Well, I'm glad that you never noticed them. I find them obvious, annoying and distracting.
JJ Abrams apologizes for lens flare
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
Eh, there was an interview Abrams did after the last movie, too, in which he acknowledged that he might have overdone the lens-flare effect a bit. It made no difference then, and it makes no difference now. The guy just really, really likes lens flare, and the people who dislike lens flare won't dislike it any less as a result of a published apology or two.
Edited to add links to previous "lens-flare overkill" interviews:
(2009) http://io9.com/5230278/jj-abrams-admits-star-trek-lens-flares-are-ridiculous
(2011) http://trekmovie.com/2011/06/08/jj-abrams-on-more-star-trek-sequels-talks-lens-flares-super-8/
No.
He knows he cannot use them in Star Wars without drawing comparisons to his Trek so this is a preemptive explanation for their absence in SW.
Agreed.
He cannot do anything without drawing comparisons to his Trek. You heard it here first.
I'm already looking forward to that. Trek fans complaining about the great stuff in Wars and why he didn't do that in Trek. Or Wars fans complaining why he did do some stuff in Trek and not in Wars. And the complaining why he did the same stuff he did in Trek also in Wars.
Trek Wars. Presented by William Shatner.
Even if it could somehow be shown that the majority of fans did, in fact, dislike the use of lens flare, he should continue to make movies just the way he wants to make them. The fans get to vote afterwards - by choosing to watch or not to watch.
He should also use them in Star Wars. Just because.
That's hardly news, though - it's more or less been the case since May of 2009.
Uh, no. You can't give the fans what they want, cause then they'll never be happy till you've catered to them to the point that you've trashed the franchise. Usually what they want is bad for the franchise (see: business). Even if you concede to their wishes, there'd be a very vocal minority that would bitch and complain like spoiled brats.
So why add to it? Ain't irony great.
And really, haters are louder than the vast majority who are just indifferent. I didn't even notice the frakking lens flare until I read about it on the BBS. Now, I'm fond of it. I do agree that it will date the movie, not sure how that is a big problem though.
I've spoken to you about baiting before. You now have a warning; comments to PM.
I was going to ask if there was any lens flare in STID because I didn't notice it.
Lens flares are dialled back a bit in STID compared to XI. The scenes set on the Enterprise are still loaded with excessive lens flares, especially the bridge. But there doesn't seem to be as much everywhere else.
Something is different though. In ST'09, I was pretty well blinded on the bridge scenes (Didn't have a problem with Lens Flares anywhere else), but, I wasn't bothered by them in STiD (And I did just recently watch ST'09, so, it's not that I've gotten used to being blinded when watching the bridge scenes)
I like the continuity in the style
maybe you didn't see them in STiD because you were already blind after ST09?
all jokes aside, I've absolutely no problems with the flares, I think they are a great stylistic choice. In fact I'd prefer that whoever takes the directors chair next time includes at least a decent number of them
Ouch, Touche
Yea, like I said they don't bother me aside from on the stark white bridge in the first movie, something was toned down about them on the bridge in STiD, maybe coming at you from an angle, instead of head on?
I had no problem with the lens flare. It looked great in some shots, like in the Kelvin scene which is the first time a shot of a ship in Star Trek felt real.
Similar threads
