Star Trek: The Motion Picture - Director’s Cut 4K Restoration (supervised by Mike Matessino)

[Tallguy 3,385]

Short answer: Sound is 110%. I can't speak to anything other than stereo.

 

FX is... 85%? But the existing FX look waaaay better here than on the 4k of the theatrical. 

 

Overall I'll call it A-. 

[Jay 37,351]

2 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

the existing FX look waaaay better here than on the 4k of the theatrical

 

By existing FX, do you mean special effects shots from 1979 that were never changed for the Director's Edition to begin with?

[Tallguy 3,385]

1 hour ago, Jay said:

 

By existing FX, do you mean special effects shots from 1979 that were never changed for the Director's Edition to begin with?

 

Yup. 

 

Leaving Drydock is AMAAAAZING! (Yes there is a small change there too.) 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

2 hours ago, Tallguy said:

Yes there is a small change there too.) 

Colour me intrigued. What kind of a "small change"?

[Tallguy 3,385]

5 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Colour me intrigued. What kind of a "small change"?

 

Same as the SD. You can no longer see the pylon supporting the model of the Enterprise. But now everything else looks glorious.

[OneBuckFilms 319]

The Earth is visible in more of the space dock shots.

 

they also added more shots of the travel pod attached to the office complex.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

1 hour ago, OneBuckFilms said:

The Earth is visible in more of the space dock shots.

 

they also added more shots of the travel pod attached to the office complex.

Ah! I assume that's the travel pod that's available at cargo six 

[Andy 4,122]

It's wonderful.  I have seen the theatrical a zillion times, and the 2001 Director's cut more than a few.  I had trouble spotting changes.  It just transported me.  The colors are so robust, and there is detail within the Vejur scenes that have you looking like Takei's expression of wonder.  There's one scene in the Officer's Lounge with Spock, Kirk and Bones where the compositing against the star field looks a bit dodgy... Hopefully they can fix that for the physical release.

 

The score mix is just brilliant.  I think it sounds better than what LLL has released both times.  There is less reverb.  You can hear it straight out in the Main Title, but also in the snare punctuating the beginning of "Leaving Drydock".

 

I will always miss a few lines that Wise decided to cut, but for that I have the Theatrical I suppose.  I just wish the Theatrical were restored with this level of care and mastery of sound and color.

 

The film is no longer grey.  It is just stunning.  Some of the shots of the Enterprise within Vejur give the Mutara Nebula a run for its money.

 

[Tallguy 3,385]

 

39 minutes ago, Andy said:

I had trouble spotting changes.  It just transported me.  

 

I'm very happy for you. I didn't have exactly that experience.

 

I'll list my complaints after I continue to rave about the virtues of this edition. The film looks amazing. It sounds incredible. Anything in the new effects that might drag down my score are more than balanced by the legitimate improvements to the film even over the 2001 edition. If this project had ONLY taken out the TNG sound effects then I would have been happy. They did that and far more.

 

I still think having the theatrical edition is necessary. And I've known for 20 years that the DE is the superior edit. But I never expected the original to be a worse looking film by comparison, scene by scene.

 

I'm actually reserving my final judgement for seeing it on the big screen. I expect it's going to be incredible.

 

Ok, the rest is a bit rant-y:

 

I think there are... 3? new shots that are necessary. And they are all super well done. (The Enterprise leaving the wormhole, the Vejur whiplash bolt disappearing before it hits the ship, the first probe being deposited on the ship.) They're a little less seamless in 4K than they were in SD, but I could see missing them.

 

OK, Vulcan is necessary. I just wish they had made it look more like 1979. But then I've had that complaint for 20 years.

 

I suppose I could add some of the connecting shots for the new trip to the Brain Complex at the end of the film as needed. But this is where the new stuff falters. They just didn't get that same kind of "glow" that the original FX had. Literally and figuratively. They're acceptable place holders for what the original team could have done with time and money.

 

Then there are the shots where the DE team said "gee I wish they had done this in 1979". But they are shots that are both not necessary or done well enough. (Keeping in mind: I couldn't do this either. The original was made by FX geniuses!) I've never liked the new Wing Walk sequence. I'm sure the story boards were pretty, but how would they have done that in 1979? The original was incredible enough.

 

I don't like the new San Fransisco shots. The original Golden Gate matte is one of my favorite mattes of all time. (I worked at a Bay Area based company and everyone had Golden Gate wallpaper on their Zoom backgrounds. I used Star Trek!) But that's a matter of taste, I suppose. There's a LOT of behind the scenes stuff that indicates this was meant to show a far different SF that involved noted futurists of the time. Which is why the coast looked different and San Fransisco was a very different looking city save for one or two landmarks. No later Trek went with this. But I also just find the original painting more aesthetically satisfying.

 

The new travel pod is very... Ehhh? If I wasn't looking I'd never see it. I think they should have added a couple of more. But even though I know it's a continuity error it never bothered me. But that's just me.

 

Oh, they did do a new shot of the Enterprise coming about after flying over the Intruder so there isn't a continuity problem. It's nice enough and it looks just like the original effect but with different movement. THAT'S how you do it.

 

Spoilers for a BIG change that hasn't been in any of the press, so I can only assume that the production team wants it to be a nice surprise.

 

Spoiler

The new Officer's Lounge scene is not well done. I mean, it's a HUGE task. But the only reason they did it is because nerds know where the Officer's lounge is. Otherwise, quite frankly, the 1979 scene does what it needs to. It's amazing enough to be seeing Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley sharing a scene for the first time in 10 years.

 

 

[Pellaeon 593]

Hmm…

 

 

 

 

Engineers…?

[OneBuckFilms 319]

Most of the film was regraded, since the original color grading was rushed at that point.

[Jay 37,351]

Mike Matessino says

 

"

I appreciate the various nice comments about the sound work. It was simply good fortune that all of the raw ADR recordings survived. That means every take, so for every line of looped dialogue I had to match the original film and then clean it up and edit it. In MANY instances, even the chosen performance had been micro-edited originally to make it fit the lip movements on screen. That had all been done with physical splices, adding in blank frames basically, but now it was done digitally so that the speech would actually blend together more naturally.

 

And, by the way, Robert Wise was in the ADR booth with all of the main actors, so his instructions were audible between takes. It was generally obvious why they went with the deliveries they did.

 

Because we had this incredibly clear dialogue, that meant we could go farther with the multi-track music and the sound effects -- for which we had all the library material AND the raw Foley recordings. On top of that were the various elements for the original film... 6-track, M&E, and mono stems. Every single sound in the movie is something I edited and prepped.

 

I gave myself over to having the dialogue mixed the way a modern movie would be, and it was actually surreal to hear it all sounding so present. I'm not sure why they did so much limiting and gating on the dialogue originally, and it was really great to be free of that, because otherwise we'd have had to "spoil" the other components so that we wouldn't end up with crystal clear music against muddy pinched dialogue. For any time where they did stick with production audio (meaning the audio actually recorded as the shot was filmed) there was also great technology to clean it up, take out reverb, etc., so that our mixer could really work with everything like he would a film made today.

"

 

https://filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=146921&forumID=1&archive=0

[crumbs 14,306]

Sounds like an extraordinary labor of love.

 

If only Mike and this team could give the same treatment to the original Star Wars trilogy.

[Holko 9,520]

Imagine the original finished, objectively best mono mix recreated like this in Atmos...

[1977 1,743]

I'm guessing the transporter effects have not been altered from the 1979 version? Although a bit revisionist, I would have liked for these to be changed to match what was used in the later Trek films.

[Andy 4,122]

The transporter effects are the same (I rather like them with their groovy flowery patterns), but Shatner's exaggerated stepping off the pad with bravado has been trimmed.

 

It's all good.  I love having both versions.  I didn't care much for the DE in 2001, but this new restoration with the sound and color upgrades has completely hooked me.

 

I watched it on my projector for my first viewing, but I think I'll go back again and watch it on the family TV (after the new episode of Picard).  Watching TMP twice in the span of a few days is a something I never thought I'd want to do.  I love the film, but it's a lot to take in, even in the better paced DE.

 

I know Jeff Bond said something similar, but this time I really felt an emotional response of wonder and love for the film and it's themes.  At the end of the day, despite all the epic scenes and beautiful shots scored with majestic music, the most powerful scene for me is the unscored scene of Spock in the Sickbay realizing Vejur has no hope or appreciation for beauty, and likewise realizes his human side offers him things the Kolinahr never could.  I teared up.

[Tallguy 3,385]

5 hours ago, JTWfan77 said:

I'm guessing the transporter effects have not been altered from the 1979 version? Although a bit revisionist, I would have liked for these to be changed to match what was used in the later Trek films.

 

That wasn't the job. It was to "finish" the film. Not to bring it in line with later Star Trek.

 

As much as I love this version here are still a couple of changes that I don't think would have been done no matter how much time and how many test screenings they had in 1979. They feel like they've been influenced by 20 years of hindsight and possibly even later Trek.

 

The ones that jump out at me are: Changing the subtitle font (which was perfectly fine, even common in '79).

 

The way San Fransisco looks (which is much more in line with what we "know" about the 23rd century after five more movies and three more TV shows). Oh, I ranted about that above too.

 

And (no matter how well done it is, and it is well done) including TOS sound FX. The production itself and certainly Paramount at the time was very anti-TOS. We all know that they only even decided to include the theme music at the very last second after promising Goldsmith that he wouldn't have to use it at all. (I'm OK with TOS. I drew the line when the previous DE used TNG sound FX.)

 

59 minutes ago, Andy said:

I know Jeff Bond said something similar, but this time I really felt an emotional response of wonder and love for the film and it's themes.

 

I think it's something you have to grow into. I'm not saying it's beyond you at 10 years old. You understand it, sure. But it hits you very differently at 50. It really is the only adult Star Trek film.

 

And Spock's tear is the capstone of the whole movie. So good to have it back.

 

OK, I watched this twice yesterday. I'm loving this so much. I'm going to take a break today.

 

[karelm 2,913]

I was disappointed in the vfx.  On my tv, there was so much noise, and over saturation in the very dark scenes like vger ship flyover.  It reeked of over processing.  In 79 and 2001, I liked that vger ship faded into the background not letting you fully see the details...just hints of it.  Now in 2022, you see the whole thing in detail, is that a good thing?  Why not leave a sense of mystery the original had or at least update it rather than over saturate it?  Also, there was some bizarre masking (very noticeable in the "will you please...sit down" sequence) anytime the characters walked past the stars in the window.  It was surprising how poor that looked.  Way better in the 2001 version.  The enterprise flip after the vger flyover was useless.  Reminded me of Lucas adding Vader's "Take me to my ship" then showing him fly his ship to the Executor.  Just not necessary...actually quite stupid.  It is just a rear camera like many cars have...a Tesla has 8 cameras to give the car 360 degree view, so the Enterprise only has one forward camera so if they want to look in the rear, they have to point the ship that direction?  Very silly and unnecessary addition.  The higher resolution details of characters looked very good but also highlighted odd issues I wish they had fixed.   For example, there are several scenes like this that just look strange.  Decker and Kirks face are in focus, but Kirk's arm is way out of focus.  I get that the original has the same issue but think they could have done some type of fx to fix issues like this because in higher res, they are even more pronounced.  Overall, enjoyable to revisit the film.  I would rate the sound and score 10/10, the film quality upgrades (dust, scratch removal and high res) a 10/10 and vfx 6/10.  Since I'm a sound guy, that weights this version as my go to version but feel the vfx had some missed opportunities.   

[1977 1,743]

Thanks @Tallguy

 

I noticed from reading The Digital Bits' review that not all of original VFX footage was found, can anyone confirm whether the opening Klingon scenes have been recomposited digitally to remove (very obvious and ugly) matt lines and integrate the elements better?

 

Also has the wobble in the live action plates(visible in the 2001 edition) in the long shots of the Vulcan scenes with the new matt work been removed?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

55 minutes ago, JTWfan77 said:

Thanks @Tallguy

 

I noticed from reading The Digital Bits' review that not all of original VFX footage was found, can anyone confirm whether the opening Klingon scenes have been recomposited digitally to remove (very obvious and ugly) matt lines and integrate the elements better?

 

Also has the wobble in the live action plates(visible in the 2001 edition) in the long shots of the Vulcan scenes with the new matt work been removed?

You should just do a Paramount+ free trial and watch

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

"The Enterprise flip after the V'ger flyover was useless".

Can you explain this, @karelm?

[karelm 2,913]

2 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

"The Enterprise flip after the V'ger flyover was useless".

Can you explain this, @karelm?

 

Sorry, wasn't sure how to describe it but it was this scene.  At first, I thought it looked great but when they turn the enterprise to see a back view, just thought it was excessive...unnecessary addition and takes you out of the film and into some animator working on modeling and masking out the old enterprise for this one to flip to show a rear view.

[Marian Schedenig 8,192]

11 hours ago, karelm said:

For example, there are several scenes like this that just look strange.  Decker and Kirks face are in focus, but Kirk's arm is way out of focus.  I get that the original has the same issue but think they could have done some type of fx to fix issues like this because in higher res, they are even more pronounced.

 

That's just classic split diopter. I'd find it odd if they artificially changed something like that.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Yeah, that's not a mistake it's on purpose, whether you like it or not.   The split diopter shots in TMP have been polarizing for decades.

[Tallguy 3,385]

2 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

"The Enterprise flip after the V'ger flyover was useless".

Can you explain this, @karelm?

 

You didn't ask me, but he's talking about the shot at about 01:13 where the Enterprise flies off the forward edge of Vejur. It now includes the Enterprise coming about because in the next scenes she's facing Vejur. (Edit, I see this was answered while I was writing.)

 

The original is oddly one of my favorite shots because it has that crazy "This is how big this thing is" sense of scale, Jerry's music is amazing, and there's a wonderful kind of artistry to the shot. And I have no problem with the new shot. Watching it again, the new move actually works WITH the music. The Enterprise finishes it's flyover as the music resolves.

 

IMHO it's a bit of "narrative sugar" that works. It doesn't significantly change anything. It has the same light, the same pace. It feels like a shot they could have done in 1979 and it looks about like what it would have looked like then. It meets all of my "rules" for "would this shot have existed even if they had thought of it?"

 

I'll take this over the travel pod that was added to the office complex.

 

Original:

 

DE:

 

 

4 hours ago, JTWfan77 said:

Thanks @Tallguy

 

I noticed from reading The Digital Bits' review that not all of original VFX footage was found, can anyone confirm whether the opening Klingon scenes have been recomposited digitally to remove (very obvious and ugly) matt lines and integrate the elements better?

 

Also has the wobble in the live action plates(visible in the 2001 edition) in the long shots of the Vulcan scenes with the new matt work been removed?

 

Not sure about the Vulcan matte. But I can tell you that at least some of the Klingon shots have NOT been recomped. I think it's a testament to how good the rest of the film looked that these shots are getting so much attention. But you can make up for it by watching the Enterprise leaving drydock on a loop.

 

Seriously people, go spend the $7 and get Paramount+ for a month. Vote for this with your $$$ (I'm not sure if this is available outside of the USA yet).

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

8 minutes ago, Stu said:

Yeah, that's not a mistake it's on purpose, whether you like it or not.   The split diopter shots in TMP have been polarizing for decades.

Yeah. There's a shot in the TV cut (and I'm pretty sure it's in the DE) of a character on the bridge saying "...and what about Captain Decker? He's been with this ship every minute of her refitting".

[1977 1,743]

No redone Klingon ship mattes = no sale

[Tallguy 3,385]

Just now, JTWfan77 said:

No redone Klingon ship mattes = no sale

 

Uh huh. I will say again: If you even mildly dislike this movie this is worth your time and money.

 

Speaking of which: https://www.fathomevents.com/events/Star-Trek-TMP-Directors-Cut

[Disco Stu 15,495]

You don't even have to spend 7 bucks.  You can start a Paramount+ trial, watch the movie, and cancel without spending a dime.  I really don't see why anyone interested in these technical decisions would not just do this?

[Jay 37,351]

Well, that's a fairly USA-centric viewpoint, since Paramount+ isn't available in every country

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I don't know JTWfan77's nationality so sure, I'll add that caveat.  If the option is available, there's no reason to not do it when it's free.

[Tallguy 3,385]

12 minutes ago, Jay said:

Well, that's a fairly USA-centric viewpoint, since Paramount+ isn't available in every country

 

Fair.

 

11 minutes ago, Stu said:

I don't know JTWfan77's nationality so sure, I'll add that caveat.  If the option is available, there's no reason to not do it when it's free.

 

I'm going to sound like I'm drinking the Kool-Aid (and gargling and bathing in it) but I'm going to pay for the month just to show Paramount that this makes money.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

3 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

I'm going to sound like I'm drinking the Kool-Aid (and gargling and bathing in it) but I'm going to pay for the month just to show Paramount that this makes money.

 

No no, that's a totally valid reasoning!  I just meant, if one has all these curiosities about the technical decisions made and there's potentially an option that's literally free, I don't see why one wouldn't take it.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

I'll wait for the DVD.

[rough cut 1,714]

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

Yea! 

[karelm 2,913]

What about my point of "Also, there was some bizarre masking (very noticeable in the "will you please...sit down" sequence) anytime the characters walked past the stars in the window?  It was surprising how poor that looked.  Way better in the 2001 version."  I don't get how twenty years ago they outdid this update? @Tallguy since you can post clips of the 2022 version, can you post a comparison between the two scenes?  It might not be that noticeable on a single frame by the video sequence was...wow that looked dated...but for the 2022 version!!

[Tallguy 3,385]

I can post later tonight. But they're completely different shots. I mean, they're all based on the same live action. But in 1979 it was a room with a viewer. In 2001 they added a view of one of the warp engines out the window (not much additional masking). In this version they went full out with rotoscoping to try and put the scene in the place it was supposed to take place, the Officer's Lounge.

 

I know that there were drawings of this set but I don't know that there was ever any intent to actually try to put the scene there. The results here were... Less than good. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

5 hours ago, Tallguy said:

...they're all based on the same love action. 

"... love action"???!!!  

 

Seriously, tho', have they gotten rid of that awful CGI nacelle?

[1977 1,743]

20 hours ago, Stu said:

I don't know JTWfan77's nationality so sure, I'll add that caveat.  If the option is available, there's no reason to not do it when it's free.

 

The option ain't available in my territory. I'll probably pick up the BD when it drops in price.

11 hours ago, karelm said:

What about my point of "Also, there was some bizarre masking (very noticeable in the "will you please...sit down" sequence) anytime the characters walked past the stars in the window?  It was surprising how poor that looked.  Way better in the 2001 version."  I don't get how twenty years ago they outdid this update? @Tallguy since you can post clips of the 2022 version, can you post a comparison between the two scenes?  It might not be that noticeable on a single frame by the video sequence was...wow that looked dated...but for the 2022 version!!

 

I feel this falls into the revisionist category of changes. The scene was shot on a set and not on a huge bluescreen. Why the decision to alter this? Even though it may have been considered at some point, it obviously never got past the conceptual stage.

[Tallguy 3,385]

8 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

"... love action"???!!!  

 

Seriously, tho', have they gotten rid of that awful CGI nacelle?

 

Fixed. And yes, they got rid of "that" awful nacelle.

 

 

6 hours ago, JTWfan77 said:

 

The option ain't available in my territory. I'll probably pick up the BD when it drops in price.

 

I feel this falls into the revisionist category of changes. The scene was shot on a set and not on a huge bluescreen. Why the decision to alter this? Even though it may have been considered at some point, it obviously never got past the conceptual stage.

 

Yeah. Again, if they had been able to pull it off it would have been a crowning achievement. It was obviously something that they wanted to do when they were filming in 1979. I should dig up where it got, beyond the drawings. At what point in the production did they say "Build a wall, put fabric over some crates, film the damn scene"?

 

I think they know this new scene didn't work out. It hasn't been any of the press. I heard a podcast with the visual effects supervisor, Daren Dochterman, and it wasn't even brought up, pro or con. If this had been successful (or even considered successful) I think this would have been the first shot in the trailer.

[Delorean90 42]

Watched it last night, having only seen the theatrical version prior (and parts of the longer TV cut over 20 years ago--"We all create God in our own image" has always been missing in my memory haha), and I thought it was pretty fantastic. The colors are fantastic. The sound mix is incredible. I'm the kind of guy that doesn't mind watching the complete Cloud/Vejur Flyover/Force Field sequence at all, I can bask, but the cuts made here are such that you still get a sense of a journey without it dragging.

 

I will say that I last watched the theatrical a couple years ago, and having since seen the video with the Joe Kraemer mockup of Goldsmith's original "Body Meld" cue, I think watching this, with the Ilia's Theme Overture over a starfield, really firmed up my conviction that Goldsmith had it right the first time. It really works to bring the whole journey together with a big emotional punch. It's funny, because watching with the final "The Meld" cue now makes it feel like something that would have been in the initial slate of cues that Wise rejected because, "Where's the theme?" It's beautiful and transcendent, but not as specific.

[karelm 2,913]

10 hours ago, Tallguy said:

 

Fixed. And yes, they got rid of "that" awful nacelle.

 

 

 

Yeah. Again, if they had been able to pull it off it would have been a crowning achievement. It was obviously something that they wanted to do when they were filming in 1979. I should dig up where it got, beyond the drawings. At what point in the production did they say "Build a wall, put fabric over some crates, film the damn scene"?

 

I think they know this new scene didn't work out. It hasn't been any of the press. I heard a podcast with the visual effects supervisor, Daren Dochterman, and it wasn't even brought up, pro or con. If this had been successful (or even considered successful) I think this would have been the first shot in the trailer.

Stuff like this makes me think this wasn't a labor of love but a cash grab.  A bit like the very mediocre Star Wars remaster.  Which implies this is not the definitive edition but later someone else who actually loves this stuff will release a revision.

[Tallguy 3,385]

33 minutes ago, karelm said:

Stuff like this makes me think this wasn't a labor of love but a cash grab.  A bit like the very mediocre Star Wars remaster.  Which implies this is not the definitive edition but later someone else who actually loves this stuff will release a revision.

 

I'm sorry, but you're obviously not familiar with the history of this production. The three guiding individuals (Matessino, Dochterman, and Fein) have been talking about this last step for 20 years.

 

If this was just a cash grab this shot wouldn't have been attempted. Whatever the result, it's because that this was a labor of love that this kind of thing (and adding the "missing" travel pod to the office complex for continuity) got added.

 

I wish it had been done better. But it was still done on a schedule and on a budget, something that any fan attempt will never have to contend with.

 

(Although obviously I wish that the new visuals were as divine as the sound!)

 

BTW, I'm planning on going through the sound mix and highlight the simple differences between this and the theatrical and the previous Director's Edition. I just have stereo. No fancy shmancy 5.1 or Atmos or whatever the cool kids have these days.

[rough cut 1,714]

I also get the feeling this was made with heart. But let’s be honest, it wouldn’t have been made unless there was a payoff in it. But it seems that it had people who loved the project have been pushing for it, without whom a remaster would never have been greenlit.

 

Since I am not a Trekkie, and don’t know the original nor the DC cut by heart, what is the nacelle they got rid of in the previously mentioned shot?

[Naïve Old Fart 9,515]

9 minutes ago, rough cut said:

...what is the nacelle they got rid of in the previously mentioned shot?

Basically, it's where they keep the warp engines. On the main body of a starship, there are two sticky-out bits. On top of those, are long, flat bits. They are the nacelles.

In the DE of TMP, a CGI nacelle was added to certain shots in which Kirk, McCoy, and Spock discuss Spock's return to the Enterprise.

 

 

5 hours ago, Tallguy said:

...I'm planning on going through the sound mix and highlight the simple differences between this and the theatrical and the previous Director's Edition.

I shall look forward to that.

 

[Tallguy 3,385]

7 hours ago, rough cut said:

I also get the feeling this was made with heart. But let’s be honest, it wouldn’t have been made unless there was a payoff in it. But it seems that it had people who loved the project have been pushing for it, without whom a remaster would never have been greenlit.

 

Since I am not a Trekkie, and don’t know the original nor the DC cut by heart, what is the nacelle they got rid of in the previously mentioned shot?

 

Oh sure, this is meant to be a profitable project. And it's because Paramount+ needs content and a draw for Star Trek fans to subscribe that the stars aligned for this production.

 

I need to go read up on the 1979 history of this shot. It's not just fan lore that there is an officer's lounge that is behind the windows you can see under the bridge at the back of the ship. There is a shot when Spock's shuttle docks where the camera is looking out of those windows and you can briefly see this room. There were drawings and schematics made by the artists working on the film of what the scene with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy if the scene was set in this room.

 

 

Due to time and budget (yes, this movie had one) the scene was completed on probably the simplest set in the movie. The chairs are literally wooden boxes covered in fabric with a viewscreen and starfield.

 

(Ah, here we go. Found this: https://forgottentrek.com/the-motion-picture/designing-the-motion-pictures-officers-lounge/)

 

In the original 2001 Director's Edition it was decided to give this room at least a taste of what was intended: That this was a place on the ship. So they figured out a line of sight out of a window on the saucer and put in a view of the warp engine to show this. Unfortunately they did NOT re-do the starfield which is now out of alignment from where we're supposed to be looking.

 

Now (as detailed above) they've decided to attempt the original location by rotoscoping out the actors and acting as if it were shot on a blue screen with a model used as a background. Nice idea, poor result.

 

What's baffling is that Dochterman has been practicing for this shot for 20 years! And he's posted far better versions on his own!

 

 

You know, I love this new version so much. It's really saddening that this brief scene sticks out like a sore thumb.

[Jurassic Shark 12,065]

31 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

The chairs are literally wooden boxes covered in fabric with a viewscreen and starfield.

 

This is typical Star Trek to me.

[Andy 4,122]

Oh do I LOVE the purple light on the nacelles in that fanmade example.  Gorgeous. 

[Marian Schedenig 8,192]

3 hours ago, Tallguy said:

And it's because Paramount+ needs content and a draw for Star Trek fans to subscribe that the stars aligned for this production.

 

If they need content, they should HD-remaster DS9!