Star Trek: Renegades

[Bry_Sinclair]

I couldn't care less that they were criminals. The bigger crime in the film/pilot/episode is that they weren't compelling characters.

I've been looking on the Renegades website and a few wikis to see if there is anything that gives some background to the characters, but there just isn't--which is a shame.

Fan films will never be able to pull off the slick looks and special effects of full-budget TV Trek, so more focus on the characters and their relationships is really where they should draw strength, which seems to be in short supply with Renegades (I found anyway).

I can understand wanting to keep things under wraps during production, but releasing character bios (or even short blurbs) now would've been good--even just to get what some of the characters' full names are.

 

[USS Intrepid]

I found Corin Nemec as Captain Alvarez of the USS Archer to be the most interesting character in the movie. The guy has charisma. A 5 year mission set onboard that USS Archer would be cool, and I think more Trek fans would be receptive to that.

I thought he was pretty good too. I bought him as a Starship Captain, and wouldn't mind seeming him headline a show.

 

[northstar]

Just no. Enterprise blows "Prelude..." out of the water.

It doesn't mean "Prelude..." is bad, just that it isn't in the same league. It isn't even close.

Yup.

Just look at Graham's makeup, for example.

Lol - exactly the same people that did Gary Grahams makeup on Enterprise did it on Prelude...

And back to Renegades - I too think Nemecs character was one of the more interesting ones. The little we see of him, but Nemec did a great job out of that.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I thought he was pretty good too. I bought him as a Starship Captain, and wouldn't mind seeming him headline a show.

His persistence, odd as it may be, was unexpected and also one of the nice moments of the film. I don't want to be faced with that guy, even if he's one of the good guys.

 

[USS Intrepid]

I thought he was pretty good too. I bought him as a Starship Captain, and wouldn't mind seeming him headline a show.

His persistence, odd as it may be, was unexpected and also one of the nice moments of the film. I don't want to be faced with that guy, even if he's one of the good guys.

Yeah he was a pretty interesting character. He could have come off as a dick, but the actor made him feel pretty likeable and relatable.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Lol - exactly the same people that did Gary Grahams makeup on Enterprise did it on Prelude...

And?

 

[Danlav05]

One of the most interesting things about this project to me is seeing the old faces; Tuvok and Chekov's roles worked really good; Zimmerman was a surprise and clearly Icheb had a hard time since arriving in the Alpha Quadrant.

They want more vets back in future eps - hopefullly there will be stories suitable to do characters justice plus it won't just be Voyager people as the pilot mostly is!

A Captain would be a huge catch - Janeway might be the most likely but Sisko or Picard would be good. They have to get Tom or Will Riker as Frakes has done ALL the spinoffs Harry would be nice; Martok - If Worf doesn't get his spinoff then Dorn might do it; LaForge, Troi would be good; Quark? Kira might go rogue again?

There are so many possibilities - at least this is a platform where the Prime Universe lives (other than Online and the novels)

 

[BigJake]

I found Corin Nemec as Captain Alvarez of the USS Archer to be the most interesting character in the movie. The guy has charisma. A 5 year mission set onboard that USS Archer would be cool, and I think more Trek fans would be receptive to that.

I thought he was pretty good too. I bought him as a Starship Captain, and wouldn't mind seeming him headline a show.

Somebody's just gotta wake the guy at the nav station up. Actually pretty much everybody on the Archer put in nice work, but that one guy just looked like he was whacked on painkillers or something the day of the shoot.

 

[wamdue]

to be fair things like her being Khans daughter, is the kind of thing would will come into play more, in a full run series.

Why have her even be Khan's daughter? To use the name?

Would be more interesting if some people called her that because she was like Bashir and someone had done some genetic engineering on her and we got to learn something like that.

I think (and again) it hints a better plot arc than if she was like Bashir. Khan is not just a name for fans, he is someone in the Trek universe, and that big name, the fact she his daughter (however that happened) means something in the universe, and its something she cant control. It may well be why she is smart, why she can survive, but the fact its a known name of Khan bring a downside, as well as the up.

 

[Danlav05]

A 5 year mission set onboard that USS Archer would be cool, and I think more Trek fans would be receptive to that.

I agree - I enjoyed Renegades as a movie but I think a Starfleet movie is more appealing; even though we are now getting a continuation I am keen to follow.

 

[Phantom]

I personally wouldn't call it "broadcast quality" by today's standards, but that's because we're living in a golden age of ultra-high budget television characterized by stuff like Game of Thrones and House of Cards. I'd put something like Prelude alongside most nineties televised sci-fi, though, quite easily. Even alongside more recent SyFy stuff like Dark Matter.

It's as good as any ep of Enterprise, and that was (obviously) broadcast quality.

Just no. Enterprise blows "Prelude..." out of the water.

It doesn't mean "Prelude..." is bad, just that it isn't in the same league. It isn't even close.

If you put a still of similar type (FX for FX, set extension for set extension, etc) from both side by side in a blind test, 99.a bunch of 9s percent of people would not be able to say which came from which.

Lol - exactly the same people that did Gary Grahams makeup on Enterprise did it on Prelude...

And?

If you can't see the absurdity of claiming that the makeup artist on Axanar, being the same person who did the makeup on Enterprise, did an inferior job to himself, you need a reality calibration check.

Look, I know that some people here just have a mad-on against the Axanar team (for reasons I'm still a bit fuzzy on), but be objective.

 

[CorporalClegg]

If you can't see the absurdity of claiming that the makeup artist on Axanar, being the same person who did the makeup on Enterprise, did an inferior job to himself, you need a reality calibration check.

Because 100% of humans are capable of 100% of their potential 100% of the time.

Srsly?

 

[BillJ]

If you can't see the absurdity of claiming that the makeup artist on Axanar, being the same person who did the makeup on Enterprise, did an inferior job to himself, you need a reality calibration check.

Because 100% of humans are capable of 100% of their potential 100% of the time.

Srsly?

Depends, did he have the same resources on that three minute vignette that he had on Enterprise?

 

[Amaris]

If you can't see the absurdity of claiming that the makeup artist on Axanar, being the same person who did the makeup on Enterprise, did an inferior job to himself, you need a reality calibration check.

Because 100% of humans are capable of 100% of their potential 100% of the time.

Srsly?

Depends, did he have the same resources on that three minute vignette that he had on Enterprise?

This. There's a difference between having a TV show budget with the full resources of the studio, and a shoestring budget with whatever resources can be scrounged together. Ability can only go so far before the price starts to climb. Essentially, it comes down to this (metaphorical) conversation:

"What can you do?"
"I can create a wholly alien creature that is authentic, and realistic."
"How much?"
"Oh, about $10,000."
"...um, what can you do on $100?"
"Much, much less."
"We'll go for that, then."

 

[Phantom]

Except he wasn't creating a creature. He was doing a pair of ears and some makeup. And he did just fine. Soval looked like Soval. The other vulcan looks just as good.

 

[Tosk]

A 5 year mission set onboard that USS Archer would be cool, and I think more Trek fans would be receptive to that.

Just so long as they replace that badly painted "stool" section of his chair. It looks like the chair was made too tall for him, so they had to cobble together a little wedge of floor for him to put his feet on.

 

[BillJ]

Except he wasn't creating a creature. He was doing a pair of ears and some makeup. And he did just fine. Soval looked like Soval. The other vulcan looks just as good.

Klingon makeup isn't cheap, I imagine.

 

[lurok]

"What can you do?"
"I can create a wholly alien creature that is authentic, and realistic."
"How much?"
"Oh, about $10,000."
"...um, what can you do on $100?"
"Much, much less."
"We'll go for that, then."

So true . Reminds me of another great low budget maxim: "Do you want it good? Or do you want it now?"

 

[Trekkin]

How you shoot it can affect it as well. A great director can light/shoot from certain angles that will hide any flaws in the make up or practical affects. It could be the exact same makeup, yet still look different.

You look behind the scenes shots of creatures from something like The Thing and whilst they're still good, they look a lot more 'fake' than what they looked like on screen because Carpenter went the extra mile to work out how to make it look as good as possible. It took a lot of time to set up and work out, and required a lot of takes.

I'm not saying the director of Prelude lacked the ability, but he wouldn't have has the time and resources to fine tune to the extent that even ENT usually would.

 

[Amaris]

Except he wasn't creating a creature. He was doing a pair of ears and some makeup. And he did just fine. Soval looked like Soval. The other vulcan looks just as good.

That doesn't mean budget doesn't make a difference, no matter how talented the artist.

"What can you do?"
"I can create a wholly alien creature that is authentic, and realistic."
"How much?"
"Oh, about $10,000."
"...um, what can you do on $100?"
"Much, much less."
"We'll go for that, then."

So true . Reminds me of another great low budget maxim: "Do you want it good? Or do you want it now?"

Exactly. No matter how good you are, budget makes a world of difference.

How you shoot it can affect it as well. A great director can light/shoot from certain angles that will hide any flaws in the make up or practical affects. It could be the exact same makeup, yet still look different.

You look behind the scenes shots of creatures from something like The Thing and whilst they're still good, they look a lot more 'fake' than what they looked like on screen because Carpenter went the extra mile to work out how to make it look as good as possible. It took a lot of time to set up and work out, and required a lot of takes.

I'm not saying the director of Prelude lacked the ability, but he wouldn't have has the time and resources to fine tune to the extent that even ENT usually would.

Edit: I thought we were talking about Renegades. Regarding Prelude, the shots looked pretty good to me, even if the green screen was obvious.