Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Best Cinematogrophy from ST:TMP DE

This is topic Best Cinematogrophy from ST:TMP DE in forum General Trek at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/1652.html

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

To me, this shot is gorgeous. I believe it is specific to the DE as well. The look in his eyes is the way I imagine I'll look at my wife one day - that, combined with the reflected Enterprise leads me to push this as the best single fram from TMP: Directors Edition.

However, I know others will think differently, so I am interested in your favorite frames.

Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :

"The look in his eyes is the way I imagine I'll look at my wife one day."

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

...?

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

Either he's unable to respond, or he's unwilling to respond.
Probably because that's a very peculiar way to write your first post here at Flare, fawning over Shatner's baby blue's.

I saw a frame of the room where they keep the EVA-suits, I guess it was just before Spock left the Enterprise to go fondle V'Ger.

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

I wasn't fawning over his baby blues, I was saying that it is impressive to convey such love for a ship as I Imagine I would have for my wife.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

I suspect UM's response was meant to imply that what you said makes you sound like a nutter.

Only he wouldn't have put it that nicely, probably.

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

Can you guys please just post your favorite images from TMP?

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Apostle:
Can you guys please just post your favorite images from TMP?

don't feel bad, newbie. we all got victumized when we got here... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Crazy sort of on-topic post: I believe the only thing that's new in that shot is the reflection, though I might be wrong.

Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :

Yup. The reflection is the only new thing.

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

Ok... so what are your favorite scenes from the bloody movie?

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :

Unfortunately, I think a lot of people around here don't care for TMP. It really is too bad, as it is the most truly, grandly cinematic of all the Trek films. Robert Wise is simply one of the greatest directors of all time, and the movie really is an example of Trek at its finest.

I too like the shot you posted, and the addition of the reflections is probably the ONLY change in the Director's Edition which I didn't absolutely LOATHE. To me the DE was, substantially, a hackjob. But alas...

I always thought two of the best sequences were the Klingon cruisers approaching at the very beginning and Kirk stepping off the air tram at San Francisco, his face first framed by the window and then his whole form fully revealed in his snazzy dress uniform. But really, every shot in the original movie was exquisitely framed and photographed.

-MMoM [Big Grin]

Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pensive's Wetness:

quote:
Originally posted by Apostle:
Can you guys please just post your favorite images from TMP?
don't feel bad, newbie. we all got victumized when we got here...

Not me!
You all loved me back then....what happened?!?

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

Is that why this forum is this old with this few members?

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :

We're just playfully cynical, that's all. We all exhibit a kind of "fashionable disdain" for each other that's more bark than bite. There very much exists a "fresh meat" type attitude towards new posters, but if you stick around for a bit and your posts feature content that's of some interest to folks, (and you can phrase it reasonably intelligibly, which I see you can) they'll warm up to you quickly enough. [Wink]

-MMoM

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

"Is that why this forum is this old with this few members?"

You speak as though that were undesirable.

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

LOL, I think I may like it here.

Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :

Captain's. Log... stardate 1234.5: I am. Aroused... oh. My.

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

The thing is, Apostle, usually a new member introduces himself/herself and talks about why he/she came here, if he/she's been lurking for a while, what he/she wants to get out of it and maybe also what he/she is willing to bring to the table.

You don't usually start a thread as if we all have held your head over the toilet in some fuzzy-warm keg party memory, and start ordering us to respond and adhere to your rights as a member.

Even if you've met some of us in some other forum it doesn't give you street-cred in here.
It just isn't very humble.

You do seem to be a composed character with a liking for Trek, myes.
We don't crucify or bully new members, not in the "Full Metal Jacket" sense anyway, but if a joining member starts off on the wrong foot and gets pretentious, things often just go downhill from there and the persons who have a flare for martyrdom, well they get their dreams fulfilled. Has happened.

I don't think that's going to happen, but that's just the point, how can we know? Who the hell is this?

Take care.

Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
We're just playfully cynical, that's all. We all exhibit a kind of "fashionable disdain" for each other that's more bark than bite. There very much exists a "fresh meat" type attitude towards new posters, but if you stick around for a bit and your posts feature content that's of some interest to folks, (and you can phrase it reasonably intelligibly, which I see you can) they'll warm up to you quickly enough.

-MMoM

I'm making Michelob and Heinikan Beer stew, if anyone is interested *makes a lot of racket in the kitchen* ?

*A loud boom! goes off* Ignore that, i'll buy another one at the corner 7-11... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Apostle (Member # 1267) on :

I don't believe I have met any of you anywhere else. **shrugs**

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
There very much exists a "fresh meat" type attitude towards new posters

Yes, and it's really quite boring. This is a forum about Star Trek. Fair enough if a new person comes in and starts acting like a moron, then you can take the piss, but don't go around convincing yourself that you hold some kind of status in society because you have posted here for a while. This is an internet forum. About Star Trek. Anyone who posts here has no right to feel even the slightest bit smug about anything. As a forum, we've managed to tread a fine line between "friendly", "mature", and "nerd". Acting like a dick towards new people ruins that. And using the word "newbie" only makes yourself out to be a pompous twat.

*cough*

quote:
Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
Kirk stepping off the air tram at San Francisco, his face first framed by the window and then his whole form fully revealed in his snazzy dress uniform.

I thought the idea of that wasn't to highlight his dress uniform, but his new haircut/piece. His hair is hidden in the window, therefore we can only see the same face that we watched for years in reruns. Then the door opens, and BANG, he's actually older because he has different hair!

Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :

While it's true it's the same face, one can obviously tell that he's older. Time does not fare well for William Shatner.

Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :

Well, since the rest of you seem unwilling or unable to be friendly enough to answer a fairly simple question, I will.

Richard Kline's cinematography in TMP is very nice, and I tend to think of the shots without SFX when I think of the cinematography of the film.

My favorite shots are actually simple ones that are lit beautifully, like where Kirk is sort of lost in the corridors post transporter accident, and some of the shots in the engine room where the swiring light is playing over the set and people.

I'd be interested to know what Mim thinks makes the DE a "hack job". Personally, I think the DE wasn't cut aggressively enough.

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :

quote:
Originally posted by MrNeutron:
I'd be interested to know what Mim thinks makes the DE a "hack job". Personally, I think the DE wasn't cut aggressively enough.

Oh goody, I finally get to vent about this! [Smile]

Here goes...you asked for it... [Razz]

VISUAL EFFECTS

The crappy TV-resolution CGI doesn't match AT ALL with the original, beautiful 1979 effects, except perhaps in one or two instances. It is astounding (or not, considering that I don't believe I've ever once seen CGI that looked as good or better than top-quality motion control work) to me that with as few new VFX shots in the update as there were, they couldn't make it look better. I can go through this point by point:

Vulcan landscape:
Looks like a video game to me. More elaborate but not as fitting as the original matte painting. (People mention that the "moons" were a mistake, but it's long since been explained away.)
San Francisco:
The frigging bridge is backwards! What the "fuck"?
I suppose aside from that it's ok.
Travel pod reflections:
As I said, I do approve of these.
Coming out of the wormhole:
Only barely passable if at all. The lighting and motion are quite CGI-ish.
Nacelle out officer's lounge window:
Nice to have it there for correctness, but it looks pretty CGI, and they didn't even bother to alter the starfield so it looks like the ship is moving in the right direction...
V'Ger weapon face-off:
Passable, but not overly so. I can still tell it's CGI.
V'Ger probe arrives:
This one is quite passable, in fact it's pretty decent. I don't know whether it's the lighting or what, but they got something right. But the washout from this shot to the probe on the bridge doesn't seem right to me...perhaps a straight cut might have been better. (That's more an editing thing though, see below.)
V'ger views out rec-deck windows:
I, of course, approve.
V'Ger exterior flyby:
Ugh. Very CGI. Doesn't have the massive feel of the "miniature," which IIRC was too large to film in one pass.
V'ger launches orbital devices:
Meh. I guess it's ok.
Approach to V'ger brain complex:
This is the worst sequence in the entire thing. The distant view of the Enterprise moving through the interior chamber is "Babylon 5"-caliber work. And I mean that in the worst way.
Docking bridge formation/Wing walk:
Unbearably, unforgivably CGI. Granted, the original matte painting was utter shite, but it fits better in a 1979 movie than does this. Bleh.

SOUND EFFECTS

I thought the sound re-editing was completely botched here:

Where's the classic "Imperial Klingon Cruiser Amar continuing to attack..."??? (Heh. Just kidding, but I do someohow miss this familiar line, though I have to admit that the scene may be better without it. I debate with myself whether the same is true for Spock's thruster suit tutorial.)
In their complete idiocy, they added sounds to the workbees at the drydock. Previously, TMP was the only Trek film and one of the few movies (along with 2001: A Space Odyssey) that actually got the "no sound in space" right.
The replacement of both the Enterprise computer voice and red alert klaxon annoy me to no end. The substitutes are not nearly as jarring, and jarring is precisely what is needed in such scenes as the "Intruder Alert." This hurts that scene badly, IMO. Besides, I was used to the originals.
I think it was incredibly lazy of them to use stock TOS sounds aboard the space station and Enterprise when, according to The God Thing, (the TrekBBS's resident TMP expert) original ambient sounds were created and recorded for the film but weren't edited in because of the rushed release date. So why didn't they bother to track them down and use them here?
The alteration of the reference to the V'Ger cloud diameter is also annoying to me for two reasons. Firstly, as a treknical-type fan, I just hate the idea of canonically changing a definite size figure like that. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, it decreases V'ger's impressiveness. I doubt that many people know what an "AU" (Astronomical Unit, the distance between Earth and the Sun) is and so it becomes important to use the larger number to convey the huge size of the cloud.

EDITING

Actually, I don't have too many objections to the re-editing of the film aside from the splicing in of new effects. I thought it was a fair combination of the theatrical version and the best parts of the "Special, Longer Version." However, I do have a couple of gripes:

I really think they should have left in Kirk's "Oh my God..." following the transporter accident, but it isn't a really big deal.
They definitely should have the bit where Kirk shouts at Uhura a second time: "Viewer off!" It very much emphasized the shock everyone was in from seeing Epsilon IX vanish.
I would have liked to have the bit from the SLV where Decker says "We all create God in our own image." One of the most poingnant lines I know. Damn that's a good one.

I'm curious as to what you think they should have taken out that they didn't, Neutron...

Anyway, I guess that about sums it up.

-MMoM [Big Grin]

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

Because I am tired, I shall only do a couple of things:

quote:

In their complete idiocy, they added sounds to the workbees at the drydock. Previously, TMP was the only Trek film and one of the few movies (along with 2001: A Space Odyssey) that actually got the "no sound in space" right.

So I only imagined the usual "engine noise" effect as the Enterprise flew overhead at the end of the film? Or the noises of the torpedo firing, and the asteroid exploding, and the ship going to warp, and, well, everything else.

Also, you do realise that everyone does know that you wouldn't hear sound in space, including the people who work on them. And you do also realise that not having sound in space during the SFX shots would make them extremely empty and lacking in atmosphere. So, actually, no sound woud be appropriate for TMP...

quote:
considering that I don't believe I've ever once seen CGI that looked as good or better than top-quality motion control work)

Not that I want to get into another tiring CGI vs physical models debate, but you do realise that one of the main advantages of CGI isn't that it looks better, rather that it is a lot cheaper and easier to do? And that it allows shots that just aren't possible with physical models?

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PsyLiam:
Not that I want to get into another tiring CGI vs physical models debate, but you do realise that one of the main advantages of CGI isn't that it looks better, rather that it is a lot cheaper and easier to do? And that it allows shots that just aren't possible with physical models?

Yes I do realize that, and I don't at all mind the CGI on, say, DS9 or in Nemesis. My point is that it's a crappy thing to do to a vintage movie. I equally abhor the Star Wars and ET: The Extra-Terrestrial special editions. If they want me to be convinced that the new stuff belongs in the original film then they need to make it LOOK like it belongs there. But it doesn't.

-MMoM [Big Grin]

Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :

So you want them to throw in a rockman or two in a suit? [Wink]

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :

Well, ideally, I'd prefer them to leave 25 year old movies alone...

Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :

As to my thoughts on the TMP DE, here they are.

EDITS

Generally I liked the changes they made with a few teeny exceptions.

I miss the Starfleet HQ logo. Did I really need to see 4 shots of the shuttle in its place?

I'm glad they cut Kirk's "Oh...my God" because it came across like a bad Shatner impersonator.

I agree about the second "viewer off" line in the Rec Deck. But I still wonder who's got a camera on V'ger after Epsilon 9 is destroyed. I also dislike the arbitrary change from 82 AUs to 2 AUs, but either way that's one big mutha of a cloud!

I liked the way they dumped the little exchange between Decker and Ilia ("Science officer's computations...confirmed, sir"), but saved the little smile they exchange by cutting it in just after the ship goes to impulse. Excellent edit!

The wormhole is still too fucking long.

I like the The cloud flythrough. The V'ger flyover is still too long. The whole idea of a lengthy flyby of this thing was a mistaken idea from the get-go.

Losing the countdown on Spock's thruster pack helps the pace, but it kind of removes one of those levels of reality.

I like the inclusion of the Spock teardrop and the dialogue that surround it. The long shot that precedes it I'm not so fond of. The self-destruct plan is a welcome addition, but it feels wrong somehow...the performances just aren't right.

UPDATED EFFECTS

I recall reading somewhere that the effects were rendered at motion picture resolution, not TV rez, for a possible theaterical release. If someone has a reliable source that says otherwise I'd be interested in hearing it.

Vulcan. I didn't mind the change in the composition. I did mind that the sun was at the wrong angle relative to the shot of Spock looking up. It did look really CG, but the matte painting that was there before was crap.

Starfleet HQ. Nice enough shots, but the composition is a little uninspired...and the shuttle changes altitude between shots. Yeah, they got the bridge backwards in one shot...but it was flipped horizontally in the original shot.

Drydock. Thank goodness they fixed the matte holes in the dock and got rid of the visible support pylon when the ship leaves. Too bad they didn't fix the fact that the Earth should be visible in a lot of shots and disappears.

I didn't mind the Ent exiting the Wormhole so much, as your eye is on the explosion anyway.

The shot of the engine outside the window is passable. But Andy Probert is correct that the viewpoint is slightly too low, and, opps, it's the same view as from the Rec Deck (and you CAN see the nacelle outside the windows of the Rec Deck earlier in the film). And, why the fuck is the ship "crabbing" the through space?

The disappearance of the energy bolt is ok. The arrival of the energy probe is VERY well done.

Nice job fixing the probe so we don't see the guy behind it, as happened before...but for all this effort, why didn't they fix the show where Ilia gets zapped? It's still, well, just a still. It's an obvious freeze-frame. Ugh.

V'ger reveal...yeah...it just don't look BIG. They should have kept it more a silhouette.

V'ger energy bolts. Hel-lo?! Guys, the things change size from shot to shot. First one disappears intot he distance and becomes a speck disappearing over the horizon, in the next these HUGE blobs rise from behind the horizon, 1000 times bigger (they be bigger than V'ger itself).

New shots through V'ger. Not so good. I didn;t like the design of these areas. Did anyone pull out any of Syd Mead's designs to see what he was doing?

The skybridge. Er, the Enterprise looks a little wonky here...there's something wrong with the (virtual) lens choice.

SOUND MIX

Much better. The film was very HOLLOW before.

I miss the male computer voice.

I like that the bridge has TOS sounds mixed in. Its not a pure TOS track, tho.

Why does the voice still annource that a travel pod is now available at Cargo 6, when we see a big 5 over the hatch?

There weas always sound in space in this film, from the thrusters on the spacesuits right on down the line. They just put in more or heightened those there. At least they're not as aggravating as the wholesale changes in the DVD of Superman.

Finally, CGI doesn't "look better" than models...just different. Most peope don't realize how much work is still done with miniatures, because it's extremely difficult to make a CG object look real, because CG lighting is a rather clumsy approximation of the real thing.