Search results

Neither did Indiana Jones.

Goldsmith's score really saves the first film. It would be virtually unwatchable with a mediocre or poor score.

It's not nearly as bad as 4 and 6, but it's still there and especially noticeable on a larger screen.

I'm pretty sure they just projected the blu-ray at the last screening I attended. It even had what looked like player-generated subtitles. The flaws were magnified, but it didn't actually look that bad, all things considered. It was in a smaller auditorium, with a screen probably somewhere in...

That's not unique to the digital file - that's how it looks on the DVD, as well.

The windowboxing makes no sense. There wasn't any on the DVD. And 4 should look good - it was nominated for Best Cinematography that year.

Wrath of Khan is easily the best. TMP is overly DNRed, but not too bad, 3 is a little worse but still watchable, 5 is pretty bad, and 4 and 6 are terrible. At least with 6, the director's cut is available on iTunes and looks much better than the theatrical cut.

The iTunes transfer is the same as the blu-ray. The only difference is that the subtitles are in the same font as the theatrical prints, versus the player-generated titles on the disc.

I've never understood the fixation on anniversaries. Is anyone more likely to buy something because it's celebrating it's 40th or 50th anniversary? Is anyone less likely to buy something because its release isn't tied to an anniversary?

I was at a screening of TMP where I'm pretty sure they just projected the blu-ray - it had what looked like player-generated subtitles, rather than the burned-in ones that appear on the iTunes version.

I hope they'd redo the theatrical cut, as well. There are things about the director's cut that I think work better, but a few things that are worse.

And even though it's an old transfer, it looks a lot better than the theatrical cut.

And Wrath of Khan is available in 4K HDR, but only on digital.

I'm sure we'd have heard if there was a new transfer by now. Paramount is pretty notorious for repackaging existing discs.

Discovery was - and still is - available to stream in Canada, as well, on Crave.

That sounds like the same version I saw.

I saw a screening of Trek a couple of years ago with Douglas Trumbull in attendance to speak about the film, and it was some kind of hybrid cut - basically the director's cut minus the new effects, or if you prefer, the TV cut minus the unfinished scenes. This was a 35mm print sent directly from...

I think he was including other titles like It's a Wonderful Life and War of the Worlds.

It's already begun - Wrath of Khan is available in 4K with HDR on iTunes, but only in standard HD on blu.

This probably doesn't bode well for any release... https://gadgets.ndtv.com/entertainment/news/star-trek-4-is-reportedly-dead-throws-future-of-quentin-tarantinos-version-trek-film-universe-into-q-1975142

Trumbull didn't offer up any major revelations. He did say that the FX company originally hired to work on the film was attempting to do shots in CG - in 1978, no less - which I hadn't heard before. They worked for over a year and didn't finish a single shot. He initially turned down working on...

This was in Toronto. The TIFF LIghtbox is doing a Trek retrospective for the 50th anniversary: http://www.tiff.net/?view=grid&mode=on-now&programme=50%20Years%20of%20Star%20Trek&

Caught a screening of TMP the other night with Douglas Trumbull in attendance for a Q&A. It was a 35mm print that appeared to have been Frankensteined from a dozen other prints. Brightness and colour would vary not only reel-to-reel, but sometmes from shot-to-shot, and the sound was scratchy...

For anyone in the Toronto area, the Lightbox is having a big Trek retrospective, with screenings of all the films and some of the TV episodes: http://www.tiff.net/?view=grid&pandi=hide&mode=on-now&programme=50%20Years%20of%20Star%20Trek& The Motion Picture is screening on Friday, September...

Everything except Khan looks pretty bad, especially on a larger screen. Marginally better than DVD, sure, but still nothing like film.

I caught a screening of the first film last night, hoping to be pleasantly surprised by a new master, but nope, the DCP looked the same as the blu-ray. And if you think it looks bad at home, try watching it on a 50 foot screen. Horrible combination of excessive DNR and sharpening. I seriously...

It's a mistake, for sure. If Paramount really had remastered the director's cut in HD, we'd have heard about it.

Someone's scanned a 35mm print of Star Trek III and posted it on the internet. If you want to see how heavily DNR'd the blu-ray is, Google it and compare.

With a few exceptions, young people aren't buying blu-rays or UHDs - they don't even have televisions. They're watching YouTube on their phones and iPads.

The thing is, the home video and marketing departments aren't wrong. They could create new, full 4K restorations of all the movies, but it would probably only translate to a few thousand copies in extra sales. Same with the remaining SD shows - the expense to remaster them in HD likely wouldn't...