to me. I've not kept up much with Blu-Ray spec so I don't know but are 4:3 TV shows going to be presented in 4:3/480p video? A higher rez? Window-paned widescreen to preserve the 4:3 aspect ratio in order to get true HD rez?

Yes, the youtube is just a small taste of what to expect, I can only say that on blu-ray the show finally feels very film-like and it's nice to see the colors pop up like TOS. The blu-ray is 4:3 but still 1024p res, pretty much like any movie that has the top and bottom with black bars, only it's on the sides to preserve the aspect ratio. Same applies to older movies made before widescreen took over. For some reason, there was a huge demand for TNG to be presented in widescreen HD, like Seinfeld got that treatment. The folks working on the HD masters actually considered it but ultimately rejected it because of the issues that would crop up, such as the fact there would be image loss and that the picture would look soft (that's why true widescreen shows were shot on Super35 for better image quality). Kind of like how 2:35 movies cropped for 4:3 always looked very soft. This video featured on the blu-ray demonstrates the issues that are involved with trying to convert the show to widescreen.




As for Buffy, wasn't the first two seasons also shot on 16mm? You can see what the SD video mastering was like using 35mm film, but with 16mm it must be even worse. If Buffy is ever to be remastered the first two seasons would definitely benefit. THE WALKING DEAD is a good example as that was shot on 16mm but with today's HD mastering it's almost unnoticeable.

http://www.chud.com/151740/roberto-orci-confirmed-as-director-of-the-next-star-trek/

Paramount proves that they don't give a shit about Star Trek by hiring this truther jackass as the next director, who has ZERO experience in that profession. This is a really odd choice especially because this is supposed to be the film that's released on the 50th anniversary of the franchise. At least if this film crashes and burns, it will actually be an inside job.

At the same time, I'm kind of glad that CBS rejected his proposals for a new TV series. I feel TV is the best medium for Trek, so if Orci can only do the films, fine. He can fuck the film franchise back to death for all I care. In the meantime, I'll just look forward to the older shows getting remastered and whatever news about an upcoming series that doesn't have Bad Robot involved.

I'm with you. Trek is a TV show. Yeah, there have been movies. Good ones. Great ones, even. But at its purest, it's a TV idea. And it became a movie... and I think that purity got lost.

Same thing happened with Star Wars. It's a movie idea. And it became a TV show... and the purity got lost.

It'll never happen but I think there's juice to the idea of cancelling the movie thing and getting Nimoy and Shatner back for another season or two of the show.