The Roddenberry Archive / OTOY
- Thread starter Donny
- Start date
I'm curious if the Colt+Spock+Screen Wall video has something to do with an alt-future from the comics (Star Trek The Early Voyages, Issues 13-15)? Screenrant posted an article today about Colt getting thrown into the future and that changed history where Pike stays in command of the Enterprise and Kirk becomes a civilian captain. The visuals shown seems to fit this scenario...
I do get that feel in watching the footage…that something “blinked” and Colt looks a bit bewildered…and there Spock is in TMP-wear trying to explain it…
I wonder if anyone thought to just film different scenes and watch cheaper dailies to see which scene lent itself to a feeling.
I wonder if anyone thought to just film different scenes and watch cheaper dailies to see which scene lent itself to a feeling.
Last edited:
Just to be clear, I'm not pillorying the work done here, which is very nice. It's just that Star Trek often gets the San Francisco area utterly wrong, and not in a consistent way.
The only think I'll say as regards Roddenberry's "vision" for the area is that I've read a lot of drafts of what became TMP, many behind the scenes docs, plus what he wrote in the novelization ("Los Angeles Island"), and while I recall some describing coastline change , those drafts sometimes have Livingston's name alone on them. e.g.
"famous antiquities" doesn't suggest a reconstruction. And, no, let's not argue the Ship of Theseus.
It's absolutely possible and likely there are documents I've not seen that add more detail to this. But I'm dubious Gene drew a map. I'd love to be proven wrong.
I'm not griping that the landscape changed, just—knowing the geography and the tectonics—the manner in which the shot portrays a kind of change I find hard to swallow with San Francisco and its landmarks managing to survive it. For instance I can buy SF becoming an island because the San Andreas fault cuts out into the ocean just south of the city, so assuming some weird subduction that's vaguely plausible, but the entire Marin headlands east of the fault vanishing? No so much.
For those who simply accept this, that's fine. Spin on. I'm not itching for a fight.
But for anyone interested in why I think the shot I critiqued above makes no geographic sense, see the spoilered images and comments below.
The only think I'll say as regards Roddenberry's "vision" for the area is that I've read a lot of drafts of what became TMP, many behind the scenes docs, plus what he wrote in the novelization ("Los Angeles Island"), and while I recall some describing coastline change , those drafts sometimes have Livingston's name alone on them. e.g.
10 EXT. SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA - DAY (MATTE) 10
with the legend "San Francisco" SUPERIMPOSED over. This is a PANORAMIC SHOT of the entire Bay Area, with the famous antiquities the Golden Gate Bridge and the pointed Trans-America Building the only recognizable landmarks. The visibility is perfect, clear as the eye can see, which indicates sparkling clean air. The shoreline and Bay as we once knew it no longer exist -- the old San Francisco city area is now an island with the old Bay now an inland extension of the Pacific Ocean.
with the legend "San Francisco" SUPERIMPOSED over. This is a PANORAMIC SHOT of the entire Bay Area, with the famous antiquities the Golden Gate Bridge and the pointed Trans-America Building the only recognizable landmarks. The visibility is perfect, clear as the eye can see, which indicates sparkling clean air. The shoreline and Bay as we once knew it no longer exist -- the old San Francisco city area is now an island with the old Bay now an inland extension of the Pacific Ocean.
"famous antiquities" doesn't suggest a reconstruction. And, no, let's not argue the Ship of Theseus.
It's absolutely possible and likely there are documents I've not seen that add more detail to this. But I'm dubious Gene drew a map. I'd love to be proven wrong.
I'm not griping that the landscape changed, just—knowing the geography and the tectonics—the manner in which the shot portrays a kind of change I find hard to swallow with San Francisco and its landmarks managing to survive it. For instance I can buy SF becoming an island because the San Andreas fault cuts out into the ocean just south of the city, so assuming some weird subduction that's vaguely plausible, but the entire Marin headlands east of the fault vanishing? No so much.
For those who simply accept this, that's fine. Spin on. I'm not itching for a fight.
But for anyone interested in why I think the shot I critiqued above makes no geographic sense, see the spoilered images and comments below.
One must to first acknowledge that Trek in general has been inconsistent on its portrayal of San Francisco and its environs. For instance, Star Trek VI puts this giant hill to the east of the bridge on the Marin side...
Context:
...whereas you can see there's no giant hill to the east of the bridge in TVH...
The theatrical cut of TMP does imply some geographic changes, but as portrayed it's not of some great magnitude. For instance...
Even though this shot was flopped because of from where they had to shoot the plate it's not an unbelievably different landscape, as this Google Earth approximation of the angle shows. As only the south tower of the bridge is out in the channel, this always makes plain which way is north, ergo this is looking south at SF, not north at Marin.
Even in the unused shot of the air tram station, which in part inspired the shot in question, you can see the new Paolo Soleri-esque cityscape roughly from Pac Heights through Russian Hill and still see Coit Tower and Telegraph hill, so it's not that radially different.
This unused effects shot was filmed from Kirby Cove on the Marin side of the bridge, Here's a photo I took of the same hill from roughly the same spot.
A bit more context.
This shot looking out of the station demonstrates a basically unchanged Marin Coastline north.
So now there's a baseline the real and close to real geography.
Now to the subject shot.
And some context:
There's simply no way for this to be possible without removing everything NE of the bridge for many miles—including 2,571 ft (784m) Mount Tamalpais, and for a 200+ hill or island to pop out in waters anywhere from to 30–60 meters deep.
Of course, if this is a replica bridge somewhere else, or at Disney's 23rd century theme park, all objections are moot.
Context:
...whereas you can see there's no giant hill to the east of the bridge in TVH...
The theatrical cut of TMP does imply some geographic changes, but as portrayed it's not of some great magnitude. For instance...
Even though this shot was flopped because of from where they had to shoot the plate it's not an unbelievably different landscape, as this Google Earth approximation of the angle shows. As only the south tower of the bridge is out in the channel, this always makes plain which way is north, ergo this is looking south at SF, not north at Marin.
Even in the unused shot of the air tram station, which in part inspired the shot in question, you can see the new Paolo Soleri-esque cityscape roughly from Pac Heights through Russian Hill and still see Coit Tower and Telegraph hill, so it's not that radially different.
This unused effects shot was filmed from Kirby Cove on the Marin side of the bridge, Here's a photo I took of the same hill from roughly the same spot.
A bit more context.
This shot looking out of the station demonstrates a basically unchanged Marin Coastline north.
So now there's a baseline the real and close to real geography.
Now to the subject shot.
And some context:
There's simply no way for this to be possible without removing everything NE of the bridge for many miles—including 2,571 ft (784m) Mount Tamalpais, and for a 200+ hill or island to pop out in waters anywhere from to 30–60 meters deep.
Of course, if this is a replica bridge somewhere else, or at Disney's 23rd century theme park, all objections are moot.
Attachments
Last edited:
Or the problem is the OTOY image should simply be flipped. That would bring it much closer to being consistent with something shot from beyond Kirby Cove as depicted in the unused TMP shot.
To create a San Francisco Island by severing the peninsula from the airport area in the east through Colma and westward via some tectonic process would force a huge chunk of the coastline to jut northward, as depicted.
https://www.goldengate.org/assets/1/6/plate-tectonics-future-sml.jpg
The question of whether anything could survive such a shift is just one way of looking at it. If planetary engineering was involved, the survival of the bridge and other parts of the city is no more fanciful than saying they have the technology to engineer the coastline.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the fact OTOY left the lamp posts on the bridge. They aren’t there in the Yuricich/Gioffre matte painting that replaces the roadbed with a Planetran pneumatic conveyance.
Also, the architecture depicted by OTOY is much more in line with something by Jacque Fresco than Paolo Soleri- though Soleri’s influence is definitely there in the view of the city in the unused tram approach matte painting.
To create a San Francisco Island by severing the peninsula from the airport area in the east through Colma and westward via some tectonic process would force a huge chunk of the coastline to jut northward, as depicted.
https://www.goldengate.org/assets/1/6/plate-tectonics-future-sml.jpg
The question of whether anything could survive such a shift is just one way of looking at it. If planetary engineering was involved, the survival of the bridge and other parts of the city is no more fanciful than saying they have the technology to engineer the coastline.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the fact OTOY left the lamp posts on the bridge. They aren’t there in the Yuricich/Gioffre matte painting that replaces the roadbed with a Planetran pneumatic conveyance.
Also, the architecture depicted by OTOY is much more in line with something by Jacque Fresco than Paolo Soleri- though Soleri’s influence is definitely there in the view of the city in the unused tram approach matte painting.
Last edited:
Indeed. More than half of them look like Vancouver or Montreal!
Just getting back from the convention; it was a rousing success for the Archive! The Cage interactive tour went great as well. I gave a few "personal tours" of the sets while i was there; and it was a delight to see fans react in the very way I always knew they would to the work we're doing.
I do want to forward any questions about the Roddenberry Archive to @Jules / OTOY, as he knows much more than I do about the future of the project and what his and Rod's vision are.
Therefore, I suggest we perhaps move the discussion to a new thread (if there already isn't one) to discuss the wonderful work the archive is doing, as I don't want to further derail this thread, which was originally created to discuss my pre-archive TOS work. How does that sound to everyone?
I do want to forward any questions about the Roddenberry Archive to @Jules / OTOY, as he knows much more than I do about the future of the project and what his and Rod's vision are.
Therefore, I suggest we perhaps move the discussion to a new thread (if there already isn't one) to discuss the wonderful work the archive is doing, as I don't want to further derail this thread, which was originally created to discuss my pre-archive TOS work. How does that sound to everyone?
Make it so...
Yeah, that would be more believable, except now there's a new hill ¼ mileout into the channel on the south side of the channel.
yep - that’s the same one referenced in both teasers.
You got it. Moved the whole Roddenberry Archive / OTOY discussion into this new thread. Hope I caught all posts …
Thank you, @Michael!
That's pretty cool live-action take of it!
Rather than a direct linear adaption of that story, the 765874 teasers might better be described as visions and fragmented memories, connected to Colt entering and leaving a possible alternate timeline.
Colt’s words in the original story - about her changing perception of reality (while she witnesses all of Star Trek multiversal history play out in the blink of an eye at the end of her journey), also mirror Gene’s description (in the tmp novel) of Spock’s humbling and deeper understanding of reality as he melds with V’ger (which we re-shot with the words GR wrote in the novel).
Spock and Colt meeting in GR’s TMP novel timeline - and the premise for the scenes shot - were green lit by Rod as a way for the RA to visualize several underlying themes GR had expressed in some of his personal notes and correspondence while working on the TMP novel (Rod also signed off on Colt’s post-2266 visual appearances in the RA being informed by JK Woodward’s designs from the IDW 2015 book, Captain’s Log: Pike and, for her most recent 2256 appearance in the Enterprise War novel, that she would be in a Disco uniform - you can see screen tests on the blog )
Another GR theme salient to the evolution of these first characters documented in the RA, going back to the Cage/Menagerie, is that both Colt and Spock (among others) would face lingering existential questions following their experience of having their perception of reality so effortlessly warped by the keepers - a point also touched upon in the TOS novel “Burning Dreams”.
Needless to say, all of Donny’s incredible work is used all over the place - including a revamped TMP bridge set used in that last shot with Spock, Donny made it specifically so we could portray the TMP bridge with the ‘test pattern’ / “house lights on” mode we see it in while it is in dry dock.
Poor choice to make a point...Sure, a rock is on the wrong place. Meanwhile, when Argentina appears in a US movie...
ARGENTINA. REALITY 2.
San Francisco is 49 square miles.
Argentina is 1,073,500 sq miles.
Lots of different landscapes there. San Francisco, not so much.
