Product Details

• Actors: William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy
• Format: AC-3, Color, Dolby, Dubbed, Original recording remastered, Restored, Subtitled, Widescreen
• Language: English
• Subtitles: English, French, Portuguese, Spanish
• Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. Read more about DVD formats.)
  
• Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Rated: PG (Parental Guidance Suggested)
• Studio: Paramount
• DVD Release Date: September 22, 2009
• Run Time: 112 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 3.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (21 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B002I9Z8B2
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #14,208 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)

Editorial Reviews

STAR TREK II:WRATH OF KHAN - Blu-Ray Movie

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

36 of 39 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Well, I think it looks good..., December 5, 2009

By 

Little Roy Blue (Staten Island, NY) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (Restored) [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)

I'm relatively new to the whole Blu-ray thing; indeed, I resisted buying a Blu-ray player for a long time because I imagined that older movies (e.g., Wrath of Khan) would look grainy and dated in this format, which mercilessly exposes the flaws in older film prints.

So I was pleasantly surprised when "Wrath of Khan" ended up looking, to me, rather good on Blu-ray. It's by no means a perfect print; for example, there's usually some fuzz (or whatever the technical term is) visible on scenes with dark lighting, such as when the Enterprise bridge goes to red alert. But by and large, this print is much nicer than the previous DVD versions.

I compared some DVD scenes to Blu-ray ones to determine whether the upgrade was worth it, and I think it was. Check out the scene when Spock gives Kirk his birthday present; on Blu-ray, you can see all the fine details on that giant globe they're standing next to, whereas on the DVD print it just looks like some glass blob. Similarly, the nebula scenes look much clearer on the Blu-ray.

Some fans seem annoyed that "digital noise reduction" has been applied to the Star Trek movies. Again, I'm no technical expert, but I believe this means that the artifacting/fuzz/whatever-you-call-it has been digitally "painted out" to give the film a cleaner look. This has led some fans to complain that the ST films now look artificially painted over, or waxy, or whatever. I sympathize with this complaint, but I think there's a tough choice to be made here; either studios can digitally "paint out" flaws, resulting in a slightly artificial look, or they can leave the flaws in, resulting in a distracting grainy look. Based on my Blu-ray experiences so far, I favor the noise reduction; for example, the Star Trek Blu-rays look much nicer to me than Fargo, which looks like it was shot through a layer of gauze.

The only real disappointment is that "Wrath of Khan" is only available in its theatrical cut, not the (slightly) better extended cut. It's a shame that Paramount doesn't give you a choice between the two versions; for "Khan," I'd pick the extended cut, and for "Undiscovered Country" I'd go with the theatrical one, but so far Paramount has not released versions that offer the option of switching.

But still, I think "Khan" looks so much nicer as a Blu-ray that I'd rather watch this copy than the special edition DVD. I don't even have a problem with the much-loathed "Delta shield" menu, which may be basic, but has a certain elegance to it...

10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Best looking & sounding version of this movie, February 27, 2010

By 

Dana - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (Restored) [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)

I love Wrath of Khan, it is my favorite Star Trek movie. This was the first movie I ever saw alone in the theater (my parents wanted to see Firefox instead), so there is a certain nostalgia for me when watching. Anyway, this is the best looking version of this movie I have seen. About 2 weeks before I bought this it was on HDNET movies and there is a night and day difference in the quality of the blu-ray. Picture is much sharper, colors are brighter, sound is crystal clear, overall I am very happy with this purchase. Considering the age of the movie I am amazed at how great it looks. I know some people were upset about this not being the extended cut with the extra 4 minutes, but in my opinion those 4 minutes don't really matter much (though I don't know why they were left out?). I suppose you can wait for the eventual release of the extended super duper restored, remastered, re-filmed with new actors edition, but I don't see the point. If you love Star Trek or just love sci-fi movies this is a movie to add to the collection.

15 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Love the Movie ... Deeply Disappointed with the Blu-ray (UPDATED), February 16, 2010

By 

Darkseid64 (Tampa, FL USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (Restored) [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)

I've loved this movie since seeing it in theaters as a teenager. Certainly one of my top ten favorites. I was genuinely excited to finally be able to buy this on blu-ray. Sadly, I was tragically disappointed when I finally saw it. The grain is abysmal. I don't understand how anyone can say this picture is great. I understand that the movie was made in the early 80s, but Bladerunner doesn't look nearly as bad. Not nearly.

I can only assume that the folks raving about the great picture on this disc are actually studio plants sent here to deceive people into buying this, or they're undiscerning viewers watching on some portable hand-held blu-ray player or a similar substandard playback device. Star Trek 2009 has a great picture. The Dark Knight has a great picture. Bladerunner has a good picture. The picture on this disc is poor in comparison.

If you love the Wrath of Khan, buy the movie. Despite my disappointment, I don't REGRET buying it as it is better looking (more detailed) than the DVD. But if you have a quality 1080P monitor, then you should temper your expectations, as this won't compare favorably to any of the truly high quality blu-ray releases out there. Hopefully, Paramount will give us a better, cleaner high-def transfer in the future.

UPDATE: Alright, I screwed up. I finally got a chance to return home for a three week vacation from my current overseas deployment. My previous review was based on viewing this blu-ray on my computer with a 30" (2560x1600) monitor. When I got home, I decided to give it a second chance on my plasma HDTV (768p) and PS3. The picture was beautiful, practically flawless. None of that ugly video noise I saw on my computer screen was visible here. If I hadn't seen it myself, I wouldn't have believed that there would be such a huge difference in picture quality between two setups. I can only assume that my computer was exposing shortcomings in the transfer that my PS3 and lower resolution HDTV are not capable of revealing. In any event, I can certainly see now why so many have been enthusiastic about this disc, and I apologize for accusing them of being plants. On the right theater setup, this disc looks sharp, colorful, and totally satisfying.