Comments on: Kurtzman, Orci & Lindelof Talk Abrams & Star Trek Collaboration

By: Trekboi

Trekboi — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:01:11 +0000

hmmm- i try to be hopefull but “TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN”

By: Simon

Simon — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:19:15 +0000

I’m fine with the CG model Enterprise. There’s nothing to give up.

By: Harry Ballz

Harry Ballz — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:03:26 +0000

“things they can’t change”?????

What, are you on glue? Orci comes here and says he reads every comment.

It IS possible to maybe INFLUENCE a creative decision on the next movie.

Too bad you give up so easily.

By: Simon

Simon — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:47:01 +0000

#54 – Seems like the audience was impressed, except for a few who would rather whine about things they can’t change and threadcrap news items every chance they get…

By: Harry Ballz

Harry Ballz — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 03:54:50 +0000

Hey, you don’t have to be a hen to judge an egg!

It’s up to the “experts” to impress the audience, not the other way around, Einstein!

By: Simon

Simon — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:38:50 +0000

#51 I guess it makes it 10 million to (counts board messages) to 10 that didn’t “buy” it.

When *you* design a ship worthy of the movie screen, be sure to let us know.

By: Harry Ballz

Harry Ballz — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:59:44 +0000

Nah, that’s not it! I don’t care if they use clay model animation! I just didn’t buy the “look” of the ship. PERIOD!

By: Simon

Simon — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:47:04 +0000

All you guys who complain about the new “E”…seriously it’s mental. You look at it and since you know it’s CG you think on those terms. Reality is that if someone had told you it was a physical model you’d be none the wiser.

Look at the other films, matte lines, blue spill, garbage mattes (those gray boxes around the ships in some shots) and fill light all make it much less detailed and realistic.

There were shots in “First Contact” where the Enterprise is CG. I know exactly which shots, I doubt a lot of people claiming CG is inferior to physical do.

By: Brian Kirsch

Brian Kirsch — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 23:53:44 +0000

#30 –

I totally agree. I really prefer physical models to GCI. They always seem more “real”. CGI is just that, and it never looks “real” to me. It’s always so obvious to me it’s just computer animation. That’s why I’m not impressed with what I’ve seen of Avatar thus far. It’s just so obviously animation. Give me real actors in makeup, and real, physical models. BTW, I love the new E, and she would look beautiful as a real model, not animation.

By: Spockish

Spockish — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:48:20 +0000

#32) Lope de Aguirre, the odd thing is Q trys to present it’s self as a Prime Number of One of a Kind, but then he is always talking about thw Q race and other Q persona. And on Voyager and TNG, Janeway and others have entered the Q Continuum. it’s almost as if Acorn has created the Q Continuum. There is one person but their are so many others.

NCC-1701 (with no bloody A, B, C or D ect.) May not logically have their time line become known in any thing but the history of Q’s 24th century. But then again Q has stated he or they know every thing that has ever happened or can happen. What about that girl in TNG that became a Q, she would be an interesting Q personality. And being tutored by Grampa Q (Mr. De Lance)

But then again thats recycling old stuff, But Khan himself was recycled in the second movie. And this is the second movie of this version of Trek.

That would be odd a second rebirth of Star Trek Movies from a Second reused character.

I do not recall whom that was but I liked her in that story line. I guess I’ll have to dig up that TNG DVD.