Scott Atwell Star Trek Discussion thread (Series and Films) (5 Viewers)

[ScottRE]

That would be my guess too, that the fix might have been applied to an intermediate or printing element to get it done faster, and that the elements used to remaster the show predated that fix.

An interesting question is, is the mistake present on all DVD editions or just the initial two episode volumes?

It's on the box set because that's where I got that screen cap. You know Paramount, if they don't have to come up with a new print they won't. That's why we've been stuck with the same 2006 HD transfers.

The only things they corrected where are the missing bits in The Tholian Web and music from The Doomsday Machine that were on the original pressing.

 

[Dave Jessup]

"Who's that girl?" (/Madonna)

2-episode-per-disc original DVD release (2001): "Reena"
Season set DVD release (2004) (un-remastered): "Reena"
Season set DVD release (2008) ("remastered" / CGI effects): "Rayna"

 

[ScottRE]

"Who's that girl?" (/Madonna)

2-episode-per-disc original DVD release (2001): "Reena"
Season set DVD release (2004) (un-remastered): "Reena"
Season set DVD release (2008) ("remastered" / CGI effects): "Rayna"

Add:

VHS/Laserdisc (1985 ish): "Rayna."

 

[Nelson Au]

This is from the remastered DVDs that came out before the Blu rays. I could not resist. .



Of course there’s the little error from A Private Little War due to DeForest Kelley’s little mispronunciation.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I’ve been re-reading the “Return to Tomorrow” oral history on TMP and found this article from 1979 that went into further detail about Robert Abel’s firing from the film, might be of interest to a couple of you:

https://webapps.cspace.berkeley.edu/cinefiles/imageserver/blobs/f7b015ac-28dd-46db-ab09/content/linked_pdf:

Every time I read an account of how this film was made and it gets into the work of Abel and his group, it just makes me furious. I’m sure a lot of us have had similar experiences of working with someone who just can’t get the job done, but is so good at the politics and salesmanship aspect of life that they convince the powers-that-be to ignore all the warning signs, and Abel always strikes me as one of those guys. That’s backed up by Return to Tomorrow - every time Abel was asked to show some film, he refused to do so, and would simultaneously demand both more money and more control over aspects of the film that were very obviously not part of his job description, and somehow he snookered them into giving him more and more with nothing to show for it.

The official final budget for TMP has been widely reported as being between $39-44 million and while that’s typical Hollywood bookkeeping at its finest, it’s so unfair to the picture and the people who actually did their jobs properly. At least $5 million of that budget figure had nothing to do with TMP but were actually for costs associated with Paramount’s attempt to launch (in no particular order) a cheapie film version, a new series, and a new network, and then at least $6 million was given to Abel, who turned over not one single visual effect before being fired.

The opportunity to view the three different versions of TMP in the past couple weeks has really had me thinking a lot about the film. It’s a film I truly love and yet one that, if I’m being a bit more objective, has a lot of elements in the finished versions that frankly make no sense. I wrote a paper about that back in a film analysis course in my college years - I’m sorry I no longer have a copy I could share.

One example of what I’m talking about when I talk about things that don’t make sense from a story point of view: the sequence with the Vulcan shuttle Surak docking with Enterprise to deliver Spock. At that point in the story, they have I think less than two days before the cloud will arrive to destroy Earth. In a later scene, Spock mentions that he’s been monitoring the Enterprise, knows of its engine/warp drive problems, and has the solution. Given the immediate urgency of the threat - why is this shuttlecraft performing a lengthy and time consuming docking maneuver? Why doesn’t Spock simply beam aboard? They’ve already established by that point in the film that the transporter malfunction has been fixed. Why is it even a mystery as to who is onboard the shuttle? Time is of the essence - why would they not communicate that it’s Spock coming aboard, instead of having to send an armed security team to greet an unknown arrival? In fact, if Spock has the solution already, why didn’t he radio ahead and tell them how to fix their engine, and meet them at the V’Ger intercept point?

Obviously the answer is, because they wanted a dramatic entrance for Spock and to show off their theatrical quality special effects.

But from a production standpoint - the film was over budget, behind schedule, and taking too long to get the story moving. Cutting that sequence would have saved them a fortune in production time, screen time and money, and wouldn’t have changed the story one iota. That’s a sequence that should probably have been cut in the writing stage.

I tend not to think about these things often because I like just going with the movie but I really get why it’s not a favorite for so many people. There are so many similar moments in the film that are just as baffling and that don’t hold up to any real scrutiny. And in a sense, it’s a shame because those things made the film run so long that they instead left out actual important moments - like Spock’s tear scene - that brought narrative and emotional clarity to the story.

It would be an interesting academic exercise to go through the film beat by beat to see how much could go without actually changing the story. It’s sort of ironic how this is supposed to be a big theatrical film and yet so much of the writing is “TV pilot” types of setups and tropes that became irrelevant the second this stopped being a TV episode and instead became a film. And yet, that was the script they had, so in those things stayed.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

BTW, that’s probably why the special longer version is my favorite version - like, just let it be a big, weird, not-entirely-logical film that’s more about vibe than plot, let it be an experience that rolls over you. In trying to streamline the film with the director’s edition, that to me almost draws more attention to the flaws, because once they start cutting little tiny bits here and there, it just draws attention to how much more could go, instead of celebrating how crazy it is that this bats#*! extravaganza exists at all.

 

[B-ROLL]

I’ve been re-reading the “Return to Tomorrow” oral history on TMP and found this article from 1979 that went into further detail about Robert Abel’s firing from the film, might be of interest to a couple of you:

https://webapps.cspace.berkeley.edu/cinefiles/imageserver/blobs/f7b015ac-28dd-46db-ab09/content/linked_pdf:

Every time I read an account of how this film was made and it gets into the work of Abel and his group, it just makes me furious. I’m sure a lot of us have had similar experiences of working with someone who just can’t get the job done, but is so good at the politics and salesmanship aspect of life that they convince the powers-that-be to ignore all the warning signs, and Abel always strikes me as one of those guys. That’s backed up by Return to Tomorrow - every time Abel was asked to show some film, he refused to do so, and would simultaneously demand both more money and more control over aspects of the film that were very obviously not part of his job description, and somehow he snookered them into giving him more and more with nothing to show for it.

The official final budget for TMP has been widely reported as being between $39-44 million and while that’s typical Hollywood bookkeeping at its finest, it’s so unfair to the picture and the people who actually did their jobs properly. At least $5 million of that budget figure had nothing to do with TMP but were actually for costs associated with Paramount’s attempt to launch (in no particular order) a cheapie film version, a new series, and a new network, and then at least $6 million was given to Abel, who turned over not one single visual effect before being fired.

The opportunity to view the three different versions of TMP in the past couple weeks has really had me thinking a lot about the film. It’s a film I truly love and yet one that, if I’m being a bit more objective, has a lot of elements in the finished versions that frankly make no sense. I wrote a paper about that back in a film analysis course in my college years - I’m sorry I no longer have a copy I could share.

One example of what I’m talking about when I talk about things that don’t make sense from a story point of view: the sequence with the Vulcan shuttle Surak docking with Enterprise to deliver Spock. At that point in the story, they have I think less than two days before the cloud will arrive to destroy Earth. In a later scene, Spock mentions that he’s been monitoring the Enterprise, knows of its engine/warp drive problems, and has the solution. Given the immediate urgency of the threat - why is this shuttlecraft performing a lengthy and time consuming docking maneuver? Why doesn’t Spock simply beam aboard? They’ve already established by that point in the film that the transporter malfunction has been fixed. Why is it even a mystery as to who is onboard the shuttle? Time is of the essence - why would they not communicate that it’s Spock coming aboard, instead of having to send an armed security team to greet an unknown arrival? In fact, if Spock has the solution already, why didn’t he radio ahead and tell them how to fix their engine, and meet them at the V’Ger intercept point?

Obviously the answer is, because they wanted a dramatic entrance for Spock and to show off their theatrical quality special effects.

But from a production standpoint - the film was over budget, behind schedule, and taking too long to get the story moving. Cutting that sequence would have saved them a fortune in production time, screen time and money, and wouldn’t have changed the story one iota. That’s a sequence that should probably have been cut in the writing stage.

I tend not to think about these things often because I like just going with the movie but I really get why it’s not a favorite for so many people. There are so many similar moments in the film that are just as baffling and that don’t hold up to any real scrutiny. And in a sense, it’s a shame because those things made the film run so long that they instead left out actual important moments - like Spock’s tear scene - that brought narrative and emotional clarity to the story.

It would be an interesting academic exercise to go through the film beat by beat to see how much could go without actually changing the story. It’s sort of ironic how this is supposed to be a big theatrical film and yet so much of the writing is “TV pilot” types of setups and tropes that became irrelevant the second this stopped being a TV episode and instead became a film. And yet, that was the script they had, so in those things stayed.

I believe in Walter Koenig's Chekov's Enterprise, he says the live-action scene of Spock's arrival took less than an hour to shoot and they still may not have had that morning's re-write script. Spock's arrival would elicit a large positive response and rather than have audience response create an issue where important plot information was given, the character moment was appropriate (IMHO).


I would suggest reading it

if you would like an eyewitness account.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I believe in Walter Koenig's Chekov's Enterprise, he says the live-action scene of Spock's arrival took less than an hour to shoot and they still may not have had that morning's re-write script. Spock's arrival would elicit a large positive response and rather than have audience response create an issue where important plot information was given, the character moment was appropriate (IMHO).


I would suggest reading it View attachment 154693 if you would like an eyewitness account.

I have read it and it is on my stack to re-read

I wasn’t talking so much shooting the live action as the Surak shuttle model doing the docking with the Enterprise - that’s what cost a fortune and took a long amount of time to achieve. It’s a beautiful sequence in and of itself.

Please don’t get me wrong - I freaking love this movie.

But Spock could have beamed to the transporter room and been onboard in six seconds, and been greeted by Chekhov there - the live action plays basically the same. That docking maneuver probably took an hour in-universe. That’s what I mean about it not making sense, story-wise. All life on earth is about to be destroyed and they’re wasting time manually docking a shuttle when the transporter does the same thing in seconds? In a situation of that urgency, why would the Enterprise even agree to stop to dock with a shuttle when the shuttle pilot won’t even reveal who the passenger is or why they’re there?

Ultimately this stuff isn’t meant to be picked apart at that level, I mean, that’s the real answer. I just thought it was interesting as an academic exercise. I had fun writing that paper all those years ago.

 

[B-ROLL]

I have read it and it is on my stack to re-read

I wasn’t talking so much shooting the live action as the Surak shuttle model doing the docking with the Enterprise - that’s what cost a fortune and took a long amount of time to achieve. It’s a beautiful sequence in and of itself.

Please don’t get me wrong - I freaking love this movie.

But Spock could have beamed to the transporter room and been onboard in six seconds, and been greeted by Chekhov there - the live action plays basically the same. That docking maneuver probably took an hour in-universe. That’s what I mean about it not making sense, story-wise. All life on earth is about to be destroyed and they’re wasting time manually docking a shuttle when the transporter does the same thing in seconds? In a situation of that urgency, why would the Enterprise even agree to stop to dock with a shuttle when the shuttle pilot won’t even reveal who the passenger is or why they’re there?

Ultimately this stuff isn’t meant to be picked apart at that level, I mean, that’s the real answer. I just thought it was interesting as an academic exercise. I had fun writing that paper all those years ago.

Transporters have a limited range (which varies by writer) but generally someone would not be able to beam from Vulcan to what would be called a "near Earth" object ie the Enterprise especially while it would possibly be moving. In other words it's "Science Fiction - it just works that way !"

 

[Sam Favate]

The official final budget for TMP has been widely reported as being between $39-44 million and while that’s typical Hollywood bookkeeping at its finest, it’s so unfair to the picture and the people who actually did their jobs properly. At least $5 million of that budget figure had nothing to do with TMP but were actually for costs associated with Paramount’s attempt to launch (in no particular order) a cheapie film version, a new series, and a new network, and then at least $6 million was given to Abel, who turned over not one single visual effect before being fired.

Oh yeah, that sort of thing is infuriating. For example, Superman Returns was considered a box office failure because the film's "budget" covered all the aborted attempts at a Superman movie since 1988! Likewise, with Star Trek TMP, all the costs associated with the new network, the Phase II show, and all the turmoil at the studio before the movie actually got going was attached to it. God forbid the studio should just eat the costs for its own failed decisions.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Transporters have a limited range (which varies by writer) but generally someone would not be able to beam from Vulcan to what would be called a "near Earth" object ie the Enterprise especially while it would possibly be moving. In other words it's "Science Fiction - it just works that way !"

I think you’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. There’s no reason for the Vulcan shuttlecraft to have physically docked with the Enterprise ship. Spock could have beamed from the Vulcan shuttle - not the planet Vulcan - onboard the Enterprise. There was no reason for the shuttle to dock with the Enterprise. Within the film’s story, that took up time that the Enterprise didn’t need to take, and in terms of the film’s budget, took a lot of money and time to achieve an effect that adds nothing to the film’s plot.

 

[Osato]

I think you’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. There’s no reason for the Vulcan shuttlecraft to have physically docked with the Enterprise ship. Spock could have beamed from the Vulcan shuttle - not the planet Vulcan - onboard the Enterprise. There was no reason for the shuttle to dock with the Enterprise. Within the film’s story, that took up time that the Enterprise didn’t need to take, and in terms of the film’s budget, took a lot of money and time to achieve an effect that adds nothing to the film’s plot.

The shuttle docking raised the coolness factor though…

It gives Spock a dramatic entrance too. And Leonard’s ego..

 

[ScottRE]

I think you’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. There’s no reason for the Vulcan shuttlecraft to have physically docked with the Enterprise ship. Spock could have beamed from the Vulcan shuttle - not the planet Vulcan - onboard the Enterprise. There was no reason for the shuttle to dock with the Enterprise. Within the film’s story, that took up time that the Enterprise didn’t need to take, and in terms of the film’s budget, took a lot of money and time to achieve an effect that adds nothing to the film’s plot.

I get what you’re saying. Storywise, it makes no sense. But I’m sure you remember how long that 10 year dry spell for new Trek was. Kids today, man, they have no idea what it was like to settle for beat up edited reruns, inaccurate adaptations and Fotonovels if you wanted to relive episodes. This is one movie that truly works best if you watch it with the eyes of a 1979 fan who engorged himself on those things.

This was the return of Star Trek and every main player got an intro.

The tour around the Enterprise was, for a lot of people, an amazing 3 minutes. I honestly feel that this is the first SF series where the actual ship was regarded as important a character as the leads.

Kirk’s entrance, Spock’s return to the ship, McCoy’s arrival….all of this was to give the fans something to applaud and each character’s entrance left room for those reactions.

So sure, the Vulcan shuttle was a waste of time in a logical sense, but in 1979, it was fantastic. The first act of the film was a mix of plot set up and reintroductions. Once they reached the Cloud, the story took over.

No other classic Trek film went to those lengths because they didn’t have to. Yeah, the trips through the cloud and over V’Ger were untrimmed “show ‘em everything” effects sequences, but everything leading up to Spock’s arrival was all there to stoke the fans. This movie was really aimed rights at the folks who kept the flame for 10 years.

 

[Nelson Au]

The shuttle Surak docking is a cool sequence. And gives Spock a dramatic entrance.

I just realized there’s a reason why they did not beam Spock on board. During this period of Star Trek, the Next Generation was still some years away. So at this stage, we’ve never seen anyone beam from a shuttle to another ship before. And intraship beaming was hazardous. And while the Enterprise transporter could have beamed Spock over, the shuttle probably did not have a transporter on board. And of course, the shuttle could have landed in the shuttle bay, but that would take more time, so docking was faster. That’s my geeky answer.

Andy Probert co-designed the Warp Sled Shuttle and it’s a pretty cool design.

 

[ScottRE]

I just realized there’s a reason why they did not beam Spock on board. During this period of Star Trek, the Next Generation was still some years away. So at this stage, we’ve never seen anyone beam from a shuttle to another ship before.

Well.....

The Galileo Seven
The Menagerie (Part 1)
Metamorphosis has Kirk saying they'd "transport up in the shuttlecraft" but they could have meant "ride." So that one is open for debate.

Not to mention Kirk and Spock beamed over to K-7 without issue as well as The Exeter and the Fesarius. Ship to ship beaming is no big deal, really.

However, yes, the SURAK may not have had a transporter. That part is totally reasonable. "Escape transporters" were an awful idea to me. All a pod needs is an explosive bolt to let it go.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I get what you’re saying. Storywise, it makes no sense.

Like I said - an academic exercise.

My favorite version of this film is the longest possible one so clearly I’m a fan, and these points aren’t being made as serious criticisms. I’m not trying to provoke an argument or persuade anyone to change their opinion of the film.

But I think these points do speak to why the film has a mixed reception among fans both then and now, and part of why it seems inaccessible to more casual viewers.

It’s a beautiful looking, almost poetic adventure. I love it unashamedly.

Incidentally, we’ve seen that the Enterprise can beam someone out of a shuttle before this - rescuing Spock at the end of the Immunity Syndrome is another example.

Again, all of this is just being presented academically to make the point that some of what happens in TMP neither makes sense from an in-universe story perspective, or from a real-world production perspective. For a movie that was severely over budget and behind schedule and over the target length, the filmmakers didn’t do themselves any favors in trying to make it more manageable.

 

[Blimpoy06]

My issue plot wise is this - If a shutttle from Vulcan is able to redevous with the Enterprise before it encounters Veger, then it is possible for other ships to intercept Veger prior to arrival at Earth. I always found it odd that there were no starships between the Klingon boundary and Earth able to do what Enterprise does.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Agreed.

I think if you were going to start writing this film from scratch, rather than inheriting bits and pieces from various other drafts and attempts at the project, the reason for sending Kirk is that he’s simply the most qualified, and he should be working with the crew that has had so much success in the past.

And if you’re starting the project from scratch, you probably just ditch the idea that the Enterprise was under construction - that was only a plot point because they didn’t think the sets would be finished for the new TV movie premiere, so it would have excused why certain locations on the ship weren’t shown or why they didn’t look finished. It actually turns out that having the ship incomplete added tremendously to the budget and production time - if the ship is complete you just see walls. If it’s being worked on, then you see open panels and wires and all of that has to be designed.

And then at that point, you might want to cut the Decker and Ilia characters so that the original cast members could have more to do.

 

[Nelson Au]

Scott, Josh, gosh darn it! You are absolutely right, I had totally forgotten about the Enterprise beaming out the crew from the Galileo in The Galileo Seven! That is one of my favorite episodes too. And they beamed Captain Christopher out of his F-104 when the tractor beam broke his jet apart.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

All of that is to say - the film is a fascinating mixture of elements that never could or would have come together in quite this fashion under any other circumstances. All films are the products of their circumstances of course but this one especially so!