• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

765874 - Unification

You could tell it was Kirk, but my mother, a big shatner fan, was not sold on him being shatner. She says that some of his microexpressions are missing.
It's not perfect, but he gets a lot of them. (IMHO.) The part that I thought was quite good was just seeing the way he walked and used his hands before you saw his face. I knew it was Kirk.

They're not ENTIRELY out of the uncanny valley. One issue is that he doesn't exactly match from shot to shot (especially in profile) the way a real person (even a real person who is not Shatner) does.
 
A very late reply, but was going back through the posts and saw this:
Spock broke off his engagement with T'Pring because it would only have been a loveless marriage of convenience, and so one between Spock and Saavik would have been.

So why were Leonard Nimoy and Harve Bennett ok with pushing this idea forward? because despite both men being quite intelligent, they also were born in the very early 1930s, well ahead of when recognizing women as complete equals was a firm concept.
Just to clarify, it was Steve Meerson and Peter Krikes (the original writers for Star Trek IV) who had the idea of Saavik being pregnant after the Genesis incident. Their script was made with Eddie Murphy in mind to play a character who would later evolve into Dr. Gillian Taylor. It was a quite different script, so Bennett and Meyer rewrote it almost from scratch. They removed the line about Saavik's pregnancy on purpose (I guess with director Leonard Nimoy's blessing). The incident is related in the books "Star Trek Movie Memories" and "The Fifty-Year Mission: The First 25 Years".
 
I have to say I laughed when I would see people say "You could just TELL that it was Shatner."

One of the remarkable things about Witwer's performance was that right away you could tell that it was Kirk.
It's a shame that the conversation for this is spread over three threads in three different forums. :lol:

I posted this in the OTOY thread in Gen Trek. An interview with Sam Witwer where he describes the process of becoming Kirk. He speaks of how important it was to have an actual actor involved in the entire process. It was not simply a matter of donning the digital mask. He speaks of how after the first test shots his heart sank because when he saw his performance immediately after the fact, he saw a guy who looked like William Shatner but did not feel like Kirk. He speaks of how he trained his body language to mimic Shatner's and how to make his face while wearing the mask mimic the same expressions that Shatner's Kirk might have in a given situation. It's fascinating stuff.

 
Last edited:
It's a shame that the conversation for this is spread over three threads in three different forums. :lol:

I posted this in the OTOY thread in Gen Trek. An interview with Sam Witwer where he describes the process of becoming Kirk. he speaks of how important it was to have an actual actor involved in the entire process. It was not simply a process of doning the digital mask. He speaks of how after the first test shots his heart sank because when he saw his performance immediately after the fact, he saw a guy who looked like William Shatner but did not feel like Kirk. He speaks of how he trained his body language to mimic Shatner's and how to make his face while wearing the mask mimic the same expressions that Shatner's Kirk might have in a given situation. It's fascinating stuff.

Sam is one of the few actors that I really have an intense respect for in terms of his honesty about the acting process. He has such a warmth and genuineness about the struggles of finding the performance and getting it right while acknowledging past actors of a character.

I appreciate acting as a craft and the work that goes in to it but Sam is one I'll sit up and take notice on his process.
 
He speaks of how he trained his body language to mimic Shatner's and how to make his face while wearing the mask mimic the same expressions that Shatner's Kirk might have in a given situation. It's fascinating stuff.
I haven't watched this interview yet, but this reminds me of a talk I saw on the visual effects involved in with Grand Moff Tarkin in Rogue One. Guy Henry, who played him, spent plenty of time practicing Peter Cushion's mannerisms and vocal intonations, especially from the original Star Wars, but there was also a lot of hand-animation supplementing the motion-capture of his face, because of things like Henry and Cushing moving their lips differently to make the same syllables when they spoke, totally unconscious and habitual actions that would be nearly impossible to imitate.

OTOY's process seems to be much more live-to-tape (though that could just be for instant feedback, and there's still refinement in the animation after-the-fact), so I doubt there was the same degree of post-production reshaping of Witwer's subtleties into a duplicate of Shatner's (plus, there was no talking), but it's fascinating how these new digital-human/digital-double animation techniques really have to go into the finest detail of how human beings recognize other people.

(Another thing I remember from that R1 talk is that I once saw an internet commenter assert that one of the reason Tarkin looked uncanny was that they neglected to take into account that a person's lips will tend to stick together at the edges as they open and close their mouths while speaking, so it was funny to me when we got to the ten-minute segment explaining the tool ILM made to precisely control and animate Tarkin's lip-stickiness in the finest possible detail. Goes to show you, it's harder than it looks to figure out what's going on from the outside.)
 
Last edited:
^I'm not so sure the final product is the same as the real-time feed. The Saavik clip they released showed that there are obvious seams in the real-time version, plus there are shots in the finished film that (AFAIK) can't be done smoothly in real time currently. (Such as when a character is facing the camera, then turns away from it without the new face glitching out at some point.)
 
Last edited:
So it's probably similar to the Volume (and similar setups). It provides a lot of on-set feedback (and in the case of the Volume actual lighting) and produces lots of artifacts that are recorded and useful for post. But it's not a point and shoot and you're done solution.

This is my guess.
 
Imagine having a whole take ruined because the live Shatner filter glitched out for a second
No big deal, you just do another take. In fact the fact that there is a certain amount of live filter means you can see immediately how it will look, something that isn’t an option for example with traditional chroma key.
 
They're not ENTIRELY out of the uncanny valley. One issue is that he doesn't exactly match from shot to shot (especially in profile) the way a real person (even a real person who is not Shatner) does.

And let's be thankful the technology has advanced a lot since Will Smith's Gemini Man. That movie used technology that wasn't nearly ready for prime time, and the result was a really flat expressionless mimicry of a younger Will Smith that always looked on the verge of crying.
 
And let's be thankful the technology has advanced a lot since Will Smith's Gemini Man. That movie used technology that wasn't nearly ready for prime time, and the result was a really flat expressionless mimicry of a younger Will Smith that always looked on the verge of crying.
I don't know what the secret sauce is but the Marvel movies seem to have this down with Ant-Man being a stand out. That was in 2015 and yet Indiana Jones looked not great just last year.

The one I want them to re-do is Tron Legacy.
 
Last edited:
I don't know what the secret sauce is but the Marvel movies seem to have this down with Ant-Man being a stand out. That was in 2015 and yet Indiana Jone looked not great just last year.

The one I want them to re-do is Tron Legacy.

Maybe it's down to the VFX budget? I forgot about the de-aging they'd done for Tron Legacy, but they also only had shown de-aged Bridges briefly. I was actually shocked at how much screen time they had given Will Smith's de-aged double given how terrible it was to look at. And it looked even worse the second he tried to smile at the end.

That said, I think they've done a reasonable job with Kirk in this short.
 
Both Tron Legacy and Gemini Man used the "CGI head" (and sometimes more) approach, the era of which is pretty much at an end.
 
Both Tron Legacy and Gemini Man used the "CGI head" (and sometimes more) approach, the era of which is pretty much at an end.
What did Pirates of the Caribbean use in Dead Men Tell No Tales?


They did a younger Jack Sparrow in a flashback scene. From this article it looks more like a combination effect.

 
stop
I thought he looked great. What thew me off in those scenes wasn't the FX, but in the scenes where it was actually Harrison and not a stunt double, you could tell he wasn't as spry as he would be.
I noticed something similar with the deaged Samuel L Jackson in Captain Marvel. He looked great, but he was sure huffing and puffing when he was running. :lol:
 
Last edited:
It was good. But also very very weird. I had to watch it twice to figure out what was going on. I thought the aging tech was fantastic for it being a YouTube short.

Was that NuVulcan in the JJverse? And does that mean there's an old man Kirk chillin' around the JJverse now? And the flashes from the Enterprise-D to the body being preserved, was that all Spock? Did they undo his death somehow? I'm sure we were never meant to think deeply about that stuff though, it was a nice send off. Better than being left under a pile of rocks where the animals are gonna get at the corpse within a day.
 
Back
Top