Comments on: Abrams: Star Trek Is Mind Blowing

By: Roger

Roger — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:56:57 +0000

To AJ and Cobra: Were you even paying attention to the movie? Veridian III was uninhabited and Veridian IV was the planet with the pre-industrial humanoid society.

The only people that get “boxed in” are those that don’t take the time to pay attention.

The Prime Directive is NON-INTEREFENCE.

Were you even watching or just going by what other people say?

Yes, I do pay attention and sadly, I wasted time on these posts. My mistake.

By: Simon

Simon — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 05:06:20 +0000

PS: The other ships designed for ST:FC were the Saber-class, the Norway-class, and the Steamrunner-class. These were only medium detailed and only meant to be seen from a distance.

By: Simon

Simon — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:59:20 +0000

#103: ILM was initially given the go ahead to design 15 ships. Paramount kept whittling down the FX budget so they ended up with 5. Of those, they could only fully detail 3: The Enterprise-E, the Defiant, and the Thunderchild (AKIRA-class). They had a beautiful rendering of another ship that was supposed to be destroyed (Admiral Hansen’s ship) but the budget was cut for those shots.

John Knoll, who won the Oscar for Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, was the VFX supervisor for First Contact. He’s a huge TREK fan, was supervisor for the SW prequel trilogy, and with his brother Thomas invented Photoshop (yes, THAT Photoshop).

By: Kuvagh

Kuvagh — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 03:59:26 +0000

While we’re talking FX: I hope that whatever ships we see besides Enterprise have adequate detailing and models which are suitable for lingering closeups. First Contact was really bad about that. Yes, I care about ships … not as much as the more important things, but I do care about them. :)

Looking as realistic as the ships from 70’s and 80’s productions might be nice, too. :)

By: Enc

Enc — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:10:26 +0000

#99
LOL no. let me change that. as a greeat person once said.

LMKAO

By: Jovan Gauthier

Jovan Gauthier — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 22:42:47 +0000

Indeed. Nicholas Meyer said that they didn’t give him enough time/money to do it properly, and in “typical studio fashion” complained when it didn’t look right. XD

By: Simon

Simon — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 22:08:40 +0000

Regarding the Genesis cave:
ILM themselves cringe when they talk about it. It was something literally added last minute and they didn’t have time to properly develop the shots. They made up for it with the Genesis planet matte paintings in “ST:III”

“Howard The Duck”’s VFX were the best thing about that film.

I didn’t particularly care for ILM’s work in “The Golden Child”.

When they’re firing on all cylinders ILM is the best of the best. 1996 was the best year ever for ILM:

Mission Impossible
Twister
Dragonheart
Mars Attacks!
Star Trek: First Contact

But in ‘96 they did have one bad one. They did the CGI alligators in “Erasor” and they look pretty poor. Again, a last second addition when the main companies on that film couldn’t do those shots.

By: 4 8 15 16 23 42

4 8 15 16 23 42 — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 15:48:08 +0000

Gotta wonder how “Abrams: Star Trek Is Mind Blowing” turns into another BBK discussion…..

By: Enc

Enc — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 06:16:30 +0000

#94
this is a planet next door like earth mars. they could like us send landers, rovers, telescopes and see down to the cm and see kirks pin. if youre gonna remove the other stuff you might as well take the pin and the body.

#92 45
good yes but cliche.
and that PD does kinda get in the way dont it. the clean up creew would arive b4 any of kirks friends and it would be the clean up creew looking down on an empty grave. kinda hard to write that scenes emotion with strangers. the fade to black would still make its point but not with the same impact.
here. it might be more of an impact with the clean up crew if this was a tv show ep and not a film. and make this shot the season ender.

#96
you gotta new topic ? :)

By: Iowagirl

Iowagirl — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 06:01:32 +0000

#45
I’d add some miniscule details, but I agree in principle. ;)

#91
Amen, Amen, and Amen. :)