Allow me to be absolutely clear about something.
I am not any sort of expert on the Star Trek films.
I am not a fan, cannot come up with a requisite line of dialogue (or Boltie) as a need arises.
I am not able to tell you if lines of dialogue, effects, or other attributes might be missing.
I can only relate what I’m seeing in a general sense.
As far as back history, I may be better than most.
The series of films began life as a video game, which became a TV series running at least two seasons, followed by various animated TV series through the decades.
I’ve always been of the opinion that the films had a certain “low-rent” look to them.
Effects, especially, seemed to lag behind the highest end norm. Not terribly so, but in some rather obvious ways. Compare the first film, created in 1979 to another medium budget sci-fi epic released two years earlier that spawned its own series of spin-offs, and the effects appear more “homespun.”
I’m not suggesting that they’re akin to those found in the Flash Gordon serials, in which tiny models supported by strings are pulled across in front of the camera, with sparklers attached to what may appear akin to be flying dildos.
Certainty not.
They just always seemed to lag a bit behind state of the art.
I’ll begin this review with the packaging, which is pretty much worthless in one important respect.
The physical packaging is fine. The films arrived in a blu-ray sized heavy paper box containing two plastic cases, each holding the requisite discs. The 4k is standard black, and contains seven discs, half of which were disconnected, and loose, but no matter.
The Blu-rays are treated in a similar manner, albeit with one extra disc – a bonus disc attributed to the Director’s Edition of the first film, for a total of 15 discs in the set. Is that Blu-ray bonus disc the same extra disc available in the separate new 4k release of the first film, along with the Director’s Edition? No idea.
The original film in its Director’s Edition receives its own disc, as does the original theatrical cut. For those who may not be aware, this was a problem production with a locked release date. I had a long discussion with Mr. Wise about what was occurring at Telluride in 1979, and he was not amused, but still his good-natured self. Hence the need for a reconstruction of the original filmmaker’s intent in 2001.
The second film, Star Trek II, The Wrath of Khan (1982) has both cuts on a single disc. Star Trek III, The Search for Spock (1984), Star Trek IV, The Voyage Home (1986) – I actually like this film – Star Trek V, The Final Frontier (1989) , and finally Star Trek VI, The Undiscovered Country (1991), which also has two cuts on the single disc, comprise the original set.
The cover art is fine. Basic illustrations of the five lead characters.
It’s the back cover which seems to have been designed by an automaton or AI creature – possibly that cute little Sony dog creature. It’s useless.
For whatever reason, some brain at the studio decided that since there were six films in the set, that everything about those films HAD to fit on the back cover. That’s an area 4 3/4 x 5 1/2 inches. Not a great deal of real estate.
But someone was told it had to fit.
So there’s an obvious, if perverse answer to the problem.
Make everything smaller.
All of the requisite information is there.
Titles, cast, release date, MPA ratings in the largest type imaginable – (Actually MPA rating are no longer necessary on home video releases) -all of the boiler plate for the crew, information about sound track albums…
and below all that, in an area about 1/4 of an inch by 4 3/4 is all of the information about special features, which is totally unreadable.
I’m not suggesting that the typography is small.
Negative. It’s SO small that the individual letters are broken up into half-tone dots. I attempted to figure out what the special features were with the use of a ten power loupe, and failed. I can’t imagine why the studio didn’t simply include a folded printed sheet along with the set delineating that information.
That idiocy aside, the films should be a pleasure to view, especially for fans.
As far as I can tell, they seem to be derived from OCNs, which obviously also contain all of the effects dupes. Main title sequences, sub-titles, etc are razor sharp and rock steady.
I cannot believe that anyone, with the possible exception of those who pray at the sacred Star Trek whatever, and may take exception to possible errors, will not be thrilled.
Again, as to specifics, color, densities, black levels, basic grain structure all looks pleasant. I’ll make the point again. I don’t know these films well enough to be able to gauge precisely what I’m seeing, but can relate that (as an outsider) they look and sound just fine.
Image – 5 (Dolby Vision)
Audio – 5 (all Dolby TrueHD 7.1, with the exception of the Director’s Edition, which is Dolby Atmos)
Pass / Fail – Pass
Plays nicely with projectors – Yes
Makes use of and works well in 4k – 3.75
Upgrade from Blu-rays – Yes, if you’re a fan
Upgrade from earlier 4k –
Here’s the rub.
In February of this year, Paramount released Star Trek: The Original 4-Movie Collection in 4k format.
That set was inclusive of the first four films, mit out the Director’s Edition of the first, but with both cuts of the second.
That’s a seven month spread between an incomplete set, and a complete set of the original films. The only phrase that comes to mind is “disingenuous to fans and collectors.”
So, for those who popped for the earlier set, and desire to have the complete series, you can purchase parts V and VI for $20 each, plus you can attain the new 3-disc set of the first film in both its Theatrical as well as Director’s Edition versions, along with a third disc of incomparable extras, for only $95. This comes with extra stuff that will bring to mind the old Warner Bros. boxes of junk.
What this “seems” to tell me, is that those who purchased the 4-film set back in February, can now either purchase the new collection for $120, and gift their old set, or purchase the two missing films for $40, plus the Director’s Edition for $95, for a total of $135, and still possibly not get what are described as the third disc of “Legacy extras.”
Is there something here that I’m not understanding?
Recommended (for mere humans)
Very Highly Recommended (for fans)
RAH
I am not any sort of expert on the Star Trek films.
I am not a fan, cannot come up with a requisite line of dialogue (or Boltie) as a need arises.
I am not able to tell you if lines of dialogue, effects, or other attributes might be missing.
I can only relate what I’m seeing in a general sense.
As far as back history, I may be better than most.
The series of films began life as a video game, which became a TV series running at least two seasons, followed by various animated TV series through the decades.
I’ve always been of the opinion that the films had a certain “low-rent” look to them.
Effects, especially, seemed to lag behind the highest end norm. Not terribly so, but in some rather obvious ways. Compare the first film, created in 1979 to another medium budget sci-fi epic released two years earlier that spawned its own series of spin-offs, and the effects appear more “homespun.”
I’m not suggesting that they’re akin to those found in the Flash Gordon serials, in which tiny models supported by strings are pulled across in front of the camera, with sparklers attached to what may appear akin to be flying dildos.
Certainty not.
They just always seemed to lag a bit behind state of the art.
I’ll begin this review with the packaging, which is pretty much worthless in one important respect.
The physical packaging is fine. The films arrived in a blu-ray sized heavy paper box containing two plastic cases, each holding the requisite discs. The 4k is standard black, and contains seven discs, half of which were disconnected, and loose, but no matter.
The Blu-rays are treated in a similar manner, albeit with one extra disc – a bonus disc attributed to the Director’s Edition of the first film, for a total of 15 discs in the set. Is that Blu-ray bonus disc the same extra disc available in the separate new 4k release of the first film, along with the Director’s Edition? No idea.
The original film in its Director’s Edition receives its own disc, as does the original theatrical cut. For those who may not be aware, this was a problem production with a locked release date. I had a long discussion with Mr. Wise about what was occurring at Telluride in 1979, and he was not amused, but still his good-natured self. Hence the need for a reconstruction of the original filmmaker’s intent in 2001.
The second film, Star Trek II, The Wrath of Khan (1982) has both cuts on a single disc. Star Trek III, The Search for Spock (1984), Star Trek IV, The Voyage Home (1986) – I actually like this film – Star Trek V, The Final Frontier (1989) , and finally Star Trek VI, The Undiscovered Country (1991), which also has two cuts on the single disc, comprise the original set.
The cover art is fine. Basic illustrations of the five lead characters.
It’s the back cover which seems to have been designed by an automaton or AI creature – possibly that cute little Sony dog creature. It’s useless.
For whatever reason, some brain at the studio decided that since there were six films in the set, that everything about those films HAD to fit on the back cover. That’s an area 4 3/4 x 5 1/2 inches. Not a great deal of real estate.
But someone was told it had to fit.
So there’s an obvious, if perverse answer to the problem.
Make everything smaller.
All of the requisite information is there.
Titles, cast, release date, MPA ratings in the largest type imaginable – (Actually MPA rating are no longer necessary on home video releases) -all of the boiler plate for the crew, information about sound track albums…
and below all that, in an area about 1/4 of an inch by 4 3/4 is all of the information about special features, which is totally unreadable.
I’m not suggesting that the typography is small.
Negative. It’s SO small that the individual letters are broken up into half-tone dots. I attempted to figure out what the special features were with the use of a ten power loupe, and failed. I can’t imagine why the studio didn’t simply include a folded printed sheet along with the set delineating that information.
That idiocy aside, the films should be a pleasure to view, especially for fans.
As far as I can tell, they seem to be derived from OCNs, which obviously also contain all of the effects dupes. Main title sequences, sub-titles, etc are razor sharp and rock steady.
I cannot believe that anyone, with the possible exception of those who pray at the sacred Star Trek whatever, and may take exception to possible errors, will not be thrilled.
Again, as to specifics, color, densities, black levels, basic grain structure all looks pleasant. I’ll make the point again. I don’t know these films well enough to be able to gauge precisely what I’m seeing, but can relate that (as an outsider) they look and sound just fine.
Image – 5 (Dolby Vision)
Audio – 5 (all Dolby TrueHD 7.1, with the exception of the Director’s Edition, which is Dolby Atmos)
Pass / Fail – Pass
Plays nicely with projectors – Yes
Makes use of and works well in 4k – 3.75
Upgrade from Blu-rays – Yes, if you’re a fan
Upgrade from earlier 4k –
Here’s the rub.
In February of this year, Paramount released Star Trek: The Original 4-Movie Collection in 4k format.
That set was inclusive of the first four films, mit out the Director’s Edition of the first, but with both cuts of the second.
That’s a seven month spread between an incomplete set, and a complete set of the original films. The only phrase that comes to mind is “disingenuous to fans and collectors.”
So, for those who popped for the earlier set, and desire to have the complete series, you can purchase parts V and VI for $20 each, plus you can attain the new 3-disc set of the first film in both its Theatrical as well as Director’s Edition versions, along with a third disc of incomparable extras, for only $95. This comes with extra stuff that will bring to mind the old Warner Bros. boxes of junk.
What this “seems” to tell me, is that those who purchased the 4-film set back in February, can now either purchase the new collection for $120, and gift their old set, or purchase the two missing films for $40, plus the Director’s Edition for $95, for a total of $135, and still possibly not get what are described as the third disc of “Legacy extras.”
Is there something here that I’m not understanding?
Recommended (for mere humans)
Very Highly Recommended (for fans)
RAH
Robert has been known in the film industry for his unmatched skill and passion in film preservation. Growing up around photography, his first home theater experience began at age ten with 16mm. Years later he was running 35 and 70mm at home.
His restoration projects have breathed new life into classic films like Lawrence of Arabia, Vertigo, My Fair Lady, Spartacus, and The Godfather series. Beyond his restoration work, he has also shared his expertise through publications, contributing to the academic discourse on film restoration. The Academy Film Archive houses the Robert A. Harris Collection, a testament to his significant contributions to film preservation.
Post Disclaimer
Some of our content may contain marketing links, which means we will receive a commission for purchases made via those links. In our editorial content, these affiliate links appear automatically, and our editorial teams are not influenced by our affiliate partnerships. We work with several providers (currently Skimlinks and Amazon) to manage our affiliate relationships. You can find out more about their services by visiting their sites.
Similar threads
- Robert Harris
- Blu-ray and UHD
2- Robert Harris
- Blu-ray and UHD
5 6 7- Robert Harris
- Blu-ray and UHD
5 6 7- Robert Harris
- Blu-ray and UHD
29 30 31- Ronald Epstein
- Blu-ray and UHD
2