Is the great rift repairable?

[YARN]

darkwing is not an authority, expert, or even particularly observant about the technical aspects of what constitutes good or bad filmmaking. His opinion on such matters is no more useful or interesting than my opinion on launch trajectories for a geosynchronous satellite.

It seems that you think you are in some sort of intergalactic "zinger" contest, but you kind of come off like a jerk.

When I ask myself the question, "Who could be making such beautiful computer images of starships?" the picture that forms in my mind is increasingly a bitter man with too much free time on his hands, and who spends it with a flickering screen designing little ships or bullying anonymous individuals.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

darkwing is not an authority, expert, or even particularly observant about the technical aspects of what constitutes good or bad filmmaking. His opinion on such matters is no more useful or interesting than my opinion on launch trajectories for a geosynchronous satellite.

And I suppose yours is?

I may not have a film school degree, but I know what a good looking movie is, and visually, ST 09 ain't one of them.

 

[ST-One]

In terms of filmmaking, Trek 09 is a disaster. It panders to the 2 second attention span crowd with lots and lots of jump cuts,

Yeah, during the action-scenes... Have you seen a movie in the last... oh, I don't know... fifteen years?

"shaky cam", plus nauseating camera moves in the FX sequences made infamous by Michael Bay's crowd.

There is nothing 'nauseating' about any of the camera moves in this film. I guess you ran out of the cinema vomiting during Star Wars or The Phantom Menace?

The cinematography is harsh, either too over exposed or underexposed , gritty, and unpleasant to the eye.

No.

Shoddy camera work is not only celebrated, but MAGNIFIED by the use of artificial lens flares (something any beginning camera operator student is taught to AVOID).

The creative team stated their reason for the flares (they didn't bother the majority of the audience) and they themself feel that they've overdone them at times.
Oh, and you can't learn art.

mawkishly overdone Checkov accents,

... the fuck! Yelchin may have played up the accent a bit (and used that fake 'w' for 'v' Koenig came up with), but it was much more of a real Russian accent - him being an, you know, actual Russian.

Oh, and it's Chekov - you Überfan you.

 

[DonIago]

...it really rankles me when people present opinion as fact.

Then again, I'm tired of trying to deal with people who refuse to show any optimism as well...and yes, I realize that's a bit of a contradictory statement to make.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

When darkwing says it was "bad filmmaking" it's just another way for him to say "I don't like it" - because he doesn't know anything worthwhile about film craft and technique.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

In terms of filmmaking, Trek 09 is a disaster. It panders to the 2 second attention span crowd with lots and lots of jump cuts,

Yeah, during the action-scenes... Have you seen a movie in the last... oh, I don't know... fifteen years?

I have, and it's only been the last few years that this particular "style" has mestasized through Hollywood like a cancer. Remember when "bullet cam" was supposed to be the "wave of the future" just a few years ago? Now it's a cliche and a joke, and the Bey Abrams "What the frak is going on in this scene" 2 second shot style will fall to the same level of (lack of) respect.

"shaky cam", plus nauseating camera moves in the FX sequences made infamous by Michael Bay's crowd.

There is nothing 'nauseating' about any of the camera moves in this film. I guess you ran out of the cinema vomiting during Star Wars or The Phantom Menace?

They did SOME of it, and only with the "fighters". A 725 meter heavy cruiser does not barrell roll continuously around like a drunken dolphin that has lost the ability to hold an attitude.

No.

Yes. The blacks are over deep and the colors are "blown out" with light and horribly muted. The overall effect is blurry, gritty, and too harsh on the eye.

The creative team stated their reason for the flares (they didn't bother the majority of the audience) and they themself feel that they've overdone them at times.

Well bully for them. We'll see if they've learned their lesson. Somehow I doubt it.

Oh, and you can't learn art.

Cinematography and camera operation is a skill that is taught in technical schools and film schools, just like any other skill.

mawkishly overdone Checkov accents,

... the fuck! Yelchin may have played up the accent a bit (and used that fake 'w' for 'v' Koenig came up with), but it was much more of a real Russian accent - him being an, you know, actual Russian.

It was played up for cheap laughs either way, thus "mawkishly overdone".

 

[Squiggy]

They did SOME of it, and only with the "fighters". A 725 meter heavy cruiser does not barrell roll continuously around like a drunken dolphin that has lost the ability to hold an attitude.

A 725 meter heavy cruiser also doesn't travel faster the speed of light or..ya know...exist. So saying that fictional thing that does other fictional things doesn't do a fairly mundane fictional thing is pretty stupid.

Well bully for them. We'll see if they've learned their lesson. Somehow I doubt it.

What lesson would that be? That they worked on a wildly successful, critically acclaimed, Oscar winning movie?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

They did SOME of it, and only with the "fighters". A 725 meter heavy cruiser does not barrell roll continuously around like a drunken dolphin that has lost the ability to hold an attitude.

A 725 meter heavy cruiser also doesn't travel faster the speed of light or..ya know...exist. So saying that fictional thing that does other fictional things doesn't do a fairly mundane fictional thing is pretty stupid.

Well bully for them. We'll see if they've learned their lesson. Somehow I doubt it.

What lesson would that be? That they worked on a wildly successful, critically acclaimed, Oscar winning movie?

Yeah - the lesson they should have learned is: ignore the nitpickers, complainers and uber-trekkies and just make an entertaining movie. Again.

 

[Squiggy]

Yeah...I'm sure the production crew is kicking themselves and wishing they could've worked on Nemesis.

 

[DonIago]

Only in the MU, Squiggy...only in the MU...

 

[Shatnertage]

I'm too lazy to go back and quote it, but someone upthread asked what Chekhov did in TOS that he didn't do in Trek09.

First thing that popped into my mind was, "Scream like a girl?"

 

[doubleohfive]

Maybe it's just me, but I always took it for granted that basic transporter room controls and operation was standard information that every Starfleet officer knew.

If you want to gripe and moan about something in the '09 movie about Chekov and the transporter room, how about this: How is it the whiz kid can beam up Kirk and Sulu whilst the two are plummeting to their likely deaths on the Vulcan surface, yet he (or whoever, I can't remember who was at the controls later) can't seem to keep a solid "lock" on Amanda, when just a few rocks crumble out from beneath her?

I don't bring this up to give those of you who don't like the movie more ammo; I've no doubt some of you will use it as such, but admittedly this is one plot hole in the film. And it's ok that the movie has plot holes because ALL OF THE MOVIES THAT CAME BEFORE IT DID ALSO.

 

[ST-One]

Cinematography and camera operation is a skill that is taught in technical schools and film schools, just like any other skill.

So is acting.
What's your point? Can't go 'against the book'?

Yeah...I'm sure the production crew is kicking themselves and wishing they could've worked on Nemesis.

 

[ST-One]

Maybe it's just me, but I always took it for granted that basic transporter room controls and operation was standard information that every Starfleet officer knew.

If you want to gripe and moan about something in the '09 movie about Chekov and the transporter room, how about this: How is it the whiz kid can beam up Kirk and Sulu whilst the two are plummeting to their likely deaths on the Vulcan surface, yet he (or whoever, I can't remember who was at the controls later) can't seem to keep a solid "lock" on Amanda, when just a few rocks crumble out from beneath her?

Unlike all the others that were beamed in this film, she (and the Vulcans) didn't have a communicator on her. Hence, that that line from Chekov about initiating a 'volume transport' or something.

 

[doubleohfive]

And there you go. Explained. Thank you so much for that.

 

[DonIago]

Alternately the transporter locks onto a fixed point (ideally) or a pre-preprogrammed area (Kirk and Sulu falling) in space, and once it does so can't be adjusted. Chekov was able to beam up Kirk and Sulu because he knew they were falling before he locked on and they fell at a consistent rate of speed. Amanda fell suddenly and unexpectedly just as the transporter "locked"...Chekov had no time to recalibrate.

Eh, whatever.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

How do you know what I know and don't know, Dennis? One does not need a degree in art criticism to judge a work on it's aesthetic qualities.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

They did SOME of it, and only with the "fighters". A 725 meter heavy cruiser does not barrell roll continuously around like a drunken dolphin that has lost the ability to hold an attitude.

A 725 meter heavy cruiser also doesn't travel faster the speed of light or..ya know...exist. So saying that fictional thing that does other fictional things doesn't do a fairly mundane fictional thing is pretty stupid.

Ah, the "magic of fiction" defense...aka the "BS defense".

If a filmmaker had a 747 engaging in a dogfight with a MIG fighter performing just as the fighter did, the viewer would rightfully say "That's a load of crap!" 747s do not have the handling characteristics of fighters because they are bigger and heavier.

Likewise a 725meter, multi hundred thousands of metric tons heavy cruiser does NOT perform maneuvers like a 4m, 10,000kg fighter. The audience knows instinctively that it's too big and too massive to do so.

Well bully for them. We'll see if they've learned their lesson. Somehow I doubt it.

What lesson would that be? That they worked on a wildly successful, critically acclaimed, Oscar winning movie?[/QUOTE]

ONE Oscar, and it wasn't for lens flares or washed out cinematography.

And wildly successful? It made ~2.57 x it's budget, which is moderately respectable, but far from being a "smash hit" or "wildly successful". Many a film that earned in that range has been considered a FAILURE.
Superman Returns actually earned MORE, and is considered a financial flop (though a lot of that is because they stuffed the budget with all the earlier failed attempt costs).

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Cinematography and camera operation is a skill that is taught in technical schools and film schools, just like any other skill.

So is acting.
What's your point? Can't go 'against the book'?

You can, but expect to get called on it.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

]Yeah - the lesson they should have learned is: ignore the nitpickers, complainers and uber-trekkies and just make an entertaining movie. Again.

And (as much as I hate to say this), tell the progressives to butt out and let the writers and directors do their thing. Stop using Star Trek as your bearer for your beliefs (that also includes the right-wing and the religious fundies as well)-in general, stop armchair generalizing and morning quarterbacking the franchise; the people in charge have more knowledge of how to write a movie script than you do-let then bloody well fracking do it!! No more bullcrits (bullshit criticisms) about how Gene made Earth a utopia with toga-clad people, or that San Fran has no tall buildings (despite it being the capital of an interstellar republic); no constant crying about how the starships look like kit-bashed crap; no, no more of that-just let them do their jobs. Full stop. Period. Maybe they'll flop with the next one-so what? They can make up for it with the third one! Either enjoy it, or be gone. Or better yet, try and write your own Star Trek/sci-fi show/movie, and let's all so how well you'll do with it!