Spoilers Star Trek: Starfleet Academy 1x09 – “300th Night”

[Detached Nacelle]

 

[tenmei]

 

[Detached Nacelle]

 

[Fateor]

Nope, they are the same location. The Google Maps image was shot in May 2024, whereas the episode was filmed towards the end of the year, so obviously they don’t look completely identical in terms of the greenery. I would also assume that when they digitally added the Golden Gate bridge in the background, they also added some plants (mainly to make the fence next to the bushes that’s actually on location disappear). But to me it absolutely looks like everything else is a perfect match — including the layout of the walkway, the location of the bench as well as the water — and they just erected that bit of futuristic fence on set for Rosta to climb up on.

(The location where they shot the drill session from the same episode is also situated on the same island, by the way.)

And if you went in and checked the goggle map of that you'd see the distances and angles for the observation platform are all wrong.

It's obvious they added it in in post the same as the bridge.

And funny how all your comparison pics are from the wrong part of the scene.

The fence is not twice as high as him. As you can see when he starts climbing it, his head reaches the same height as the fifth hole from the top. There’s only four more holes to go. So its total height should be something like 2.90 m / 9.5 ft.

That's not when he started climbing, that's when he had already climbed up a step.

This, is when he started climbing.

I thought this couldn’t get any more ridiculous. But here we go, I guess. Do you so desperately want to be right that you’re now going to deny what you’re seeing with your own eyes right in front of you? The Kelso Conservation Area is obviously the location where they filmed those outdoor scenes for “Vox in Excelso”. Forget about individual rock shapes or whatever; you can lay the aerial shot from the episode right on top of a drone shot a couple of mountain bikers filmed years ago and it’s a perfect match!

Yes, because a gif that has cliff's appearing, rock shapes morphing, and new ten+ foot tall tree's of a completely different type then the other around them totally proves your point.

Uh-huh. And adding those few seconds of campfire in post is basically impossible. Got it, Mr. Hollywood.

They had deep conversations in front of the fire, so more like minutes.

Excuse me, what? Read that interview again. The TrekMovie interviewer (!) says it reminded them of M’Talas Prime. But Frakes doesn’t say they are the same set or use the same elements. When he says “We reused, obviously, the set pieces and redecorated. But it felt like it went on forever.” he’s referring to reusing the set pieces they built for the Ukeck set to make it appear larger than it is, not anything from Star Trek: Picard. Heck, those sets in Picard were built and filmed at Blue Cloud Ranch in California (!), not Canada. So you seriously assumed they packed up set elements they build a couple of years ago in California, and shipped them all the way over to Toronto for a shooting that took place years later? I mean, it’s not impossible, but so incredibly unlikely. Please let’s be real here. Once more your entire claim falls apart once you even put in a couple of minutes of research.

He agrees with the interviewer and that interviewers set up specific context.

And yes, they did ship the remaining set stuff up to Canada after the move, they do all the time in film production. Hell, Fallout shipped entire sets from one side of the US to the other.

 

[tenmei]

Ah, the Argument of Theseus. If you change the caveats when points are proven wrong, is it even the same argument you started with?

 

[Michael]

And if you went in and checked the goggle map of that you'd see the distances and angles for the observation platform are all wrong.

Well, you are wrong. The tower is visible exactly where one would expect it to be visible. Right were it actually is in real life. Everything we see makes total sense when we consider where they likely positioned the camera for the various shots. And please keep in mind that the image on Google Maps has massive distortion, since they take those as 360° spherical shots.

It's obvious they added it in in post the same as the bridge.

This just makes zero sense. Why the hell would they care to digitally add some random tower that is actually there on location?! Please think about this for just one second.

That's not when he started climbing, that's when he had already climbed up a step.

This, is when he started climbing.

That is not true. And everyone can check for themselves here. The top of his head is roughly at the top of the fifth hole from the top of the fence. You’re not fooling anyone.

Yes, because a gif that has cliff's appearing, rock shapes morphing, and new ten+ foot tall tree's of a completely different type then the other around them totally proves your point.

I don’t even know what to respond to this, to be honest. This is close to conspiracy theory nonsense. Everyone who looks at the comparison I posted can see that it’s clearly and unmistakably the exact same location. The fact that you seem to be living in some fantasy world doesn’t change that fact. I presented clear evidence where they shot the episode. You on the other hand were cocksure it was filmed at the “University of Waterloo”, even though you posted exactly zero fucking evidence for that claim. This takes the cake for the most ridiculous conversation I’ve had in quite a long time on this board. Kudos, I guess.

They had deep conversations in front of the fire, so more like minutes.

Oh, another one of your specialty: An overconfident claim made in the hope that no-one would bother to check. I just stop-watched for how long the fire is visible all throughout “Vox in Excelso”, and it’s 47 SECONDS. Not that it changes anything about the fact that it’s trivially easy to add a flame in post production, especially in a daytime scene. Doesn’t matter if it’s seconds, minutes or goddamn hours. This is just another attempt at distracting from the fact that your original claim makes no sense.

He agrees with the interviewer and that interviewers set up specific context.

He does not. The interviewer asks: “How was this one built?” and Frakes answers: “That’s the Volume, that’s the new magic of filmmaking… And I thought to great effect. It was thrilling to be out there. We reused, obviously, the set pieces and redecorated. But it felt like it went on forever.”

His answer has zero to do with the interviewer saying it reminded them of M’Talas Prime. He’s explaining how they made it look larger than it was.

And yes, they did ship the remaining set stuff up to Canada after the move, they do all the time in film production. Hell, Fallout shipped entire sets from one side of the US to the other.

Post ANY proof that they either shipped set elements from Picard to use on “300th Night” two years later or alternatively a screenshot showing even ONE SINGULAR element that’s identical in both sets. You won’t, because you can’t. Because the Ukeck market set did not use elements from Picard. If you want anyone to believe that claim, you will have to fucking prove it. You’ve been shown to be wrong so many fucking times in this thread alone, how do you expect anyone to believe anything you claim?

 

[TRON JA307020]

I can't speak for you but I would posit anyone who genuinely dislikes any show or film would typically just forget it exists and let it fade into apathy. Trawling every topic of discussion to routinely express critiques, especially disprovable ones and ones that don't lead to further discussions, is just not normal behaviour. It's an agenda.

Forget it exists? No. Better to complain about it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. We complain enough we might get something better and something that follows Trek source material closer.

Out of curiosity, how far past Thursday? Just so we know.

I always watch it at different times.

 

[fireproof78]

Better to complain about it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. We complain enough we might get something better and something that follows Trek source material closer.

Not how it works.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Forget it exists? No. Better to complain about it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. We complain enough we might get something better and something that follows Trek source material closer.

Only if one has actionable, quantifiable complaints and complains directly to those that can make a difference.

"I just don't like this because it's different" is not constructive in any way. Feedback that can be disproven is not viable in any way.

I don't feel the Kurzman era is any less Star Trek than the Berman era. It all feels the same to me so your desire, I feel, is already met. Who would you have them cater to? The far right brigade on their gfr articles or actual people watching the show?

 

[tenmei]

I always watch it at different times.

You wait until it drops out of the Top 10 and then watch it, by default, putting the delayed ratings up? Yes, I saw your original unedited post

 

[TRON JA307020]

Only if one has actionable, quantifiable complaints and complains directly to those that can make a difference.

"I just don't like this because it's different" is not constructive in any way. Feedback that can be disproven is not viable in any way.

I don't feel the Kurzman era is any less Star Trek than the Berman era. It all feels the same to me so your desire, I feel, is already met. Who would you have them cater to? The far right brigade on their gfr articles or actual people watching the show?

It feels nothing like previous trek. Cater to? Who do you think they are catering to now? Why are you bringing that up?

All I want is a well written and produced star trek show. Something this show is not. Inbmy opinion.

 

[fireproof78]

Only if one has actionable, quantifiable complaints and complains directly to those that can make a difference.

"I just don't like this because it's different" is not constructive in any way. Feedback that can be disproven is not viable in any way.

I don't feel the Kurzman era is any less Star Trek than the Berman era. It all feels the same to me so your desire, I feel, is already met. Who would you have them cater to? The far right brigade on their gfr articles or actual people watching the show?

Here's the thing: current business is driven by subscriptions and views. If I watch it to complain about it then that's a watch. It doesn't tell Paramount anything.

Vs. not watching. Showing them this is not worth my time or my money. If the vocal fans actually believe that current Trek is damaging the franchise, then not giving it views is the most logical choice.

 

[TRON JA307020]

You wait until it drops out of the Top 10 and then watch it, by default, putting the delayed ratings up? Yes, I saw your original unedited post

I already told you I do not watch it on thursday. Most times ill watch it bit by bit. Rarely in one sitting. Can take me up to a week to get through an episode.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

It feels nothing like previous trek. Cater to? Who do you think they are catering to now? Why are you bringing that up?

What you want is what I feel is already provided so what makes your feelings more valid? Why should it be changed to suit you?

All I want is a well written and produced star trek show. Something this show is not. Inbmy opinion.

And that is just opinion. Nothing no amount of complaining on a backwater forum can ever be put into an action plan.

So we loop back around. The only way for you to make a statement is to not watch. To not be subscribed. That is what actually hurts them.

 

[fireproof78]

So we loop back around. The only way for you to make a statement is to not watch. To not be subscribed. That is what actually hurts them.

Exactly this. Do not engage. This is business 101

 

[TRON JA307020]

What you want is what I feel is already provided so what makes your feelings more valid? Why should it be changed to suit you?

And that is just opinion. Nothing no amount of complaining on a backwater forum can ever be put into an action plan.

So we loop back around. The only way for you to make a statement is to not watch. To not be subscribed. That is what actually hurts them.

I watch so I can explain why it needs to change. Watching it the way I do doesn't help it get to the top 10. So thats something.

Exactly this. Do not engage. This is business 101

I watch so I can give my criticisms.

 

[fireproof78]

watch so I can give my criticisms.

Unfortunately, this will not change their minds. This is a business driven by views.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Unfortunately, this will not change their minds. This is a business driven by views.

Well I do the best I can. Star Trek needs a change. It needs to go back to what made it great.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

I watch so I can explain why it needs to change. Watching it the way I do doesn't help it get to the top 10. So thats something.



I watch so I can give my criticisms.

So you pre-decided you didn't like it and then hate watch just so you can complain? Here I thought the point of watching a tv show was for entertainment...but if this absurdity is fun for you then good for you.

 

[tenmei]

Well I do the best I can. Star Trek needs a change. It needs to go back to what made it great.

It needs to change - by not changing?