Some of us might think Peter Jackson's Weta or Digital Domain is the best; but, each to his (or her) own opinion.
TOS myths and misconceptions...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Some of us might think Peter Jackson's Weta or Digital Domain is the best; but, each to his (or her) own opinion.
I disagree completely. By our standards World War II was fought with primitive weapons, but at the time they were using them, they were state-of-the-art. The writing perfectly illustrates the point that by Star Trek's 23 century perspective (with their shield technology) 100 year old atomic weapons are primitive.
Nothing careless about it.
It's all academic because ILM was founded 8 years after Star Trek went off the air, so you can't compare the two. By 1976 computer technology had gotten smaller and cheaper and made Star Wars type motion control possible, which made a HUGE difference in how models were photographed. Such a thing was completely out of reach of a TV show in 1966. The state of the art during Star Trek's run was 2001, and the effects there cost a fortune.
2001 came out in 1968, after Star Trek had already been on the air for two years, and four years after the first pilot was produced. The state of the art at that point was closer to Forbidden Planet.
2001 started production in 1965 with many of the effects done in-camera. I'm sure DS9Sega can speak with more authority on this. So while it wasn't released until 1968, 2001 was filmed concurrent with the production of TOS. Thus, the effects work for the film were state of the art for the time TOS aired on NBC.
Moreover, Forbidden Planet was a decade-old film at that point.
Last edited:
Doesn't really change my main point, since I'm pretty sure that Howard Anderson and Doug Trumbull weren't comparing notes. 2001 changed the definition of "state of the art" but not until it was released and everyone could see just what they were cooking up, by which point Star Trek had already been on the air for two years, when it changed the state of the art (which, as far as television was concerned, was probably best exemplified by one of Irwin Allen's various series).
Just to be clear, "state of the art" doesn't mean the average of a time. It means the level of development (as of a device, procedure, process, technique, or science) reached at any particular time usually as a result of modern methods. It's commonly used to mean the highest achievement at that time, hence "state of the art visuals." 2001 came out while TOS was on the air, ergo, it was the state of the art as of 1968. The state of the art prior to that was what something else.
Anyway, my point was that TOS's effects can't be fairly compared to the state of the art effects of 1966, let alone the (r)evolution that motion control provided Star Wars via ILM.
Anyway, my point was that TOS's effects can't be fairly compared to the state of the art effects of 1966, let alone the (r)evolution that motion control provided Star Wars via ILM.
number6
Vice Admiral
Sure it can. The effects were state of the art for televised sci-fi in that era. A lot of what was done wound up being developed and refined. The ILM material over those later years (especially model animation) has a direct artistic lineage to this era and the eras which came before.
Wasn't John Dykstra working for Trumbull at the time 2001 was being made?
number6
Vice Admiral
I think so.
That was all in the context of a response to a post about ILM and Trek.
I think the closest that he ever came to saying that was in Star Trek IV. Except I think it was backwards something like "Scotty, Beam Me Up"
Qualifying it by saying it's what he believed the Captain would have said.
number6
Vice Admiral
I am aware. ILM didn't exist in the era of 2001 and TOS, of course.. My point still stands. TOS and 2001 were state of the art for their time and ILM took a lot of that to the next level by inventing the technology to make their work possible...in the same way that 2001 and TOS had to in their day.
I am sure that ILM's stuff will look archaic in our children's adulthood as well..
I never bought into the whole GL thing anyway. The guy made some good films and had a prolific creative mind. He knew how to hire the right people to bring his creation to life and refine his vision..Kinda like GR..
All the GL posturing is simply residual anger over the appearance of Jar Jar in TPM.
The Tholian Web was the only time anyone other than Kirk called McCoy "Bones". Right after they play Kirk's last message.
Not necessarily. I was starting to lose respect for him after ROTJ, and I'm not the only one.
I'm with yah.
number6
Vice Admiral
So this is all really about the Nyub-Nyub.
Similar threads
- Poll
