MovieChat Forums > Star Trek: Of Gods and Men (2007) Discussion > Good story marred by BRUTAL acting and c...

Good story marred by BRUTAL acting and camerawork


This should have been made as an actual feature (or at least made for tv movie)...the main trek alumni are fine but every one else is terrible. The shoddy camera work, bad acting, lousy pacing and poor editing bothered me more than the low budget or weak special effects.


Standouts were Checkov and the Klingon aboard the alt enterprise - but overall this was pretty awful. A noble but failed attempt.



You Suck...now deal with it.

reply

I thought the acting was very good, better than I expected from aged TOS actors actually. It's the amazingly awful camera work that you can't get past. Even out-of-focus shots of actor closeups. To get all these fine original Trek actors and then botch it with filming like this is unforgivable.

reply

Personally, I don't like Trek stories where they try to tie characters from multiple episodes together. They rarely work, and this is no exception.

I appreciate the effort that went into this. But it didn't do a whole lot for me. And Uhura singing to Charlie at the end was truly vomit-inducing.


"Oh no...they sent the wrong Spock!"

reply

I tried to watch it but had to quit after several minutes because I could not bear the camera moves or the acting, not to mention the ill-fitting costumes.
Honestly, I like the Star Trek Continues webisodes on YouTube much better.

"Say thank you, Gilbert. Say thank you." --Arnie Grape

reply

Shortfic I couldn't agree more. The reason you like Star Trek Continues is probably the same reason I like it...they have been one hundred percent faithful to the original series in everything they do, including lighting, filming angles, etc. etc. In all honesty I cannot distinguish the set and filming of Star Trek Continues from TOS. The only difference is different actors. Most of the acting is quite good too, with a few exceptions. I don't care for Grant Imahara as Sulu, for instance. He is NOT an actor, though I enjoyed him on Mythbusters for many years.

The crew who filmed and some who acted in this are a group who do their own TOS episodes and you see none of the care and work that the STC crew takes in emulating TOS. That is why, despite the inclusion of original actors and stars, this movie is excruciatingly painful to watch. I couldn't get past the first ten minutes.

A bagful of manure is still a bagful of manure even if you douse it in perfume.

reply

This should have been made as an actual feature (or at least made for tv movie)...the main trek alumni are fine but every one else is terrible. The shoddy camera work, bad acting, lousy pacing and poor editing bothered me more than the low budget or weak special effects.


Agreed but even the main trek alumni were wooden and camera conscious.

reply

Yeah, I have to agree. I was willing to give the bad CGI a pass. I could accept the replacement actors for Mitchell and Charlie. The general acting was okay, but not great. But all the shakycam kept pulling me out of it. None of the actual shows from TOS even all the way through to ENT used shakycam. Put the damn camera on a tripod, for crying out loud! And the lighting was so flat and overlit. There was none of the moodiness of the original show. They blew it.

reply