or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › The Star Trek Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Star Trek Thread - Page 51

post #2501 of 4149

I haven't seen much of the revamped TOS effects except for when I'm at the gym but I just saw this....

 

 

HOLY SHIT THIS IS GREAT!!! They updated the effects perfectly without going nuts over-detailing everything. The thing that bothers me about every subsequent Star Trek show is just how ugly they've gotten. TNG was mostly beige while DS9 had that grim looking puke green palette as Voyager had no palette to speak of and Enterprise's entire decor consisted of shades of white, black, grey and blue. Looking at these updated FX, I really wish they would do a Trek show set during the original era and make it look as goofy and funky as TOS did.

 

You know, TOS didn't have fancy effects and had to rely on strong storytelling and the quality of their actors. I wish that we could get a new Star Trek show that recaptures the look and feel that these updated FX do. I mean, how much do you think it would cost to produce these FX shots? We're not talking Transformers with everything having an insane level of detail and 25 million moving parts.

 

Star Trek, like The Twilight Zone, are two shows where their look was integral to their success and I think that a common mistake of revamps is the way they try to reinvent everything. A new Star Trek show molded as TOS would get soo much out of its budget as there would be no need to fixate on unnecessary detail that does nothing to improve the quality of the writing or the acting.

post #2502 of 4149
Thread Starter 
I wish the effects in TOS were simply remastered the same way they're currently doing with TNG, using the same model effects footage but all cleaned up straight from the original negatives. To me that would have been a better way of celebrating the 40th anniversary and paying tribute to the guys who worked their asses off trying to make the effects work on that show. Inserting CGI in a 1960s TV show just seems wrong and insulting to those who worked hard on the original effects. I don't get this tinkering at all.
post #2503 of 4149
I love the practical FX. But I love the remastered TOS, Doomsday Machine being my favorite. The sheer amount of detail in the battered Constalletion is just off the charts.

I wish they'd go back and do that to TNG.
post #2504 of 4149

FX integrity is a tricky subject. The DVD format will bring out and emphasize every flaw in FX that were designed to be seen on relatively low resolution Television sets. I watched the unrestored Battlestar Galactica (the 1970's version) on DVD and it was painful. The matte lines are so blatant that I couldn't get into the story at all. So, in a sense, the new format itself results in the viewer seeing the show in a way that was not intended.

 

So is the response to simply erase those Matte lines using computer technology? That is destroying the integrity of the original effects. If you are going to do that, why not also add some enhancements?

 

I think the Star Trek Original Series upgrades have been very effective, tasteful, and respectful to the originals.

post #2505 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

FX integrity is a tricky subject. The DVD format will bring out and emphasize every flaw in FX that were designed to be seen on relatively low resolution Television sets. I watched the unrestored Battlestar Galactica (the 1970's version) on DVD and it was painful. The matte lines are so blatant that I couldn't get into the story at all. So, in a sense, the new format itself results in the viewer seeing the show in a way that was not intended.

 

So is the response to simply erase those Matte lines using computer technology? That is destroying the integrity of the original effects. If you are going to do that, why not also add some enhancements?

 

I think the Star Trek Original Series upgrades have been very effective, tasteful, and respectful to the originals.


Stuff like matte lines in the TOS effects and composite grain in the original TNG video masters I don't think is a big deal and that ridding them wouldn't "destroy the integrity" (heck if I wanted to be that nitpicky I would only allow myself to watch TOS on a 1960s TV, cuz afterall that's how it was originally seen right?). What matters the most in my mind is staying true to the look of the original series by keeping the original effects and model shots, only cleaned up for HD. The TNG remaster is a great example so far from what I've seen. The Enterprise-D has never looked better. Seeing cleaned up HD footage of Kirk's Enterprise would look fantastic I think.
post #2506 of 4149

If integrity to the original FX is what you need, the Blu-ray sets of TOS have the alternate angle function to show the remastered original FX shots as they were.  They already gave it to you, a far step from "George Lucas ruined my childhood."  I myself was a child around the time TNG started up so I never really experienced TOS until the last few years when I bought the first season on Blu, and I personally like both the updated effects and the ability to see the original for what it was.  You've got the best of both worlds.

 

Granted, using the original model shots for TNG is awesome and clearly in some ways superior, but on the other hand, any other optical or computer generated shots may still have to be re-created, like the jellyfish aliens in Encounter at Farpoint (as far as I know anyway).  Some things may come down to cost-effectiveness and clarity of image, and I don't mind if they create an updated image as long as the original ideas and concepts put forth by the original team are respected, which, from what I've seen so far in my TOS set and clips of TNG, is what they've done.

post #2507 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill McNeal View Post

If integrity to the original FX is what you need, the Blu-ray sets of TOS have the alternate angle function to show the remastered original FX shots as they were

Yes, but unlike the live footage the f/x were not remastered. That's why I didn't bother with the blu-ray set. That would be like Lucas releasing HD copies of the theatrical Star Wars but with only the live footage remastered and the effects still dirty. If I'm gonna go HD I rather they go all the way.

Besides that, the jellyfish aliens you mentioned for TNG, they actually were models. The only stuff so far recreated is phaser blasts and such effects which is fine as they appear true to the original look. I do like that they fixed certain errors like they did for TOS (Scotty's missing phaser beam, little stuff like that).
post #2508 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Yes, but unlike the live footage the f/x were not remastered. That's why I didn't bother with the blu-ray set. That would be like Lucas releasing HD copies of the theatrical Star Wars but with only the live footage remastered and the effects still dirty. If I'm gonna go HD I rather they go all the way.
Besides that, the jellyfish aliens you mentioned for TNG, they actually were models. The only stuff so far recreated is phaser blasts and such effects which is fine as they appear true to the original look. I do like that they fixed certain errors like they did for TOS (Scotty's missing phaser beam, little stuff like that).


Ah, well then I see why you might have a small axe to grind.  I assume that it just was probably easier and less expensive to do it the way they did for TOS and they're only investing in TNG because the TOS sets sold well enough.  They had to go back to the original negatives to reedit the episodes of TNG anyway, so it probably made a little more sense to use the existing model shots and just tweak and enhance them if needed.  As far as I know (which isn't very far) they didn't have to completely re-edit together the TOS footage, so upgrading the effects shots was the simpler route, and would explain why the original effects shots wouldn't be made to look any better since they would've already been rendered into the final episode negatives.

post #2509 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Yeah, remastering TOS was easier since it was all edited on 35mm film so all they had to do was scan the master prints and digitally remove the dirt and hairs, color correcting ect. The optical effects would have been trickier, going back to the original negatives and reassembling the effects might have cost more. Still, how much money went into the CGI? It couldn't have been cheaper could it? Oh well.

Again, I like how TNG is approaching it. Of course they WILL have to replace stuff with CGI. For example, I doubt this brief shot of the CGI Enterprise will make it into the remastered blu-rays.

267

Then there's the low-res planets that were used in the early seasons that looked like they belong in a Super Nintendo game. They made the TOS planets look more impressive.

267
post #2510 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Yeah, remastering TOS was easier since it was all edited on 35mm film so all they had to do was scan the master prints and digitally remove the dirt and hairs, color correcting ect. The optical effects would have been trickier, going back to the original negatives and reassembling the effects might have cost more. Still, how much money went into the CGI? It couldn't have been cheaper could it? Oh well.


That's assuming that the original raw elements for TOS' effects still exist, or were ever archived.


Edited by Hammerhead - 3/11/12 at 11:43pm
post #2511 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post


That's assuming that the original raw elements for TOS' effects still exist, or were ever archived.

 

 

Don't the original F/X all reside on the TOS blus as alternate angles?

post #2512 of 4149

I think he means the plates and stuff for the effects, not the original version of the show shown as seen on TV.

post #2513 of 4149

Yes, the raw elements. That's why the TNG Blu material looks so good without being CG recreations-- they were able to locate the bluescreen stage shots of the Enterprise model et al on 35mm and re-composite them at HD resolution.

post #2514 of 4149

I'm hoping fellow Trek Fans might enjoy my review of Shatner's World.

 

William Shatner has always been something of a walking one-man show, so his decision to actually mount a stage production to showcase his unique talents may seem a bit redundant. But mount one he has, and the result is Shatner’s World.

Shatner’s World came to Broadway last month, and I was lucky enough to see the world’s biggest living Science Fiction icon live. I’ve never been shy about expressing Shatner love on my DeFlip Side radio program, and it turns out that I’m in good company, because neither is William Shatner.

Part clip show, part memoir, part shtick, Shatner's World rides a free-form groove fueled by ego, swagger and sincerity. And it's certainly worth the time to go see.

You can listen to and read my full review at the DeFlip Side website:

http://deflipside.com/?p=4512

Thank you, Mr. Shatner, for providing this unique opportunity to see you in person.

post #2515 of 4149

So, my TNG experience is still going good. My mission was mainly S3-5, skipping over the turds, then cherry picking from S7 to finish it up.

 

I'm halfway through S4 right now, and it's been mostly great, but I needed a little break. Before I get to that, the recent highlights:

 

"Family". Wow. That one is still a powerhouse all these years later. This is my kind of episode, as opposed to the exceptionally well plotted but dry "Yesterday's Enterprise". Picard's dick brother really makes it work. Rarely is the show as gripping as when they start arguing and fighting.

 

"Brothers" continues the string of greatness that starts off season 4. I'm not sure what kind of debate there's been over the years about how good an actor Brent Spiner is, but I think he's phenomenal. Data is one of the iconic sci fi characters of all time. Any over the top Data wackiness that has ever occured (and there's been plenty) was always the fault of the script and direction of the individual episode, I think. When you give him a good script, like with this and "Offspring" from S3, he knocks it out of the park and makes my favorite moments of the series.

 

After a few more S4 eps, I really needed some variety, so I saif F it and started DS9 Season 1. I read up a bit on what to expect from the early seasons, and decided I didn't want to miss any essential character building.

 

I remember bits and pieces and images from seeing the pilot and the first few eps back in '93. I was in 2nd grade, Jesus. I remember the feeling that the pilot was a bit of a "TV event" back then, with ads probably highlighting the totally awesome at the time wormhole effects and the Picard crossover. Boy does that same wormhole effect get used and used over and over in the 1st season. Like 30 times. I really hope they re-render it for Season 2.

 

Anyways, despite the pacing taking a shit and dying in the 2nd part, the pilot was pretty damn good. Sisko is the man right off the bat, and the destruction at the beginning is a great hook into the character. The show really makes you feel like Picard is being a big dickface at their first meeting. Not even a "Awwww bro, sorry bout the wife dying thing, I was totally on a Borgbender that weekend."? Tense!

 

After that, we start to settle into the real show. Honestly, the 2nd episode and "Dax" (I was skipping around a bit, though I ended up watching about 16 out of the 20 I think) gave the show a slightly impenetrable feeling. I was really not used to the idea of there being too much going on in a Trek show. The Cardassian/Bejoran thing, and circumstances of the Federation being custodians of the station is a pretty heavy infodump at first, nevermind shapeshifters and mysterious symbiote weirdness. Also, the station is simply...fugly.

 

But, soon enough, you get used to it. It also helps that the cast is fantastic. O'Brien is always a solid presence, at least as good as the best TNG crewmembers, though all he got to do on that show was show off his amazing kayaking outfit. Kira is one spunky babe, and a damn good character, especially as the center of "Duet". Dax is fine, but could use some growth to fully justify the supposed familiarity with her and Sisko. Odo is simply the man. Quark I was dreading (keep in mind I just watched TNG S3, showcasing the Ferengi at their worst), but after the pilot, I can't think of a single scene I disliked him in. He's good, except for the STD nightmare of a nose that I hate looking at.

 

After a few episodes, I realized that Quark's place and Odo kind of make DS9 the "Deadwood" of Star Trek. Sure, Odo isn't as handsome as Timothy Hutton, but the dynamic between the characters is just as good.

 

The crucial thing is, the show has a really good feel to it in the 1st season. It has that ever elusive watchability that even TNG had trouble keeping a tight grip on in the good seasons. Even if the plot of an episode is slight, you'll probably still get some prime Odo, Odo/Quark goodness. I'd probably only put 4 or 5 of the eps on my "good" list, but I'm happy to have watched all the ones that I did.

 

One that I really enjoyed that the episode guides weren't crazy about was "Captive Persuit", where O'brien becomes space buddies with Emmy-winning lizardman Tosk. In case you don't remember, Tosk's whole reason for existence is to be hunted by some goofy helmeted guys from the Gamma Quadrent in a "The Most Dangerous Game" type situation. Tosk's most endearing quality is that he answers any tough questions about his past with "Ah...uh....I am Tosk!". If I ever get pulled over for speeding, I am totally going to pull that one. "Sir, do you know how fast you were going?" "I....I....am Tosk!" "You're Tosk. OK. Is that supposed to, like, explain everything? Here in human society, on this side of the wormhole, the mutual exchange of information usually has a little more substance to it." "I...(*blink)...I.....am Tosk!"

 

So, with that surprisingly solid 1st season out of the way, I'm onward to DS9 Season 2. The rest of TNG will have to wait a little while.

post #2516 of 4149
Thread Starter 
DS9's first season I think is good but it's definitely different from the rest as most of the time it was pretty episodic and at times felt like the sister show to TNG. Right off the gate in S2 the show starts to become comfortable in its own skin, diving straight into a multi-episode story arc, digging deeper into the history of the station, Cardassian occupation, whispers of the Dominion leading up to their appearance in the finale, ect.

I'm currently in that second season along with TNG's seventh season. I always wanted to watch the shows in air date order and Netflix has finally allowed that opportunity. http://startreklist.blogspot.com/2011/04/list-of-all-star-trek-episodes-sorted_05.html
post #2517 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Restored these scenes with the music Ron Jones scored for them.



I think the music compliments the scene with Data and Tasha fine, and it is the only scene in the episode where we learn something new about a character. However the Crusher scene still falls apart because Gates' acting is just soooooo awful there.
post #2518 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by neoolong View Post

I think he means the plates and stuff for the effects, not the original version of the show shown as seen on TV.


 

 

Gotcha. I guess I was just coming from the assumption that the original film elements were destroyed or at least not lovingly archived like TNG (since unlike that show, TOS was edited on film.) In hindsight, that was a mistake.

 

Regarding the larger issue of what version one prefers, I like the new FX. It's totally faithful to the intent of TOS, down to the production design, but also brings it in line with the contemporary shooting style for the spinoffs. It's a fun thing to watch intently with the remasters.

 

Okay... so early DS9 seasons. They're good but a lot of what's great about the characters is how they grow under the war and better writing. The show is still finding its own voice in the first season. In hindsight, the pilot is a necessary introduction to a very complex region of space. For that alone, I forgive it for being a bit slow. I dig it more than Encounter fo sho.

 

Adding Worf helps a lot later on, which is something I never thought I'd ever say.


Edited by Pop Zeus - 3/15/12 at 6:02pm
post #2519 of 4149
Thread Starter 
I'm currently in the third season. The quality is as consistent as the second season, but of course it's still warming up for the 4-7 seasons, but a damn good one.

Also, Garak is awesome.





Yeah, the second one is only a simulation, but damn is it an accurate one.
post #2520 of 4149

I know this comes slightly out of left field, but does anyone else hope Giacchino brings in Goldsmith's main theme for the franchise (the one used for The Motion Picture and The Next Generation) for the Abrams Trek sequel? While he finally made me really appreciate Alexander Courage's original theme in the last film with his bombastic rendition, Goldsmith's has always been my favorite. It's just so damn rousing.

post #2521 of 4149

For me, it is the theme from First Contact. I have both this and the nuTrek soundtracks. Love them.

 

post #2522 of 4149

That *is* a very good theme. But don't tell me it wouldn't be thrilling to hear the TMP/Next Generation booming out of the speakers once again.

post #2523 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Couldn't stand Giacchino's rendition of the theme, I'd hate to imagine how he'd butcher Goldsmith's. Ron Jones was the only guy who seemed to do it justice, I'd like to see him get a crack at a feature film.

post #2524 of 4149

I really enjoyed  Giacchino's score for the film, but I do agree..what he did with his rendition of the Star Trek theme was a bit "off

 

Seeing John Williams conduct the Trek score is just awesome..

 

 

As for the films go, I always loved Star Trek 4's

 

post #2525 of 4149

Um.  Aren't we forgetting the best damn Star Trek theme?

 

post #2526 of 4149

Isn't that more James Horner recycling, though? I seem to recall hearing that some or much of his Wrath of Khan score was recycled from his score for Battle Beyond The Stars.

 

It's good recycling, mind you, and after all my favorite theme was reused over and over again. Hell, even Giacchino does it now and then.

post #2527 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonBaseNick View Post

 

As for the films go, I always loved Star Trek 4's

 


I like Rosenman's score okay, but it sounds too much like his score for Bakshi's Lord of the Rings in my mind.  It also sounds a little cheap, like they skimped on the orchestra.

 

I always thought Dennis McCarthy's main title for Generations was pretty underrated.  And that it should have been recycled for Enterprise the way Goldsmith's theme was for TNG.

 

post #2528 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

Isn't that more James Horner recycling, though? I seem to recall hearing that some or much of his Wrath of Khan score was recycled from his score for Battle Beyond The Stars.

 

It's good recycling, mind you, and after all my favorite theme was reused over and over again. Hell, even Giacchino does it now and then.



The fact that Wrath of Khan is derivative doesn't make it any less of a great score. Horner picks just the right bits of Prokofiev, Korngold and Goldsmith (who drew heavily from Stravinsky for his score) and makes them work together organically. Although Battle Beyond the Stars is built on similar sources, the steals are much more blatant and unconnected.

 

And this may be one of the best musical passages in the whole series:

 

post #2529 of 4149

This thread brings me such joy.

post #2530 of 4149

Dude, I *know* composers rip off past ones all the time. I was only talking about Horner cannibalizing his past work, which he has done many times, and has been noticed. That doesn't take anything away from his Trek scores, which I should've made more clear. It's a matter of preference for me.

post #2531 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post

I always thought Dennis McCarthy's main title for Generations was pretty underrated.  And that it should have been recycled for Enterprise the way Goldsmith's theme was for TNG.



I second the fondness for the Generations theme.  And using it for Enterprise would've been a really good idea, especially since the film it's from was about "generations" and the show attempted to give us the first generation of Starfleet.  Plus, it would've spared us from the song they did use.  The theme was one of the many things in the pilot that made me choose not to watch the series, and not only am I a huge Scott Bakula fan (I own all of Quantum Leap) but I'm also one of those tasteless people that enjoys watching Voyager.  I'll eventually get around to watching Enterprise to see the later seasons people speak highly of, but at the time, it couldn't grab me.

 

And speaking of Voyager, Goldsmith's theme for that show is one of my favorite Trek cues.  Nothing transcendent but just a really nice, simple piece.

post #2532 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Spider View Post

Dude, I *know* composers rip off past ones all the time. I was only talking about Horner cannibalizing his past work, which he has done many times, and has been noticed. That doesn't take anything away from his Trek scores, which I should've made more clear. It's a matter of preference for me.



Well, the full Battle Beyond the Stars score is out there now, if you want to compare them. It doesn't so much play as Horner recycling himself as refining the concept. Unlike Cocoon where I swear he (or someone) just spliced 'Battle In the Mutara Nebula' straight into that film's action climax.

post #2533 of 4149

Thanks.

 

Anyway, switching gears, I was somehow late to the party on the discovery that all the Star Trek series are on Netflix Instant. My dad and I ended up watching the remastered "The Trouble With Tribbles" last night as a result, and it's still such a hoot; I can't wait to watch more episodes with him. Laundry list!:

 

-I love how it seems like Kirk is wearing the green uniform shirt because the wardrobe people realized, "Crap, Bill gained weight" and are trying to hide it. That may not be the reason, but it amuses me to think so.

 

-I feel sympathetic pain for the poor bastards who had to make all those tribbles.

 

-The whole build up to the bar fight and Kirk's interrogation afterwards are just classic. Shatner may be a ham most of the time in this role (which fits perfectly, I'd argue), but his underplaying the disappointment that no one stepped up to defend him from Klingon insults is hilarious. As is his "Now he tells me" when Bones says all they have to do is stop feeding them.

 

-I've come to the decision that Nimoy and Kelley were probably the best pure actors in the show's regular cast, Nimoy by doing his own unique thing, Kelley for being a consummate professional even when he has to say the most ridiculous things.

 

-"...where they'll be no tribble at all" really shouldn't be funny, but Doohan's tossed-off delivery helps. The "everyone except Spock laughs!" sitcom ending is silly, but excusably so.

 

-The remastered effects (and credits!) are quite nice indeed, retaining just enough of that old-school quality while still looking, well, better.

 

-It's interesting how the actors emphasize the "Kling" in "Klingon" more in their pronunciation here. Can't really say I prefer either pronunciation.

post #2534 of 4149

I've never posted in here.  I'm a pretty casual Trek fan, but I ran across this story and figured this was the best place to share it.

 

Vegas almost had a full scale Enterprise built in 1992, until Paramount CEO Stanley Jaffe said "no".

 

While obviously a money making novelty, I can't resist the idea of being able to visit a full scale replica of the ship, complete with interiors...that's just too cool to not try at least once.  And I actually don't mind that this didn't happen, but I'd rather it had been some other reason other than a paranoid studio exec worried about his reputation, without even knowing if it would be affected.  What if the attraction worked?  In 1992 Trek was pretty popular.  Even if it failed, Jaffe was only at Paramount until 1994, unlikely to have been long enough for a failure to affect his job.  


Edited by Ambler - 4/8/12 at 11:42pm
post #2535 of 4149

That's insane. And I would have gone every year.

post #2536 of 4149

I'm not even the biggest Trek fan and I would've gone every year.  This thing would've made insane amounts of money...everybody would go just to at least see it for themselves.  I hate short sighted, arrogant, vain corporate CEOs with no vision or bravery.  

post #2537 of 4149

I would have as well. That sounds amazing. SO many people hate Stanley Jaffe now haha.
 

And if it was somehow a colossal failure, I'm not sure why he was so concerned. Paramount wasn't paying for it, and it wasn't really going to be there forever, they would have demolished it. Worst case is he would end up the butt of a few jokes and all would have been forgotten over time, I would think.

post #2538 of 4149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexus-7 View Post

I would have as well. That sounds amazing. SO many people hate Stanley Jaffe now haha.
 

And if it was somehow a colossal failure, I'm not sure why he was so concerned. Paramount wasn't paying for it, and it wasn't really going to be there forever, they would have demolished it. Worst case is he would end up the butt of a few jokes and all would have been forgotten over time, I would think.


Yeah, his decision made very little sense if any.  He said it would be there forever...I'm surprised nobody said the obvious "if it doesn't work, they'll tear it down, and we're not paying for it anyway."  The more I think about it the angrier I get.  I mean you wouldn't even need to be brave, all Paramount was holding was the rights...Jaffe could've easily blamed it on somebody else if it didn't work out.  Another stupid decision driven by fear.

 

post #2539 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Got Leonard Rosenman's expanded soundtrack to THE VOYAGE HOME. Probably the weakest of the TOS film scores, but I would not go so far to call it BAD, just not as good as the others. Plus I'll take it any day over nuTrek's. It's nice to finally have all of the six TOS scores in their entirety. smile.gif

I was very intrigued to learn that originally the intention was for Rosenman to bring back the TOS theme in full form for the title credits. After hearing it, I can see why Nimoy decided to go with the other theme he developed. Rosenman's rendition is too slow, plus it sounds more suitable for a western.

Still better than Michael Giacchino's schizophrenic rendition.
post #2540 of 4149

Out of all the films, I enjoy Voyage Home the most, but that's just me. Khan is a close second.

 

Wow, you were not kidding about that being suitable for a western...

 

While Horner does copy and paste like none other, I would not have minded if he was brought back for the new Trek. Then again, I enjoy Giacchinos score.

I also picked this up the other today, framed and hanging in my office, it brings me pure pure joy.

A70-6892

post #2541 of 4149

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Got Leonard Rosenman's expanded soundtrack to THE VOYAGE HOME. Probably the weakest of the TOS film scores, but I would not go so far to call it BAD, just not as good as the others. Plus I'll take it any day over nuTrek's. It's nice to finally have all of the six TOS scores in their entirety. smile.gif

 


Best thing about this disc is the full recording of "I Hate You". Now where's "A Star Beyond Time"?

post #2542 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Cumberbatch might be Khan.

http://collider.com/star-trek-2-sequel-villain/162992/

Also, Nimoy is returning. Ya know, it's bad enough they have to dredge up old characters like Khan, but Nimoy? Why? He should have stayed at retirement, and Senile Spock should have remained with the colonists like at the end of the last flick.
post #2543 of 4149

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post

Cumberbatch might be Khan.
http://collider.com/star-trek-2-sequel-villain/162992/
Also, Nimoy is returning. Ya know, it's bad enough they have to dredge up old characters like Khan, but Nimoy? Why? He should have stayed at retirement, and Senile Spock should have remained with the colonists like at the end of the last flick.

 

Just someone please get Nimoy a set of dentures that fit.  I also don't really trust that rumor.

 

post #2544 of 4149

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBananaGrabber View Post

 I also don't really trust that rumor.

 

Major Star Trek Sequel Spoilers Confirmed

post #2545 of 4149
Thread Starter 
It's really stupid how stuff like that info is now considered "spoiler" material. Abrams and his pointless "mystery box" approach. Did knowing Cumberbatch would be Khan really ruin the whole flick for me?
post #2546 of 4149

Not really surprised, just dissapointed they are re-hashing Kahn. They should have stayed true to the "formula" that was used in WOK and found a TOS episode and updated it or expanded upon it.

 

And what are the odds that Shatner wants in on this even more once he finds out Nimoy is gonna do another apperance no matter how brief.

post #2547 of 4149

Remember when people thought that there might be Horta and shit?

post #2548 of 4149

The downside?  Re-using Khan so soon in the "new" canon.

 

The upside?  We know the cast works like gangbusters and the script has no reason to not be better this time 'round since there is no Writer's Strike.  As long as they use Khan in a new and interesting way, I'll be fine with it.  At this point, I still trust them.

 

I just hope Khan is motivated by something other than revenge if he is indeed in the film and is a villain.  We don't need a third straight entry in this franchise with a vendetta-seeking enemy.

post #2549 of 4149

They've failed to create as memorable a villain as Khan since... Wrath of Khan in 1982 so I don't see how this is a bad thing. The character has been dormant for 30 years and they successfully re-invented the original crew. Might as well go for the powerhouse villain cause they've never topped him despite 9 movies later and countless episodes. Benedict Cumberbatch is no slouch either so I fully expect him to bring something as exciting as Ricardo Montalban but fresh as well.

post #2550 of 4149
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

They've failed to create as memorable a villain as Khan since... Wrath of Khan in 1982



returngrace_054.jpg
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › The Star Trek Thread