Hey, you have a lot of class, M!
(Get it, Class M... is this mic on?)
Seriously, thanks.
(Get it, Class M... is this mic on?)
Seriously, thanks.
Did J.J. fix Star Trek or doom it?
- Thread starter xortex
- Start date
- Status
How does that make sense? If the movie is met with a collective yawn, no studio will touch Star Trek, as a television commodity or otherwise.
Doomed.
Doomedy-doom-doom-doomed.
Doom-eded.
Doom.
And all of Trek fandom is doomed too.
Heck, I'm ALREADY "pining for the fjords" and thinking about buying the entire series DVD box for "The Starlost".
doomed-ed-ed.
Doomedy-doom-doom-doomed.
Doom-eded.
Doom.
And all of Trek fandom is doomed too.
Heck, I'm ALREADY "pining for the fjords" and thinking about buying the entire series DVD box for "The Starlost".
doomed-ed-ed.
That would be a strange and useless measure of "success" in any event.
That's what matters.
The movie likely won't entice newbies to check out the pre-existing Trek productions, because like with the success of the new Dr Who series, there's so much of it. They'd have over 40 years of material to sift through. And remember, this is generation Ipod. They couldn't be bothered catching up with 5 series worth of episodes and 10 previous movies.
I thought I'd heard that sales of classic "Doctor Who" boxed DVD sets were up, as a result of new fans impatiently waiting for new "Doctor Who" episodes.
Have you never seen "The Cage", nor "Amok Time"?
Not to mention throwing a bowl of soup at Chapel in AT.
Wow, this post is like a year old and for whatever reason I never looked at it...
So, I agree with the OP about the bridge being WAY too brite! I don't think that alone is enough to "doom Star Trek", but it does hurt the believability a lot if you ask me.
In a lot of sci-fi films an tv shows - even some of the usually very accurate onse - you will see people standing near windows, and you can see stars outside. But real life astronauts will tell you the on the shuttes or space station, you can NOT see stars out the window unless the cabin is kept COMPLETELY dark - the stars are just to faint and the cabin light washes it out, not to mention glare you get off of the windows from the cabin lights.
Now with the Star Trek viewscreens - or even that viewer-window combo the Fed ships aparently have in the new film - those probably have built in image enhancement stuff that make the stars visible, but even then, you would still want the bridge lights to be relativily dim, or it would be too distracting and make it harder to focus on the viewer.
For example, in the new ST preview there is a scene (an otherwise kick-ass looking sequence) the camera view is looking over Pike's(?) shoulder towards the main view-window/screen where some hazardis debris and/or action can be seen, and not only are the *BRIGHT* bridge lights on full, those silly bright light bars over the ops/cons pannels are right in the captian's line of sight and I think REALLY distract from the (dangerous looking) action on the main viewerthingy. Why would Starfleet designers want to put really distracting (and seemingly pointless) big brights lights in the captian's very vital field of view? And not only that, but those very same light bars are also shining down on the ops and com stations, right over and onto it's display/touch-screen pannels - pannels which are covered with a very reflective clear surface - and you can clearly see some glare from the lights reflecting off of that surface, and I think that would make it much harder to see what's on those displays!!! Nd the situation appears to be the same at all the other bridge stations! (I mean, I figure it's like how I often can't use my crappy cell phone or laptop or my kid's DS devices outside becaue the sunlight is so bright it almost completely washes out the screen, so I have to duck into the shade or inside somewhere so I can see what's on the screen!)
Why would Starfleet engineers design things in such and obviously usless and crappy way!?
And while I really think that otherwise I myself will really really enjoy this film - a film the looks like it will be the most realistic and believable Trek *ever* - those silly and unrealistic lights are already "talking me out" or the movie and ruining my ability to suspension disbelief.
So, I agree with the OP about the bridge being WAY too brite! I don't think that alone is enough to "doom Star Trek", but it does hurt the believability a lot if you ask me.
In a lot of sci-fi films an tv shows - even some of the usually very accurate onse - you will see people standing near windows, and you can see stars outside. But real life astronauts will tell you the on the shuttes or space station, you can NOT see stars out the window unless the cabin is kept COMPLETELY dark - the stars are just to faint and the cabin light washes it out, not to mention glare you get off of the windows from the cabin lights.
Now with the Star Trek viewscreens - or even that viewer-window combo the Fed ships aparently have in the new film - those probably have built in image enhancement stuff that make the stars visible, but even then, you would still want the bridge lights to be relativily dim, or it would be too distracting and make it harder to focus on the viewer.
For example, in the new ST preview there is a scene (an otherwise kick-ass looking sequence) the camera view is looking over Pike's(?) shoulder towards the main view-window/screen where some hazardis debris and/or action can be seen, and not only are the *BRIGHT* bridge lights on full, those silly bright light bars over the ops/cons pannels are right in the captian's line of sight and I think REALLY distract from the (dangerous looking) action on the main viewerthingy. Why would Starfleet designers want to put really distracting (and seemingly pointless) big brights lights in the captian's very vital field of view? And not only that, but those very same light bars are also shining down on the ops and com stations, right over and onto it's display/touch-screen pannels - pannels which are covered with a very reflective clear surface - and you can clearly see some glare from the lights reflecting off of that surface, and I think that would make it much harder to see what's on those displays!!! Nd the situation appears to be the same at all the other bridge stations! (I mean, I figure it's like how I often can't use my crappy cell phone or laptop or my kid's DS devices outside becaue the sunlight is so bright it almost completely washes out the screen, so I have to duck into the shade or inside somewhere so I can see what's on the screen!)
Why would Starfleet engineers design things in such and obviously usless and crappy way!?
And while I really think that otherwise I myself will really really enjoy this film - a film the looks like it will be the most realistic and believable Trek *ever* - those silly and unrealistic lights are already "talking me out" or the movie and ruining my ability to suspension disbelief.
If anything can be read from some of the replies to this thread I'd say many Star Trek fans are nothing but a bunch of whiny, sad, disrespectful ingrates. We are getting a movie that is not only getting mainstream press but actually becoming water cooler talk after nearly 15 years and all they can do is keep whining. For someone of J.J's caliber, he could have easily gotten away without making any Trek at all, and Trek would have been a lost in time franchise like.. gasp!.. Lost in Space or Man from U.N.C.L.E. We are getting something completely out of the blue, a true movie calling itself Star Trek. Yet you naysayers keep spewing vitriol.
Wow!!! A hot Hollywood producer has left a steaming pile of crap on the sidewalk with a Star Trek label on it!!! I'd better eat it up because it was unexpected.
I hope this movie is a huge success. But I also am aware of the things I like about Star Trek and I am very critical of those things I see missing. I'm not grateful to have new Star Trek if it isn't recognizable as Star Trek. Sorry.
How is this any more a 'true' movie than say The Motion Picture or The Undiscovered Country?
Put on as much butter and jam as you want, doesn't change the fact that it's toast.
Toast is delicious...With butter and jam on it's even better.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
I'm not familiar with cinnimin
It's neither a success or failure yet. That result will come out in about 4 months.
And what might that corner you refer to be exactly ?
ST-One
Vice Admiral
If it's a success, then quite a few people think it is actually good.
Whether you agree with them or not.
- Status
