The Doomsday Machine Revealed

Discussion in 'Star Trek - The Original & Animated Series' started by CrazyMatt, Aug 18, 2013.

  1. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    I got my first Enterprise model in 1971 and that's the decal sheet it had.
     
  2. Rulius

    Rulius Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Location:
    N.E. Ga.
    I also wonder why they didn't damaged the bridge module thats supposed to be uninhabitable.
     
  3. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    Yeah, I noted that too, but I suppose you could rationalize the damage wasn't obvious.
     
  4. CrazyMatt

    CrazyMatt Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Trying to focus....
    Like so many other things in life, it all came down to money. Although Star Trek was actually produced on a substantial budget for the time--each episode cost more than almost any other contemporary series--the cost of production left little money for important items.

    I remember reading somewhere that one of the production staff--perhaps even GR--had the idea originally to 'damage' the three-foot Enterprise model and use that as the Constellation. They dropped the idea due to... you got it, the cost to do the damage and then undo afterwards.

    Faced with these budget limitations, Matt Jeffries, having already worked with AMT to license the Enterprise model, apparently thought he could get away with using one as another Starship in TDM. Again, if the model had been more extensively detailed, and filmed from a more advisable distance, maybe it would have not been so noticeable that it was the same toy model anyone could buy.

    In fact, he also went on to use another one in "The Trouble With Tribbles" as well. The second time around, however, it was filmed at a greater distance and looked much more realistic.

    I wonder if the model was prepared before the script was finalized. Note also the rest of Spock's line: "The entire bridge is damaged and uninhabitable. The rest of the ship seems able to sustain life."

    'Able to sustain life?' What about the three areas in the saucer section that have big gauges out of the hull? What about the two warp drive pods with the exploded bussard collectors and the starboard nacelle missing the latter half?
     
  5. Myko

    Myko Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    I think the Constellation looks a little better in the new effects. The machine looks okay, but not as good as the original. But the thing that ruins it is the lighting and the composition of the shots. The strafing run bit is especially atrocious.

    I have the stance on TOS-R that if I have to choose between poor original effects and poor new effects the originals win by offering historical context. It is interesting to see what they could do back in the sixties. Watching bad CGI from ~2010 is hardly exciting.
     
  6. scotpens

    scotpens Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Toy? TOY???

    It's not a toy, it's a MODEL! Toys are for kiddie-winkies! :)

    In the original FX shots, damage to the saucer appears to be confined to three "bites" out of the rim. We can assume that airtight bulkhead doors would have closed automatically to seal off the damaged areas.

    [​IMG]

    As for the warp nacelles, aren't they normally uninhabited and accessed only for maintenance?
     
  7. feek61

    feek61 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Location:
    The Sunshine State
    I always thought the AMT "Constellation" look pretty good; at least the shot of the top of the saucer as shown above.
     
  8. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    The worst shot is from aft as it approaches the planet killer. There it's really obvious.
     
  9. CrazyMatt

    CrazyMatt Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Trying to focus....
    The shot where the model "jiggles" may be the worst fx of the three year run. The model is also briefly overlit from behind, which only helps reinforce the impression that it's woefully under-detailed.

    [​IMG]

    Interestingly, in no shot from behind do we see the bottom half of the saucer. It's been speculated that the lighting wasn't quite bright enough to see it clearly (the point made above doesn't jive with that theory), or that the bottom was removed to accommodate a mounting pole.

    [​IMG]


    It's especially noticeable in this shot... in fact, I looks like the piece with the impulse engines has fallen off!

    [​IMG]
     
  10. CrazyMatt

    CrazyMatt Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Trying to focus....
    Another bad fx shot... the explosive matter/gas was filmed at way too slow a speed...

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Redfern

    Redfern Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    [​IMG]

    Originally posted for "shiggles" in a thread discussing Frank Herbert's "Dune".

    (At least they didn't lynch me.) :lol:

    Sincerely,

    Bill

    Credits: TallMan's Blender Enterprise and a freebie sandworm from RunTime DNA
     
  12. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    ^^ I don't care for that one at all.

    But then I'm not much of a Dune fan.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2013
  13. feek61

    feek61 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Location:
    The Sunshine State
    I always liked that effect!
     
  14. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    I've always liked the spewing flame at the end, but I didn't care for the explosion effect afterward.
     
  15. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    Any faster and it would destroy the scale.

    And it beats the barfing up blue Kool-Aid effect in the remaster.
     
  16. CrazyMatt

    CrazyMatt Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Trying to focus....
    The idea behind the effect is fine... but to truly give the illusion of the great size of the planet killer, the gasses should have "burped out" (horrible term, I know) much slower. Hence the suggestion that they should have shot the effect at a higher speed; when played slower, it would have looked much better.
     
  17. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    What I like about that scene is it speaks to the implied strength of the neutronium hull. The stuff is so strong the robot still didn't blow apart, but everything went out the funnel.

    Man, I wouldn't want to have been in line with that flame of debris.
     
  18. feek61

    feek61 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Location:
    The Sunshine State
    I always liked that thought of it's strength as well
     
  19. publiusr

    publiusr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    I also liked that there was no visible engine nozzles. It looks cthonian