For that matter, why get so hung-up on what a character looks like in a partial clip, of a supposed Dream Sequence, in an episode we haven't actually seen yet?
Reasons not to make a Pike show
- Thread starter Mudd
- Start date
It's a trailer...I don't care about "good enough" in a trailer. Trailers are deceptive marketing on principle, so putting stock in them, when things are usually unfinished, when the main production crew is not involved with their editing, is not something I'll do.
As for actual shows, at some point of time, Trek fans have settled for "Good enough." Star Trek has had technical errors, continuity errors, slips, trips, falls, failings and everything else that impacts production. But now, it seems every error is worth hand wringing over.
Exactly.
No, it doesn't, but it takes time to actually DO the work to replicate how he looked in Nemesis. You're assuming that the work has to be 100% completed in order for it to be featured in a trailer. The fact of the matter is what you see in a trailer is almost never the final product especially when it comes to shots utilizing visual effects. I'm not making excuses, I'm just stating a fact as a video editor. Wait until you're seeing a completed episode to make your final judgements over the accuracy of something like that. The bigger point was to tease the audience and actually show Data so they could hit us right in the nostalgic feels.
By making a poor first impression?
Why do people apply standards and budgets of 25 years ago to the present? Those few seconds could’ve been fixed with CGI if nobody cared enough to match the original makeup. I mean look at El Camino — it also has visual continuity problems, but mostly due to actors aging, and there I can understand the lack of a de-aging budget.
Why do people apply standards and budgets of 25 years ago to the present? Those few seconds could’ve been fixed with CGI if nobody cared enough to match the original makeup. I mean look at El Camino — it also has visual continuity problems, but mostly due to actors aging, and there I can understand the lack of a de-aging budget.
And it's all because a certain percentage of the fanbase just doesn't like Alex Kurtzman going as far back as Trek 2009 and think he doesn't understand or even like Star Trek. So for every perceived mistake or slip up made under his watch, to the haters, it adds more ammo to their anti-Kurtzman arsenal.
I really wish you would stop assuming people behind the scenes "don't care." Your attitude on this is very cynical and built around assumptions.
I believe that the Actual "First Impression" that was meant to be relayed by that trailer was that DATA is Being Included in the New Series.
Not what he looked like in a fleeting moment from a clip 5 months prior to said episode.
Priorities do matter, just not the ones many are harping on.
If they weren’t given a proper budget or the right people weren’t hired or consulted then someone didn’t care. The goal was to focus on Data’s reappearance, not undermine the moment with distracting makeup that looks like a transformation stage from The Incredible Hulk series.
Last edited:
Now who is making assumptions? What does matching makeup have to do with who is in charge? It either makes sense or it doesn’t.
Also be nice if some folks would also learn to move on from the really unimportant stuff.
That a character looks "different" 5 or 6 months before an episodes premier in a trailer is nothing new to CGI now-a-days.
But, again, you don't know if any of this is actually the case, but, for some reason, you seem convinced that there is someone back there who just doesn't care about anything just to make your beliefs on this matter seem for real. Again, you saw footage of something that was unfinished and was five months out from airdate. Trailers are not the final product.
Not sure what it takes to get through to you on this matter.
In other words, settle for a B- effect?
How many people are not going to watch because of that 5 second bit, if that long? Really poor first impression...
It's a nitpick from the word go.
How about recognize the limitations of doing a trailer and that we are probably not seeing the final product and maybe, just maybe, be patient long enough for the show actually airs before declaring the production team to be doing subpar work.
... ??? a "B Effect in a Trailer ???
Five or Six months before it's meant to be actually shown.
Even you should admit that that is more than a bit ridiculous.
How many people are not going to watch because of that 5 second bit, if that long? Really poor first impression...
I can think of at least one person.
Yeah, but I wasn't going to watch Picard anyway
No, they are not, but if you’re a Cinefex reader, you know that what gets replaced is usually stuff that isn’t noticeable on casual viewing: earlier versions of CG shots and such (but without compromising on quality). Trailers must make a great impression, regardless of whether or not the movie is slightly different.
So, do you feel the Picard trailer did not make a great impression because you were too focused on the inaccuracy of a hairline?
^^^
And the trailer DID make a great impression - it got people talking about and anticipating the show. <---- That is the main and only purpose of a trailer.
Yeah, but I wasn't going to watch Picard anyway
This isn’t about watching something or not; it’s about one’s opinion of it before or after. Again, is Star Trek fine with people thinking it’s merely OK?
