Star Trek - The Motion Picture - 2001 Director's cut DVD vs. 2022 Director's Cut Blu-ray - part 1

This video is the first of line of videos comparing the 2001 Director's cut DVD version and the 2022 Director's cut Blu-ray version.

[@spiderman101x]

Did you guys forget to actually put shots of the two filmed versions here? There is nothing but titles and stars

[@hammerman199374]

As usual, this is great. I have one minor suggestion: if you could place your captions before the indicated clip, it would help in us as the viewer then knowing what to look for instead of having to back track if we missed it initially.

[@jim2lane]

Seven full minutes of exposition before you get to any meaningful visual comparisons of the two cuts?

[@TrekkieChannel]

I'm trying to show ALL of the visual changes, that's why I'm also showing the changed star fields

[@jim2lane]

@@TrekkieChannel I appreciate what you're doing, just IMHO 30-45 seconds would have been more than enough time to accomplish the crawlers and starfield comparisons 😉

[@cmillerg6306]

​@@jim2lane well, when you provide your you tube channel concerning the comparisons, we might be grateful.

[@johnkelly1198]

Cant read that fast

[@deathbyteacup]

And then has the gall to say the video would be boring if every edit was included a full four minutes in

[@aeugnewtype]

They explain in the special features of the new Blu-Ray that they found the original negatives of all the VFX and miniature work and re-composited them digitally to clean up a lot of the visible matte and other little issues, and you can even watch several of the unedited VFX composite shots on their own in the special features. The result of this new transfer is just stunning and I'm glad they went back and updated this again. I saw it in the theater back in 2020 and it just absolutely blew me away, and being able to view at home now is just a treat.

[@ThunderZandor]

I've got this magazine called Enterprise from the early 80's. In it they have a composited shot of the shuttle flying over and into the bay in San Francisco. That shot has never been released ever except as a freeze frame in this magazine. I hope it's in this new 2022 release.

[@lasthurrahvlog8379]

I really appreciate these in-depth looks at the first Star Trek movie, what I consider to be the best of them all. Nice work on your part, great insights, and a huge effort! Thanks!

[@THEremiXFACTOR]

I agree. I really like TMP.

[@OhChrisFreeman]

The shimmering effect around the new credits in the 4k version is the shimmering effect from the V'ger/Decker merge at the end of the movie

[@ThunderZandor]

😮

[@aaronster]

oooohhh foreshadow!

[@cmillerg6306]

About matte lines: they are an artifact of compressed light-level dynamic range and digital quantization error, where a light level is not assigned its precise level, but is rounded off to the nearest digital value availble... only 128 levels with 8-bit resolution. This shows up badly in sci fi scenes with high dynamic range. A more curious example is seen in the front-projection scenes that Kubrick created for the ape-man scenes at the watering hole. In the 8bit resolution blue ray, one can see the somewhat randomized-orientations of the 3M reflective tape of the front-projection screen (esp upper right corner of screen). These disappear in the 4k version, which uses 10 bits for light levels. That 4x increase in resolution did the trick.

[@startrekvisualcomparisons4461]

No mention of the using different takes of subtitles shots of Spock on Vulcan? According to the research for my comparisons, they appear to have found most of the original takes used in the theatrical version without the burned-in original subtitles! It’s one of my favorite tiny “fixes”!

[@TrekkieChannel]

Wait ... are you doubleofive? :) I never thought about checking the subtitles, they are as a sup stream on the DVD so not sure how to do it, but I can try to revisit the Vulcan scene for some future part if I find out how to make the subtitles a part of the video

[@startrekvisualcomparisons4461]

@@TrekkieChannel It is me, indeed! It’s not the subtitles, it’s actually the takes, watch Spock when the camera is on him and there are subtitles.

[@TrekkieChannel]

@@startrekvisualcomparisons4461 Nice to see you here, on my previous computer I had your Picassa albums bookmarked :-) I used to be pretty active on originaltrilogy.com a few years back, so always nice to see a familiar face here. Are you sure about the different takes? I am right now comparing them frame by frame and I found 1 shot different - when the priestess touches Spock's face. At least "one shot so far"

[@Krazy80s]

Your efforts in putting this together is great. But the critique I have when watching this: I'm 3:29 min in and your background is a moving star field comparing the differences between the moving star fields of the DVD and Blu-ray. Get rid of your star field background. It's visually better if the background were a different color like using the TMP rainbow motif. But the star field has to go. LLAP

[@briansergeant]

There is one good thing about the ‘22 remaster. The classic blue mountain Paramount ident has been restored.

[@cubdukat]

What I'd like to know is how they were able to solve the CGI problem. The excuse they gave in the past was that the original scene data and models were lost, and the only way to recreate everything would be to rebuild everything and re-animate the sequences. And what makes it even more galling is they hired one of the original animators to oversee the new version: "Mojo" Leibowitz, who also worked on the HD versions of the DS9 "Sacrifice of Angels" sequence for "What We Left Behind." At any rate, I'm definitely happy they finally got around to it, albeit a good 22 years later. Personally I think all of the classic Trek films should get the same treatment as this did, or at the very least all new 4K film scans.

[@petervanek732]

When Foundation Imaging went bankrupt they sold everything, all their hardware, including the content of the hard discs, that's why all CGI models done by FI are officially lost. Unofficially most CG artists have backed up all of their work on personal media and still have them. I ASSUME the models here are a combination of original models re-rendered in higher resolution and brand new models.

[@DCDura]

Why 5 minutes of Star Fields moving forward and backward? This and the cacophony of different musical scores! Why?

[@startrekvisualcomparisons4461]

So you can feel the pain of making comparisons! LOL

[@garymarzuki8391]

Because in the Directors cut...this is the actual beginning of the movie...even before the opening credits. It's a Prelude, called ILia's song

[@mratoz]

Ilias Theme was a different cut in each version. The main title was the original theatrical version in 2022, but the album version in 2001. Unrelated, the nacelles are black now in Drydock since the recomposit the elements prevents the bleed of blue from Earth in the background.

[@DCDura]

@@startrekvisualcomparisons4461 Indeed

[@matteritchie]

The prelude was there in some original theatrical cuts. I actually saw it once cut just like it is here. I actually liked it. It crated a sort of liminal space to pass from our world into theirs. And Ilea’s theme is such a great part of the score.

[@donlengel4770]

I remember going to the theater in 79 and seeing the original version. The 2022 version is it .

[@philippealain-art]

The best Star Trek, the most faithful to the spirit of what Star Trek is and should be, the most cerebral, deep and ambitious. Light years away from what it has become since 2009 and since Jar jar abrams and alex kurtzman, the incompetents who turned the franchise into somthing completely stupid and ridiculous. Thanks to those who worked to bring us this long awaited HD version.

[@eq1373]

😴😴😴😴

[@philippealain-art]

@@eq1373, only for the decerebrated and the stupid epileptic images addicts. If you don't like intelligent, profound movies, watch Fast and Furious, Transformers or the stupid fake Star Trek movies and series by Alex Kurtzman.

[@ObsessiveCostumingDude]

I really enjoy your comparison videos. Thank you for putting all these together for us. :)

[@qunewsguy]

I love how your video has as many long pregnant pauses and breaks for special fx shots as the original does

[@raycooper3463]

@4:36 the audio ( the music of Ilia’s Theme) is not the same, not just out synch. I can hear the pitch changes they made.. not a fan. Do you have any idea how many times I listened to the Soundtrack album after seeing ST:TMP in the theaters? Sans VCRs of any sort in my household, I had to rely on the music and my imagination, to be transported (pun intended) back into the movie.

[@TrentPruitt1997]

I think the reason why the main title sequences’ audio aren’t synched up is because, from what I understand, the 2001 DVD used the soundtrack album version and not the original film version from 1979, which they seem to have restored for the 4K. You can tell, if you listen to them individually, there are some differences in the way the theme is played. Idk why but that’s kinda bugged me to an extent, but it’s nothing major.

[@erikisalive]

Gave up on this after 3 minutes of nothing happening

[@MrMichelPM]

Too much time on the entire pre-film traveling starfield, as well as too much text commentary on more, visually, obvious changes. I like the fornat of this video, but you need to address the pacing and maybe where changes are pretty much visually obvious, maybe refrain from text commentary.spx Most ST fans and fans of this movie are completely aware of the visible SFX black matte layer on the Klingon ship models, that stood out in the originsl theatre releases, that still was NOT dealt with in the 2001 Director’s Cut version. It is, usually, the first thing fans of this movie always notice, since this is the start of the film. Clearly, this black FX matte layer has, finally, been fixed or greatly reduced to no be so obviously noticeable, in the 2022 Blu-ray version. Any pointing out of more “not so obvious” changes between both Director cut versions is appreciated.

[@davidsandy5917]

Seven minutes in and we are still watching credits...

[@andyfromtheuk]

Absolutely brilliant! :)

[@martinharris5017]

Thanks for this comparison! Now I see why it's worth seeing the 2022 version! Amazing.

[@lizardmanYTMND]

THERE IS NO COMPARISON... Uh, wait, I guess there is!

[@lynnpoint6395]

Thanks for the video! Lots of comment about the credits and opening that I'm sure some found interesting, but there is no comment about what happens at 13:29? The left view screen of the control panel on the 2022 version finally shows what happened to the third Klingon Battle Cruiser, a mystery that had lingered for over four decades. But no discussion at all about this?

[@dubstepzsi]

Hey thanks for this, the issue around the Klingon ships would have been done with whats called a Keying function something i use a lot in DaVinci Resolve and would not have been available back then. The keying function allows you to control the blue or green screen overspill and you can control how much of the outline is visible.the colour correction back then there wouldn't of been any as there was no colour grading process as everything colour was done in camera with film negative stock that would have been chosen for the look of the film, so for example a popular one in the 70's and 80's was the Kodak 2383 something as a colour grader i emulate a lot for films and that kodak film stock was actually use din Top Gun the original movie.

[@averageadventure200]

why does the dvd look more artistic and lived compared to the blueray

[@StarshipYorktown]

The stars zipping past on the left and right side of the screen is a bit distracting when watching the video.

[@Talos1963]

I was interested in seeing this, but the interrupting titling was infuriating. Halfway through the video, and you've only reached the credits?!?

[@TrekkieChannel]

IF I show more than cca 20 seconds there is a huge risk KZbin's copyright bots will block the video. I'm not pausing it for artistic reasons, but because I want to keep the video visible.

[@ThunderZandor]

TreK-ChaNNeL- you should consider slashing out 7 seconds out between the yellow text. I had to forward as much as 10 seconds. Ok, let's make a deaL - edit out 12 seconds and it 's all good.🖖Other than that you did a fantastic review of the changes. I learned new things today, my cat too.😺

[@Eduardo99922]

Thank you!!!

[@dtuk22]

Blimey! How much mileage can you get out of comparison of a 45 year old movie.

[@helenofirvine]

It took you 8 minutes to get to the actual comparisons!

[@TrekkieChannel]

Nope, the comparison starts within the first few seconds. If you don't find comparison of the starfields interesting, that's fair, but pretending that the comparison starts after 8 minutes is just factually incorrect

[@Tgarnett25-lb5rh]

I thought the scenes with the actors looked good, but the effects shots looked better in Daren Dochterman’s 2001 version.

[@64jmoore]

The constant background if a moving star field and on the left and right sides if the comparison videos is really annoying!!!! ALOT!!!

[@patrickedm8540]

Could you take another 10 min with captions

[@enginerdy]

This is the most infuriatingly edited video I’ve seen on KZbin in months…

[@peterharoldjanakjr2078]

Wow. 5 minutes in and still babbling. Not even a shot yet. No need to exain the top half is the old and the bottom the new. One figures that out by the time your 5 minute mark comes.

[@ThunderZandor]

SOme people get so distracted they will forget. Maybe the yellow text could have been much smaller, i agree.

[@TheRealNameless1]

Honestly, 2 min of narrative overview would have worked well. I was about to abandon this video but decided to skip ahead and saw some footage

[@stevef.8708]

I was starting to get pretty annoyed at around rhe 5 minute mark. Great content but your expose could have been done in 1 minute without all of the BS. Get on with it man!!! Rest of the video was great.

[@jetsgardner5490]

The unnecessary and distracting starfield on either side of this is ridiculous. Also I almost clicked out after several minutes thinking I was going the spend the whole time reading captions I could've found on a website instead of actually seeing the differences. You should rethink these and resubmit this.

[@TexasNorthDFW]

I stopped 5 and a half minutes in when I got sick of you interrupting the damn thing.

[@TrekkieChannel]

The interrupting is the only way how to keep a video like this on youtube

[@hamilton9651]

You can't save or improve this bomb!

[@thatllputmarzipaninyourpie3117]

The first 7 minutes is a bunch of uninteresting bs, for those who want to skip it.