Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Media

Star Trek: The Motion Picture DVD In Nov 161

Posted by CmdrTaco from the i'll-pre-order-mine dept.
CliffSpradlin writes "The Motion Picture will be released as a two-DVD set. More info can be found here on TrekToday about what is on the DVDs. At the bottom of the page, there is a form to ask the developers of the DVDs questions about the release. This rerelease is totally revamped, with a new sound mix, better effects, and a better feeling of continuity. For more info what has been changed technically, go here for information from the official website, StarTrek.com"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture DVD In Nov More

Star Trek: The Motion Picture DVD In Nov

Comments Filter:
  • Finally we get something good:
    a new edit by director Robert Wise, and more than two hours of new bonus materials.

    Even though the first movie sucked (IMHO, the first good one was ST:TUC - don't believe me? Rent 'em and groan!).

    At least the re-edit will make for some good Trekker/ie alternative view.

    • Actually, I have seen every Trek movie recently; my friend has the entire set in a colletor's edition VHS tape set.

      I thought the Wrath of Khan, and the Search for Spock were decent... :)

      But I'm probably way too much of a trekkie.

      By the way... i'm buying this DVD when it comes out. I suggest you all do as well.

      (VOICE STYLE="klingon")

      "Today is a good day to buy!"

      (/VOICE)


      • (VOICE STYLE="klingon")

        "Today is a good day to buy!"

        (/VOICE)


        *Mental image of a hard sell Klingon car salesman in a cheap suit*


        "You will look nice in this car." (screaming, fingering dagger): "YOU WILL!"


        -Legion

      • Okay, let's get a real thread started here. Since ST:TMP already has an alternative subtitle, I've been thinking about what would be good for the other ones. Here's what I've got so far.
        • Star Trek: The Motionless Picture
        • Star Trek II: Quien Es Mas Macho, Guillermo Shatner o Ricardo Montalban?
        • Star Trek IV: Songs of the Humpback Whale
        • Star Trek V: For the Love of God, Why?
        Anyone have ideas for III and VI?
  • Will the remastering remove the warp rainbows?
    • umm... why would it?
      • Because they look silly.
        • Oh... yes. Yes they do. :)

          But I don't think they should be edited out of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They're part of the film - it's quirkiness - and it fits right in with William Shatner in a tight Trek uniform.

          Now editing Jar Jar Binks out of Star Wars Episode One... that is something that I would not mind at all.

    • Re:Rainbows (Score:2, Interesting)

      by SparkyMartin ( 206236 )
      I hope not. STTMP is the only movie where they looked cool and only appeared during acceleration. All of the other silly ST movies show them any time the ship is in warp and as it goes by it makes a silly "whoosh" sound.
  • When Enterprise was annouced, trektoday/trekbbs was slashdotted all day. Same again this time? Use a fscking cache [google.com], /please/
    • well, maybe not that cache, as its over a month old, but go find another one, please!
    • a fine idea, but the website appears to be updated with new content fairly regularly, and the googlecache doesn't have the st:tmp dvd story. good try for karma, though.

      complex
      • hence the follow up, guess I really should check my posts first :)

        I'm still waiting for slashdot to mirror smaller sites, adverts are no good to the site if no one can get there in the first place!

  • just one question ... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Frizzled ( 123910 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @04:35PM (#2173275) Homepage
    did they "re-master" the part where spock is out, flying around in a spacesuit?

    the first film really did set a tone for the rest of the series (saving the planet, one episode at a time) ... but that scene still gives me chills.

    _f

  • Planet Vulcan? (Score:4, Funny)

    by rakerman ( 409507 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @04:35PM (#2173276) Homepage Journal
    Is it just me, or does the newly rendered Planet Vulcan [startrek.com] look like something out of a level from Quake?
  • The main hassle fro the first star trek movei was that it didn't appeal to everyone. Which is hard to do in the first place.

    Specifically, it didn't appeal to the shot'em up types, and the "gimmick" used for the plot was a little too pat for my taste.

    So in some ways, it was typical Star Trek. I wonder how much the new graphics, and special effect enhancements can make up for the weakness of the original story.

    To tell the truth, it would have been better to have a revisit from Harry Mudd, or something.

    The common consensus was that the movie with Kahn was a much better story all around.

    Still, should be interesting

    - - -
    Radio Free Nation [radiofreenation.com]
    is a general news site based on Slash Code
    "If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"
    - - -

    • Lost, lamented aliens (Score:3, Informative)

      by fm6 ( 162816 )
      To tell the truth, it would have been better to have a revisit from Harry Mudd, or something.

      The guys I miss are the Iotians [geocities.com]. The closing line from that episode begs for a sequel. Alas, the official party line is that Sigma Iotia II is under permanent quarantine. Mustn't give the Federation any real competition.

    • The common consensus was that the movie with Kahn was a much better story all around.

      This is just the old truism. Even numbered Trek films don't suck.

    • Alien54 said:"To tell the truth, it would have been better to have a revisit from Harry Mudd, or something"

      Harry Mudd was supposed to make an appearence on TNG, way back in the day. The idea was that the Enterprise D would come across this guy who was sitting in hypersleep (or whatever they'd call it on Trek) and when they woke him up, the scene would go something like this:

      MUDD:"Where am I?"
      DR.CRUSHER: "You're on the starship Enterprise."
      MUDD(incredulously):"Oh, great!"

      Cool idea, right? It never got made, because the actor who played Mudd died. So we got the *ahem* "Outrageous Okona" instead.

      Just your daily dose of useless Star Trek trivia. (I hear that there's a market for that stuff)
      • It never got made, because the actor who played Mudd died. So we got the *ahem* "Outrageous Okona" instead.

        These days with digital actors, it might not be so much a problem.

        - - -
        Radio Free Nation [radiofreenation.com]
        is a news site based on Slash Code
        "If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"
        - - -

        • Radio Free Nation is a news site based on Slash Code
          "If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"
          You also have a click-through license agreement that's over 4,100 words long. A bit excessive, don't you think?

          -dair
          • You also have a click-through license agreement that's over 4,100 words long. A bit excessive, don't you think?

            I agree

            It is a bit much. But then, I am not in charge of the site.

            What can I say, the guy paying the bills is slightly eccentric. Which gives him a say, I suppose. He doesn't trust big media, not that I can blame him.

            Although the idea of a click through license agreement for a website is interesting.

    • Re:first star trek movie (Score:4, Informative)

      by jnik ( 1733 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @07:48PM (#2173762)
      I wonder how much the new graphics, and special effect enhancements can make up for the weakness of the original story.

      Really, it's far, far more than that. The official line is that the DVD is finishing the film. They're doing post on some footage that never got used, re-editing, and overall trying to do the film the way it was meant, rather than under the Christmas deadline. All-in-all, it should be a better, not just prettier, flick.

      • The official line is that the DVD is finishing the film.

        Oh, I hope so. Specifically, I hope the "Doug Trumbull" ending gets put on!

        I read in some SF fan magazine that they had an ending planned where, at the very end when V'Ger makes a bright flash of light and disappears, V'Ger first spit out all the stuff it ate, including a Federation space station and a few Klingon battlecruisers. The Klingons, noticing that they are now right next to Earth and all Earth defenses are at the moment shut down, start attacking things, and a pitched battle (Enterprise vs. 3 Klingon cruisers) ensues. Enterprise wins, but damage is heavy and they have to eject the saucer!

        I doubt they can finish it that far because I don't think any of the scenes involving actors were ever filmed. And the whole thing could have just been a rumor. But it would have been cool...

        steveha


    • To tell the truth, it would have been better to have a revisit from Harry Mudd, or something.

      Somehow, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Mudd just doesn't seem right.

      Unless it was a reference to Harry's wife...
  • When will the box set of 1-6 (DVD) come out? Anyone know? Anyone have any information about it?

  • Woo hoo! Select scene 1, loop, pop open a beer. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @05:06PM (#2173351) Homepage

    Hurrah, now I can watch the best bits without wearing out my tape. Specifically, the first two minutes: that spine shivering D7 battlecruiser flyby intro, and the sterling example of a thorough Klingon scientific investigation: "Visual! Tactical! Stand by torpedoes! Fire! [pause, oops] Evasive!"


    After that though, the boring old Federation Dudley Dorights take over, and it all kind of goes downhill from there. ;)

    • "Visual! Tactical! Stand by torpedoes! Fire! [pause, oops] Evasive!"

      These lines were spoken in Klingonese, of course.

      Best line heard in a movie theatre when ST:TMP premiered came at that point:

      Damn, if I'd known this was a foreign film, I wouldn't have bothered!

      ;-)

      The other thing I love about that scene is the music. Awesome music. In fact, the soundtrack, which I have on CD, has been a modest favorite of mine for years, once I got "past" the romantic "excesses" on it.

      Oh, and here's what the /. "quote of the moment" happens to be as I preview this comment:

      You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.

      WRONG AGAIN! Stupid computer...!

  • Boycott! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Trollificus ( 253741 )
    Aren't we supposed to be boycotting anything that has to do with DVD? Ohhh, I forgot. That doesn't apply to Anime and geek movies. Silly me.

  • gee wiz (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I suppose it takes up two DVDs because the thing is so long, drawn out and boring.

  • TWO discs?! (Score:4, Funny)

    by nougatmachine ( 445974 ) <johndagen@n[ ]cape.net ['ets' in gap]> on Saturday August 18, 2001 @05:11PM (#2173361) Homepage
    Help! Say it isn't true! They've taken the limping snail's pace of the first Star Trek Movie and made it longer?!

    This is not a good sign...

  • It just isn't a good Star Trek movie. Try to watch it without preconceived notions of what Star Trek is and just watch it as a really good sci-fi movie. This movie probably would have become as big a hit as Blade Runner had it used a completely different setting and characters and not been called Star Trek

    • you're probably right. if they didn't waste about two hours oohing and aahing over the enterprise in "dry-dock" and hired some actors it probably wouldn't have been so horribly nauseating.
    • is why are they all wearing their pajamas in STTMP?
    • This movie probably would have become as big a hit as Blade Runner...

      Blade Runner (new special edition due on DVD later this year, BTW) tanked at the box office originally - it found its legs on TV and video. Scrapping the voice-over and sappy ending in the Director's Cut didn't hurt either.

  • Star Trek.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by OpCode42 ( 253084 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @05:27PM (#2173399) Homepage
    This should have been called "Star Trek : The Slow Motion Picture". Terrible.
  • Why do they always do 2 single-sided dvds where one double-sided dvd would suffice? (Gladiator for example) Wouldn't that make it less expensive?

    (no, i haven't seen the actual star trek dvd set so it could concievibly be a 2 double-sided dvd set but i doubt it)
    • Some older players (first-generation) cannot play double sided DVD's.

      They were originally made to play only single-sided DVD's, and those who bought DVD players when they first came out can only see single-sided DVD's now.

      Therefore, the industry is reluctant to make tons of double-sided DVD's, because everybody who bought the first DVD players would complain.

      That's my random guess anyway. :)
      • I believe that you're thinking of double layer DVDs. Double sided DVDs can be played by any player (save one of those jukebox style multidisc players), you just have to flip the disc when it reaches the end of that side. It's the dual-layered (multiple layers on the same side, requires the laser to focus on different levels) discs that many older players won't play.

        I think the reason that they don't do this is because there isn't a label on the top, which makes it alot harder to tell what movie you're looking at. Although the title is usually printed around the hole in the center, it's not obvious at first glance. Also, to many people, it seems that they are getting "more" if they get two DVDs rather than one Dual Layer DVD.

        I actually like the double sided discs. They just look really cool :-)

        • Oh, is that what double sided means? I've actually never seen one like that...

          Wow. written on both sides... amazing.

          I should probably get some newer DVD's. :)
    • So you can put them both in a 2+ DVD changer and not have to get up to flip it over? I dunno, that's my guess though.
    • Because then they can't have pretty labels on the top of the DVD saying what it is.

      If you have 5 DVDs in a changer, and you want to pull out one, but none of them have labels, it could be hard to distinguish immediately. (Not that I have a 5-disc changer, just an observation.)

      I also know one person who hates DVDs with two sides, and if she knows a movie is that way, she will not buy it.

      So it seems to be more a marketing issue than technical.

    • Re:Why 2 DVDs? (Score:3, Informative)

      by camusflage ( 65105 )
      According to the rec.video.dvd FAQ [dvddemystified.com], it is in fact a technical limitation. You're looking at four layers in one disc. Combine that with changers built to play only single sided DVD's, and you won't see many DVD-18's around.

    • Re:Why 2 DVDs? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Gladiator was DUAL LAYER, not DOUBLE SIDED.

      I haven't heard of a DVD player which will read both sides of a double sided DVD, nor have I heard of double sided DVD's being used for a single version of a movie... I've only seen double sided used for widescreen/regular view versions of a movie so you don't have to flip it. But I won't deny the possibility those exist.

      DUAL LAYER means that the laser focuses deeper into the DVD to read multiple layers. I believe they actually did some tests with up to 4 layers, or maybe it was 10 layers. Of course your DVD player must support the number of layers to be able to read them and older DVD players only supported one layer. Newer ones support two. That means you can't even use the dual layer CD on an older DVD player at all. It's not as simple as getting up to flip it over.

      Also, Dual Layer DVD's have a little bug in them. Many DVD players will pause for a second when they switch to read the next layer. Apparently the DVD player manufacturers have never heard of anti-skip technology where you buffer the data so that it doesn't skip when something like that happens. Or maybe they just didn't want to increase the costs of the DVD player.

      Gladiator has this problem near the end. I thought the DVD was messed up at the time because I'd never heard of this issue before then. I don't know why they didn't disguise it by makign the swap when the screen was dark and there wasn't anything on the screen. Maybe they wanted more room for extras.

      I think the newest DVD players don't have this problem anymore, but I'm not sure about that, and I'm not upgarding my DVD player until recordable DVD's come out... I was planning to wait for those before I even bought my first DVD player, but when a couple years went by and there was no recordable DVD in sight, I was kinda forced to buy the regular kind of player. They'd better get those recordable DVD players out soon!

      • The Right Stuff is a double sider, as is Das Boot. I think it's got something to do with the low availability of dual layer pressing plants at the time.

      • I haven't heard of a DVD player which will read both sides of a double sided DVD...

        Here [crutchfield.com] is one. Clever design, it's a 300 disc carousel with the drive inside the hub. Normally it sucks the disc in from the front, but if you hit the "flip" button on the remote it'll spit the disc back into the carousel, spin the tray 180 degrees, then suck the same disc in from the back.

        I also have a Panasonic combo LD/DVD player that can move the read head from one side of the platter to the other.

        ...nor have I heard of double sided DVD's being used for a single version of a movie... I've only seen double sided used for widescreen/regular view versions of a movie so you don't have to flip it.

        Yeah, same here. Too bad, given my gear I'd much rather have one double-sided disc taking up one slot than two single-siders.
    • I've heard it's more expensive to bother pressing both sides of a disc rather than making two discs. The things are dirt cheap anyways.

      I personally would rather have 2 discs, it's nice to have that one side that you don't have to worry about scratching.

      Ofcourse, if you're like my cousin, you might care less if the "pan-n-scan" side gets damaged.
    • I have a multi cd, dvd player..I bought it for that specific reason. I can't stand having to flip a dvd to continue a movie. I bought the directors cut of DasBoat and can't stand that it's been pressed on both sides. The simple fact is that you can buy a multi cd-dvd player, but no one manufactors a dvd player that will read a double sided dvd. Besides, the cost of the medium (the disk) and the stamping is most likely less than a dollar a disk.

  • Special Edition (Score:3, Funny)

    by 6EQUJ5 ( 446008 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @05:43PM (#2173442) Homepage

    Features digitally enhanced Shatner hair-piece!

    "However.... bad.. acting.. cannot.. be.. edited..."

  • Don't Buy It!!!! (Score:1, Informative)

    by sconeu ( 64226 )

    Or, do you really want to support one of the seven major members of the MPAA [mpaa.org]?
    • I have an idea... we all hate the MPAA, right?

      But we all like Star Trek, right?

      Why don't we just buy a single "community copy" of the new Star Trek DVD, and share it!

      The MPAA will hate it, and we'll all see the movie. :)
      • Umm... why was I just moderated as "flamebait"??

        Usually I don't question moderation publically...

        but, this is just wrong.

        If I was going to be moderated down, I was thinking maybe "offtopic"...

        I wasn't flaming anyone... and I don't see who could possibly flame me over this...

        I was just trying to be funny.

        But my suggestion still stands...

        Oh well, I guess it went way above the moderator's head. :)

  • NOT 3D Graphics!!! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I read about this new release a couple weeks ago and cried with disbelief when I read they are replacing the ship shots with computer rendered ones. One of the things that always made star trek, star wars etc look so great was the fantastic battleship looking models they all used on classic blue screen setups, not this cheap garbage like in Bablyon five. I've seen examples from the dvd of the ship and sure enough it looks computer generated, plus in the pictures I saw they didn't even bother to render in the random hull plating look that the models have, which make them truly look like a battle ship.
    • Gee, except for the first movie I thought the ships on Star Trek looked like cardboard cutouts because they didn't have the plating. If the cgi is as good as B5 they did a good job.
      • Um, I thought that the Star Trek scenery was all cardboard cut-outs. As well as all of the gadgets being wooden, of course... :)
  • I want to know what the Deltans do that make the entire male crew spoog themselves. A few Decker flashbacks to his time on Delta would certainly have helped this movie.

    -- Analog man in a digital world
    • Some of the novels, and Roddenberry's novelization of the movie tell about who/what the Deltans were

      The Deltans were supposed to be kind of the anti-Vulcans. Where the Vulcans banished emotion and championed logic (unless you happen to be a fan of Dianne Duane's books) ... the Deltans cherished empathy + emotion. They were major sensualists -- or by some definitions uncontrollable nympho hedonists.

      Deltans have a very strong Empathic sense. (part of their society-sharing emotions constantly) ... One of the scenes added in to earlier 'director's cut' versions had Ilia removing Checkov's pain when a Vger attack acrced across his controls and fried his hand.

      Lastly, they generated *incredibly* strong pheromones...which is why most of the males (and several of the females) all paid "very" close attention to whatever Ilia did on the bridge. But -- as she said to Sulu in another directors cut scene -- she would never take advantage of a sexually immature race.

  • Models are better than rendering. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Saturday August 18, 2001 @07:44PM (#2173756) Journal
    Little models are better than rendering because computer programmers still don't know shit about texture and (un)rigidity and natural motion.

    A two-foot piece of plastic with funky lighting looks a hell of a lot more real than a wire-frame sprite with a shaded skin.

    --Blair
    • > because computer programmers still don't know shit
      > about texture and (un)rigidity and natural motion.

      Thank you! I knew I wasn't the only one who thought that Geo. Lucas' new CGI "improvements" for the first three looked like shit, as did Jar Jar.

      The natural motion is finitely powerful muscles moving arms and legs of a certain mass. There's acceleration and deceleration, there's equal and opposite reaction moving a part of the body the opposite way, there's the evolved way animals take advantage of this, and so on.

      For a particularly silly example, see Jar Jar diving into the water. That's the most embarassing junk scene in a major movie since the cartoony waves of "hydrogen bomb blast" breaking apart the window to the phantom zone in Superman II: Prior To the Coming of Prior.

  • This is great, and I will of course purchase it, but what I'm really waiting for is the long-promised DVD of the adventures of Buckaroo Banzai across the 8th dimension. [amazon.com]

  • mmm....dmca (Score:4, Funny)

    by Trepidity ( 597 ) <delirium-slashdot@NoSPam.hackish.org> on Saturday August 18, 2001 @10:05PM (#2174076)
    Slashdot user #1: The actions of the MPAA in trying to restrict free speech and stifle scientific research are unconscionable. Let's hit them where it hurts - in the wallet - and refuse to buy their products until they respect their consumers!

    Slashdot user #2: ooh look, a new Star Trek DVD!!
    • Yup. And the interesting thing is that Taco does not seem to see the contradiction, even to the extent of saying, "I know the MPAA are bad guys, but...". It's like each 'category' of slashdot is a water-tight compartment. I'm really curious to know what it would take to pierce the barrier. If MPAA 'enforcement agents' were running around killing people like the 'death squads' in El Salvador, would Taco still be happily promoting their wares?

      Of course it's easy (and cheap) for me to take this stance, because:
      1. I have neither a TV nor a DVD player nor a computer running Windows.
      2. I no longer have the attention span for 90 minutes+ of passive "entertainment". And my big goal in life is to get outside more, not to spend more hours in front of a CRT.
      3. The whole "Star Trek" thing strikes me as egregiously awful rubbish, summing up the worst and most embarassing stereotypes of the 'geek'. Not to mention the deeply authoritarian, imperialistic ideology underpinning the shows. Did you notice that the riot control expert (a Marine Colonel, I think) quoted in a recent non-lethal-weapon thread cited the phaser as the dream weapon they're working towards? Oh, and feel free to 'rebut' this by pointing out the episode where Captain Picard orders the Deltachrons not to impose their culture on the Anabonkas. You will be missing something.
      4. For some reason I associate Star Trek with Microsoft. Every MCSE I've worked with seems like he wants to prance around in a spandex uniform saluting and saying "Thrusters full ahead, Captain!" (Or whatever they say). The whole tone of Microsoft's communication to developers/sysadmins seems to say, "Aren't you lucky to be on board our great big high-tech ship? You are hereby promoted to assistant technical system support engineer! Click OK to continue." Of course the abuse of the word "Enterprise" underscores the link.
      So how am I doing in the real world? Well, I bought a book recently. Although book publishers haven't taken the spotlight yet, they all seem to support the DMCA. Some association of publishers was quoted as celebrating Sklyarov's arrest. My hands are not altogether clean.

      By the way, if you mod this down for mocking Star Trek, I hope you are magically transported to the Enterprise and get to find out how an outspoken intelligent person would fare in such an environment.
  • To Go Where Nomad Has Goen Before.

    What a waste of plastic.
  • I know this is alittle offtopic because the dvd is based on tos but here is a sneak pirated peek of the new "Enterprise" tv show [panix.com].

  • Taking technology and advances too far? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Seemlar ( 90176 ) on Sunday August 19, 2001 @04:30AM (#2174684)
    While being able to get ST:TMP on DVD was something I looked forward to, I can't help but be greatly disturbed by a certain trend.

    For twenty years I've greatly enjoyed ST:TMP. Now I find the only version I can see coming in the DVD format is.. the Directors Edition.

    What if I don't want a directors revised version? Where do I get ST:TMP it its pure unaltered version on DVD?

    Now I'm all for a film being enhanced or added to.. but NOT at the cost of its original vision, flawed or not.

    I'm similary going to be force fed a bastardised version of Star Wars when George Lucas feels worthy to put them on the DVD format, most likely only in his 'special' editions.

    I personally feel an altered movie should not be allowed unless its true original version is also made available.
    • On the stars side Itink that has already happened. Unless you go to anold video store torent a copy, all the copies of star wars at retail stores are the "special" edition versions. I'd rather have the originals, not out of tradidionalism, but because theydon't have te iddie pandering as much.
  • Come on, we don't need remastered Planet Vulcan. We need remastered uniforms; am I the only one who gets distracted watching the first movie because all of the crew are clearly wearing pyjamas!?

    Have they 'remastered' transporter effects and that sort of thing too? Gaach.

    Can someone find a link to some market research into 'remastered' movies? Do any exist? Do 'remastered' versions sell better? In all holiness, what gives? One would have thought that Lara Croft and the other CGI babes would have given those bored animators more than enough to occupy their time without wasting millions on useless editing...

  • Utterly useless movie, a total waste of huge amounts of money, and it created a precendent for the resulting chain of awful movies and serial spinoffs we endure to this day (Wrath of Khan excepted) James Kirk and his geriatric crew never looked worse.

Slashdot Top Deals

The question of whether computers can think is just like the question of whether submarines can swim. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra

Close