1:50 "when a black star of high gravitational attraction began to drag us toward it." That phrase is used because this 1966 show predates the use of the term 'black hole', which wouldn't enter the language until the following year.
mike bazinga Bueno, puede ser que suene cool, pero 'Star Trek' era una serie muy apegada a la realidad científica, lo que ha llamado la atención de generaciones de científicos actuales. En ese tiempo se sabía de los agujeros negros, pero se les llamaba así: 'estrellas negras', 'black stars', en inglés.
I watched the original in 1966 on a black and white tv with a rabbit ear antenna. To this wide-eyed 7 year old it was mind-blowing. Old or new effects, 50+ years later it's still great.
@oobikeboy Ditto ... except I was 12. I was originally hooked on the possibilities of space flight by my Dad's favorite movie ... "The Day the Earth Stood Still". Ever since then, I wanted to pilot a ship in space ... 'outer space'. Star Trek took it to the next level. Oh, Susan Oliver and Nichelle Nichols took something else to the next level ... 😎 ^v^
@@taproom113 The Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, War of the Worlds, all incredible moves of that era. As for the women of TOS, quite an amazing selection to choose from, but it was Sherry Jackson as the android Andrea that launched my puberty into orbit! 🖖
I can't think of any places on the Enterprise where they could use transparent aluminum to block off a space big enough for two whales. Also, if they did we wouldn't have the 4th movie. 😁
@@rainydaylady6596 I will apologize in advance for starting a flame war but I think the world would have been a better place if we didnt have that particular 4th movie.
@@ThunderAppeal Voyage Home was a different aspect of Star Trek to be sure. But it and ST:Beyond have gone on to prove something. It doesn't have to be the Enterprise. It just has to be Star Trek.
What made this show great was the strength of the characters. They played their roles as if they had been long-time space travelers. They looked like they believed it, so we believed it.
Agreed, but I always appreciated the score (though often repeated for different scenes/episodes), which added significant tempo and character to whatever was occurring.
It's interesting the look they choose for the CGI. They couldn't make the CGI special effects look too good because it would clash with the overall dated and campy look of the original. It's a fine line and I think pretty well done.
No question this made it work, and I think Roddenberry would be thrilled to see it if he were alive. Still after all these years, the first two seasons of TOS are the best to me. Nothing else quite "feels" like Star Trek to me.
@@UnchainedEruption Jedi Rocks is the Special Edition song, and it was done with CGI (I'm amazed you can't tell....it looks pretty horribly obvious..) The original song was not Jedi Rocks though - it was Lapti Nek, and was done with puppets. I admit the puppets also don't look very convincing, but IMO they at least convey some kind of basic sense of realism, which is more than can be said for the CG version. Here's the original song/sequence: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dV0LD-QAzg0.html
Ah lol that one is the prime example of cgi f**k up... seeing it with my wife I was cringing of embarrassment... how could they have butchered that movie? It was supposed to be epic, not some kind of goofy ... goofy I don't even what
I'm a traditionalist. I love antiques, and have vintage stuff all around my house. But I really like these newer effects as applied to TOS. Subtle for the most part and pleasing to the eye without standing out and calling attention to themselves.
Interesting that they deliberately chose to step away from the best CGI effects available (at the time), they even put special effort into recreating the campy cheesy charm of the old VFX. The project was obviously made by fans for fans, more about curating than reimagining. These days they do the exact opposite. Shows made by Trek haters, no regard for established fans or continuity, simply out to make a buck selling junk under a famous brand.
@@ManiakGear What you said is exactly what I was thinking myself. The artists could have easily made the VFX look insanely realistic and cinematic but they chose to keep with the theme and look of the original. This is a great example of a perfectly executed revamp and facelift to the original footage. Sure, there are probably certain scenes that could have been done differently, but overall they hit the mark in my opinion.
Yes. For the most part, they are great.........except where they actually create mistakes that weren't there with the old effects. There was one episode where they show with the new effects the Enterprise leaving a planet as they're still talking on the bridge. Then as the episode is closing, they show the ship leaving again.
But I grew up with the fuzzy balls for planets. I want to see the original original series. I’ll watch STTNG or anything after that for more modern effects. There’s a history and heritage here that’s being disrespected. I’m fine with some modern frame rate upsampling or color adjustments, but this complete removal of the original art infuriates me.
@@idx1941 Well, I don’t like my heritage bleached and made “better”. The VFX artists worked their best with the tools and budget they had. That’s part of the appeal of old shows. I want to see their work. Where does this end? At some point not long from now we will have AI that can “fix” the Mona Lisa and make her into a 3D living model. I’m not against that. I just want to appreciate the original.
SAG-AFTRA is concerned that advanced CGI will mean less work for guild members. Just drop in any deceased actor to fill a role that role. Example: John Wayne used instead of Nathan Fallion in a rebooted FIREFLY. We're already beginning to see evidence of that
@@philgiglio7922 l understand their concern, but it does bring up interesting possibilities. Imagine a young Sean Connery in new James Bond movies? It would be great!
Am I the only one here who thinks it was just fine as it was? Part of the joy of watching old shows and movies is enjoying the artistic integrity of the original creators and what they managed to do with the resources available.
100% agreed. It was what it was, and it was perfect. Wish they didn’t feel they have to update and ‘modernize’ everything. Besides, now in 2022 the cgi also looks dated and shite. Just doesn’t seam-in with the original grain. Just say’n
This. Plus how many kids are confused thinking they had CG in the 60s. Restoring film scratches, adding missing shots, cleaning up real artifacts like bad matte lines, there are arguments for these. CG ships instead of models? Gtfo.
@@bobthebusdriver3535 Mm, that crackling hiss and the occasional pop or even the clunk of the needle when it's forced to jump a particularly large gap. It's all atmosphere. Even today, when listening to certain songs on Spotify, I half expect to hear specific noises that were made present in some songs on the vinyls I grew up with.
The classic is, well, the classic. However, some of the CGI remastered scenes made more sense than in the original. For example, the Enterprise breaking away from the sun. In the classic, all the ship is doing is shaking in space. The CGI you can actually see the Enterprise head towards the sun, orbit it and break away from it.
Reminds me of the added CGI to the Star Wars Episode IV movie -- as technology improves the special F/X, classics are redone. Kind of like seeing the I Love Lucy episodes on TV in color now. Looks good but a bit "fake" now.
Even the magnetic flux from the Sun is scientifically accurate... Most impressive... They've really thought it out well... Definitely one of my top favorite episodes of the show...
The new CGI is great. I could never get into TOS because of the bad effects and horrible sets. With one gone, the other is easier to ignore and I've finally been able to appreciate them.
@@thermaldetinatorsonly8857 I can get into The Twilight Zone and other old shows just fine, but obviously Star Trek _does_ want me to watch and that's why they _did_ replace the old special effects.
Am I the only one who thought they missed an opportunity to add cloud footage out the jet cockpit window? The blue backdrop seems like it could have easily been replaced.
No, you're not the only one. I was thinking the same and I would definitely have added clouds to the cockpit scenes. Very easy to do. However, the work CBS Digital did on this is outstanding, and I respect their decision to leave those scenes untouched.
That is a real HGU-2A/P pilot's flight helmet. It is based on a Gentex HGU-22/P shell. The 2A/P denotes the single visor and it has bayonet oxygen receivers by Sierra Engineering. (You can see the visor locking knob at 8:16). It was issued to both Air Force and Navy pilots. The O2 mask is a MBU-5/P. I have half a dozen of these helmets on display as this episode got me interested in collecting flight gear. That lead to becoming a Naval helicopter Aircrewman.
Even more impressive is that they also had no digital cameras so, they had to composite the effects shots of physical models using physical film reels that could be damaged by mishandling and improper lighting conditions in an editing room. All of this work was performed with a very limited effects budget as well. :)
Considering the budget they worked with , the original special FX people back then could use next to nothing and still pull it off !!.what they could do, our imagination. Would make it work.
I agree. They did very well. I chuckled at the video of a globe spinning on the view screen at 2:06. Neil Degrasse Tyson would say it was spinning the wrong way. :-) I thought it showed how much trouble they were in.
When I watched this episode on BBC America, I thought that I was losing my mind. I was thinking "I don't remember "Star Trek" looking this good and vibrant." I said to my buddy, "I think they remastered "Star Trek," and they've done a fantastic job!"
So, the pilot was there, and never there, and the guard had chicken soup, and never had chicken soup. And the Enterprise managed to keep records of something that basically never happened. Talking about fake news.
@@frankcabanski9409- Well, that's a bit harsh, but I agree that adding the new effects basically amounts to cosmestic silliness. The strength of the show is with the characters, not the backdrops!
I don't know what to think. Of course the new version looks much better, but I personally think that the bad visual effects are part of the charme of these old shows. So, I prefer the original.
One thing I love about the digital remastering is that they didn't change much and didn't make it look phenomenal. It still has a layer of cheese that makes it blend in well with the rest of the show and was never distracting. It was far more well done than any of the effects Lucas applied to the original Star Wars films. It was only a touch up.
A funny way to say "the CGI looks bad but the bar set by the original effects is too low to complain". Even a fanmade remaster using the rescanned negatives could have done better - seeing the Enterprise warp away from the most stock-ass image they could have found from Google Images (4:45) just gives me second-hand embarrassment on the behalf of the people who worked on the remasters. You say it "matches the time", but they couldn't have gone with something that doesn't stick out like the 1972 Blue Marble. They had to go with the 2002 Blue Marble, the one you've seen in every climate-related news article. This and other cockups sorta throws a wrench into the idea that _"It was only a touch up",_ no? That's besides why I hate the CGI effects. I don't watch a show made in the 60s to see what 2008 thought was good CGI. I sure as shit don't care to see a flat, poorly-lit CGI Enterprise. I want to see the ships obviously hanging from strings and flying around hand-drawn images of Earth, damnit. I want to see the camp practical effects they saw in the 60s. The redone effects screw with this. This is what I expected coming into TOS, not the 2008 CGI bullshit. They didn't choose this look to make it match the camp effects (if they cared AT ALL about the original effects, they'd have left the original effects untouched), they chose this look to be as cheap as possible. Seeing the Enterprise speed away from an enhanced photo of Earth just irks me on a spiritual level. Honestly, at least creating a CGI Jar Jar would have taken more effort than overlaying a stock image of Earth on the scanner and making it shrink.
As long as they make the untouched originals available alongside the remastered versions, I don't mind. The worst thing they could do is what George Lucas has been doing with the original Star Wars. Btw, I love how they made even the CGI Enterprise move like it's dangling from a wire.
Well thankfully we have stuff like the Harmy editions or the 4k77 / 4k80 releases, when we can't watch the original cuts of the Star Wars trilogy officially
The opening to this episode was/ and still is one of my all-time favorite teasers ever. The night after this episode 1st aired is when NASA and the US suffered the loss of our test pilot's in the fire of Apollo 1.
Yeah, I'll always remember that as though it was yesterday. Grissom, Chaffee and White died supposedly because the ground crew thought that opening the capsule's door would essentially cause a flashover. Very tragic.
@Brandon Bennetzen An inward opening hatch would have been useless. With the pressure build up inside the capsule an inward opening hatch would have been impossible to open. An outward opening hatch with explosive bolts as used in the Mercury capsules would have been their only chance. I have read that ufortunately after Virgil Ivan 'GUS' Grissom's incident where the hatch blew after splashdown they ditched the explosive escape hatch idea. The part about the launch crew trying to save them is very true. A friend of mine visited the cape and his tour guide was a member of that crew, and still bore the scars from the burns he suffered as they tried to save the three astronauts.
I remember watching this episode when it first ran. Seeing the Enterprise from Captain Christopher’s view was just amazing to me when I was 9 TOS will live forever!
Something neat in this episode: Because he’s an Air Force captain when they give Christopher a Star Fleet uniform to wear it has the sleeve rank of lieutenant (one gold stripe) which is the naval equivalent rank..
The irony is that the F-104 footage in the original is undoubtedly stock Air Force footage; ie, the real thing. That CGI would be deemed better reminds me of the VR product in Red Dwarf: Better Than Real.
It's all about maintaining the same resolution of the footage. With up scaling to HD, the stock USAF footage would not match the rescanned 35mm of the actual show, same reason to redo the visual effects, because they will not scale to HD.
I watched the entire show years ago when I bought it on DVD. I recently bought it on Blu-Ray, and decided to watch the enhanced versions of the episodes. I like some of the new effects, but I must say... The moment I switched back to the original effects (during Court Martial) was like coming home again after being away for years.
@@RU-vidCX9 The benefit is that the original shows will be viewable by a younger audience that considers the original unwatchable. People natter on about the "charm" of the original poor opticals, but these were simply the best that the time and budget would allow on a show that wasn't intended to be watched and scrutinized for 50 years as it has been. They existed just to help with the storytelling. Some of the new effects are much more coherent and add realism to some scenes that was missing before. Some people say they prefer the original, "cheesy" optical effects, but that is nostalgia, nothing more. Young people don't have that sense of nostalgia, and simply think the originals look ridiculously fake.
All in all, I think the new effects were well done. They didn't try to add or reimagine anything, and they didn't try to put in a lot of detail that just wouldn't have been there in 1966. They just made it look nice, and I admire their restraint. One cool side effect for me is that the Enterprise feels more like it's the same ship that got refit and faced off against V'Ger and Khan.
It's interesting to compare the original VFX with the newer CGI version! Even though the original FX are over 50 years old now, they're STILL remarkably well done, even by modern standards! For those who weren't around for TOS in 1966, Roddenberry and crew had to create not just the FX themselves, but the TECHNIQUES as well! With the state of the art at the time, the opticals houses wouldn't have been able to keep up with Star Trek's needs! Trek LITERALLY made things up as they went! And rhey STILL look good today!!!
I prefer the original starfield in the intro. Whoever managed the upgrading of the visual effects should win an award. They did such an amazing job. It's pretty seamless.
6:35 to 7:00 The light speed breakaway factor USS Enterprise travels around the sun was The Best CGI enhancement for this episode a Perfect tie in To Star Trek Four The Voyage Home.
I really appreciate that these 2006 effects stayed true to the original vision, unlike some of the re-done STAR WARS movies. I'm 57 and grew up watching TREK. During the Covid 2020 lockdown I re-watched every episode, with the new effects. Loved every minute of it! I also like that I can show these to my kids and they are impressed by this old show. Though I have all the DVDs of the original series, I recently bought the Blu-ray edition that lets you toggle between the original and remastered effects. Brilliant!
I’ve watched the remastered versions through at least twice since they were released, but I think the next run through I might go for the originals just because it’s been a few years. Paramount allowing BOTH versions on the same discs really shows how much they appreciate and respect their customers.
It is nice on how these remasters are giving to fans something. Yet, IMHO the remastered Star Trek The Next Generation Blu-ray edition is best I have ever found for any movie or series. Watching the creators documentary of their process and work. Show a such dedication and effort they did to get all original film material digitalized and edited for remaster. And when they did the new GCI, it is so finely made that you do not even realize it, as it is identical as much as possible with the original ones, except lot better. In this GCI version in TOS, you can clearly see that lot of content was added and different perspective used etc. Yet, it is well made for the purpose. But compared to TNG version, it is just mind blowing. I am on first season, fifth disk on TNG, and every episode is jaw dropping for the quality of remaster. That is possible as all the material was shot on 35mm film, and almost all effects were done separately so they were possible be redone from source. There were few cases (like Crystal Entity) that had no original material found, so they needed to redo everything by observing VHS material and redoing it from copying it from there. And yet, some takes were not found anywhere, why in the box you have small text at the bottom of list of episodes and the times how much was not found and upscaled VHS material in best possible manner. It is silly really, as it can be just 4 seconds or 10 seconds in total per episode, but they did their best find every single original film strip to get it done right. But when you have thousands of boxes full of film, most isn't labeled or organized by any means... It is like a 6500 piece puzzle without picture in it. And you need to go through every piece and start to find out to on what episode it would belong to, to what scenes (as many were rotated across many) and is it the approved or is it a secondary take. Then find out all the audio and effect material matching to those and just combine everything back to the original work as aired.
As a kid I watched the series on a very small tv and the effects were okay for the time. But now we can see rich color and detail especially on the actor's faces and costumes. The effects should also be updated and I think the example here is a huge improvement. Compared to Star Trek Discovery, the work here is downright subtle and classy.
How very true. "Digital enhancement" so often turns out to be a code term for "we'll let a color-blind intern make things more awesomer!" In the case of TOS however, it's a really well done job that actually does improve on the original and updates it for the new viewing technologies. Kudos to the people behind it; a surprisingly well done job that demonstrates true effort, skill and, most important of all, a real sensibility and respect for the original.
At the end of the day, I guess I like the fact that both versions are available. There's something special and fun about those older, optical effects, and they have a different feel in timbre that fits the original series so well. And of course they're what I remember from so many years of watching episodes on TV. The redone effects are beautiful and fascinating as well, both in themselves and as a kind of "re-imagining" of the purpose of the original shots. I'm glad both are available.
I enjoy both versions. I think the original looks amazing for the time (and budget on which) it was made. But the CGI of the remastered edition looks so crisp, it's really enjoyable to watch.
I just watched this episode last night, and seeing the comparisons, I think this episode greatly benefited from the enhanced effects. Especially the scenes around the sun-- the original didn't make much sense without the sun there as a guide to explain what they were actually doing. The addition of the sun in the enhanced scene helped me understand what they were trying to do. I'd never watched much of the original series as a kid... I found it too 'grown-up' for me and thought it was boring. Now I'm amazed at how complex the stories are (for the most part) and how well-written and acted everything really is. I'm totally hooked. :)
I have a love hate relationship with this. I love the fact that they can clean up the images and make them look so much better, but I really hate having the effects changed. It's a 1960's TV show, it should look like it. I think many older fans such as myself will in many ways still prefer the older version because it's how we remember it. Younger fans may prefer the newer remastered version.
Nah. It's just too old and makes no sense even as seen in the video. CGI replacements are much better and feel better in place. Just because something is old and real effects used doesn't mean half a decade later release shouldn't contain CGI to improve upon its realization and make things better and actually make it more original then it was possible at the time. Seriously grow up. Just because you remember it that way doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed for the better. If the change worsens the scene in a way that it is less logical and less interpreted of as it should be then the one who made the changes should be fired and never allowed to do any work on video content ever again but i'm all up for remastered shows with bringing the visual effects closer to its original intent then for what it was -possible at the time.
@@augustomontes8202 the point is not going past any bad effects and not accepting changes that improve it deciding not growing up and sticking to the bad.
Love how they both recreate some of the original VFX shots, and also produce some new camera angles for the ship. They take advantage of the fact that CG lets them film the ship closer and in sharper detail than they could when the show was first produced.
I think if it's done in this fashion, it's a great thing. It breathes new life into older works while preserving the original. I think it's a big win-win for everyone. It really is only a problem when they do it the Lucas way and try and only replace it.
It reminds me of the fad a few years ago to "colorize" classic films like "Casablanca" in a misguided attempt to appeal to younger viewers. I'm sorry, some things should not be tampered with.
With the new CGI replacing the old effects, the horrible sets are a little easier to ignore. Grew up with TNG, but I never watched TOS until lately because of how poor the production was.
The problem with older Star Trek (basically everything pre-Enterprise) is that it was all filmed on 35mm film, but edited on videotape. That means none of the original special effects exist in a format that would support an HD conversion. The live action footage can be cleaned up and re-scanned from the original film masters, but the special effects cannot be. When the show was going to be released on HD-DVD (yes, the show was originally meant to be released on the losing format of the HD format wars), the decision was made to "enhance" the special effects, rather than just recreate them as closely as possible, as was done with other shows (and would be done with TNG a few years later). The newer Blu Ray releases have the option to watch both versions, with the original effects or the new effects, but the original effects footage is just an up-conversion of the DVD file, not a true HD presentation.
@@brmnyc tamper with everything, release new 100 versions of everything that exists every year. If it means 99 pieces of junk and 1 new masterpiece it would have been worth it
The vast majority of the re-mastered special effects for the series as a whole were a great improvement. However, in some external shots of the Enterprise, there was too much extraneous movement. The Enterprise wouldn't have needed to "waggle" so much when making course changes. It's very minor in this episode, much more noticeable in some others.
The blu-ray releases have (and DVD too I do believe) have both the old and new versions of the special effects... So it's not exactly worth arguing about if you can pick and choose unlike with the Star Wars versions where you have the current tampered ones and that's it...
Not sure about DVDs (the last set I bought was the Star Trek TOS set from early 2000s - 2004 I think), but yes, all of the "complete series" Blu-ray releases feature both versions of each episode. Unlike for example the Star Wars releases...
@@TrekkieChannel My dad has the same 2009 edition as I do on blu-ray, except he has the DVD. The 2009 DVDs only have the remastered versions, I can confirm. blu-rays have different technology enabling them to have alternate scenes if needed without the need of having two full length versions of the feature on the disc.
@@ebolarnator1794 Yes. I can confirm the same since, when they first came out, I bought TOS on blu-ray for the very reason that they had both options available and the dvd's didn't. Then I couldn't watch them for over a year because I didn't have a blu-ray player yet! But I knew eventually I would. :)
Whenever I watch the remastered DVDs this episode stands out as the one that looks the best with the CGI. Some episodes were given effects that looked like sharknado.
While the SPFX junkie in me loves to see the new effects shots, and some of them, like the sun slingshot illustrate better what's happening, I can't help but feel for those original special effects artists. They worked their asses off with tight deadlines and limited FX budgets to create the best effects they could. It somehow seems disrespectful to just throw their work out.
I think I have to agree with you about the respect aspect. Never really looked at it that way before, but it is a valid point. The original effects did require a ton of work, given the small budget and resources of the time. Hard to imagine today, but back then, there were actually not many pictures of Earth from any major distance. So that aspect alone had to be a challenge. Although I must admit there were a few of the CGI effects that did look better (by today's standards) we must give props and salute the original FX people. They actually did do a really good job, given what they had to work with at the time.
Especially when you read stories about the troubles they had with the physical miniature. If they didn't light it properly,sometimes parts of the blue screen reflected on the ship, which made it look partially transparent during the final compositing, which means they had to use lots of light, but heavy light means high temperatures (that's also a reason why on practically all behind the scenes pictures you see everybody shirtless), and after they managed to prepare the correct light density they could film only a couple of SECONDS of footage, because the ship started to warp from all of the heat... Sounds insane when you read that stuff.
That's always my position. Regardless of how I may approve or disapprove of any new SFX, which work in some aspects and others perhaps not as much, I'm always thinking of the legacy of those filmmakers and artists. It's sort of hiding away the work from their families to say something like, "Your great grandfather painted that backhround shot and painted the design on that model, you know." I feel the same way about Star Wars. Those SFX artists were groundbreaking in a lot of ways and now the originals are mostly hidden from public eyes. I think preservation should stand for something. Especially when the quality of new Trek is decidedly questionable at best. New fans should see Trek as everyone got to see it. I mean cheers to the new arrists for their hardwork because they do some impressive things as well but it's more a grievance with the new producers or whoever felt these updates were necessary. And if it's the Roddenberry estate or something, they're completely justified in that, it's just my opinion that they shouldn't replace the original work. Nobody would want to add digital effects to, say, Vertigo or The Wizard of Oz or Planet of the Apes, they should exist as they did in their time because it represents the time they existed and where the technology was at the time. That's really all it's about.
I'm very proud to say as a young teenager who first saw TOS as it originally played back in 1966 with my dad that the writer of this episode, D.C.Fontana (Dorothy Fontana) is an Alma Mater of my High School. She was graduated more than 10 years before me from Passaic Valley Regional High School, Little Falls, N.J. She put Little Falls on the map when at the time we had the only drive-in movie theater across Rt. 46 in Totowa Boro, N.J. Dorothy was Gene Roddenberry's secretary who had the necessary skills to help him write well-needed episodes when he was working 20 hours a day. She also wrote "Charlie X" and some other episodes in TNG. She is also credited with writing the first time travel episode of any Star Trek Series. Thank you, Dorothy. As of April 25, 2019, I hope and pray you are still with us.
I appreciate the updated effects. It's clear they tried to keep true to the original (not the Enterprise design from the Kelvin Timeline). But sometimes the resolution is too high compared to the film footage. For example the viewscreen projections looks clearer than the physical set and characters. They should have reduced the quality slightly. And there is still a bit of dust and scratches on the film. They could have added a bit of that to the CGI to blend it in.
the episodes were originally filmed on 16mm color film, which has a higher resolution than 1080P HDTV even TV shows from the early 60s filmed on B&W 16mm film stand out sharp and clear on METV episodes, because they are showing the original 16mm reels in HD now.
Been watching Star Trek since it came out. I’d have to say I love the new improvements. I don’t know why some folks are crying about it? If you own the blu-Ray you can watch it with the new cgi or original “full-on cheese” . I like both. But watching the enhanced versions brings that “newness “ flavor back. Good stuff
Nothing beats the original, because with the originals, our minds were on the same voyages as the crew. We experienced what they experienced. We were invisibly there with the crew every moment. It's the childhood memories. You can't etch new things there.
I must say that the comparisons of the visual effects in the scenes on all of the original "Star Trek" episodes are no doubt very remarkable! Personally, I prefer the CGI effects over the original effects anytime. I am sure the late Gene Roddenberry would have been proud.
@@gameking8809 I think because they would have been closer to what he visualised in his head when he was planning the show. People on here who dislike the new CGI effects are usually just expressing nostalgia for an 'analogue' period of time.
@@cardcounter21 Again, nothing to do with "nostalgia". Part of older science fiction is to seethe sfx that they had at the time. Do you want these same idiots to re-do the effects from "Forbidden Planet"? You know, that Robbie the Robot is so foolish looking! And flying saucers? Laughable, those should be replaced with landing spacecraft that make sense! How about we replace musician's voices of the past with more technology and auto tune? I mean, what is the matter with auto tune? Listening to old Mick Jagger/Stones recordings, especially live with mistakes....why don't we just auto tune Jagger's voice and he can sing really pretty like Freddie Mercury? Or would wanting to keep Jagger as Jagger just be "nostalgia"?
ToyKingWonder no need to. Those sfx stand the test of time as do 2001 aSpace Odyssey. The sixties Star Trek by comparison was on a tight budget for sfx. It’s why we have transporters, much cheaper than building entire sfx about launching and landing and taking off again in a physical shuttle, even if it’s partly reusable. The sfx of Star Trek were not top of the line by any means, just good enough to get the job done.
Thanks for posting this fun piece. The original is still pretty slick stuff for ‘66. (Except I remember this on our 19” black and white tv with a rabbit ears antenna.)
All I see on many Trekkie pages, different websites, is fans bitching about the 'awful' job done on remastering TOS. I think it's amazing, every second of it! Top job done.
To be honest, I'm super impressed with the quality of the original remastered print. The HD remaster is sharper but plasticky. I like the filminess of the original. It's the difference between impressionism and realism. Both have their merits but the fantasy-like aberration of film just hangs together as an artistic experience better than the pastiche digitization of the HD remaster. Every mid to close-up shot is more attractive. The DPs knew what they were doing.
That's because TOS was shot using a film cameras, while generations, deep space nine, and voyager were shot using video cameras. If film camera is set up correctly durring shoot (and they were experts, i bet it was) you can rescan the film to very high resolutions, while video camera recorded what it recorded. That's why old movies and series pop up in higher and higher resolutions. Materials shot with video camera can still be remastered, but only so far, until recreating animations and adding details is required
haha Anyone notice that the interior shot of the F-104's canopy looking forward lacks the central metal bar that is clearly over Cpt. Christopher's head in other shots?
I like the angle of some of the older shots, but the ship looked better over all. Seeing the ship at an angle climbing, in my opion, looked better than the more straight flying enterprise in the first scene of the jet chasing it. Also prefered the jet contrails being shown from the original version, than them not being shown in the CGI version (more realistic).
One of the greatest Sc-fi series of all time. I actually like some of the new enhances CGI effects made to the show but also the original version is the original a d especially remind me of my childhood.
Star Trek came along at the right time and asked the right questions. It got people to think about space right around the same time as the moon missions. I don't think there would have quite been the hype for Apollo 11 if we weren't already being primed to boldly go where no man's gone before.
I love it. I love those real pictures of the Earth -- the Earth looks much less cheesy. I also like the Enterprise against the clouds -- what one would expect. Near the Sun? I like the idea, though it does seem a bit close for comfort. I also like the idea of the Enterprise as an Unidentified Flying Object -- a "real" one. This episode also reminds me of the Mantell UFO incident, where a military pilot chased a large high-altitude UFO, only for his plane to go into a dive and crash.
Loren Petrich it amazes me that the concept of the US Government covering up Alien sightings in the 1960s was a plot point , Because the popularity of Conspiracy idea was more a modern thing.
Thanks for making this video so we can see them side by side. Truth be told, I’m almost never in favor of changing old special effects. To me, there’s no point because we all liked the original already. If the studio wants better effects, they should make new episodes instead of changing old ones.
This was one of the episodes to really benefit from some improved CGI shots. It really made the scene look much more seamless. I also wish they used the "Earth orbit" style scenes more. Here we see Earth looking much more massive, like a planet should be. In almost all the other episodes the orbit shots were just recreations of the originals, with the planets looking just as small as the original Earth shots do here. Planets should have looked much larger.
that is correct - the first photos of the Earth from beyond low orbit was when Apollo 7 orbited the moon, and coming back from the far side they saw the Earth Rise over the horizon of the moon. Star Trek used globes of the earth that showed the continents and oceans, but no cloud cover. They used the same globe for other planets in early episodes, tipping them on their sides and hoping no one would recognize the continents.
Generally the newer stuff does _look_ better (except they sure could use some work on the contrast). But in almost every shot they copied of the ship, they totally missed the dramatic compositions of the original shots.
When the show came out, they didn't have a good idea of what the earth actually looked like from space. The updated version looks like the real earth as we see it through modern photos from space. Very well done.
