• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

what am I seeing?

In ARENA (non remastered), when Kirk and crew first beam down to the planet they show some kind of mountans in the background...but it looks like a paste shot because the mountains kind of jiggle..what am I seeing there???

Rob
 
In ARENA (non remastered), when Kirk and crew first beam down to the planet they show some kind of mountans in the background...but it looks like a paste shot because the mountains kind of jiggle..what am I seeing there???

Rob
If you mean the dark thing seen angling across the top of the screen and slightly down from left to right as the "Arena" title is shown, that's an awning or some sort of overhanging structure in the extreme foreground. You'll note that the fortress wall is obscured by it at the right and you see also some kind of support there.
 
In ARENA (non remastered), when Kirk and crew first beam down to the planet they show some kind of mountans in the background...but it looks like a paste shot because the mountains kind of jiggle..what am I seeing there???

Rob
If you mean the dark thing seen angling across the top of the screen and slightly down from left to right as the "Arena" title is shown, that's an awning or some sort of overhanging structure in the extreme foreground. You'll note that the fortress wall is obscured by it at the right and you see also some kind of support there.

Okay, I see what you mean..thanks!!!

Rob
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.

I don't really see what the problem would be with that. It would just be a case of "Parallel Vasquez Rocks Development" on another planet. Hardly anything unusual for Trek. :rolleyes:
 
In ARENA (non remastered), when Kirk and crew first beam down to the planet they show some kind of mountans in the background...but it looks like a paste shot because the mountains kind of jiggle..what am I seeing there???

Rob

CGI mountains in the distance. But originally there was a piece of set in that part of the shot(a piece of jagged metal or pipe representing a damaged piece of the base structure)and Okuda and his team ingeniously used that piece of set to superimpose a new mountain vista into the shot, giving the Cestus base a lot more depth and reality.
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.
I don't really see what the problem would be with that. It would just be a case of "Parallel Vasquez Rocks Development" on another planet. Hardly anything unusual for Trek. :rolleyes:
The problem would be that they go to Planet Vasquez Rocks later in ``Arena''. The reasonable supposition of the audience would be that the Metrons had returned Kirk and the Gorn Captain to Cestus Whatever, so why wasn't Kirk making his way back to the base where the weapons were --- but wait, why did the Metron say he was making up a new planet if he were throwing them back on the old --- hold on, what's going on here?

In other episodes Planet Vasquez Rock is only one world at a time and there's no risk of confusing this planet from the one we last saw two months ago. This was the only time the same area was used to represent two planets, so it is worthwhile making sure the audience isn't likely to confuse which planet is which.
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.
I don't really see what the problem would be with that. It would just be a case of "Parallel Vasquez Rocks Development" on another planet. Hardly anything unusual for Trek. :rolleyes:
The problem would be that they go to Planet Vasquez Rocks later in ``Arena''. The reasonable supposition of the audience would be that the Metrons had returned Kirk and the Gorn Captain to Cestus Whatever, so why wasn't Kirk making his way back to the base where the weapons were --- but wait, why did the Metron say he was making up a new planet if he were throwing them back on the old --- hold on, what's going on here?

In other episodes Planet Vasquez Rock is only one world at a time and there's no risk of confusing this planet from the one we last saw two months ago. This was the only time the same area was used to represent two planets, so it is worthwhile making sure the audience isn't likely to confuse which planet is which.

It's also possible that more than just rocks were visible behind the fort -- things like roads, cars, etc.
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.

That's a common misconception. It's not supposed to be the distant landscape, it's a worn metal beam in the foreground that's meant to obscure the distant landscape. And I don't think it's a matte, just a forced-perspective piece inserted in front of the camera. On the right, you can see a bit of the scaffolding holding up the "beam."

Also, you're in error about the geography. Although the fort in question was right next to Vasquez Rocks, the familiar rock formations would not have been visible in the background given the way the camera is facing in this shot. If I recall right from a Wild, Wild West episode that featured the fort and the rocks together, I believe the cliffs and such are off to camera left in that shot.

As for FalTorPan's suggestion that traffic might have been visible there, I don't think so. As I recall from my visit to Vasquez Rocks, the freeway isn't visible from there because of the intervening mountains. That's part of why it's such a popular location for Westerns and SF shows -- it can pass for total wilderness, aside from the dirt road and the picnic tables, but those are easy enough for a film crew to hide.

No, the metal beam was presumably placed there to make it less obvious that Cestus III had the same landscape as the Metron asteroid.
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.

That's a common misconception. It's not supposed to be the distant landscape, it's a worn metal beam in the foreground that's meant to obscure the distant landscape. And I don't think it's a matte, just a forced-perspective piece inserted in front of the camera. On the right, you can see a bit of the scaffolding holding up the "beam."

Also, you're in error about the geography. Although the fort in question was right next to Vasquez Rocks, the familiar rock formations would not have been visible in the background given the way the camera is facing in this shot. If I recall right from a Wild, Wild West episode that featured the fort and the rocks together, I believe the cliffs and such are off to camera left in that shot.
You're referring to this view, I believe:

PDVD_004-1.jpg


From the POV used in the "Arena" shot I linked above, the distinctive upthrust formation would have been out-of-frame to the left, if I'm not mistaken.


As for FalTorPan's suggestion that traffic might have been visible there, I don't think so. As I recall from my visit to Vasquez Rocks, the freeway isn't visible from there because of the intervening mountains. That's part of why it's such a popular location for Westerns and SF shows -- it can pass for total wilderness, aside from the dirt road and the picnic tables, but those are easy enough for a film crew to hide.

No, the metal beam was presumably placed there to make it less obvious that Cestus III had the same landscape as the Metron asteroid.
At the time that episode was shot, the freeway (which might have been visible from that angle, if it didn't actually pass right over the place once occupied by the fort set) hadn't been built yet, and the only roads of consequence (including the two-lane Sierra Highway, which was the only real through road) would have been behind the camera, I'm pretty sure.
 
Having never either visited or read much about the Vasquez Rocks, I have no idea what its surroundings look like. I was simply suggesting a possible reason why the "metallic mountains" were used. :)
 
Having never either visited or read much about the Vasquez Rocks, I have no idea what its surroundings look like. I was simply suggesting a possible reason why the "metallic mountains" were used. :)
That's the way I read your post.

I have been there, but it was a very long time ago -- before the fortress set was demolished and before the freeway went in -- so working out in my head exactly where everything was/is in relation to everything else is still a bit tricky.

There are some photos here (on an old Bonanza fansite) which give a pretty good idea of what the surrounding terrain is like, though if you were to go there today, there would be homes built much closer than is shown in the photos. One shot, about halfway down the page, and captioned "Rock formations from the rear of the park" shows the approximate location of the fortress set, with the rocks in the background.
 
Also, you're in error about the geography. Although the fort in question was right next to Vasquez Rocks, the familiar rock formations would not have been visible in the background given the way the camera is facing in this shot. If I recall right from a Wild, Wild West episode that featured the fort and the rocks together, I believe the cliffs and such are off to camera left in that shot.
You're referring to this view, I believe:

PDVD_004-1.jpg


From the POV used in the "Arena" shot I linked above, the distinctive upthrust formation would have been out-of-frame to the left, if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I remembered it.

At the time that episode was shot, the freeway (which might have been visible from that angle, if it didn't actually pass right over the place once occupied by the fort set) hadn't been built yet, and the only roads of consequence (including the two-lane Sierra Highway, which was the only real through road) would have been behind the camera, I'm pretty sure.

I've been looking at Vasquez Rocks on Google Maps, and I think I was wrong about the location of the freeway; it would've actually been south of the park, behind the camera from that "Arena" shot. If you enter "Vasquez Rocks" on Google Maps, the "Gorn cliff" is the outcropping to the right of the "A" marker tab (or whatever you call that inverted-teardrop thing), which has a flat, sandy area just east of it. That must be the famous filming location because it's the only part that's sandy rather than covered in scrub. And there's a big rectangular "peninsula" to the sandy area on the southeast. I think that must be where the fortress stood, judging from the terrain and the camera angles. If you look behind the horses on the shot you provided, you can see a road just to the right of the big cliff, heading directly away from the camera. On the Google Maps overhead view, that road is visible going northwest from the sandy area, then curving further west and eventually intersecting with Escondido Canyon Road. That's the path my cousin and I took to get into the park; I vividly remember it because we got separated for a time and I didn't have a cell phone yet, so I trudged up and down the length of that road a couple of times trying to see if he'd gotten back to the car yet. (This was also the road that Fred and Barney drove along underneath the opening titles of the live action The Flintstones movie, although they reversed direction on it a couple of times.)

So if the fortress was in that rectangular area in the southeast corner of the sandy region, with the gate facing northwest, it's consistent with what's in the photos. That would mean the "Arena" shot is looking pretty much directly north, assuming that's the only entrance. The only things due north of the park now are Dietz Drive and Escondido Canyon Road, and I think they'd be behind the hills from the fort's POV if they'd even been there in 1967.

EDITED TO ADD: Okay, from the Bonanza fan page M'Sharak linked to:

http://ponderosascenery.homestead.com/vasquez12.html

The flat rocky area just behind those sparse trees and in front of the cliffs is where I think the fortress was. The camera angle is roughly the same as in the black-and-white photo through the fortress gates, but further back from the cliffs.


Having never either visited or read much about the Vasquez Rocks, I have no idea what its surroundings look like. I was simply suggesting a possible reason why the "metallic mountains" were used. :)

Or rather, why the crumpled metal beam that many have mistaken for a bad "mountain" effect was used.
 
Last edited:
maybe its from one of those boulders on the top of the wall...they kind of look like the material we see in the shot..

Are you referring to the grey spheroids atop the gate towers in the "Arena" title shot, another one of which is visible in the lower right of the shot? No, those are probably plaster or papier-mache, something lightweight that resembles rock -- maybe the same spray-foam stuff they used to create cheap, fake cave walls. What's on top of the shot is clearly a crumpled piece of brown metal; look how it catches the light, especially in the top right.
 
What your see there is a piece of rumpled material meant to look like stone. This was added as a matte in post production to hide the Vasquez Rocks that would have otherwise been visible. If you had seen them, it would have ruined the illusion that Kirk and the Gorn had been transported to a faraway place. The outpost set was right next to the Vasquez rocks.
I don't really see what the problem would be with that. It would just be a case of "Parallel Vasquez Rocks Development" on another planet. Hardly anything unusual for Trek. :rolleyes:
The problem would be that they go to Planet Vasquez Rocks later in ``Arena''. The reasonable supposition of the audience would be that the Metrons had returned Kirk and the Gorn Captain to Cestus Whatever, so why wasn't Kirk making his way back to the base where the weapons were --- but wait, why did the Metron say he was making up a new planet if he were throwing them back on the old --- hold on, what's going on here?

In other episodes Planet Vasquez Rock is only one world at a time and there's no risk of confusing this planet from the one we last saw two months ago. This was the only time the same area was used to represent two planets, so it is worthwhile making sure the audience isn't likely to confuse which planet is which.

But didn't Cisco mistakenly say that he wanted to ask Kirk about fighting the Gorn on Cestus 3? If the producers of Arena had the hindsight to have predicted this glaring error, then it would have saved them having to matte in a crumpled up grocery bag!

On the Vazquez Rocks topic though, is the nice glade and lake as seen in Shore Leave actually near Vazquez Rocks, as there are some rocky things in the distance, as seen when Kirk starts chasing Finnegan??
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top