View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pow Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014 Posts: 3444 Location: New York
|
Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Also Bud, if you search Google by typing in Oceanus: Odyssey One they have a very nice page under FutureDude detailing info about the movie. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013 Posts: 17170 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
________________________________
Right you are, sir! Here's the trailer below!
Unfortunately all the YouTube listings that claim to have the full movie are just links to other sites you must register with to download the movie.
I'm always wary of those.
But the trailer is freakin' awesome! This is the kind of sci-fi undersea adventure I've been yearning for. The visuals are stunning, the characters are interesting, and it will be great to see a future that isn't populated by women struggling to smash the glass ceiling, and scruffy, unshaven men!
Plus, the futuristic undersea vehicles are magnificent!
One thing puzzles me. IMDB lists this feature as a 2018 "in production" project . . . so how could those YouTube links really have the full movie?
________________________________
_______ Oceanus: Odyssey One Theatrical Trailer
__________ _________________ ____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:22 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pow Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014 Posts: 3444 Location: New York
|
Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, I'm also wary of downloading movies, too.
The website for O:O lists the movie as being in production & available in 2018. All rather confusing.
The designs for the undersea city & their vehicles are splendid looking. Interior sets equally cool.
Wish this was available now as we have so few sci-fi productions in both film or television dealing with life in the future beneath the seas. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pow Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014 Posts: 3444 Location: New York
|
Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What might have been an episode for SQDSV.
Captain Bridger is under sealed orders to secretly meet up with the Seaview. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013 Posts: 17170 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
________________________________
Interesting idea. It made me realize that one of the strengths of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea was the Seaview's amazing exterior. But the interior (in many cases) was not very impressive. They just look like "rooms", not like a submarine's interior.
Seaquest is just the reverse. The interiors are fine (except for certain aspects of the bridge), but the exterior was disappointing! The shape of the sub is appealing in some ways . . . but it has no "sail", and it never cruised on the surface! _________________ ____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pow Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014 Posts: 3444 Location: New York
|
Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, Bud, the sets for the interior of the Seaview have not all aged well over the years.
I believe most of the sets were carried over from the motion picture & therefore they had a larger budget for the sub's sets than they might have if they had been constructed for a television series.
The exterior of the Seaview is nice but if they were to revive the show it would have to be updated. Just like they did with Star Trek's Enterprise from the 1966 tv show when they did the '79 movie.
I loved the Seaquest squid-like hull. The interior sets were beautiful with the bridge rivaling the Enterprise.
I suppose seeing them do a Flying Sub would be too much like VTTBOTS. But man, that FS was fantastic in design & ability.
The UFO tv series had a jet aircraft as the nose of their 4-person submarine. Sky 1 would disconnect from Sky Diver & plow through the sea until it broke the surface of the ocean & ascended in to the sky.
The made just different enough from the Seaview/Flying Sub concept to pull it off.
The Seaquest had a shuttle that never truly looked futuristic to me. Looked much like something we might have nowadays.
I would say that 2 of the coolest ideas for Seaquest were the WISKERS & Hyper Reality Vehicle.
The WISKERS were probes that operated outside the Seaquest & fed it data. They could send 'em ahead on scouting missions.
The HRV was really nifty & made so much sense. A robotic device with mechanical arms that could be operated via gloves & goggles,usually by the sub's chief engineer.
It was utilized to explore dangerous situations where they did not want to risk a human,or were simply to deep to be able to send out a human being in a exo-suit.
One of the things I see in many sci-fi tv shows is a total, or near-total, absence of robots. There are exceptions of course: Lost In Space & the outstanding series Farscape both had 'bots.
For the most part though sci-fi shows ignore 'em. That is unrealistic because 'bots will play an enormous part in humankind's future. Certainly in space & deep sea missions.
I understand the practicalities of shooting a tv series did not allow for having robots on,say, ST:TOS back in 1966.
That era did not have cgi so they had to resort to mechanical props.Props which could breakdown & be fussy to operate.TV shows never have time for those challenges.
Now they do. They do have cgi available to their productions. And the mechanical props in this day & age can operate far better & more reliably than 10 or 20 years ago.
So whenever I see a current tv show do an amazing submarine or star ship---minus any 'bots---I can hear Neil DeGrasse Tyson groaning right along with me. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Krel Guest
|
Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pow wrote: | I understand the practicalities of shooting a tv series did not allow for having robots on, say, ST:TOS back in 1966.
|
Star Trek didn't have robots because GR wouldn't allow them. He thought that robots were too space opera, he felt the same way about rockets. He wouldn't allow ST to have any rocket propelled spacecraft. Also pockets, that is why none of the shirts or pants had pockets, too 20th century.
David. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gord Green Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 06 Oct 2014 Posts: 2948 Location: Buffalo, NY
|
Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
The history of "pockets" is really quite interesting.
Originally a pocket referred to a pouch or set of pouches containing keys and coins necessary in daily midevile life.
It wasn't until the late 19th century that they became incorporated in garments like pants and shirts.
In the future perhaps we'll go back to using a pouch of some kind to carry the necessities of daily usage. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
scotpens Starship Captain
Joined: 19 Sep 2014 Posts: 883 Location: The Left Coast
|
Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pow wrote: | The exterior of the Seaview is nice but if they were to revive the show it would have to be updated. |
This DeBoer design (available in both 4-window and 8-window configurations) would make a great updated version of the Seaview.
Link: http://deboerhulls.com/model-kits/concept-II/
Pow wrote: | I loved the Seaquest squid-like hull. The interior sets were beautiful with the bridge rivaling the Enterprise. |
Frankly, the design of the Seaquest never appealed to me. I just thought it was silly-looking. Of course, it's no more impractical than the Seaview with its huge superfluous fins! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013 Posts: 17170 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
________________________________
Wow, that's a beauty! I agree that this version is a great update.
Concerning Roddenberry's "no no's" for TOS, I guess it was sort of like the motto for Smallville.
"No tights, no flights!"
In this case it was "No pockets, no rockets!" (It's ironic that they both pertained to garments and flying.) _________________ ____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:23 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pow Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 27 Sep 2014 Posts: 3444 Location: New York
|
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gene was a tremendous visionary & created (along with others) one of the finest sf TV series extant.
However, to believe that bots are 'space opera' & not a critical & realistic part of humankind's future shows that even great visionaries can get it wrong. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013 Posts: 17170 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2017 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
________________________________
To be fair, there really were lots of robots in Star Trek TOS. What Are Little Girls Made Of, I, Mudd, and The Changling are three examples.
But they were always one of two types: actors whose physical appearance gave no hint that they were robots (and yes, they were called "androids", but that word is defined as "a robot with a human appearance"), or they were completely "machine-like" as in The Changling.
I think maybe Gene felt that any kind of robot suit would look silly on TOS because the budget simply didn't allow that kind of thing to be done very well. _________________ ____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gord Green Galactic Ambassador
Joined: 06 Oct 2014 Posts: 2948 Location: Buffalo, NY
|
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Don't forget Data in Next Generation. I understand that he was a creation of Gene's, and he was most definitely a robot although always reffered to as an android!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bud Brewster Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)
Joined: 14 Dec 2013 Posts: 17170 Location: North Carolina
|
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
________________________________
Data was referred to as an android because he looked more like Brent Spiner than like Gort. That, apparently, is the only criteria to be android.
I guess if you put Robby in a rubber suit that made him look like Orson Wells in his later (rotund) years, he'd be an android.
Then we'd have to change his name from "Robby the Robot" to "Andy the Android"!
"Welcome to Altair 4, gentlemen!"
"For your convenience, I am monitored to respond to the name . . . Andy." _________________ ____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Krel Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The old definition for an Android, was an artificial human. Not a robot that looked like a human. Data would be considered to be a robot that looks human, not an Android.
Wasn't it the Captain Future stories, that had an Android character, and a robot character?
David. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|