Star Trek - Tomorrow is Yesterday - visual effects comparison
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 сер 2024
- This is a video comparison of the visual effects scenes from the classic Star Trek episode Tomorrow Is Yesterday by D.C.Fontana.
On the left side you can see the scenes from the 1966 edition of the episode, on the right side you can see the same scene as it appears in the 2009 digitally enhanced edition.
STAR TREK and related marks are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc.
![Star Trek - The Cage - Visual Effects comparison [redux] (part 1 / 2)](/img/n.gif)
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.
black star sounds wayyy more cooler lol
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.
@@mikebazinga982 and more accurate actually
Your right bout that. It would seem the term somehow came back into popular usage again by the 23th century
And then TNG used "quantum singularity" instead.
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.
I was 6 and had to beat my younger brothers to the TV. They weren't fan at the time.
Gawd, you’re an old fart like me.
@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! 🖖
Thanks
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.
@@fractalelf7760
Sorry to bother you, but I do! ☺️
It was my life since my early childhood. 👏🏻🤩
Agree. Mike Okuda and his team did very good job!
These were very tastefully done.
In the CGI version on the view screen I can see some farm fields and what looked like barns or farmhouses.
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.
Could you imagine if George Lucus did the revamped version?
@@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.
@@desoliver9712 I do. Spock would find himself in a cave, he was able to hid in, yet are unable to "unhid" himself. That R2-D2 scene has no sense.
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.
@@KevinJDildonik 💯!
I also enjoy listening to my LP's from the '70's on a turntable...scratches and all! Good times!
@@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.
50 years old and still thrilling. Thank you Gene Roddenberry wherever you are.
I believe some of him is in orbit.
@@GregorBarclay 'In to every life, a little Roddenberry must fall'
Someone should have told them to take a few whales with them before they left.
And a bowl of petunias....
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.
Hindsight is always 20/20.
I appreciate all the work that went into updating the show. Planets look like planets instead of a hazy ball.
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.
@@NoahSpurrier I grew up on that has well, but I don't mind seeing a better looking product.
@@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!
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.
Wonderful :) Always great to hear that classic Trek has inspired people
At least they didn't add any CGI alien musical numbers.
Lol Well I liked Jedi Rocks, and I don't think that was done with CG.
@@UnchainedEruption of course Jedi Rocks is done with CG, the original is puppets
@@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:
ua-cam.com/video/dV0LD-QAzg0/v-deo.html
And your point is...?
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
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.
Plus, effects arguably look much better than The Bounty did while making the same maneuver in Star Trek IV.
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.
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.
If you think adding some crap CGI effects made it better, you're a buffoon.
@@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!
@@johnbockelie3899 -When you put it that way, it starts sounding confusing. Essentially, though, that about covers it.
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.
I'm also a Star Wars fan and I approve this message!!
👏🧐
I much prefer Star Wars to Star Trek, including the remastered versions.
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.
@@Bruh-zx2mc So, why don't you just watch the non-remastered version?
You really have to give Kudos for the old tv and movies - managing to pull off everything they did with JUST models, and painting and similar props.
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.
@@johnbockelie3899 TOS actually had a very large budget for the time.
@@usera9478 oh rly? How does it fare with modern sitcoms? ;) yeah, and basically no special effects in those! Most of the budget are actor salaries ;)
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.
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 noticed that too. Since it was blue it would have been simple enough.
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.
Dam budget cuts!!!
seems a little more complicated since there are window reflections from the canopy.
I love how they are going at warp 8 towards the Sun and Mercury will be soon approaching. Meanwhile, Alpha Centauri just went by.
Oops.
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.
That was the most underwhelming high speed pass next to the sun, in the old version 😉
That's one of the shots which are really MUCH better in the new version
@@TrekkieChannel question is: are the ships in Trekverse sturdy enough to survive such proximity?
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.
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'm kinda sad they didn't add the trail and the little 'zoom' sound effect from ST4.
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.
scar89
Totally agree !!
its neat to watch them all over again with the new detail of teh sets though
I'll keep them both.
Same. I'm just glad we can choose which one to watch. Not like Star Wars.
Totally agree. It's like putting a Tesla motor in a 1920's car. Yeah, technically you can do it, but what's really the point?
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.
Gasoline85 are the Original Effects EPs on the Blu Ray in HD. ?
MrVercettti89 yes on the Blu-ray you can switch between original and special effects.
I grew up with Star Trek and I think the original effects are part of it's charm.
@@MrSquifler Yes, they do. You can switch to whichever you prefer before you start the disk.
@@UA-camCX9 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.
Love the slight tilting on the ship, they tried to make the cgi look as if it was pending from wires, nice detail.
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!
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.
Better Than Life
@@felixbodenstein4186 Agreed fully. Though sadly the fact remains that reality is no longer deemed worthy.
@@TheGreenElbow Sorry. I'm several years (ie, nearly two decades) removed from the source material.
When "real" is simply stock footage that looks out of place anyways, the CGI is always better.
My FAVORITE episode of the ENTIRE ST:TOS series! Mostly because I grew up during that time period and felt a connection to the story line.
Ah, but what about Gary 7? Now that could've been excellent.
I think I prefer Mr. Seven. (Assignment: Earth)
i grew up with the old effects and i have to say i love the new ones much much better.
kelly savage same here.
Keep in mind that in the late 1960s they were doing the best they could within a limited budget and technology that was scarcely more advanced than stone knives and bearskins. If anything even close to modern CGI had existed back then you can be damned sure they would have used it. Yes, there was a certain charm to the original effects, but I think that overall the remastered ones add to the episodes, and are in keeping with the spirit of the creators.
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.
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.
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!!!
When they showed time clocks running backward-clicking seconds vs electronic display with star date blanked--really good
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
on Classic series Doctor Who DVDs/Blu-Rays, whenever there is new CGI effects, they are included as an optional extra that need to be switched on.
I bought the blu-ray remastered edition of ST TOS, and it indeed does come with both unedited and CGI remastered editions.
I like some of the changes Lucas made. Not all, some were just made to change 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 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 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.
if you get the blu-ray it has the original effects and the new.
@@sermerlin1 The only one that needs to grow up is yourself. If you can't get past a few poor effects then you have the maturity of a child.
@@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.
Good thing we have access to both!
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 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!
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
This show still holds up in 2019 🖖🏽
Absolutely!
Totally
At 6:49p I was born & that episode aired 7pm C.S.T. I’ve been stuck here for 52 years with no hope of extraction.
zamp6969 aside from effects, thought the female computer annoying Kirk was funny.
Seen the original growing up for many years, and I have to say, I love the remastered version. They done a great job with it.
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.
There's an old saying, the best SFX are the ones you don't notice.
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.
Lol! I agree with all of you, but Mike Matei would like to have a word with you...............
you're an idiot
Yep, a small screen with 320 interlaced resolution. Don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure I watched it in B&W.
It's funny how an unclouded (or fuzzy) Earth worked on a TV show in the 60s, and how it's completely unbelievable 50 years later.
Well most of the people watched the show on a 23/24" black and white 4:3 screen
@@TrekkieChannel My family didn't have a screen larger than 19" diagonal (or color) until 1973.
I remember watching these reruns at 7pm on the local antenna channel in the 1970's. Still pretty cool even today...:)
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 watch the new effects from time to time, but most of the time I watch the original versions
When the original was filmed, we had never seen what the Earth looked like from over-head, over a 100 miles
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.
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.
yes, exactly. but it looked like that last shot had the original doing similar. But yeah, giant ships don't waggle, wobble, or teeter.
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.
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.
Normally I'm against messing with a good thing but in this case I'll make an exception. The original series do need a little touch up. Nice job!
Always a joy to see these side by side.
Glad you enjoy it
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.
Concurred, with The Galileo Seven taking second place.
they did such a good job at staying true to the original, and making things look like they were made in the time the show was made.
Now this is how you do a touch up of old special effects and stuff. You he me, George!
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
While I knew there was a correlation between this episode and Star Trek IV, the new CGI effects really bring that into focus.
I'm surprised how well the CGI fits. It really is better in all honesty. But I prefer the original. That's how it was. That's how I wanna see it.
if only the studio had the tech to make the effects like this back in the 60's
I was hoping they will re-shoot the models when I first heard that they plan to do something like that.
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.
ugh, the beauty of the roughness in the originals is lost
I've always felt like adding CGI strips this series of its historical significance. The special effects of the era are an inseparable part of the series' history! It would be fun to watch the updated series as a novelty, but I truly feel like Netflix should have the original broadcast version instead of the update. (Preferably both, like Prime Video has)
Blame Les Moonves.
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 the very first STAR TREK for me to watch. I thought this was a real UFO at first. I was now "hooked" on Star Trek !!!
When I recently started rewatching TOS I thought, wow, they really had some good special effects. I thought they'd just touched them up to eliminate the outlines between the model and the background, but turns out, they completely redid them. That explains why they look so much better.
I like both and would take either. It's not supposed to be about effects, it's about story, plot, and characters.
That's what few of the younger generation realize.
To be fair, these enhancements are quite tasteful. But I still hope that this fad of "enhancing" special effects of old is over for good.
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
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.
The CGI IS. AWESOME . It makes the original look new again .
This was always my favorite Star Trek episode
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.
Planets are big, m'kay?
God, the Enterprise is SO beautiful ❤️
really is.......isn't She.
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. :)
Wonderful. One of the few episodes which really does benefit from the new CGI.
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..
I think they did a particularly good job of redoing the effects on this episode.
Me too.
I understand that it's the shape of things to come, but the CGI version looks more like a model that the original version...
I was trying to tell my sister how they updated the special effects and she didn’t really buy it, but this’ll definitely show her 😂
I remember watching that as it were yesterday BUT unfortunately it’s been quite a few tomorrow’s🤷♂️🤔😀😍love it
I can cry by seeing this good old Enterprise...it was a very good time,those days...really😰!!!!
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.
what makes you so sure?
@@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.
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).
Glad I’m not the only one who feels this way!
I love the classic but the cgi just adds another layer of excitement to it
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. :)
Welcome to the wonderful world of TOS fandom :)
I can't say enough about the digitally-remastered version of Star Trek. "Tasteful", "Seamless", and "In the spirit of the original" all come to mind.
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.
While I appreciate the updated effects, I prefer the original ones overall. I'm a product of the '60s and I remember the original show. To my mind it's not supposed to look slick, it's supposed to look like a product of times. If I were a young person seeing these for the first time, I would probably prefer the updated FX. I guess for me it's a mix of memory and nostalgia for the times.
I own the original Paramount release of the show in the late 90's. The entire series! The new CGI versions really freshen up the show. It adds more visual excitement to shows I have seen many times. I have no problem with it.
Peace and Long Life!
it really seems like there are other constraints in play which determined what shot was used, the pictures of the Enterprise climbing above the clouds in the 60s effects were clearly a compromise of budget, having to shoot the models against a background that was not black very much limited choices. I don't think the what we're seeing is an example of "anything is possible" in terms of the director's vision even within the means available. With production for television of the day in mind, any shortcuts would logically lead to a shot, even if shoddy, that was as clear as possible. Waving around the Enterprise on a stick was good enough because no one could miss the point, but if the director had more time and money, it's certain they would have went with a solution that maintained more suspension of disbelief.
I grew up with Star Trek in the 80s. I like the new CGI effects. But when I see the original effects, it makes me feel like the 6 year old boy, sitting infront of the TV and watching Star Trek :)
It is an old series, it is OK to have old CGI effects. Noone would start to make a remake of Alien 1, with a CGI Alien.
Somehow, I liked that it looked like toys. I was a kid, playing with toys myself. I just used some pictures, and a lego star ship, to make great fantastic scenes in my head. And I didnt felt bad for it, because star trek uses nearly the same technique ;) Now, the scenes look so perfekt, I would feel bad to recreate such things as a kid with my toys.
I don't think it should be a binary choice. Both ar good a diffrent things and being able to use bothe wold inevitably improve whatever story they're in.
The thing a lot of people don't realize these days is that with these old shows there was a kind of unspoken agreement between the audience and the show: We would pretend we didn't notice that the walls were plywood, and they would tell us an entertaining story. We would pretend a horse-faced guy with a bowl-cut and green eyeshadow was an alien, and they would assume we were intelligent and tell us thought provoking stories (Excepting this one. This one is terrible). We'd meet in the middle because we - the show and the audience - *wanted* to like each other.
Modern shows have super-realistic FX and as a result people are a lot less tolerant of the fakey stuff, and I feel like this sort of thing kind of upsets that balance, that wiling suspension of disbelief.
Excellent side by side comparison.
Thanks, glad you enjoy it
That was a great episode! Wow, never realized how much better the remastered version is. Thanks for putting it out there!
Glad you enjoyed it!
They did a good job. I’m impressed.
Excellent...I'll never watch a Star Trek episode again with the same eyes...thank you for posting⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐👜✌👍
I like some of the improvements but some of them I don't like, for example a close up of a cgi ship never looks as good as the model.
I agree with it
Eric Alekzander agreed
Affirmative
Eric Alekzander yeah some improvements work and some don’t, but at least you get both versions on the blu-ray
In the 1960s they didn't know what the earth looked like from space, so they did the best they could.
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.
@@NJP76 Well said!
@@TrekkieChannel Lol, I never thought about the shirtless thing but you're right!
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.
As with everything, the resolution and detail improves over the years. Star Trek...cherished memory from my youth, when you had to get off your ass to change the channel on the television--a minor effort then, an unimaginable inconvenience now.
I´ve never seen Star Trek, but I love these kinds of video´s
I see a lot of people saying the CGI hasn't aged well, I disagree. Not discounting what was done originally, for what those old practical effects were they’ve aged well, but the CG is clearly better imho.
Agreed. I was talking to my wife about it a while back, explaining the difference in the planets to what they have now, and how much better the newer ones were.
but it isn´t good cgi. It lacks detail, especially in the exterior ship scenes.
I remember watching this for the first time, on NBC in first-run, and being distraught because I thought that week's episode had been pre-empted for yet another news special about the Vietnam War, what with all the clips of warplanes and so forth.
caatcher Bet you were surprised then when you saw the starship Enterprise in the sky.
"Breaking today, an alien UFO has been spotted above US military installations in South Asia. Laballed 'U.S.S. Enterprise. Details coming in, stay tuned."
@@peterkrochmalni673 More relieved than anything else!
I think if Roddenberry were around, he'd appreciate the new stuff which he didn't have the technology to provide the show in the 60s
Well "young" Roddenberry said something like that about the TNG remasters
In fact this episode more than others really seems to benefit from the cgi more so than others. The Enterprises in atmosphere scenes really look better.
Agreed
In fact more than others this episode more than others really seems to benefit more than others from the cgi more than others. The Enterprise in atmosphere scenes more than others really looks better more than others.
@ Robert Dambeck: I think so too. It does show the amount of respect towards the original production value and style and yes, Gene would appreciate it a lot when he'd see how much of a detailed and passionate treatment his baby got.
I gotta say they integrated the CGI brilliantly with the old footage. Even keeping the original color grade in some places.
Such a light touch. They did an excellent job and you know they people responsible took a lot of care doing it.