• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Killjoys Season 1: Discussion and Spoilers

Christopher said:
ATimson said:
But... why oh why the lens flares? :wah:
Click to expand...
I think I read or heard once that filmmakers originally tried to avoid lens flares or artifacts that would give away the presence of the camera, but around the '60s or '70s, the new generation of directors and DPs began embracing such artifacts as artistic devices in their own right, perhaps to give a sort of verite texture.
Click to expand...
I don't see how you get truth by applying a layer of artifice. :p To me, they're the result of bugs, not features to be embraced.

It the same reason I don't understand some peoples' obsession with film grain and judder. To me, they're defects; I welcome cinema's more pristine digital future.

(Pristine as shot, that is. I know a number of titles have been damaged on Blu-ray release by the application of digital noise reduction; I think that's counter-productive!)
 
ATimson said:
But... why oh why the lens flares? :wah:
Click to expand...

I hate (and allow me to emphasize hate) lens flares very much in general. But what bothers me about the use of lens flares in Killjoys is they don't look natural. While the overused and rather obnoxious use of lens flare is one of my top hated things about the Abrams Trek movies, at least there they are actually natural. The Killjoys lens flares look like they were digitally added in post production. So they are literally adding lens flares to the show because someone at the top thinks they are cool.
 
I must be lens-flare blind. I had no idea what was being talked about when people first started complaining about the "lens flares" in the 2009 Trek movie. And I watched all of KILLJOYS last night without even noticing a single lens flare; I was too busy paying attention to the story and characters. I'll take people's word for it that there were some lens flares along that way, but they couldn't have been too jarring if they didn't even register for me.

Is this like noticing the punctuation in a book? "I wanted to enjoy that novel, but all those semi-colons were too damn distracting!" :)
 
Last edited:
It was entertaining enough.

That F**KING music needs to go though. Its just awful.
 
Greg Cox said:
I must be lens-flare blind. I had no idea what was being talked about when people first started complaining about the "lens flares" in the 2009 Trek movie. And I watched all of KILLJOYS last night without even noticing a single lens flare; I was too busy paying attention to the story and characters. I'll take people's word for it that there were some lens flares along that way, but they couldn't have been too jarring if they didn't even register for me.

Is this like noticing the punctuation in a book? "I wanted to enjoy that novel, but all those semi-colons were too damn distracting!" :)
Click to expand...

haha I never noticed lens flare until it was a big thing here after 2009. I can see it now, but I still don't notice new lensflare, didn't see it in Killjoys.
 
Christopher said:
I didn't notice lens flares either.
Click to expand...
For most of the show I didn't either. This was the shot that set me off:
Screen%20Shot%202015-06-22%20at%2012.24.17%20AM_zpsxgyala8r.png
 
Stuff.

Syfy seems to be learning something about Marvel Films about shared universes. The US network’s newest show, Alphas , may have a slightly harder edge than stablemates Eureka and Warehouse 13, but when ex-Bionic Woman Lindsay Wagner turns up as Dr Vanessa Calder in Alpha ’s sixth episode, she will have officially linked all three shows together, opening up no end of crossover opportunities.
Click to expand...
 
Christopher said:
ATimson said:
But... why oh why the lens flares? :wah:
Click to expand...

They've been part of the cinematographers' toolbox for decades. I don't see any reason to expect filmmakers to stop using them. (I think I read or heard once that filmmakers originally tried to avoid lens flares or artifacts that would give away the presence of the camera, but around the '60s or '70s, the new generation of directors and DPs began embracing such artifacts as artistic devices in their own right, perhaps to give a sort of verite texture. Or maybe just because they knew that audiences were aware of the artificiality of film, so they decided to use it instead of trying to hide it.)
Click to expand...

I'll add to that the more recent trend of CGI blood 'splashing on the lens'. Still not sure how I feel about that.
 
I liked it, but as has been mentioned before the set design is boring as hell, I can go to an office building down the street and see a a more exciting environment. The characters have potential though.
 
First ep was alright, but not special. Dark Matter's first ep was a better hook for the respective series. Will stay tuned, though.
 
TV Guide description for tonight's episode, The Sugar Point Run:
A hostage exchange with a vengeful warlord turns deadly when the Killjoys are stranded in a restricted, bombed-out city overrun with dangerous gangs and scavengers.
 
I didn't like this episode as much as the first. It was a lot more casual about violence and killing. And there's far too much 2010s slang in the dialogue of this show set in the future, not to mention all the ordinary Earthly-looking locations and vehicles. Plus the whole "Dutch's secret assassin past" arc isn't doing much for me. And the music is still terrible.

Hannah John-Kamen is still staggeringly beautiful, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top