Star Trek: The Original Motion Picture Collection (1979-1991)

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Volume11

I don't think anyone expects all of these films to be uniform and perfect. As you pointed out, they were made by numerous directors with numerous camera and effect crews over a long period of time.

I think what we all want and expect is the best it can look without DNR and/or EE. Especially considering its one of Paramount's flagship franchises.

i'm sure without dnr and ee this would have been a better looking set,even with a fast clean up.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Beast

Not every old film is going to look the same.

Different cameras, lenses, and film stocks were used. Star Trek VI has always looked terrible.

None of this has anything to do with excessive DNR. Removing film grain and detail to give a "clean" look is the issue.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

and for a fact blu-ray discs with its 50gb doesn't need dnr,ee.
again part of this started when people at this and other forums were crying about the grainy look of blu-rays& hddvd. most of these cry babies wanted a video game look,thinking thats hd.at the time studios use to come to these sites.

well the gamers[not all]got there way,hence dnr,ee etc.
now the same people don't want dnr,ee!now the studios don't come to these forums now.insiders were told once the war was over bds will look better.
hasn't happen yet.just to let you know i'm talking about catalog titles.the newer titles don't seem to have these issues.as far as i'm concerned these issues give blu-ray a bad name.

Too bad Criterion doesn't have the rights to Trek.

[Russell22]

Originally Posted by Kirsty_Mc

In that case your opinion is seriously flawed. I find it to be a great improvement over the DVD version.

I can't understand much of the posts here about the quality of these titles. Bear in mind that these were shot mostly on 1980's / early '90's filmstock, you aren't going to get any better. I find this set to be a great improvement over the DVD versions. If you like the franchise... then buy them.

I stand by my review of star trek 6's quality on blu ray. Most people in other forums have said the same as me. It does look better than the dvd yes but not by much in my opinion. Compare it next to TMP and it's a night and day difference in quality..its a shame coz id rather have the weakest film (st-5) have the weakest transfer but so be it. Its still a good set as i said and well worth getting.

Coincidentely after watching "bring back star trek" documentary on u.k tv tonight i was amazed to find out walter koenig also wears a wig like the shat does!! ive had my suspiciaons for a while though..lol

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Volume11

Too bad Criterion doesn't have the rights to Trek.

They have admitted to using DNR and EE also. If you pay attention.

[Jason One]

Originally Posted by Beast

Not every old film is going to look the same.

Different cameras, lenses, and film stocks were used. Star Trek VI has always looked terrible.

Star Trek VI looked fine in the theater and on previous DVDs. The blame for the poor quality of the BD lies entirely on the massive amount of DNR.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Jason One

Star Trek VI looked fine in the theater and on previous DVDs. The blame for the poor quality of the BD lies entirely on the massive amount of DNR.

You may want to re-watch it again. Cause it looks pretty terrible on DVD.

[ezeblazin]

I hope BlockBuster plans on having the movies available to rent separately, currently there not on their website, cause I plan on renting them.

They're there...you have to add the whole set, but you can unlock it once it's in your queue

[Jason One]

Originally Posted by Beast

You may want to re-watch it again. Cause it looks pretty terrible on DVD.

Nope. The special collector's edition actually looks quite good.

[robertc88]

Originally Posted by Russell22

I stand by my review of star trek 6's quality on blu ray. Most people in other forums have said the same as me. It does look better than the dvd yes but not by much in my opinion. Compare it next to TMP and it's a night and day difference in quality..its a shame coz id rather have the weakest film (st-5) have the weakest transfer but so be it. Its still a good set as i said and well worth getting.

Coincidentely after watching "bring back star trek" documentary on u.k tv tonight i was amazed to find out walter koenig also wears a wig like the shat does!! ive had my suspiciaons for a while though..lol

Russell,

What equipment are you utilizing watching these movies? Sorry if you previously posted that but I may have missed it.

Same goes for others. If it isn't listed and you don't mind, please do so. BTW, I'm a big fan of Blade Runner. I don't know how many times I've watched it since I got it. BD done right!

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by robertc88

Russell,

What equipment are you utilizing watching these movies? Sorry if you previously posted that but I may have missed it.

Same goes for others. If it isn't listed and you don't mind, please do so. BTW, I'm a big fan of Blade Runner. I don't know how many times I've watched it since I got it. BD done right!

i did make that point.if warners[slap happy dnr dudes]bros can redo blade runner,paramount could have done the same thing with startrek.
i thought it was there cash cow.again dnr&EE seems to be a issue with catalog titles with all studios.unless they redo the title.
i just want my blu-ray to look like film,this is a hd format after all.somehow the studios need to wake up and listen.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by robertc88

Russell,

What equipment are you utilizing watching these movies? Sorry if you previously posted that but I may have missed it.

Same goes for others. If it isn't listed and you don't mind, please do so. BTW, I'm a big fan of Blade Runner. I don't know how many times I've watched it since I got it. BD done right!

but saying its better then the dvds isn't saying much.i'm not hearing the wow factor or wow this looks great,that says alot.plus no reviewers have there box set yet to review.buy the time they get them the box set will be out.

[OhDamaso]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

but saying its better then the dvds isn't saying much.i'm not hearing the wow factor or wow this looks great,that says alot.plus no reviewers have there box set yet to review.buy the time they get them the box set will be out.

Also, my thought is if it's only "marginally" better than DVD (just saying IF), then I would only expect to pay marginally more for the blu-ray, not twice or three times as much.

[fighthefutureofhd]

really? most of the special edition dvd's, which are two discs are going for $4.99 to $9.99. so you expect to only pay $10 to $20 for each of these blu-rays? if so i think at the moment that's what you're paying for them.

[sfmarine]

I'm new to Star Trek. Mostly a Star Wars fan. A friend of mine dragged me to the new movie and I was blown away. I'd like to know where I should start? Should I get the movie collection or season 1? Or both? I'd like to go in the correct timeline. I never really watched the show or the movies. Maybe a few shows but I was young and don't remember.

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

but saying its better then the dvds isn't saying much.i'm not hearing the wow factor or wow this looks great,that says alot.plus no reviewers have there box set yet to review.buy the time they get them the box set will be out.

I agree, not one reviewer got the set yet and that scares the crap out of me. I would think if the product is good that Parmount would want it to be reviewed as soon as posible to have better sales. Maybe they know that this is not a good transfer.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

I'm new to Star Trek. Mostly a Star Wars fan. A friend of mine dragged me to the new movie and I was blown away. I'd like to know where I should start? Should I get the movie collection or season 1? Or both? I'd like to go in the correct timeline. I never really watched the show or the movies. Maybe a few shows but I was young and don't remember.

You can watch the movies without seeing the TOS a few things might look a little weird but the movies do stand alone alright but I could be wrong since I've been watching Star Trek for 35 years TOS is a good place to start and the BD look's incredible for a 40 years old TV show. Just keep in mind it's from the 60's so it will look a bit cheesie at time but even after 40 years, it's still one of the best TV shows ever made.

In order they match up this way

Enterprise (5 seasons)
Original Series (3 seasons)
The Motion Picture
The Wrath Of Khan
The Search For Spork
The Voyage Home
The Final Frontier
The Undiscovered Country
Next Generation (7 seasons)
Generations
DS9 (7 seasons)
Voyager (7 seasons)
First Contact
Insurrection
Nemesis

Technicaly the new Star Trek movie should be between Enterprise and the first season of TOS but I don't considered it part of that timeline. Too many things have been change to make sense to me as an old Treeker Still a good movie however.

[Raymond23]

The Star Trek movie is a reboot of the original, and as the movie points out, history has been changed. Vulcan was never destroyed in the original timeline. So, like Casino Royale did to Bond, STar Trek (Movie) does to this franchise.

If all you have seen of TREK so far is the current movie, you may be disappointed. The film was nonstop action, the series really aren't. The Original Series (TOS) has really good stories, but it is very dated and cheezy (part of it's charm). I would rent a few things first before you buy (or look to see if you can find anything on cable). Also, there are a few single/multidisc DVD sets you can buy for cheap to get a sense of what is going on...

The timeline is as follows:

1) Enterprise TV series-It's the last TV series made, but is a prequel to everything. It shows man's first tentative steps into space.

2) Star Trek TOS-Kirk as Captain, with Spock, McCoy etc. No big premier or finale.

3) Star Trek I-VI. The movies with the original crew. Kirk is now an Admiral, others are Captains of their own ships, but they all land back on board the Enterprise and then blow it up a few times...

4) Star Trek: TNG, DS9, Voyager: These more or less occur in the same time period and are separate crews on separate ships each following their own story arcs. Set several decades after TOS.

5) Star Trek VII-X (movies)-Further adventures of the crew of Star Trek TNG.

You don't need to know much about anything that happened before to enjoy anything on that list (Star Trek 2 is a sequel to a episode from TOS, II-IV vaguely makes a trilogy but they explain everything and the movies can be enjoyed on their own.)

Hope this helps.

[Raymond23]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Technicaly the new Star Trek movie should be between Enterprise and the first season of TOS but I don't considered it part of that timeline. Too many things have been change to make sense to me as an old Treeker Still a good movie however.

The new timeline goes like this:

-Enterprise
-Star Trek (movie)
-?????

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Raymond23

The new timeline goes like this:

-Enterprise
-Star Trek (movie)
-?????

Yep! whatever they come up for the next movie.