STID "tracking" for $85-90 million opening [U.S. box office]
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
Funny, I think 6 is the best looking out of all of them. Easily the best set designs and most "real" looking ships. The only thing that doesn't look good IMO is the floating CGI Klingon blood.
I love The Undiscovered Country.
But...
Many of the sets do look cheap and in the end battle the lighting of the Enterprise and Excelsior looks really off making them look "plasticky". The mystery plot isn't exactly "deep" but the movie is saved by the character moments including Kirk's "Let them die!" and Gorkon's death scenes.
Agreed. It doesn't look anymore or less cheap than movies II-V IMO.
I think the sets look great.
Overall I like the way the film looks because they were still primarily using models as opposed to CGI. With some of the newer movies (TNG and Abrams stuff), some parts look too "cartoony."
I always appreciated the maturity that Meyers brought to Star Trek. He didn't portray Klingons as meat heads, and his films always had the best dialog.
How many did he direct, since you said "films"?
Never mind--Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country. Answered my own question.
Never mind--Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country. Answered my own question.
As for some parts looking too "cartoony": That's the problem I have with all CGI-heavy movies. Once you see enough of them, CGI effects look as fake as the process shots in the train scene at the end of the Marx Brothers' Go West (1940). I lament the modelmaking talent that has gone to waste in the past 15-20 years.
Whether CGI and its products are inherently less preferable is a question analogous to the one at the center of John Varley's "The Unprocessed Word," perhaps.
I enjoyed TUC in the theater in '91 and found nothing substandard about the effects. Hated the digital clock atop the main viewer, though.
Whether CGI and its products are inherently less preferable is a question analogous to the one at the center of John Varley's "The Unprocessed Word," perhaps.
I enjoyed TUC in the theater in '91 and found nothing substandard about the effects. Hated the digital clock atop the main viewer, though.
I agree. It was done quick, and on the cheap. And it shows.
I have that feeling with all TNG movies as well. The audience wasn't getting their money's worth paying for a film that they could get on their TV every week for free. Wasted opportunity.
I would say that both model work and CGI work have their places in film. It's knowing which will work best and using it at that time.
He was also involved in the writing of The Voyage Home.
I don't think it's a coincidence that arguably the 3 best Trek films all involved Meyer.
On a side note, I read somewhere that when JJ Abrams was a kid his parents were friends with Nick Meyer and they'd often have him over for dinner. Kind of ironic that they both turned out to be ST directors.
What? He was involved with the Abrams movies?
(I kid, I kid--I wouldn't presume to dictate to another what his favourite films should be. But the door was left open.)
Monday's take: $1,334,349 for $201,200,543 to date. By comparison, Star Trek made $1,272,135 on the Monday after its fourth weekend. We're into the part of the summer where weekday numbers are elevated, so that'll help STiD's legs.
It was very cheap, they couldnt even buy the new uniforms Meyer wanted. You can see rips and such on the uniforms on screen if you look closely enough. I still think a lot of the "cheap" TV look from STVI is because it was filmed in Super 35.
RAMA
Yup, this movie will have "legs" still on the strength of it's reviews and word of mouth. $230 million domestic is a cinch, I think it may do slightly more. 4th of July weekend always gives a slight bump to older movies.
My contention has been the CGI in ST09 and STID has been the best of it's kind. The equal of any space FX I've seen as well as planets AND surfaces.
RAMA
I know. I also remember Meyer saying they had to dig up old set pieces at the last minute and try and salvage them. All that said, I still looks better than any ST film before or since.
A lot of Trek films have been made on cheap budgets and tight deadlines. But sometimes things like that work from a creative perspective.
TWOK was made on a ridiculously low budget, and is still vastly superior to most other Trek films.
A low budget doesn't necessarily correlate to a "cheap" appearance on screen.