www.ditl.org

Teaos wrote:But it is nice to see different evolution lines. Gorn, Cardassian and the Voth are some of the only reptilian species we have seen.

Wait: You see the Cardassian's as reptilian? I never thought of that at all!

Teaos wrote:

A shame it didn't take away from the show...

Didnt take away from it? It made it painful to watch. I think my eyes started bleeding as it was doing its slow lumbering walk going "Grrrrr"

No, it didn't. It was real, there and it had presence, mass and form. It wasn't some CGI.

I liked it. It was cool, 1960's or not. And I think I'll watch it again tonight and like it.

The thing about the TOS Gorn Captain in 'The Arena', is that all technology dates and is rendered obselete with time, so even the ENT Gorn slaver will one day look like something from tom and jerry.
When watching sci fi, its always best to suspend disbelief, you could even circumvent doubt, and say that the Gorns' rubbery appearance was due to it having the dermal features of typical amphibians like frogs(rana), its kitchen-sieve eyes were somesort of protective membrane, and its lumbering gait, was because the Gorns are semi aquatic, thus clumsy on land(hence his hippo-waddle) or that the Gorn planet has a different level of gravity etc, ok these explanations are a little crappy, but it helps somewhat.

Wait: You see the Cardassian's as reptilian? I never thought of that at all!

Yeah, they do apear to be reptiles.
Of course, they're the worst looking reptile alien I've ever seen in all of sci-fi.

Wait: You see the Cardassian's as reptilian? I never thought of that at all!

Yeah, they do apear to be reptiles.
Of course, they're the worst looking reptile alien I've ever seen in all of sci-fi.

Granitehewer wrote:The thing about the TOS Gorn Captain in 'The Arena', is that all technology dates and is rendered obselete with time, so even the ENT Gorn slaver will one day look like something from tom and jerry.
When watching sci fi, its always best to suspend disbelief, you could even circumvent doubt, and say that the Gorns' rubbery appearance was due to it having the dermal features of typical amphibians like frogs(rana), its kitchen-sieve eyes were somesort of protective membrane, and its lumbering gait, was because the Gorns are semi aquatic, thus clumsy on land(hence his hippo-waddle) or that the Gorn planet has a different level of gravity etc, ok these explanations are a little crappy, but it helps somewhat.

Yup, pretty much. I try not to let special effects get in the way of a good story/tale, and 'Arena' was a good story/tale.

Look at the original starwars movies. The FX werent great by our standards now but they were good enough to not distract from the story even now. The Gorn was so bad it does distract.

Teaos wrote:Look at the original starwars movies. The FX werent great by our standards now but they were good enough to not distract from the story even now. The Gorn was so bad it does distract.

Your comparing a movie that had a budget ten times what a series had for an episode, not a fair comparison.

Teaos wrote:Look at the original starwars movies.

You're talking about ten years, a movie budget, and a whole new SFX industry apart.

A whole new idustrey because they made the industrey. There was not a whole lot done in SW that couldnt have been done in trek if they had just tried.

Teaos wrote:A whole new idustrey because they made the industrey. There was not a whole lot done in SW that couldnt have been done in trek if they had just tried.

Well your making the claim, lets see you back it up. Can you prove that ST could have pulled off SW level SFX with their budget in the 1960's?

Not all but a lot. Quite a bit of the stuff the did in SW cost next to nothing it was just a new way of doing stuff. Some original thought mixed with a bit of work.

As an example they were the first people to think of moving the camera across a model to simulate movement rather than the other way around giving them far better shots. That cost nothing! Yet it added a lot to the quality. I saw a thing on the making of star wars on the discovery channel a while back. While there were a few things that ST might not have been able to do a lot of it thety could have.

Although I disagree with Teaos for now, he does have a point. Said technique was also used for the thunderbirds. And they did it at least as good as SW, I think.

Not all but a lot. Quite a bit of the stuff the did in SW cost next to nothing it was just a new way of doing stuff. Some original thought mixed with a bit of work.

Care to provide evidence for that?
If CGI cost next to nothing, then it would have been used far more extensively in the following decades.

Star Wars IV did have an extremely low budget. Most studios turned them down and 20th century fox wasn't about to invest a whole lot into what they saw as a huge gamble.