AVS Forum banner

Star Trek (2009)

115K views 1K replies 280 participants last post by  Steeb 
#1 ·
#203 ·
I saw it in a real IMAX, and it had several out of focus shots. Bad out of focus. Like someone reaching up to your projector lense and cranking it one way or the other.


Still....


It's a fantasticly fun movie that I can't wait to get my hands on. Especially since I'm more interested in the sound than the picture anyway.
 
#205 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mumbles3k /forum/post/17344430


Actually, the TNG set was created in the year 2010 and then sent back in time to 2009 using red matter. This would explain why the preview says that the new movie is "now available." Of course, now we're all living in an alternate timeline, but what can you do? These things happen.

LOL! Good one!
 
#206 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowrage /forum/post/17344827


I saw this at the DLP theater I always go(never had a picture issue) to, and there were definitely a lot of out of focus shots...not motion blur mind you(which doesn't bother me). But every few cuts a shot will be out of focus. I know for a fact I saw it
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) when kirk gets beamed back up onto the ship...or was it when he got kicked out, it was when he was arguing with Spock on the bridge during one of those two parts
, there was camera movement but nothing fast enough where blur would become an issue.


Other than that beautiful photography...too much lens flare though. Yes lens flare can work(as it did here, mostly), but it was overdone just a enough to where it became a joke. Some one want to turn it into a drinking game?

The Lens Flare didn't bother me at all. I also saw this at a DLP showing and it was phenomenal looking. I didn't notice any out of focus shots that didn't appear to be intentional and I really liked the color saturation of the deck of the Enterprise (stark whites and deep colors of the uniforms) contrasting against the dark space. I honestly think ST never looked better.


Even my wife who doesn't EVER comment on PQ be it at home or in the theater said it looked amazing.
 
#209 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian-HD /forum/post/17354627


Just an update concerning the Blu ray in NYC, still waiting and was told maybe next.

next...?



was there more?


thanks.
 
#211 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert George /forum/post/17343769


I saw ST in 2K D-Cinema on a large-ish screen (twice) and it looked stunning. Some of the hand held stuff is obviously going to have some motion blur, by design knowing Abrams' style, but the more conventional static and dolly shots are gorgeous. The BD is going to be REALLY gorgeous based on the 1080p rip I have seen. The soundtrack is insane.

I'v seen the same rip and have to agree, it looked and sounded great, i may actually buy this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack /forum/post/17344523


I'm looking forward to it. It could very well have been the film print. Just looked really washed out, jacked up contrasty...


There are shots through out on faces that are out of focus, i noticed this in the theater and can see it on the rip i viewed, not sure why this happens but its there. One example is when Kirk & Pike have there first chat in the bar, Pikes face keeps going out of focus (i'm pretty sure its that scene). Lens flare is really, really over done and can become distracting at times but other than that its one of those movies you just sink into.....

Kirk, Spock, Bones, the likeness is uncanny !!!
 
#213 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rover2002 /forum/post/17356469


I'v seen the same rip and have to agree, it looked and sounded great, i may actually buy this




There are shots through out on faces that are out of focus, i noticed this in the theater and can see it on the rip i viewed, not sure why this happens but its there. One example is when Kirk & Pike have there first chat in the bar, Pikes face keeps going out of focus (i'm pretty sure its that scene). Lens flare is really, really over done and can become distracting at times but other than that its one of those movies you just sink into.....

Kirk, Spock, Bones, the likeness is uncanny !!!

I would guess that the soft focus on Greenwood and Nimoy was intentional.
 
#214 ·
I think the lens flare was only so bad because of the bright white bridge and the multiple lighting sources. After seeing it the second or third time though, its not as distracting as the first time was. I thought they made some sort of camera error or filmed in a hurry, but its supposed to be there.


I saw this three times: Digital, film, and IMAX. Honestly, the best presentation was in the digital theater. The soundtrack doesn't lend itself to huge open rooms, and in the IMAX the sound effects heavily outweighed the dialogue and music. Also, it was still shown in 2.35:1, just on a tremendous screen. There was a ton of screen space not used in that theater. Film, of course, ran the natural course of handling and was dirty/scratched from the projectionist and whatever. But the digital theater was amazing. The music was loud, the sound effects rumbled and gave the appropriate volume around dialogue or was louder when nobody was talking, and the dialogue itself was the clearest, and was carried just the right amount of weight to fill the theater even in quieter conversations, such as with Spock and new Kirk.


I'd say the digital video itself was quite pristine, and there were no differences between the IMAX and d-cinema, except for the size of the projected image.


I'm hoping the BD is as close to the digital presentation as possible, as I think that would translate best into the home theater environment.
 
#215 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jedimasterchad /forum/post/17358507


I thought they made some sort of camera error or filmed in a hurry, but its supposed to be there.

The exterior shots (in space) have that exact same look, giving the impression that they were filmed by the same camera crew, rather than being completely fabricated using CGI. Rare to find films with this level of consistency between the live action and special effects (Blade Runner did it pretty well).
 
#217 ·
Why does Future Shop always seem to get steelbook releases? Are there any US stores that will have it? I just don't understand why steelbook editions do not show up more in the US. I'd much rather see Best Buy get steelbook edition as instead of the stupid exclusives like lapel pins.
 
#218 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkcohen /forum/post/17356842


I would guess that the soft focus on Greenwood and Nimoy was intentional.

Shark, on the IMAX print I saw, the out of focus shots on Pike in the bar scene (which someone else just mentioned) were enough to make me look around the theater to see if other people were as shocked as I was about it....and I'm an audio guy, not a video freak. If was intentional, it makes zero sense to me as to why.
 
#219 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rolltide1017 /forum/post/17359443


Why does Future Shop always seem to get steelbook releases? Are there any US stores that will have it? I just don't understand why steelbook editions do not show up more in the US. I'd much rather see Best Buy get steelbook edition as instead of the stupid exclusives like lapel pins.

WOOT! FutureShop steelbook FTW!
 
#220 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 /forum/post/17359488


Shark, on the IMAX print I saw, the out of focus shots on Pike in the bar scene (which someone else just mentioned) were enough to make me look around the theater to see if other people were as shocked as I was about it....and I'm an audio guy, not a video freak. If was intentional, it makes zero sense to me as to why.

I've seen the film 3 times, twice in IMAX, and the only out of focus shots I remember were the ones of Nimoy, which were obviously intentional considering his age. Perhaps the theater you saw it in was jacked up. I remember all shots of Greenwood being highly detailed.
 
#221 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkcohen /forum/post/17360345


I've seen the film 3 times, twice in IMAX, and the only out of focus shots I remember were the ones of Nimoy, which were obviously intentional considering his age. Perhaps the theater you saw it in was jacked up. I remember all shots of Greenwood being highly detailed.

Spock Prime looked old in the movie, I don't think they photographed him in any special way, I don't think they would shoot him out of focus on purpose when they can alter his age digitally like Ian Mccellam(I butchered that spelling) in X-Men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 /forum/post/17359488


Shark, on the IMAX print I saw, the out of focus shots on Pike in the bar scene (which someone else just mentioned) were enough to make me look around the theater to see if other people were as shocked as I was about it....and I'm an audio guy, not a video freak. If was intentional, it makes zero sense to me as to why.

Same here. I distinctly remember seeing it when Spock and Kirk were arguing on the bridge. They do look like errors, because they usually happen after cuts. Hopefully the commentary will discuss it.
 
#222 ·
The lens flares are intentional, and Abrams himself has been asked about their overuse: http://io9.com/5230278/jj-abrams-adm...are-ridiculous

Quote:
I'm kidding. I know what you're saying with the lens flares. It was one of those things... I wanted a visual system that felt unique. I know there are certain shots where even I watch and think, "Oh that's ridiculous, that was too many." But I love the idea that the future was so bright it couldn't be contained in the frame.


The flares weren't just happening from on-camera light sources, they were happening off camera, and that was really the key to it. I want [to create] the sense that, just off camera, something spectacular is happening. There was always a sense of something, and also there is a really cool organic layer thats a quality of it. They were all done live, they weren't added later. There are something about those flares, especially in a movie that can potentially be very sterile and CG and overly controlled. There is something incredibly unpredictable and gorgeous about them. It is a really fun thing. Our DP would be off camera with this incredibly powerful flashlight aiming it at the lens. It became an art because different lenses required angles, and different proximity to the lens. Sometimes, when we were outside we'd use mirrors. Certain sizes were too big... literally, it was ridiculous. It was like another actor in the scene....

I thought the flares worked well for his aesthetic goals. But that's me.
 
#223 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penman /forum/post/17363297


The lens flares are intentional, and Abrams himself has been asked about their overuse: http://io9.com/5230278/jj-abrams-adm...are-ridiculous




I thought the flares worked well for his aesthetic goals. But that's me.

JJ probably could have done this movie with his eyes closed, because it just seems to me that he really is that good. Perhaps he did have his eyes closed and didn't notice the lens flare untill he saw the final cut :p
 
#225 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rolltide1017 /forum/post/17359443


Why does Future Shop always seem to get steelbook releases? Are there any US stores that will have it?

I saw the same steelbook advertised at FYE in the U.S.; you can't find it on their website (yet) and the in-store ad didn't make clear whether this was only for the DVD or also includes the BD, but a U.S. steelbook with that exact same image is coming...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top