What's new

PHE Press Release: Star Trek: The Motion Picture: Fully Restored Director's Edition (4k UHD) (Paramount+ Streaming) (1 Viewer)

Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
11,713
It is very rare to find someone who has the same opinion of IV that I do...YAY! Hi Colin! :banana:

Don't get me wrong...I've owned every version of it, have all the soundtracks, had the comics and novelizations...but I don't hold it in as high a regard as most people do.

The Final Frontier has good moments, 100% right. And then it has things I want to punch in the face because they're so incredibly stupid. I trace all of those things right back to, you guessed it, Star Trek IV. So I guess I blame the absurd comedy in V on the absurd success of IV, leading to my "less than" opinion of the whales.

"Final Frontier" has some cringe-worthy moments, but I also think it's arguably the most thought-provoking of the "Trek" movies.

I find the discussion of how Kirk "needs" his pain to be pretty compelling, and the take on religion also is stimulating.

I don't actively dislike "Voyage Home" but I think the comedy's clunky and Catherine Hicks annoys the crap out of me in that role.

And I suspect you're right that the clumsy stabs at laughs in "FF" are there because comedy made "VH" a hit.

Honestly, "TMP" is the only "Trek" movie I actively dislike.

"Nemesis" and "Beyond" are too mediocre to really dislike, and as much as I dislike parts of "VH", it's still moderately entertaining.

"Insurrection" is also spotty - and philosophically a mess, IMO. I never thought the "good guys" in that one were worth defending! :)
 

Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
11,713
Oh yeah, definitely. 4 has definitively been my least favorite and has been for a while, but I don’t have overly negative feelings towards it. Though my Trek rankings have changed drastically over the years/decades, even when it comes to my top favorite. Only 4 and 5 have never at one time been my “favorite” Trek film. This is due to how much I LOVE the Trek movies rather than me falling “out of love” with any of them.

I've pretty consistently favored "Wrath" and "Country" as my 2 faves over the last 30 years. I actually liked "Country" more than "Wrath" for a while there, but now I flip that ranking.

#3 would probably be the 2009 reboot.

After that... I dunno. I like "Generations" way more than most - mainly for the thought-provoking parts ala "FF" - and "Contact" is good as well.

I also like "Into Darkness" more than most, though I don't love it and I will always roll my eyes at the "Wrath" throwbacks. I'd probably put it on a par with "Frontier" in my ranking.

After those, "Search" probably comes next, and then you get a big melting pot of flawed "Trek": "Voyage", "Insurrection", "Nemesis", "Beyond".

Waaaaaay back in last place? "TMP", always and forever! :D
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
23,517
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
"Final Frontier" has some cringe-worthy moments, but I also think it's arguably the most thought-provoking of the "Trek" movies.

I find the discussion of how Kirk "needs" his pain to be pretty compelling, and the take on religion also is stimulating.

It’s a really ambitious film. It doesn’t succeed at everything it tries but it isn’t afraid to take big swings, and that’s part of what makes it rewarding and worth revisiting for me.

There’s a small subgenre films that I informally call “amazing journey with no possible satisfying ending” films and Star Trek V is one of those. The problem, if you will, with a film like this is that there’s no way to really resolve the quest the characters embark on. It’s seeking answers to things that it’s just not possible for us to know. If the Enterprise meets the real God, that’s putting its thumb on the scale and suggesting a certainty of God’s existence that is difficult to pull off in a fictional film. If the Enterprise fails to meet God, that’s a disappointment too. Either way, it winds up being somewhat off putting and unsatisfying to people of faith and people not of faith, for different reasons. The excitement comes in those brief moments during the journey where it seems possible that an answer may be in reach.

“The Ninth Gate” is another film that’s similar in that regard, with its characters on a quest to prove the Devil is real and summon him. Their journey is extraordinary but there’s no real way to end it because you run into that same problem.

But I’ll take a film that’s 90% innovative and bold even if that means painting itself into a corner it can’t get out of. It’s just part of the nature of tackling subject matter that’s ultimately unresolvable from our mortal perspective.
 

AndyMcKinney

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
3,131
Location
Kentucky, USA
It was apparently assembled on film - the reason this is believed to be true is that a 35mm version with added scenes had previously been shown at in-house studio events and during at least one seminar with Douglas Trumbull. All of these screenings happened at a time when the director’s edition was only available in standard definition - so there’s no other way that these special audiences could have seen a longer version projected on film unless special longer version had been assembled on film. I’m not sure the studio realized what print they were showing. At the time the special longer version first aired in the early 80s, videotape editing was basically in its infancy so it’s much more likely the studio assembled the longer cut on film.

The sound mix on SLV is monaural - which honestly I’d be fine with.

I guess I wasn't clear in my assumption... it wasn't VT vs film assembly, just that if ABC had assembled it, that it might have only been delivered in 4:3. But, if it was projected at the studio as you say, then I stand corrected, but will now have to wonder this:

if there was an anamorphic print of the SLV, then how in the world was this not used for the laser?
 

JamesSmith

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2003
Messages
2,282
There’s a small subgenre films that I informally call “amazing journey with no possible satisfying ending” films and Star Trek V is one of those. The problem, if you will, with a film like this is that there’s no way to really resolve the quest the characters embark on. It’s seeking answers to things that it’s just not possible for us to know. If the Enterprise meets the real God, that’s putting its thumb on the scale and suggesting a certainty of God’s existence that is difficult to pull off in a fictional film. If the Enterprise fails to meet God, that’s a disappointment too. Either way, it winds up being somewhat off putting and unsatisfying to people of faith and people not of faith, for different reasons. The excitement comes in those brief moments during the journey where it seems possible that an answer may be in reach.

Some great insight there Josh. I did find Star Trek V off-putting, but it did have some great moments between the characters. Scotty knocking himself out, the singing between Kirk, Spock and McCoy, etc. But I really wondered about Kirk's comment about finding God in ourselves (my paraphrase). Don't think Shatner really understands what religious leaders, philosophers have said about the Supreme Being since history began. Anyway, that's my two cents.
--jthree
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
23,517
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
I guess I wasn't clear in my assumption... it wasn't VT vs film assembly, just that if ABC had assembled it, that it might have only been delivered in 4:3. But, if it was projected at the studio as you say, then I stand corrected, but will now have to wonder this:

if there was an anamorphic print of the SLV, then how in the world was this not used for the laser?

That is a really really good question. I think the assumption has always been that the 4x3 crop hides that SLV includes some unfinished shots that are far less obvious when cropped but I honestly have no idea.

Someone on the internets did a really good job of making a sort of, id guess you’d call it a “digital reconstruction” of that version but in widescreen using an HDTV airing of the theatrical version combined with the extra scenes from the director’s edition DVD and the soundtrack taken from the laserdisc. It didn’t stay on YouTube or wherever I saw it long but it’s gotta be out there somewhere. It was pretty fun to see while it lasted.
 

AndyMcKinney

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
3,131
Location
Kentucky, USA
That is a really really good question. I think the assumption has always been that the 4x3 crop hides that SLV includes some unfinished shots that are far less obvious when cropped but I honestly have no idea.

Someone on the internets did a really good job of making a sort of, id guess you’d call it a “digital reconstruction” of that version but in widescreen using an HDTV airing of the theatrical version combined with the extra scenes from the director’s edition DVD and the soundtrack taken from the laserdisc. It didn’t stay on YouTube or wherever I saw it long but it’s gotta be out there somewhere. It was pretty fun to see while it lasted.

the main 'problem' scene is is the "Kirk leaves the ship to go on the spacewalk" where the set scaffolding shows badly. Of course, it showed badly in the 4:3 crop, also. All that would have to be done would be to zoom in even further to make the best compromise between cropping and revealing set scaffolding, and if that's too extreme, just present it as-is.

My suspicion is that maybe Paramount was too cheap to call up the master again to do a widescreen version for the laser release. Just re-use the VHS/Beta dubbing master instead.

Call me crazy, but when I was 'on the fence' about asking for a laserdisc player for Christmas around 1990-91, the lack of a widescreen "Special Longer Version" was the deciding factor for me. When I saw it was pan/scan and that the only widescreen was the theatrical, I said, "nah, don't really want a laserdisc player that bad." In retrospect, I'm glad I never bought into that format.
 

Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
11,713
There’s a small subgenre films that I informally call “amazing journey with no possible satisfying ending” films and Star Trek V is one of those. The problem, if you will, with a film like this is that there’s no way to really resolve the quest the characters embark on. It’s seeking answers to things that it’s just not possible for us to know. If the Enterprise meets the real God, that’s putting its thumb on the scale and suggesting a certainty of God’s existence that is difficult to pull off in a fictional film. If the Enterprise fails to meet God, that’s a disappointment too. Either way, it winds up being somewhat off putting and unsatisfying to people of faith and people not of faith, for different reasons. The excitement comes in those brief moments during the journey where it seems possible that an answer may be in reach.

See, I like the way it makes the character who claims to be God into a fraud.

Not that I'm anti-religion, but it makes a statement on how those who use alleged holy status for their own selfish ends.

Given that the mid-late 80s was the heyday of the grifting televangelists, I think the movie comments on that trend in its own unusual way, and I think the fact this "God" was just some dude with an agenda offers a good take on that topic.

It's like Bono said a couple years earlier in response to the preachers who demanded viewers send money to prove their faith: "my God's not short on cash, mister".

No way the film could have the crew actually find God - I mean, where does the series go from there? - and the movie pulls off the fake God well...
 

Sam Favate

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
11,288
Real Name
Sam Favate
ST V is my least favorite of the original series films. That said, it has its moments and I look forward to seeing it again on 4k. Also, it is nowhere near as bad a film as Nemesis, which basically throws out 15 years of TNG characterization and world-building for a pretty insipid film. Add in what happens to Data as the emotional shock to the audience, and it's a film I really dislike and never want to see again.

I had the pleasure of introducing my wife to Star Trek, which she absolutely loves. When we watched the films, she was yelling at the screen during Nemesis: "Oh come on!" "No way he does that!" "This is terrible!" It's worse than the Enterprise series finale.
It reminded me of when I first saw Nemesis in the theater, back in 2002. I was sitting with my best friend, whom I've known since we were 10, and with whom I've seen and discussed every incarnation of Star Trek. He turned to me during the movie (which was unusual; we never talk in movies) and said "This... Do you like this?"

Throw in SNW's connection to ST V, and I will be glad to add this to my collection, again (for what will be, I think, the 5th time).
 

ChrisCook

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Messages
1,607
the main 'problem' scene is is the "Kirk leaves the ship to go on the spacewalk" where the set scaffolding shows badly. Of course, it showed badly in the 4:3 crop, also. All that would have to be done would be to zoom in even further to make the best compromise between cropping and revealing set scaffolding, and if that's too extreme, just present it as-is.

My suspicion is that maybe Paramount was too cheap to call up the master again to do a widescreen version for the laser release. Just re-use the VHS/Beta dubbing master instead.

Call me crazy, but when I was 'on the fence' about asking for a laserdisc player for Christmas around 1990-91, the lack of a widescreen "Special Longer Version" was the deciding factor for me. When I saw it was pan/scan and that the only widescreen was the theatrical, I said, "nah, don't really want a laserdisc player that bad." In retrospect, I'm glad I never bought into that format.

 

Osato

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Messages
7,785
Real Name
Tim
ST V is my least favorite of the original series films. That said, it has its moments and I look forward to seeing it again on 4k. Also, it is nowhere near as bad a film as Nemesis, which basically throws out 15 years of TNG characterization and world-building for a pretty insipid film. Add in what happens to Data as the emotional shock to the audience, and it's a film I really dislike and never want to see again.

I had the pleasure of introducing my wife to Star Trek, which she absolutely loves. When we watched the films, she was yelling at the screen during Nemesis: "Oh come on!" "No way he does that!" "This is terrible!" It's worse than the Enterprise series finale.
It reminded me of when I first saw Nemesis in the theater, back in 2002. I was sitting with my best friend, whom I've known since we were 10, and with whom I've seen and discussed every incarnation of Star Trek. He turned to me during the movie (which was unusual; we never talk in movies) and said "This... Do you like this?"

Throw in SNW's connection to ST V, and I will be glad to add this to my collection, again (for what will be, I think, the 5th time).

I remember seeing Nemesis on opening night. While watching the movie I clearly recall checking my watch to see how much longer it was going to be.
 

Clinton McClure

Rocket Science Department
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 28, 1999
Messages
6,937
Location
Central Arkansas
Real Name
Clint
IV has always been my favorite, followed by V, VI, II, III, then TMP last. Of the Next Generation era, First Contact, followed by Generations. Insurrection and Nemesis are equally bad and tie for last place. I only watch ST 2009 occasionally for Zoe Saldana. I walked out of the theater part way through Into Darkness and turned the last movie (I don’t even remember the name) off after 15 minutes.
 

Joel Fontenot

Screenwriter
Joined
Aug 9, 1999
Messages
1,075
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Real Name
Joel Fontenot
the main 'problem' scene is is the "Kirk leaves the ship to go on the spacewalk" where the set scaffolding shows badly. Of course, it showed badly in the 4:3 crop, also. All that would have to be done would be to zoom in even further to make the best compromise between cropping and revealing set scaffolding, and if that's too extreme, just present it as-is.

My suspicion is that maybe Paramount was too cheap to call up the master again to do a widescreen version for the laser release. Just re-use the VHS/Beta dubbing master instead.

Call me crazy, but when I was 'on the fence' about asking for a laserdisc player for Christmas around 1990-91, the lack of a widescreen "Special Longer Version" was the deciding factor for me. When I saw it was pan/scan and that the only widescreen was the theatrical, I said, "nah, don't really want a laserdisc player that bad." In retrospect, I'm glad I never bought into that format.
When Paramount first released TMP on laserdisc, it was 1981 and in pan and scan. Widescreen was far from a regular thing at that time. The SLV was first released in 1983, and widescreen letterbox formats were still not a thing yet. That didn't start to really become common for LD releases until the late '80s and into the 90s.

For me, '91 was also the time I considered getting a VHS player or going for the laserdisc player. But I had the opposite outcome.

I was living on my own, but had lived with VHS with my parents for years before that. Yet the fact that ST:TMP was just released on laserdisc in widescreen format AND in it's original theatrical version was the deciding factor for to jump on the laserdisc and forgo VHS outright. My parents had the SLV of TMP, so I was sick of it by them. I was ready for the original cut since up to that point the last I'd seen it was in the theater in '79.

Among the first set of laserdiscs I bought that year, I also picked up the widescreen sets of the Star Wars films, the '89 and '90 Fox widescreen issues. Raiders of the Lost Ark and Last Crusade the following year. Never got the LD of Temple of Doom.
 

Nelson Au

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 16, 1999
Messages
17,706
Thanks Neil for the post. I watched the podcast, but joined 17 minutes late. Good to see them talk about the work on the film! Too bad David Fein wasn’t able to give specific details on a blu ray release. He had to generalize. I found it interesting to hear Darin explain the shot of the Enterprise in space dock and the mount on the side of the model in the 2001 Directors Edition and the 2022 version, and how they replaced the new image of the Earth behind the space dock. I’ve always noticed that mount on the side of the model. And it was interesting to hear Darin talk about trying to revise the Officers Lounge sequence with the warp drive engines seen out the windows. This is the Andrew Probert artwork he was referring to I believe.

AProbert art TMP Officers Lounge.jpg

I could not help but notice behind Darin, was the Mitchell Hooks painting used on the cover of the James Blish Star Trek 5 cover. I’d be curious where he got that unless it’s a reproduction he did himself. I really like the book covers from that era by Lou Feck. His covers are my favorites.

Mitchell Hooks:
Mitchell Hooks Star_Trek_5.jpg

And Lou Feck:
Lou Feck Star Trek 8.jpg Lou Feck Star Trek 6.jpg
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
351,447
Messages
4,953,297
Members
143,055
Latest member
Oh Yeah!
Recent bookmarks
0
Top