Enterprise Pic
- Thread starter bdb
- Start date
That was invented by the master himself, Hitchcock, wasn't it? For "Vertigo".Jackson_Roykirk said:
I liken this to one of those Speilbergian "zoom in while moving the camera away" shots, where the view of the person in the foreground doesn't move while the background perspective changes (does anyone know what I'm talking about?)
And isn't it Spielberg?
EDIT:
Wikipedia says yes. It's even called the "Hitchcock zoom" ...
Right... whomever worked on that shot at ILM should be fired, it's so horrible. Seriously... you "honest to Christ can't figure [it] out"? "Concept-level art"?... "animatic"?
If I were Leonard Nimoy, I believe my response would be, "Go to hell!"
If I were Leonard Nimoy.
Thank you on both counts (really)...I knew how to spell "Spielberg" (typo), but I had forgotton that "zoom in/pullback" effect was used in Vertigo, and I was unaware that Hitchcock had 'invented' that. (when I think of Vertigo, I usually only think of the lovely Ms. Novak -- that and the fact that it is a great film.
)
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Maxwell Everett said:
Right... whomever worked on that shot at ILM should be fired, it's so horrible. Seriously... you "honest to Christ can't figure [it] out"? Concept-level art"... "animatic"?
If I were Leonard Nimoy, I believe my response would be, "Go to hell!"
If I were Leonard Nimoy.
I'm astonished. You've been one of the most credible and well-reasoned posters on this board. YOU think this looks decent? Go over to the trekart thread on this and see posts of this thing up against stills from TOS series and movies. This thing looks like concept art by comparison.
Have the visual sensibilities of everybody on this planet atrophied in the last decade?
No, it does not; your bias in respect to these matters completely overwhelms any naive aesthetic response you may still be capable of.
In fact, in the trailer itself the image is far more persuasive and real-looking than any "live" model photography ever done for a "Star Trek" film.
"Everybody's out of step but Johnny."
Interesting considering the International Space Station is built in modules (not unlike nacelles... ect) and hauled up into space on shuttles that have consistently been built here on Terra Firma for final attachment...
Or what spacecraft are you talking about?
Sharr
trevanian said:
Maxwell Everett said:
Right... whomever worked on that shot at ILM should be fired, it's so horrible. Seriously... you "honest to Christ can't figure [it] out"? Concept-level art"... "animatic"?
If I were Leonard Nimoy, I believe my response would be, "Go to hell!"
If I were Leonard Nimoy.
I'm astonished. You've been one of the most credible and well-reasoned posters on this board. YOU think this looks decent? Go over to the trekart thread on this and see posts of this thing up against stills from TOS series and movies. This thing looks like concept art by comparison.
Have the visual sensibilities of everybody on this planet atrophied in the last decade?
Well thank you for saying so, but yes... as far as this one high-res shot is concerned (haven't seen the trailer in 35mm yet) it looks credible to ME as a massive, physical spaceship being built. And (presumably) this is probably ILM's first crack at VFX on this movie... so it's only going to get better from here (over the course of the year) as they tweak and refine.
And I am quite familiar with the VFX from TOS and the movies (And love both the work by Trumbull and Dykstra on TMP and Ralston and Farrar's work on the sequels.) I don't need to go over and visit some (excuse me for saying so) pissant trekart thread.
This image looks just as good as what's come before... just as professional and equally realistic. It's all technically bullshit anyway.
Dude, no offense, but seriously -- if you really and truly think that something as "today" as welding will survive into the 23rd century as a means of constructing starships made out of who-knows-what advanced materials and that such a construction method would hold fast during something as fantastical as "warp flight" that's hundreds of times the speed of light, well . . . I just think you need to open your mind more to the "creative" aspects of science fiction. That's like saying that sutures and thread will still be used to operate on people . . . but that's not what we saw, even in TOS, is it?
I respect your right to your opinion, and I anticipate some of the "well, welding is what we saw in the opening of DS9" or maybe "that's certainly what it looks like they're doing in this teaser pic", but just because something is the "most effective" and "modern" way of doing something today doesn't mean it will last into the future with such an unbelievably advanced society as depicted in TOS.
I mean, who says that starships are even really constructed of "metals" as we know them?
It's always refreshing to come here and read the posts of people who think outside the box, but I just think you missed the boat on that one.
As for the image, meh . . . I'd have to see more, but certain aspects of this (the clearly TMP-inspired bridge, the multiple phaser turrets, the bizarro font choice mixes, the Hulk-sized engines) make me go immediaely into a "wait and see before judging too harshly" mode. YMMV.
Squiggyfm said:
That was in the movie.
And, AFAIK, it was Blackout.
Just got back from seeing Cloverfield on one of those digital screens
The written description of the teaser, and even the on-line version at YouTube, didn't prepare me for how cool it was. And, even resulted in a little lump in my throat for that reveal of the E.
Oh...re: metals. "The Class-F had a duranium-metal shell, was driven by ion engine power, (TOS: "The Menagerie, Part I") and was protected by deflector shields. (TOS: "The Immunity Syndrome")" -- from Memory-Alpha.org.
Although not canon-sourced (i.e. print media), Memory-Alpha has the following from the entry for duranium...
"According to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual, duranium is a naturally-occurring ore in planetary crusts such as the crust of Bajor. This would suggest that duranium itself is not an alloy, but rather that there is a family of elements where duranium is the prime constituent. This is further supported by the use of the term "duranium-235," which implies that duranium is in fact an element, one that has an isotope with an atomic weight of 235."
The written description of the teaser, and even the on-line version at YouTube, didn't prepare me for how cool it was. And, even resulted in a little lump in my throat for that reveal of the E.
Oh...re: metals. "The Class-F had a duranium-metal shell, was driven by ion engine power, (TOS: "The Menagerie, Part I") and was protected by deflector shields. (TOS: "The Immunity Syndrome")" -- from Memory-Alpha.org.
Although not canon-sourced (i.e. print media), Memory-Alpha has the following from the entry for duranium...
"According to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual, duranium is a naturally-occurring ore in planetary crusts such as the crust of Bajor. This would suggest that duranium itself is not an alloy, but rather that there is a family of elements where duranium is the prime constituent. This is further supported by the use of the term "duranium-235," which implies that duranium is in fact an element, one that has an isotope with an atomic weight of 235."
For the same reason you don't reinvent the wheel. If it works chances are we'll continue to use the method that has proven workable and or efficient right now.
Actually things don't change that much, its a mistaken conceit of scifidom in general and Trekdom in specific that thinks: "Future equals totally complete way of building or doing things".
I'd suspect this would increase with things like anti-gravity generators and such. Not having to worry about oxygen and being able to get at the guts of the saucer or nacelles would be served by ground construction then assembling all the pieces in space later.
Sharr
No offense taken, but how would you fuse two materials together?...Glue? Mechanical fasteners? (i.e. nuts and bolts/rivets)? Seriously -- I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, but you are either going to glue, soldier, mechanically fasten -- or you can intrisically bond the two materials together (this is welding).
If a weld is done properly, the weld itself is at least as strong or even stronger that the materials being joined. A proper weld turns two pieces into virtually one piece. I suspect different welding techniques will be developed in the future that would make welds even stronger and more efficient to execute than the techniques we use today, but it would still be welding.
Maybe that guy in the teaser was using some futuristic "molecular welder" (I can't tell since I don't know what one looks like). Or maybe the whole teaser is just a metaphor symbolizing that this film is "under construction" and the welder is not meant to be a 23rd century starship builder at all, but just part of the "this film is under construction" metaphor.
Either way, I don't have a problem with the use of a welder.
cheers
It's not so much assumption as extrapolation. Not many of the ship building techniques used 200 or 300 years ago we used in the construction of any modern ship, jet or space craft. So it's not so much of a stretch to expect that none of the techniques used today would be used to build the Enterprise.
I think Arlo would say no to the first part, but yes to the second, and I more or less agree. The ship we see is the design they're using in the movie, but the whole "construction" sequence is a metaphor for the making of the movie, and more broadly, the rebuilding of the franchise.
Similar threads
