Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 10:54 AM   
 By:   Midnight Mike   (Member)

IMHO the Directors cut blows the theatrical cut out of the water. The pacing is so much improved, but particularly these top 10 changes make it the superior version.

1. Cutting Kirk’s “Oh my god” in the transporter room.

2. Shortening Kirk’s speech to the crew on the recreation deck, it’s so much better now.

3. Adding all the ambient sound effects to the ship (Big improvement)

4. The improved Overture and Main Titles with Star field

5. Cutting the epsilon 9 dialogue down in the beginning

6. The removal of the awful male computer voice

7. The improved worm hole and meteor destruction sequence

8. Showing clearly Vejur’s entire ship when it enters earth orbit

9. Cutting Decker’s and Ilia’s looks at each other on the bridge

10. Adding back Spock crying on the bridge and his explanation of Vejur’s motives.
(biggest improvement )

This movie has lots of insurmountable problems that start in the script, but the director’s cut turns a 2 star movie into a 3 star movie IMHO.

 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 11:14 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

IMHO the Directors cut blows the theatrical cut out of the water. The pacing is so much improved, but particularly these top 10 changes make it the superior version.

1. Cutting Kirk’s “Oh my god” in the transporter room.

2. Shortening Kirk’s speech to the crew on the recreation deck, it’s so much better now.

3. Adding all the ambient sound effects to the ship (Big improvement)

4. The improved Overture and Main Titles with Star field

5. Cutting the epsilon 9 dialogue down in the beginning

6. The removal of the awful male computer voice

7. The improved worm hole and meteor destruction sequence

8. Showing clearly Vejur’s entire ship when it enters earth orbit

9. Cutting Decker’s and Ilia’s looks at each other on the bridge

10. Adding back Spock crying on the bridge and his explanation of Vejur’s motives.
(biggest improvement )

This movie has lots of insurmountable problems that start in the script, but the director’s cut turns a 2 star movie into a 3 star movie IMHO.



(1) Never bothered me seemed like a natural response.
(2) Don't recall the differences.
(3) Ditto.
(4) Nice touch.
(5) Don't recall the differences.
(6) I hated that voice! But you know what? After all these years it's so ingrained in my head I miss it.
(7) Nice touch.
(8) Worst addition. The ship was so large and mysterious up to that point. Seeing the whole ship in one shot was a disappointment and a let down.
(9) Don't recall the differences. But yeah the goggly eyes were annoying.
(10) Second worst addition. There's no crying in outer space!

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 11:33 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

IMHO the Directors cut blows the theatrical cut out of the water. The pacing is so much improved, but particularly these top 10 changes make it the superior version.

1. Cutting Kirk’s “Oh my god” in the transporter room.
2. Shortening Kirk’s speech to the crew on the recreation deck, it’s so much better now.
3. Adding all the ambient sound effects to the ship (Big improvement)
4. The improved Overture and Main Titles with Star field
5. Cutting the epsilon 9 dialogue down in the beginning
6. The removal of the awful male computer voice
7. The improved worm hole and meteor destruction sequence
8. Showing clearly Vejur’s entire ship when it enters earth orbit
9. Cutting Decker’s and Ilia’s looks at each other on the bridge
10. Adding back Spock crying on the bridge and his explanation of Vejur’s motives.
(biggest improvement )
.


1. Oh my God seems natural to me.
2. nothing noticeable to me
3. Like some of that
4. Sure, that too - on the other hand, I kinda like those simple non fancy title cards.
5. Cannot really tell much diff
6. I was rather comfortable with it
7. The updates are nice, but the style of the new effects are somewhat incongruous technically
8. I totally hate seeing the whole ship, never wanted to. Hate it - hate it - hate it.
9. Yeah, right there, too much lovey dovey.
10. Nah, never wanted to see Spock unravel like that.

besides all that Dochterman added all that new interior effects inside Vger I did not like, and it was low-def on top of that. Never understood that, or the photoshop mods to the Tram station in SF at the start of the movie. A lot of un-needed mods. The first cut is better.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 11:49 AM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

Well, it's easy to have 2 different versions of something and then make comparisons.
But when there was only one thing at the time (in this case, the theatrical version), the brain just accepts it as what it is and doesn't really second guess how it could be improved without the hindsight of the subsequent version which was still yet to come.
Then it leads down the slippery slope of revisionist history.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 11:56 AM   
 By:   Midnight Mike   (Member)

Well at least both versions are available, so we can all watch the version we want.

 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 12:20 PM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

Well at least both versions are available, so we can all watch the version we want.

 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 1:27 PM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

Well, it's easy to have 2 different versions of something and then make comparisons.
But when there was only one thing at the time (in this case, the theatrical version), the brain just accepts it as what it is and doesn't really second guess how it could be improved without the hindsight of the subsequent version which was still yet to come.
Then it leads down the slippery slope of revisionist history.


Here is wisdom - and let's not forget the paradox infused danger of tampering with the flow of time and events wink

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 2:07 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

Here is wisdom - and let's not forget the paradox infused danger of tampering with the flow of time and events wink


Your post, besides giving me a chuckle (thank you), got me thinking that it's not entirely inconceivable that some day down the road JJ Abrams might come to feel that his ST movies could stand some of that good ol' fashioned tinkering.
I don't want to turn the thread into a big Abrams feud (certainly many folks enjoyed those movies), but it is tantalizing... the thought that he may one day tweak them movies into something that even their most ardent detractors would enjoy.

Just a thought.

EDIT: I think the above contains the most times I've ever used the word "that" in a single post. I don't know how it happened, but beware....! BEWAAAAARE.....!

 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 2:32 PM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)

I'd like to see the trailer of TMP on the big screen followed by "The Wrath of Khan" and "The Undiscovered Country". wink

Seriously, I saw a print of the original theatrical cut and I thou...zzzzzzzzzz

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2013 - 7:27 PM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

I'd like to see the trailer of TMP on the big screen followed by "The Wrath of Khan" and "The Undiscovered Country". wink

Seriously, I saw a print of the original theatrical cut and I thou...zzzzzzzzzz


Wow that is really an unremarkable statement
I always thought whoever said TMP is boring just is not very aesthetically or imaginatively inclined

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 1:11 AM   
 By:   jenkwombat   (Member)

Ado, I agree with you. Although TMP certainly isn't my favorite of the ST movies, I never understood the hostility aimed at it by so many. I thoroughly enjoyed it back in 1979, and still do to this day.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 4:15 AM   
 By:   jackfu   (Member)

Ado, I agree with you. Although TMP certainly isn't my favorite of the ST movies, I never understood the hostility aimed at it by so many. I thoroughly enjoyed it back in 1979, and still do to this day.

Agreed. I’m just grateful it was made. After all, the characters had to be (re)introduced, reunited, etc., at least from a fan perspective, anyway. Had TMP never been made, even with its flaws, would anyone have been bold enough to take it on later? I look at it in comparison to some of the ST TOS shows; some clicked, some didn’t. I think I’d likely go with the original release of TMP, since that’s what I saw in ’79, but I also like the idea of the Director’s Cut being the original release to start with.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 7:16 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

I was always engrossed in this film. Especially the travel through V'ger. The part I believe fell apart for 50% of the audience. I dunno, maybe I see it more as an "art" film. The marriage of sight and sound was mesmerizing for me. (Like Disney's Fantasia) I was never bored by it's leisurely pace.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 7:52 AM   
 By:   Scott M (Oldsmith)   (Member)

IMHO the Directors cut blows the theatrical cut out of the water. The pacing is so much improved, but particularly these top 10 changes make it the superior version.

1. Cutting Kirk’s “Oh my god” in the transporter room.
2. Shortening Kirk’s speech to the crew on the recreation deck, it’s so much better now.
3. Adding all the ambient sound effects to the ship (Big improvement)
4. The improved Overture and Main Titles with Star field
5. Cutting the epsilon 9 dialogue down in the beginning
6. The removal of the awful male computer voice
7. The improved worm hole and meteor destruction sequence
8. Showing clearly Vejur’s entire ship when it enters earth orbit
9. Cutting Decker’s and Ilia’s looks at each other on the bridge
10. Adding back Spock crying on the bridge and his explanation of Vejur’s motives.
(biggest improvement )
.


1. I was also fine with the original OMG. I never understood why it stands out and needed to be cut.
2. It's not that much shorter. Cutting the second "viewer off" only took away from how awesome the cloud danger was.
3. I preferred the TOS sounds to remain in 1966. Putting them in the 80's seemed weird to me. The instruments were totally different, they should make all new sounds. Roddenberry understood this, don't knwo why nobody else does.
4. Agreed, the original titles were obviously slapped together quickly and were probably supposed to be temporary.
5. Nobody on Epsilon 9 could act, so yeah, cutting that worked for me.
6. I actually got so under to it, I still expect to hear it.
7. Yes, excellent!
8. Agreed, until then we never had an idea of what that ship looked like.
9. They didn't cut them, they were moved to a better spot when Enterprise was leaving the solar system.
10. Nimoy's contribution to Spock's arc and it really give the character a place in the story.


 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 8:45 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

I was always engrossed in this film. Especially the travel through V'ger. The part I believe fell apart for 50% of the audience. I dunno, maybe I see it more as an "art" film. The marriage of sight and sound was mesmerizing for me. (Like Disney's Fantasia) I was never bored by it's leisurely pace.

Yeah, I think especially the modern is audience is used to a certain number of action beats per so many minutes, and when they do not get this fed to them they grow restless. I feel like you Solium that this was a partly wordless sensual experience of the strange beauty of space and the creatures you might find way out there, and out there a lot of words fall flat when you are surrounded by a massive light energy cloud. I felt that the long passages of really remarkable Trumbull effects of layered ribbons of colored light were pretty astonishing and lovely with the score. I did not need action beats or a lot of talking. The same applied to the trip around the Enterprise.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 9:48 AM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

I was always engrossed in this film. Especially the travel through V'ger. The part I believe fell apart for 50% of the audience. I dunno, maybe I see it more as an "art" film. The marriage of sight and sound was mesmerizing for me. (Like Disney's Fantasia) I was never bored by it's leisurely pace.


I find the Fantasia analogy is very apt. And I, too, see it as an arty movie.
It tried to be, for want of a better word, "wondrous". It was for me.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 10:04 AM   
 By:   Jeyl   (Member)

The Enterprise is a lady, not a man. Director's Edition all the way.

However, it must be a restored and remastered Director's Edition. The current one that's out is in no way shape or form fitted for High Definition presentation since everything, and I mean EVERYTHING was mastered in standard definition. I have very reliable sources that say the original files used to make the new effects in the Director's Edition are still available AND ready to be updated.

Daren Dochterman said on his blog that one sequence they wanted to change was the Officer's Lounge, and they were originally going to re-design the background to better match the lounge we saw when Spock's shuttle was docking with the Enterprise. Due to budget limitations and a couple of placement problems, they were forced to just use the existing set with only an added nacelle that didn't even have matching stars. With the technology he has now, he said he can do the the rough work in about a week.

And let's not forget the most important part of the restoration itself. Restoring the picture quality! While the Director's Edition was certainly presentable for it's time, it was still plagued with dirt, scratches and other noticeable print issues that could have used a nice clean up job. The scene on Vulcan for example with the close up shot of the Vulcan priestess talking actually has more dirt and scratches on it than the previous versions, and that's because they had to use a raw, uncleaned source so they could redo the subtitles so the words don't match her lip movement. While the BluRay of the theatrical cut certainly seems cleaner, the amount of digital noise reduction that was applied to the print was just a travesty. Models looked soft and details looked waxy. Even though I'm no fan of film grain, I'm not for it's elimination to the point where there's a noticeable loss in detail. James Cameron with Lowrey Digital did some grain removal on ALIENS (The film stock used was HEAVY in grain), and they managed to bring it down to a nice level without losing the detail, so it can be done!

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 10:10 AM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)


Wow that is really an unremarkable statement
I always thought whoever said TMP is boring just is not very aesthetically or imaginatively inclined


It takes forever to get going and although I like the story of the movie and some of the set pieces and big scale space shots, it always felt too 2001:a space odyssey to me and not very Star Trek. The pacing is awfully slow. The only upside is that Goldsmith's music gets a lot of screen time, but it's not a movie I'd recommend my friends to check out.

But to be fair, when I saw the star trek marathon (up to Nemesis) in the theatre, I only nodded off during Search for Spock and Final Frontier.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 10:43 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

While the BluRay of the theatrical cut certainly seems cleaner, the amount of digital noise reduction that was applied to the print was just a travesty. Models looked soft and details looked waxy.

I agree with about 50% of this statement. The live action shots on the BR look fabulous. They don't look DNR'ed to death. However the special effects do look flat and waxy and just plain horrible. Watch Voyage Home if you want to see a complete disaster. frown

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2013 - 12:42 PM   
 By:   Midnight Mike   (Member)



2. It's not that much shorter. Cutting the second "viewer off" only took away from how awesome the cloud danger was.


Here is what I love about the new edit to this scene:

In the theatrical version after watching Epsilon 9 be destroyed, Kirk looks at the crew and says...

"We can only hope there is an intelligence in the cloud that reasons the way we do. Pre-launch countdown will commence in 20 mins."

In the Directors Cut, after watching Epsilon 9 be destroyed, Kirk now looks at the crew, opens his mouth to say something, we cut to the crew looking at him, cut back...Kirk closes his mouth, and simply says "Pre-launch countdown will commence in 20 mins."

Nothing wrong with the cut line, but it's not needed.

This very small edit turns a simple expository scene, which does nothing but tell the audience things we already know, into a small moment for Kirk.

Everybody just watched Epsilon 9 be destroyed. The all look to Kirk...He's got nothing to say, there is nothing to say, the ship is going to meet the cloud, and probably be destroyed.

I feel it gives that scene a small Kirk moment showing the loneliness of command that wasn't there before, and makes Shatner a better actor in that scene.

A brilliant edit by Robet Wise 20 years later, Improving the film.

Mike

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.