ST Twelve and freefall.

[T'Girl]

Zero gravity never looks quite right in a majority of science fiction movies, you only need to watch Picard's little float across the deflector dish in first contact to see this. Don't get me wrong, a very few movies have depicted zero gee to a passing degree.

I was watching Apollo Thirteen last night, for those who don't know, Ron Howard (the director) built his spacecraft sets inside a cargo plane and flew a series of arcs and dives to place the sets and actors in freefall.

Would something like this be cool in the next Star Trek movie? If there were to be a scene, or series of, in the movie, would it be worth Abrams effort to use this method to show freefall, aboard the Enterprise or elsewhere?

Would it increase your enjoyment of the movie?

 

[F. King Daniel]

If they need to do any zero-gee or freefall scenes, CG would probably be an easier (and cheaper) way to go. Done well, the difference would be like Superman's flying in the old Christopher Reeve movies vs. Superman Returns. To give a rather poor analogy.

 

[number6]

It would be a major plothole.

 

[shapeshifter]

^

I agree with the CGI option as best.

 

[Set Harth]

Vomit Comet all the way.

 

[Ln X]

Who's cares about reality, I mean Star Trek increasingly became science fantasy in later series (I'm thinking VOY), so if it ain't science fiction why are we worrying about realistic zero-g?

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

I would like to see [freefall] in Star Trek 12, if it were done well. (TM)

 

[chardman]

The problem, as I see it, is that while a set of the interiors of an Apollo capsule and LEM are small enough to be built inside the fuselage of an aircraft, the same cannot be said for most any of the sets we associate with the Enterprise. It'd only be a plausible thing to do, if the lack of gravity only affected a very small part of the ship, such as a single crew quarters. The thing is, the bulk of Apollo 13 took place in a weightless environment, and depicting that environment accurately was something that the whole film depended upon, right? But you're not likely going to build a whole film around the gravity going out in one crewman's quarters, now are you? Such a scene would be pretty brief in the whatever the overall storyline was. The overall authenticity of such a scene isn't likely to make or break the whole film. So would going to all that trouble for such a brief scene/sequence even be worth it? I'm guessing no.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Vomit Comet with a green screen.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I demand they build a full-scale replica brewery in the back of a cargo plane

 

[YellowSubmarine]

It would be a major plothole.

Realistic portrayal of freefall violate established canon now, wouldn't it?

 

[M'Sharak]

Vomit Comet with a green screen.

And when you get to this point, you're right back at thinking about whether it might not really be simpler and just as effective to stick with the practical sets Abrams has said he prefers, hire an ace wire-fu guy out of Hong Kong to design and execute the stunts, and then use CG to fill in the gaps.

 

[Ln X]

The practical sets were cool but looked a little out of place. I mean the engine room literally looked an engine room. Don't get me wrong, I like the messy, more industrial, approach to the sets (well the engineering set was actually a real building), but it does totally screw up the continuity. With freefall it's all those little thin wires which the actors dangle by. To be totally honest what is the difference between real freefall and sci-fi (or should that be fantasy?) freefall?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Vomit Comet with a green screen.

And when you get to this point, you're right back at thinking about whether it might not really be simpler and just as effective to stick with the practical sets Abrams has said he prefers, hire an ace wire-fu guy out of Hong Kong to design and execute the stunts, and then use CG to fill in the gaps.

Undoubtedly.

But having authentic dynamics in, say, a climactic epic zero-G combat sequence (or even just in pivotal moments of one) piques my nerd interest. By itself, such a sequence filmed that way would get me into the theater at least one extra time, especially if it's exciting.

Of course, this is just me speaking for what I personally would find interesting in a film, as per the OP. The overall cost-benefit analysis from a production and marketing standpoint is another issue, and, yeah, I would expect it to lead to different, much more grounded result.

 

[Set Harth]

Vomit Comet with a green screen.

In the Vomit Comet, even a blue screen would end up green.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Only if you're behind it.