It's seeping into TV now, too. AP Bio is extremely teal & orange.
You'll be able to edit after you get a few more posts under your belt. Welcome to the board!
Star Trek VI - The best looking film?
- Thread starter Commander Kielbasa
- Start date
I'll be honest, I never knew the sets on TUC were redressed from TNG until I joined these boards 6 years ago. I've always thought they looked great and alongside TMP, the best, most realistic enterprise interiors - with the sole caveat being that it's on account of its newness mainly over stylistic choices.
That's the very first thing I noticed! The doors and windows scream 100% Ten Forward.
Regarding the OP's question, I mostly agree that I think TUC looked/looks good. There are little things here and there that I've picked up on throughout the years and seeing the movie multiple times that slightly undermines the overall effect. One major thing someone pointed out that I never noticed before was the augmentation of Spock and Uhura's stations, which I never noticed before, but I wish I could unsee it. The edges of their stations jut out from the wall in an awkward way. I really wish they had done that differently. I like that they try to make Spock's station echo the alcove set-up from the earlier films, but it would work better if the station was sunk into the wall a little more; same for Uhura's station. If there was anything they could have done rather than have those stations protruding they way they do, that would have hopefully been better.
I absolutely LOVE the interior of the Enterprise-A in TUC. The reuse of Next Gen sets doesn't bother me in the slightest, either. Timeline wise, TUC happens before TNG. So TNG is stealing TUC sets! Seriously, though, I have no problems accepting that the Enterprise-D based the design of Ten Forward off the Federation President's Paris office. Or that there's design similarities (okay the WHOLE design
) between the Enterprise-A and D's engine room. If it ain't broke, why fix it? Hell, the Enterprise-E
So it doesn't look as good as someone thinks it does if they don't understand film making?
You can't argue away someone's preference by saying, "You can't like that better because it wasn't as well made."
I like Killer Klowns From Outer Space more than Avatar.
Which post are you replying to?
STEPHon IT, page 1, post #4, paragraph 2. The post right below my first in the thread.
Okay. Weirdly the quote didn't show up previously.
The rest of the 80s-90s Trek movies look like B-movies, which they kinda were.
More than kinda -- TWOK was produced by on a low budget by Paramount's TV division. The other films were also deliberately budgeted low; as early as July 1982, Time magazine reported that "Paramount is planning eight tightly budgeted Star Trek films, one to be released every 18 months.". That timetable and number of movies wasn't held to, but the costs were.
More than kinda -- TWOK was produced by on a low budget by Paramount's TV division. The other films were also deliberately budgeted low; as early as July 1982, Time magazine reported that "Paramount is planning eight tightly budgeted Star Trek films, one to be released every 18 months.". That timetable and number of movies wasn't held to, but the costs were.
TMP - very grand huge budget SciFi 'A' movie from A list director with lofty themes of space travel/existence/humanity, future earth in peril, realism with Starfleet almost like youd expect NASA to look in 200 years, grandiose title 'The Motion Picture', overtures etc..almost like a golden age Hollywood picture..
TWOK - (compared to TMP) low budget SciFi 'B' movie with added horror elements/extra violence, extra colour, revenge themes/mad man killing everyone in sight (that many exploitation B movies seemed to have) and even the B movie style could almost expect it to be playing as part of a double bill in some rundown old cinema off Times Sq...but at the same time is kind of an A movie as well as it feels big budget with the FX/sets etc (anyway the 10m budget was pretty big for a SF film back then) , it feels all lofty intellectual/intelligent, classic literature, acting from all is utterly convincing etc - similar to Star Wars'77, Alien.. - 'B' movies but done in 'A' list ways
Last edited:
They somehow didn't look as good in TWOK in my opinion though, which is down to the cinematography and lighting.
I've written about how much I dislike STVI previously from a story point of view but I have to agree that visually it was very well shot and just looked lovely, even with the redressed TNG sets. The characters looked great too, far better than in STV (which is a film I really like). The only TREK film that really looks "cheap" to me is STIII.
When the original post mentions "color grading", it calls to mind the digital process that is used all the time now to alter the look and feel of footage after it has been shot. I'm not certain digital color grading existed when TUC was released but "color timing" certain did where the footage could be tweaked during the processing stage to enhance or bleach out certain colors, increase the contrast as well as other more "analog" kinds of manipulation. Just a clarification...that's all.
Just a long way to restate that I personally agree that STVI does look fantastic.
When the original post mentions "color grading", it calls to mind the digital process that is used all the time now to alter the look and feel of footage after it has been shot. I'm not certain digital color grading existed when TUC was released but "color timing" certain did where the footage could be tweaked during the processing stage to enhance or bleach out certain colors, increase the contrast as well as other more "analog" kinds of manipulation. Just a clarification...that's all.
Just a long way to restate that I personally agree that STVI does look fantastic.
One element that really compliments the look of STVI is the sound design. The bridge hums, the button chimes and a little bit of TOS thrown in for good measure. It really complimented the look. TMP may look great, but barely having any sound at all really dampens the mood (At least until the Director's Edition).
Yes, it was amazing how a little bit of TOS sound FX in the mix really made the TMP Enterprise feel more homey.
I love VI, the best of the TOS films IMHO.
I like the Super 35 film, it gives a nice depth of field and the film has wonderful contrast - note that the white's are really white (unlike in color graded movies of today). It's not overly lit and there's that scene in starfleet headquarters where Meyer steals from Citizen Kane - this scene was cheap to film as the set falls into darkness. Here's a great link for anyone who wants to learn more about the cinematography of VI:
https://ascmag.com/articles/star-trek-50-part-viii-undiscovered-cinematography
I wish this one would get a proper remastering as the DNR applied to the movie is really bad.
I like the Super 35 film, it gives a nice depth of field and the film has wonderful contrast - note that the white's are really white (unlike in color graded movies of today). It's not overly lit and there's that scene in starfleet headquarters where Meyer steals from Citizen Kane - this scene was cheap to film as the set falls into darkness. Here's a great link for anyone who wants to learn more about the cinematography of VI:
https://ascmag.com/articles/star-trek-50-part-viii-undiscovered-cinematography
I wish this one would get a proper remastering as the DNR applied to the movie is really bad.
Great article! Thanks for sharing it. I've bookmarked all the others in the series.
Similar threads
