^ Updated my post to include that and didn't see your post. Yes, highly recommended. I've now bought it twice in my lifetime, having once found it on a high school field trip in a curiosities shop under the James Dean Museum (which also has a small exhibit on Garfield creator Jim Davis), lost it since then, and had to pick up another used copy at a local used bookstore a few years ago.
Yes, there are errors in these books and some of them are sloppy, but most of it is supported by memos and other documentation. The stuff that isn't can easily be read as speculation. Cushman obviously didn't have a team doing research for him. These are an entirely different kind of book, just collections of stories about the series. Cushman attempted to document the production of every episode from beginning to end. "The Making of Star Trek" was fun to read in the 70s when television was mysterious to me but it's kind of dull to me now. "Inside Star Trek" is also lots of fun to read but you only get two perspectives of what was happening, and information about the third season is speculative since Robert Cushman quit at that point.
But in general, did you find the episodes that were supposed to have the new effects put in to look better overall?
Stories are great and vibe too. Technical not that good, but it was in 60's.... Somehow when I was younger vibe of some episodes always had this drama vibe thing, psychedelic/horror vibe sometimes with background sounds/music. Realy special atmosphere. Next Generation was kind of more realistic with vibe and 80's time. Not that psychedelic atmosphere.
Do you mean even though I don't see a difference between to non-effects scenes in both versions?* If so, then yes. I find the overall viewing experience with the enhanced effects more satisfying. In addition, my new subwoofer arrived yesterday - not yet hooked up - and I'm counting on the bass boost (upping my 5.0 system to 5.1) to further add to the viewing experience. ___________ * The non-effects scenes are a bit disappointing because they range in appearance from excellent (what one would expect from Blu-ray) to seemingly standard definition quality, depending on the scene (or even the shot) within a single episode. I don't know why they wouldn't be uniformly excellent or uniformly mediocre. I assume, however, that these non-effects scenes will never look much (if at all) better. Maybe one gets a boost with a 4K TV, but I imagine the variation in quality (assuming my eyes aren't deceiving me) would remain.
Yes. From a technological standpoint, it looks like the 1980s-1990s in many respects. But that ain't bad for a late-1960s TV show. On a related note, I find it humorous when people compare the movie 2001 A Space Odyssey to modern technology. It was 2001! I shouldn't be compared to 2023! ("Look, how the viewing screens on the ship look just like iPads!" Well, we didn't have iPads in 2001, so . . .)
My copy of THE MAKING OF STAR TREK. I think it must be a replacement version as my original probably bit the dust.
Okay, I must not be explaining myself all that well with regard to what I wanted to know about the visuals; at any rate, what kind of sub did you end up getting? That was quick! Let me know if you need setup assistance. I turned 50 yesterday, so better hurry up before this age kicks in and I don't even remember my own name.....
Don’t discount the likelihood I’m just being obtuse. Feel free to try again with your visuals question. I ended up buying a Kanto Sub8. Didn’t want anything larger. I think it’s a good starter SW (given my space limitation). It’s still in the box.
Yikes! I have that book - I bought it in the early 70s and I had totally forgotten about it. I've just dug it out now for a re-read. Thanks!
It's a good'un. I particularly like the memo, transcribed within (and also at the link below), where Bob Justman suggests a list of alternative Vulcan names, based on the idea that all such names would start with Sp and end with a k. The 1966 Star Trek “Vulcan Proper Names” Memos
No one told Ted Sturgeon about this when he wrote "Amok Time" a few months after the memo. He named Spock's rival "Spor" which they changed to "Stonn" which also didn't follow Justman's naming formula although he did make a sexual joke about the name "Spor" in a memo to Roddenberry. The guy who wrote that article forgot about Stonn too.
I suspect there are three main reasons why some shots look less sharp than others: Problems with the original negative, under or overexposure, etc. Only a portion of the original image was used, i.e., it was cropped in post-production to change the framing of the shot. The original camera negative for a particular shot no longer exists, so a print (i.e., second generation film) had to be used instead. Any of those three could cause a particular scene to look blurrier or grainier. I have no idea how many of the original camera negatives were actually available and able to be used for the remaster, but you can see quite a bit of variability in picture quality from scene to scene, so I imagine a lot of different sources were used.
If I recall correctly, the TOS Remastered team didn't have any way to recomposite visual effects, they just had to remaster the final film print and then add and/or replace with updated CGI VFX. This is different than the TNG remaster where they were able to build from the OCN up in many cases.
Right you are. I still think it's the same case, only working from the final film prints, but I could be mistaken. Per this StarTrek.com article: The Lost Film of TOS There could be other info out there but this is from an official source, at least.
There are several cases where they zoomed into the negative to reframe something (the worst case I can think of is a shot of Teri Garr in "Assignment Earth") but in lots of cases the cameraman just didn't get a shot exactly in focus but it was the best take and it was good enough for television. In one briefing room scene they kept the focus on one actor and let two other actors be slightly out of focus even when they were talking. I guess they thought it was close enough.
I initially thought the new effects scenes were limited to space and landscape sequences, but I guess even relatively insignificant shots were redone. In one episode I recently watched, a shot of one of Sulu's instruments that showed the date was re-done (though, wisely, not overly so, as a true modernization would have made it look sorely out of step with the Enterprise's level of technology). I'm 100% enjoying the new effects. I started watching "Mudd's Women", and the opening scene where they are chasing another ship was very entertaining. The original shot was slow and uneventful. The updated scene had the ship weaving like it was being driven by a crazed drunk who didn't quite know how to operate the vessel. It reminded me of a dashboard cam car chase from one of those cop shows. I also was surprised how well they re-recorded the music for the show's intro.
Yes the spinning dial clock in "The Naked Time" was like having a rotary dial phone on the bridge. Unfortunately they weren't able to change the horrible special effect of Dr. McCoy getting "zapped" by Thalassa in "Return to Tomorrow". It's obviously sheets of paper flapping around a fan.
Three days after my 50th birthday we had to put our beloved 20-year-old Chihuahua/Corgi down because she was suffering in a lot of pain. On top of that, I found out, through my wife's social media troughing, that a childhood friend of mine who grew up with me seemingly passed away in 2013. He was 39. We also lost a goldfish this month -- suffice to say, it has not been a happy or memorable May for me. As such (and to the delight of many on this forum, I am sure), I don't know how much contributing I will be doing because I'm just not in the mood to listen to music or watch films. Now, it's just me and my wife in the house, and to call it "empty" is something of a moronic understatement. If there's anyone who can remotely relate to this (or who has put down a beloved pet recently) please share, as I can use some suggestions for getting through this.
As someone who has spent the last 10 years going from one trauma to the next, I found mindless comfort watching does it for me. The Amazing Race, MKR (My Kitchen Rules,) Judge (now Justice) Judy and House Hunters have seen me through a lot of it. If you can find that show that isn't too taxing on the brain and gives you a few laughs it helps.
