1 - The first in a legendary series and a new direction for the makers, it is still remembered with affection while seeming solid but rather clunky; many would hope for something lighter and more engaging.
2 - Often regarded as the high point of the series, this was an improvement on its predecessor in every way and still stands up as a classic today, the one that got everything right.
3 - For some, this was a rather disappointing sequel, 'good, but not great', and many of the ideas that went into it would be better served later.
4 - Well received at the time, and still a favourite for many, this is very much a product of its time and seems curiously dated today.
5 - Technically well-executed with some significant departures from its predecessors, but probably the hardest in the series to love.
6 - Another high point and made with the knowledge that this was the end of an era, the makers would bow out at the top of their game with this sophisticated product.
But that's enough about the Star Trek movies.
Shatner got much of his start doing Shakespeare at Stratford in Canada. You can see that in much of what he has done since!It sure tells you something about William Shatner though, that when Nimoy directs him the character is pleasant and funny, but when he directs himself Kirk turns to a bit of self-absorbed loudmouth.
I have one of those Butter Grip on a Minolta X570.A black Butter Grip makes my F2 look and handle better.
(https://www.cameradactyl.com/buttergrip/nikonf2).
Also, I use a camera strap similar to the one below that makes its weight and bulk a non-issue.
(https://www.ebay.com/itm/Camera-Har...=p2349624.m2548.l6249&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0).
Speaking of inexpensive............that strap you linked to looks interesting.
I have paid that much (or more) for your basic, one piece, shoulder strap.
Oh, certainly. When well directed, as in, not by himself, he's capable of great subtlety and expressiveness. Kirk was a far better character than people give him credit for.Shatner got much of his start doing Shakespeare at Stratford in Canada. You can see that in much of what he has done since!
I was actually referring to the fact that Shatner has a tendency to project to the back row of the theatre, no matter what he does.Oh, certainly. When well directed, as in, not by himself, he's capable of great subtlety and expressiveness. Kirk was a far better character than people give him credit for.
I used to think of Shatner mainly as the guy who... inserts... odd pauses... everywhere, but that's just a product of him barely knowing his lines due to rushed production late in the run of the original Star Trek. Still... one can't help but notice a certain egotism filter through when he has no other director working with him.
Oh, I take your meaning now, my bad. But yes, ever notice his tendency to rewrite his lines to be iambic pentameter? A real consumate shakespearian that one!I was actually referring to the fact that Shatner has a tendency to project to the back row of the theatre, no matter what he does.
And frequently as if he is playing a character in a Shakespeare play that involves lots of yelling and swords.
I was actually referring to the fact that Shatner has a tendency to project to the back row of the theatre, no matter what he does.
And frequently as if he is playing a character in a Shakespeare play that involves lots of yelling and swords.
This thread.
The worst.
Are you guys talking about THE Shatner....Captain Kirk.?I was actually referring to the fact that Shatner has a tendency to project to the back row of the theatre, no matter what he does.
And frequently as if he is playing a character in a Shakespeare play that involves lots of yelling and swords.
Sorry to say this, but William Shatner is another one of us pesky CanadiansAre you guys talking about THE Shatner....Captain Kirk.?
I do not pretend to know much about him, but for some reason i am surprised to hear he is on stage "Projecting to the back of the theater".................or that he has performed a Shakespeare gig.
Now that Nikon knows this, they'll never release an F7. I blame Huss.
Huh...... interesting ........other than Star Trek, i just do not know much of him.Sorry to say this, but William Shatner is another one of us pesky Canadians:
https://etcanada.com/photos/215310/highlights-from-william-shatners-colossal-career/#image-215312
In 1954, that would be a disease that shows itself on a small black and white screen in a large cabinet!I am sure he can act................probably had the "Television Disease".
F6.2
Might as well ride on Leica's coat tails like they always have.
"What does God need with an integral battery grip?"Ah, my opinion about ST:V is quite the opposite. I find it technically atrocious but oddly charming. It sure tells you something about William Shatner though, that when Nimoy directs him the character is pleasant and funny, but when he directs himself Kirk turns to a bit of self-absorbed loudmouth.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?