Star Trek DS9 on Blu-Ray -- Remain Ever Hopeful Thread (1 Viewer)

[Brian Himes]

There were less then 20 when I saw it and the beginning had a few glitches. We got sound but no picture for all of the opening song. I'll have to wait and see that when it comes to disc.

 

[Sam Favate]

Looks like the disc is coming August 6, with the promise of earlier release for backers of the campaign. They're finishing up the bonus materials.

Here's a great interview with Ira Steven Behr from Salon:

https://www.salon.com/2019/05/12/re...uj3RgvcW-_oGNCh0y4z71aO7ZOOgEXG8EswiQC6QjjHvY

 

[Jason_V]

There were five people in the audience tonight, including my wife and me. I hope it did a lot better elsewhere.

---------------

A whole lot more than five last night. The theater was at least half full, so I'd go with upwards of 50...maybe more. All ages, all races, mixed gender.

I really, really, really want DS9 and VOY in HD now. If I had a spare $15 million or so, this would have been done already...

 

[ScottRE]

Looks like the disc is coming August 6, with the promise of earlier release for backers of the campaign. They're finishing up the bonus materials.

Here's a great interview with Ira Steven Behr from Salon:

https://www.salon.com/2019/05/12/re...uj3RgvcW-_oGNCh0y4z71aO7ZOOgEXG8EswiQC6QjjHvY

Boy they sure play up the serialization aspect of a show that really wasn't that heavily serialized until the war arc. Even then, they had to fight for those episodes in year 6. While there are ongoing threads as the war went on, it was hardly what Babylon 5 was.

This isn't to downplay what an amazing series DS9 was. However, this article starts by saying fans were cranky toward DS9 when it began. None of the Trek sequel series were successful in their first seasons. TNG didn't hit its stride until year 3. Same with Enterprise. DS9 really clicked in year 4 and stayed pretty solid. I know a lot of people were "meh" about a show that was taking place on a station (and the whole "Paramount ripped off B5" thing was pretty heated), but in our house, it was considered pretty strong Trek and better than the bland milk UPN was making of Voyager.

I give the Berman era shows credit for each series being different. TNG was a more drama focused extension of TOS. DS9 was very character based. Voyager was a high concept adventure while Enterprise was like "the right stuff" (or was when on its best game).

I tend to enjoy them all, depending on my mood.

 

[Jason_V]

Boy they sure play up the serialization aspect of a show that really wasn't that heavily serialized until the war arc. Even then, they had to fight for those episodes in year 6. While there are ongoing threads as the war went on, it was hardly what Babylon 5 was.

To quote Wiki: "A serial is a television show which has a continuous plot that unfolds in sequential episode-by-episode fashion. Serials are, more often than not, shows that possess narrative complexity. They typically follow many story arcs that span entire television seasons, or even in some cases, the entire run of the series."

The main plot line of DS9, to get Bajor into the Federation, started in the pilot episode and carried through to the final episode. Kira's character arc of turning from terrorist to diplomat/commander ran the entire series. Julian's flirtation with Dax started in "Emissary." Was every single episode about these things? No. But every episode added to the story, even if it was a look or a line.

I'm not going to touch the B5 reference since I don't want this to devolve.

This isn't to downplay what an amazing series DS9 was. However, this article stars by saying fans were cranky toward DS9 when it began. None of the Trek sequel series were successful in their first seasons. TNG didn't hit its stride until year 3. Same with Enterprise.

Cranky and successful are different things. "Emissary" had the highest viewership of any syndicated show at the time, if memory serves. Cranky has everything to do with "the show didn't go anywhere and there wasn't a ship." This was touched on in the "What We Left Behind" doc.

 

[ScottRE]

To quote Wiki: "A serial is a television show which has a continuous plot that unfolds in sequential episode-by-episode fashion. Serials are, more often than not, shows that possess narrative complexity. They typically follow many story arcs that span entire television seasons, or even in some cases, the entire run of the series."

The main plot line of DS9, to get Bajor into the Federation, started in the pilot episode and carried through to the final episode. Kira's character arc of turning from terrorist to diplomat/commander ran the entire series. Julian's flirtation with Dax started in "Emissary." Was every single episode about these things? No. But every episode added to the story, even if it was a look or a line.

DS9 had those character beats, yes, but evolving characters, doesn’t make DS9 a “serial” any more than than the original series, which had Spock going from a shouty/smiling character to one more cool and subtle. Character maturity and evolution can happen in even the most episodic television series. The Fugitive, which was a episodic as television got, still had character evolution. The plot about Bajor joining the Federation was a very small part of the series overall. It was fodder for a number of episodes, but viewers tended to not be as interested in the workings of Bajor and more about the Dominion.

DS9 was episodic at the beginning with some interwoven threads here and there, much like The X-Files and other shows were. Even SeaQuest had some story threads that carried over through their third season. That didn’t make them serialized. The average, non-war arc portion of DS9 could still be enjoyed by anyone who just dropped in from time to time. Did you get more out of it if you sat through the entire run? Sure, but for the most part, DS9 was pretty episodic. Regardless of the strict definition, a serial is a long narrative arc, like prime time soaps such as Dallas. As far as DS9, the War Arc was a serial. The third season of Enterprise was a serial. The fourth season was not. It had a series of multi episode story arcs.

We can haggle, but I really think calling DS9 "serialized" from the start is really pushing it. Especially since Paramount didn't want them to have serialized storylines and they had to battle over how many episodes the war arc would occupy.

Cranky and successful are different things. "Emissary" had the highest viewership of any syndicated show at the time, if memory serves. Cranky has everything to do with "the show didn't go anywhere and there wasn't a ship." This was touched on in the "What We Left Behind" doc.

I guess what I'm saying is weak launches for the sequel series were the norm: strong pilots, but the episodes to follow usually fell short. TNG had huge ratings, but was a creative failure for the most part. Fans complained about it, but stuck it out because Star Trek. The fact that DS9 had fan backlash or wasn't a favorite when it began wasn't new or confined to that series. I loved "Emmisary" but the series took an immediate dip as they found their footing. Only later, as each of the shows went along, did ratings erode, even when creativity was high. Enterprise, for example, was really finding its way when it was cancelled. One could argue that only the original series launched at a creative high point.

My thoughts are, admittedly, shattershot. I know DS9 was looked at as kind of the Red Head Stepchild because it wasn't on a spaceship and Sisko was a commander at first. This was unfair, because the characters were really excellent.

 

[Jason_V]

DS9 had those character beats, yes, but evolving characters, doesn’t make DS9 a “serial” any more than than the original series, which had Spock going from a shouty/smiling character to one more cool and subtle. Character maturity and evolution can happen in even the most episodic television series. The Fugitive, which was a episodic as television got, still had character evolution. The plot about Bajor joining the Federation was a very small part of the series overall. It was fodder for a number of episodes, but viewers tended to not be as interested in the workings of Bajor and more about the Dominion.

Spock's evolution happened in a matter of a half dozen episodes, maybe less. TNG had almost no character evolution: the people the characters started as ended in the same way. A bit older and more experienced, yes. But Picard never changed his overall character. A story arc would be plot driven or about the characters. The wholesale change in Kira from "Emissary" to "What You Leave Behind" is palpable, as an example. Do you need to see every single episode to understand her evolution? No. But if you jump from "Emissary" to something in Season Three to Five and then Seven, it won't make sense. It all started with "Emissary."

DS9 was episodic at the beginning with some interwoven threads here and there, much like The X-Files and other shows were.

I think I can trace at least half of the story threads in the first season straight through to the finale, if you really want me to. And pick them up in various episodes along the way.

Regardless of the strict definition, a serial is a long narrative arc, like prime time soaps such as Dallas. As far as DS9, the War Arc was a serial. The third season of Enterprise was a serial. The fourth season was not. It had a series of multi episode story arcs.

I'd argue Season 4 of Enterprise was serialized. Each arc drove toward one point at the very end: the formation of the Federation. Or making sure it didn't crumble or get undermined. Or making sure the underlying governments were stable and secure.

Especially since Paramount didn't want them to have serialized storylines and they had to battle over how many episodes the war arc would occupy.

Sure, that was a battle, no pun intended. But that was ALWAYS going to be the a nature of the show. Think about it: when you have your main characters tethered to one place, you see how their actions affect everything around them over time. That's the nature of the beast. With the other ship-based shows, by definition they didn't stick around any one place for long. The only people who could change were the main cast...and even they had to basically reset to zero at the end of every week.

I guess what I'm saying is weak launches for the sequel series were the norm: strong pilots, but the episodes to follow usually fell short. TNG had huge ratings, but was a creative failure for the most part. Fans complained about it, but stuck it out because Star Trek. The fact that DS9 had fan backlash or wasn't a favorite when it began wasn't new or confined to that series. I loved "Emmisary" but the series took an immediate dip as they found their footing. Only later, as each of the shows went along, did ratings erode, even when creativity was high. Enterprise, for example, was really finding its way when it was cancelled. One could argue that only the original series launched at a creative high point./quote]

You're right: it's not new or confined to this series. Fans have found something to complain about every single time. But what happened is that once the viewers left, they didn't come back. Same with Voyager. Same with Enterprise. The only show they stuck with was TNG and, I believe, that was more about the time period it premiered in and the lack of new Trek than anything else. The hate mail the production received about the show is fairly appalling. I've never heard of the same happening to the beloved TNG. I'm sure VOY and ENT and FOR SURE Discovery have all received their share of horrible mail, but we don't know about that publicly right now.

My thoughts are, admittedly, shattershot. I know DS9 was looked at as kind of the Red Head Stepchild because it wasn't on a spaceship and Sisko was a commander at first. This was unfair, because the characters were really excellent.

I think it's more than that. It wasn't the "strange new worlds" show everyone wanted. It dealt with dealing with the "strange new world" of what was inside the character and how one decision in Year One could affect something down in Year Five. The audience, by and large was not ready for that storytelling. Looking at the show now, it's safe and comfortable and "quaint." In context, we had a black commanding officer who was being an actual father to a son with a former terrorist as his confidant and a transgender being as his best friend. A three episode story "To Be Continued" arc to start Season Two, important stories about homelessness and racism and homosexuality and divided loyalties and the horrors of war and the burden of being in charge. Ten episodes strung together at the end of the series with a recurring cast of 20 or 30 actors. Continuing storylines over seven years...but because there was no ship and they "went nowhere," everyone left. That's fine, I guess. It allowed the producers to do things they likely wouldn't have done otherwise.

TOS is very important just for being there and starting all of this. TNG has gotten self important, for me, over time. It didn't do a whole lot of breaking ground (yes, syndication; yes, ratings). Voyager didn't have an ounce of the evolution or storylines it should have had-but it was safe and didn't ask the audience to do any heavy lifting; in and out in 45 minutes. Enterprise got there too late.

 

[Sam Favate]

With the release of the documentary, there's obviously been renewed interest in having the series in HD. There's a Facebook group dedicated to that goal and there's been some discussion there about how, exactly, we can make that happen.

Here's what I said:
Nothing will happen until after CBS and Paramount merge and the company has new leadership. The new leader should be petitioned by fans, letting him know that we want this to happen. It also would help to contact Netflix and CBS All Access and let them know we want DS9 in HD. If CBS/Paramount got feedback from those companies and knew they'd have an outlet for DS9 HD, they might get something going. Remember, TNG was done entirely for blu-ray. The costs were all offset by how much or how little the blu-rays sold. The market has changed, and selling blu-rays would only be a small portion of the revenue for an HD project like this. The rest would come from selling the streaming rights to Netflix (or CBS AA's subscription revenue).

Think about it this way: For about the cost of two episodes of Discovery (roughly $16 million), CBS AA could remaster all of DS9 and run it exclusively. Blu-ray sales would then be icing on the cake.

That's the approach that needs to be taken. Those of you that are CBS AA subscribers, let your voices be heard. And those that are not, tell CBS AA you'd subscribe if they had DS9 in HD.

---
When you think about it in terms of what Star Trek means to CBS AA, and how it would cost about the equivalent of two Discovery episodes (I've heard $15 million for the project; Discovery has an approximate budget of $8 million per episode), that seems like a bargain for CBS AA to get 175 episodes of a show that, right now, there's a keen interest in.

As a subscriber to CBS AA, I intend to let them know of my interest in them having DS9 in HD.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I still think it's a tough hill to climb. The sales for TNG on Blu-ray were, frankly, abysmal. The only reason that all of the seasons ended up being released is because they were so far along with the work that it would have cost them just as much to stop as it would have to finish the releases. Otherwise, if it had been up to sales, it wouldn't have happened.

So to begin with, you've got a company that lost a bunch of money doing the TNG upgrade and is feeling shy about going down that route again.

As far as selling the streaming rights being an incentive, I'm not sure about that either. There's no reason for a company like Netflix (or any of the other streaming subscription services which currently offer DS9) to pay extra for an HD version. If anything, I believe in the future companies like that will begin to reject standard definition masters, and will only accept HD material, as their audience becomes more picky about what they are and aren't willing to watch. If and when that happens, the onus will be on the rightsholders to prepare the material for HD distribution; I don't believe Netflix or any other outfit would actually pay for it themselves. I think they'd simply say, "When the contract for this material expires, we will no longer license SD content; but if you decide to remaster it in HD, we would consider re-adding it."

As for CBS All Access, we have very little user data since they don't release things like number of members and the viewership numbers of the programs they have, but I'm not sure it would be a winning proposition for them. Here's the thing. Let's say that the entire project cost $16 million, as you estimated in your post. Would upgrading DS9 to HD actually help CBS All Access generate an extra $16 million in profits so that they'd break even on it? I don't see how it could. I would assume that most of the people who would sign up to CBS All Access for such a thing are already members of the service.

The only way I see this happening is if CBS, on their own, decide to make the upgrade not for any kind of immediate profit, but simply for the show to remain viable. I do believe there is a day coming where standard definition content will no longer be accepted by various subscription services and television syndication networks. That's why a studio like Fox, for instance, has been quietly upgrading their SD content to HD. Fox didn't upgrade M*A*S*H to HD for an immediate payoff; they did it because there will soon come a time where the old SD masters that they've used for decades on that show will no longer be accepted by any potential licensee. I believe it's possible that, as a whole, the old Star Trek shows could be bundled to different streaming subscription services and syndication networks for television, and that eventually, the work will be paid off - but we're talking years if not decades of licensing agreements.

I say this as someone who would be in line on day one to purchase a potential Blu-ray set for DS9, but the economics of it and the marketplace are currently not aligned in such a way that there would be a clear path to profitability.

 

[ScottHM]

So to begin with, you've got a company that lost a bunch of money doing the TNG upgrade and is feeling shy about going down that route again.

As long as TNG is still making them money it hasn't lost any money. It continues to be a revenue stream.

As for CBS All Access, we have very little user data since they don't release things like number of members and the viewership numbers of the programs they have

But they apparently do release data concerning their profits for the TNG remaster.

I think it would be profitable in the long run to remaster DS9, I'm just not sure anyone in a position to do anything about it cares about the long run.

---------------

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think it would be profitable in the long run to remaster DS9, I'm just not sure anyone in a position to do anything about it cares about the long run.

I think that’s the big problem. In general, companies are moving away from long term investments in favor of short term profits, and the idea of throwing millions of dollars at a twenty year old show that’s already fully available on both physical and streaming platforms isn’t an endearing one in a “will this generate profit today?” environment.

I think it’s important to do because within a relatively brief period, audiences and the services they subscribe to will begin rejecting standard definition material on principle, in the same way that the vast majority of TV watchers today won’t watch silent films or black and white content. DS9 limited to standard definition playback has a shelf life whose expiration may be rapidly approaching. DS9 in HD wouldn’t be a record breaking seller, but it would allow the show to remain viable for the foreseeable future.

I hope someone eventually shows some foresight in that keeping all Trek accessible and at current standards allows the new shows to bring viewers back to the older ones and helps enforce brand loyalty. But I’m concerned that they won’t realize this until it’s too late.

 

[mark27b]

Digital Bits announcement

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/051019-1530

and HD show footage

 

[Sam Favate]

I still think it's a tough hill to climb. The sales for TNG on Blu-ray were, frankly, abysmal. The only reason that all of the seasons ended up being released is because they were so far along with the work that it would have cost them just as much to stop as it would have to finish the releases. Otherwise, if it had been up to sales, it wouldn't have happened.

Right, but I'm not talking about the same business model used for the TNG upgrade. This would primarily be a project of CBS AA - a relatively inexpensive one, given what they spend on original content and the rush in the industry right now to spend billions on streaming content to gain an upper hand. Sales of blu-rays and other streaming distribution rights (which would be for other countries, like the way Discovery is on Netflix and the Picard show will be on Amazon) would be secondary sources of income on this.

Your example of MASH is a good one. The studios have to know that it's pretty much now or never. If they don't upgrade and soon, their content will be unusable. If I bought a company and it had a warehouse full of widgets just sitting there needed to be cleaned up, I'd ask "Why aren't these widgets making us money?"

CBS AA could claim it was the only place to see Deep Space Nine in HD. It could certainly entice Star Trek fans to keep their subscriptions during the long lull between original Trek shows (Discovery ended in April, Picard isn't due until November-December - that's at least a seven month period that many fans will drop the service).

In any case, if anyone is interested in encouraging CBS AA to do this, here is the link for feedback and comments:
http://audienceservices.cbs.com/feedback/feedback.htm.

 

[Worth]

Of course, the entire run of MASH was shot and completed on film, so it was relatively cheap and easy to scan the original elements and create new HD masters. Anything made from about the mid-80s to the late-90s is going to be a much more complicated and expensive proposition.

 

[Jason_V]

I will always live in hope. Mechanics of how it would have to happen are immaterial. If there is a will, there is a way for anything to happen in this world. I've always said it would make no sense at all for 14 seasons of the franchise to not be ready for HD streaming. It just doesn't. Push will come to shove at some point...it has to. The SD masters won't be good enough anymore for DS9 and Voyager (early DS9 looks really rough as it is right now).

The 25th anniversary would have been a great time to get the project going. The release of "What We Left Behind" was another missed opportunity. Heck, I'd even be okay if Voyager got the HD treatment first for their 25th anniversary next year...that would at least be a sign someone is trying to get this done.

 

[Brian Himes]

Umm...correct me if I'm wrong but was't it stated a long time ago that part of the problem with upgrading DS9 & Voyager to HD is that all of the CGI used would have to be redone from scratch? None of the raw stuff was saved? Those sequences (the big battle scenes in DS9 from season 4 thru season 7) now only exist on the broadcast masters. Right? So, not only do you have the cost of upgrading the 35mm film of the live footage (and reconstructing each episode from cans and cans of footage as was stated in the documentary) but having a team recreate all of the CGI. After the sales disaster of TNG on Blu-ray, I and understand Paramont's reluctance to go forward with DS9 & Voyager. If they don't see a market for it and the bottom line, a profit for them, then it's just not going to happen. If this so called push comes to shove happens, then I can see them going the cheap way and just upgrading the existing masters to HD. Scand them, clean them up, do a minimal of upgrading, and hope for the best. Afterall, there are a few episodes in TNG where they were not able to locate a few minutes of footage and had to upres the video masters. It was noticeable but not so much. I can certainly see Paramount going that direction instead of an all out proper upgrading and restoration.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

That's what Fox has done with its "shot on film, finished on tape" shows from the same period like Buffy The Vampire Slayer and The X-Files - the live action footage was rescanned in HD, but shots with special effects were upconverted from the standard definition video masters rather than being recreated from scratch in HD. It generally works pretty well (though not as seamless as the TNG discs).

 

[TJPC]

I have the DVDs of both series, and they look much better than what I see broadcast on our HD Space Channel. The broadcasted ones look like they are projected through jello. Is it possible the “uprezing” that happens on Blu ray players make that much of a difference?

 

[Brian Himes]

Is it possible the “uprezing” that happens on Blu ray players make that much of a difference?

I honestly couldn't tell you. When I've watched my DS9 DVDs in the past, I've always used my DVD player and not my Blu-ray. Also, I have not watched them on my HD TV set, so again, I couldn't say if there any difference in viewing.

Also, it was my understanding that seasons 1-3 of DS9 were done using more traditional methods for creating the special effects (ship models, etc) and only from seasons 4-7 were they CGI heavy. Now Voyager is another matter. From what I remember Voyager is 100% CGI effects right down to the ship itself. No model of Voyager was ever created. Now how much of the raw material is left from Voyager, I don't know but I do recall reading that everything from DS9 (seasons 4-7) is gone. The company that was used for the work didn't save anything and is now out of the business. At least from what I recall reading, somewhere. Possibly right here on this board.

 

[Jason_V]

I honestly couldn't tell you. When I've watched my DS9 DVDs in the past, I've always used my DVD player and not my Blu-ray. Also, I have not watched them on my HD TV set, so again, I couldn't say if there any difference in viewing.

Also, it was my understanding that seasons 1-3 of DS9 were done using more traditional methods for creating the special effects (ship models, etc) and only from seasons 4-7 were they CGI heavy. Now Voyager is another matter. From what I remember Voyager is 100% CGI effects right down to the ship itself. No model of Voyager was ever created. Now how much of the raw material is left from Voyager, I don't know but I do recall reading that everything from DS9 (seasons 4-7) is gone. The company that was used for the work didn't save anything and is now out of the business. At least from what I recall reading, somewhere. Possibly right here on this board.

Everything I know about Voyager suggests there was a shooting model for at least part of the series run. I remember seeing a picture of it (it was enormous) and saying out loud "That sucker is huge." My mother heard me and told me to never use that word again. So...yeah.

Memory Alpha also shows the studio model: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Intrepid_class_model

DS9 was CG heavy in the later years, but "Way of the Warrior" used a lot of model and practical effects. Some of the Klingon ships in the final battle were Hallmark ornaments and I'm sure there were more practical effects through the season. So to say everything is gone can't be right either. DS9 fully transitioned to CG in Season 6 and Voyager in Season 4.

Frankly, with Trek in the 90s and beyond, it's very hard for me to believe no one has a copy or the raw files or anything. If this was a no name series with no pedigree, maybe. But not Trek.