cheap cheap cheap
- Thread starter mahler
- Start date
Nemesis.
The sets are cramped. Engineering looks like a 50s mad scientist's laboratory and the Rommie "senate" looks like a classroom.
The props looks like toys--especially the phaser rifles.
And nobody's uniform seems to fit right. Hardy's get-up looks like something off the Halloween clearance rack at Walmart.
The sets are cramped. Engineering looks like a 50s mad scientist's laboratory and the Rommie "senate" looks like a classroom.
The props looks like toys--especially the phaser rifles.
And nobody's uniform seems to fit right. Hardy's get-up looks like something off the Halloween clearance rack at Walmart.
What do y'all think is the cheapest looking movie? This is from a strictly visual point of view. My vote is for TFF. It just looks,.................cheap
I still say that movie had the best bridge set of all the various Enterprises though.
My vote for cheapest set goes to the last two films with it's brewery/engine room.
The dune buggy chase in NEMESIS looked like something out of a 70's drive-in movie . . .
Of course, it didn't help that I saw NEMESIS only hours after seeing ATTACK OF THE CLONES for the first time. Guess which one had better production values?
To be fair, though, NEMESIS had better dialogue.
Of course, it didn't help that I saw NEMESIS only hours after seeing ATTACK OF THE CLONES for the first time. Guess which one had better production values?
To be fair, though, NEMESIS had better dialogue.
I didn't even have to think about it:
Star Trek VI.
I could never get over the "made-for-cable" look of the film, with its drab music and confining sets.
Most of the aliens look like cheap rubber masks that you buy at "Dollar General".
I like Star Trek VI, but I really feel like the energy (or something) was off.
Star Trek VI.
I could never get over the "made-for-cable" look of the film, with its drab music and confining sets.
Most of the aliens look like cheap rubber masks that you buy at "Dollar General".
I like Star Trek VI, but I really feel like the energy (or something) was off.
TSFS. The Excelsior bridge was trash; the Grissom bridge was just a redress of the Enterprise bridge; and the spacedock was awful (though I did like the dining/lounge area next to the docking port).
--Sran
--Sran
The special effects for TFF are chincy, the Enterprise looks like a card board cut-out a lot of the time.
The brewery/engine room "set" was probably a good cost cutter, but it comes off as "hey, look at all the money we saved."
In terms of costumes, the mish-mash of uniforms on the Enterprise Dee bridge in Generation looks cheap.
The brewery/engine room "set" was probably a good cost cutter, but it comes off as "hey, look at all the money we saved."
In terms of costumes, the mish-mash of uniforms on the Enterprise Dee bridge in Generation looks cheap.
Sran, I loved you in my "Evasive" thread, but I hate you here.
TSFS????
I f***ing LOVE the Spacedock!!!!
I think you could say this about a lot of Berman era trek though.
I love TNG and all, but I've always disliked the look of much of the props, sets designs, and clothing.
What do y'all think is the cheapest looking movie? This is from a strictly visual point of view. My vote is for TFF. It just looks,.................cheap
I still say that movie had the best bridge set of all the various Enterprises though.
I don't know about that, but I have to say for all the of Star Trek V's faults. The set for Paradise City looked fairly impressive. ALso the two moons. It was really a waste that we only saw so little of it in the movies.
Also "Planet of Galactic Peace gone awry, what now?" would have made a better movie than "Yet another false god story, featuring old men on camping trips"
Think of it, people; a story focused on Nimbus III itself would have been awesome and would have fit the characters quite well too.
And yes I agree with the poster above me and vote for The Voyage Home with most of it set in 1980s San Francisco.
I think what disappoints about the engineering set in particular was that it was huge in the previous two movies, a real contrast to the cramped-up version seen on TV, so when Nemesis suddenly rebuilt the same set in what looks like a much smaller soundstage, it was very noticable.
Location shooting is not cheap. It can be expensive, dependent on the location. Filming in Los Angeles added an additional $20 million to the price tag for ST:ID. Paramount has expressed relief that they can film location shoots in a place other than LA.
What do y'all think is the cheapest looking movie? This is from a strictly visual point of view. My vote is for TFF. It just looks,.................cheap
Cheapest "looking" movie?
The location filming of TVH present day Earth looks "cheap" compared to the location filming of TUC Klingon penal colony ice planet actually Alaska exterior shots IMHO.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102975/locations?ref_=tt_dt_dt
The Berman era's Phasers never appeared to be anything with weight or the look of real weapons. More like vacuum formed garage kits.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
