- Joined
- Sep 25, 2019
The flaws are clearly visible, there's no arguing with that, but the 2009 CGI also has substantial flaws due to its age. CGI still struggles with things like fire, light reflecting white off of surfaces (this one in particular catches my eye because you can clearly see that this isn't how it works in real life), and fluid effects, and ten years ago it struggled with those things quite a bit worse. Remastered Star Trek looks like someone's Call of Duty Modern Warfare mod to my eyes, it just takes me out of the experience. At least the cheap and dated effects feel like they were made in the 1960s when the rest of the show was. The CGI effects look like they were made in, well, 2009.You may complain about the colors, but you can't tell me that budgetary constraints making certain ships vague blobs of light or the shuttlecraft being larger than a starship in "The Doomsday Machine" weren't noticed even back then.
The Remastered Star Wars movies have this same issue, where 1990s and early 2000s CGI has aged like milk. Though at least in that circumstance the original model work still looked pretty good and could mostly be cleaned up for its HD release.
I suppose I'm a bit more hostile about it because I still remember the 2010-2013 period or so where the only way to see the show was with the new effects, to the point where I had to find a European set of the show to get the old effects. Still though if you go to watch the show on Netflix and such you're stuck with the new effects, and I've talked to people just getting into the show who are flat out unaware of the orignals.Having said that, I think they did it the right way in the Blu Ray DVD's by giving people a choice. I have nothing against the old effects, as I said they are in my blood. But I think the updates were done with care and in my opinion add something. They are not sacrilege to me at all.