I made my own mistakes in this thread, but in addition to that, this is now becoming yet another war about the JJ-Prise... I think the thread ought be closed, but that's just me.
2011 SotL Calendar
- Thread starter EmperorKalan
- Start date
Yeesh! It isn't about being mired in the past. It's about having an opinion that (OMG!) doesn't gel with everyone else's. My dislike of the JJprise isn't because it's new, but because it's fucking ugly.
When ever people complain about the new Enterprise, it reminds me of the people who complain that Batman in the new movies should wear the Grey Batman suit worn by Adam West. They are so mired in the past that they can't accept change.
But it's an old story around here: if you don't automatically embrace the newest thing TPTB throw you then you're out of step, biased, mired in the past or just a hater or whatever.
Yeesh! It isn't about being mired in the past. It's about having an opinion that (OMG!) doesn't gel with everyone else's. My dislike of the JJprise isn't because it's new, but because it's fucking ugly.
When ever people complain about the new Enterprise, it reminds me of the people who complain that Batman in the new movies should wear the Grey Batman suit worn by Adam West. They are so mired in the past that they can't accept change.
But it's an old story around here: if you don't automatically embrace the newest thing TPTB throw you then you're out of step, biased, mired in the past or just a hater or whatever.
Yep, and if you hate it, then you need to go every thread to spout out your hate.
I agree with JarodRussell, about rather than recreating the same scenes, but go with others or make up new ones. I enjoy seeing some fan-created designs. I, personally, like the Oberth tug and the USS Spirit.
I'm gonna make a lot of people happy one day when I've had enough of the attitude from some around here and never return. You don't like something and dare say it and it the same old shit time and time and time and time again...
Bad enough I can't even participate in a discussion in the TOS forum without ENT or whatever being used to retcon something in TOS. People are saying things there I dislike all the time and I rarely utter a peep about it.
Aw, crap. There's no finger emoticon.
Oh, jeeze, here we go AGAIN...
(Not that I have anything against your amazing artwork, but the way my eyes bug out every time I see the first reveal of your latest project really hurts!)
That's BS, whenever there is a discussion about anything related to STXI, you have to come in and say you hate it. If you don't like it fine, ignore it, and move on. Comment about the non-STXI part.
Anyways, I hate it that the SOTL calendar is not carried at my BN only some Calendar Store that is seasonal around the holidays.
Okay, that comment with *your* avatar =
!
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Well, the Kelvin follows the 'Enterprise' style somewhat.
But neither the Enterprise nor the Kelvin match up very well with the rest of Trek or TOS in particular (for the same reason TMP doesn't either).
But, come on, Tobias Richter created not only two very well made models but two beautifully lit and composed renders/images and animations.
Come, come, Mr. Scott. Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant.
Those are awesome.
Man I hate it when "bad astronomy" takes me out of the initial good feelings I have about somebody's work. While I can't deny the possibility of two large moons orbiting inside a ring system around some distant Earth-like planet, the super-sized Moon and Sun rising south of Florida* really ruin the bottom image for me.
Now I know someone will say "artistic license" but there is an attempt here to convince you that the ships are in space so, at least IMO, the space parts should be spot-on accurate to help sell the illusion.
*(Tampa Bay and the Keys are clearly visible)
Now I know someone will say "artistic license" but there is an attempt here to convince you that the ships are in space so, at least IMO, the space parts should be spot-on accurate to help sell the illusion.
*(Tampa Bay and the Keys are clearly visible)
And to be fair, by your own statements you've liked almost no Trek since 1979. That's thirty years, now.
I've liked a lot more than anything JJ ever put forth. And even so then so what? If I feel other SF has come along and been more consistently gratifying than contemporary Trek then big friggin' deal.
I've enjoyed parts of contemporary Trek, but I've gotten far more enjoyment from Babylon 5, Stargate SG-1, The X-Files, a handful of films and numerous SF novels. It's not an indictment of my preferences if I perceive that Trek drifted away from the kind of SF I prefer. I can live with it as long as I have other things to turn to.
Last edited:
Real-life isn't sexy (enough). Film and TV (thus VFX) are all about creating emotional impact, by tweaking reality. None of what is seen in film and TV is reality-based, starting with simple aspects such as lighting, sound or dialogue delivery. Characters in real-life aren't back-lit, side-lit, floor-filled, etc. Nor does a blade being pulled from a leather sheath sound like metal-on-metal, or a punch to the face sound so crunch-smack loud. And no-one ever misses a beat or blows a sentence while speaking in movie/TV-reality (unless the character is meant to). At yet, that is what audiences expect. Most don't want “reality” when going to the movies, they what the augmented version of it; movie-reality, that they have come to expect when paying the price of admission. To boot, most are now so ingrained and versed in experiencing movie-reality as movie-reality, most of all the “nonsense” goes unnoticed by most.
Matter of fact, if one were to make an all-real-life-accurate film, most peeps would think it was wierd or odd, or even bad or boring. Esp. in regard to sci-fi (or fantasy). One need look no further than Star Wars or Trek compared to 2001 for that proof (and 2001 is my all-time fav film).
So yeah, it's not about remaining real-life accurate for the very few that would notice and/or expect that; it's all a visually-based art-form based on creating the potentially highest level of emotional impact for the many.
Reality is considered, yes, but not to the point of sacrificing potential for emotional impact. And if the viewer gets too caught up in the details (or lack thereof) of reality, one is setting one's self up to miss the aesthetic of the art itself.
And all that may be complete BS to one that is of a purely reality-based sensibility (I used to be that type before I learned and grew), but nevertheless, to quote Bruce Hornsby;
That's just the way it is...
All is not lost though. If one wants 100% reality, one can always bin all the made-up stuff and stick with the NASA Channel or the like. I love that channel myself.
Just some thoughts...
deg
This also goes for the artist, I know a guy named Clawhammer that, since he needs to animate his stuff, had to change his entire working routine to avoid what Deg said!
(The good news: it's fun to learn animation.)
But the moon and sun rising south of Florida could have been avoided by simply turning the map upside down, no?
Unless there's supposed to be a subtle message in Florida pointing at the deflector dish of the Enterprise...
Unless there's supposed to be a subtle message in Florida pointing at the deflector dish of the Enterprise...
This also goes for the artist, I know a guy named Clawhammer that, since he needs to animate his stuff, had to change his entire working routine to avoid what Deg said!
Yep.
deg
But the moon and sun rising south of Florida could have been avoided by simply turning the map upside down, no?
Unless there's supposed to be a subtle message in Florida pointing at the deflector dish of the Enterprise...
Not only is Florida upside-down... but the entire continent is in a mirror-image orientation...
