CoryHolmes Posted October 30, 2008 Share Posted October 30, 2008 yup yup! If the writers of trek don't care about chronology and consistencies, why should I? BECAUSE!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyryder Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Is that a viewscreen, or a windshield? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big F Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Is that a viewscreen, or a windshield? Que scene from Titan A.E with the windsheild cleaning gag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermillion21 Posted November 3, 2008 Share Posted November 3, 2008 yup yup! If the writers of trek don't care about chronology and consistencies, why should I? ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vermillion01 Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 Details on the new Star Trek trailer due to appear sometime between now and the the 14th... Trek trailer news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taksraven Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 I was reading on the Star Trek Wiki that they shut down the "Star Trek Experience" at Vegas only a month or two ago and how apparently Robert Picardo thought it was an idiotic move with a new movie about to be released. Taksraven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 I was reading on the Star Trek Wiki that they shut down the "Star Trek Experience" at Vegas only a month or two ago and how apparently Robert Picardo thought it was an idiotic move with a new movie about to be released. Taksraven I actually went on it a few years ago, the "museum" area was kind of nice but the ride itself was kind of idiotic imo one step above a Universal Studios ride, hope they make a better one some day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I heard talks were already underway to replace Star Trek: The Experience, just not having it in the Hilton. I never went on the ride part myself, but I really liked how the area it was in was "Trek'd" up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uxi Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 The rides on the Experience were several years, if not a decade or more out of date. One of my friends loved going to that damned place and I was bored stiff. They needed to have more to do there. Bridge mockups of all the series, for example, probably multiples so enough of the trekkie geeks could enjoy them simultaneously. "Simulator" rides, etc. THe main events should have been more like a Choose Your Path type thing with several different stories that continually changed to keep it fresh. I did think the bar thing was pretty cool, even if a little embarrassing, with teh cosumed guys running around and staying in character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UN Spacy Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 The new Starship Enterprise?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Too much like the refit. That design would piss off hard-core Trekkies more than any casting decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 The images I've seen look similar to that but not exactly. The pylons look almost forward swept which doesn't match up to what I've seen. Still I actually like it, and I'm pretty big fan of Trek. I just don't believe that TOS is doctrine, especially when trying to give an ailing series new life. I'm sure we'll see a shot of it in the new trailer that comes out with Bond on Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I don't like how forward the deflector or the bulges around the hood of the nacelles. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 IMHO the problem isn't the overall shape/design, it's the little details. Anyone who has built a movie-era Trek kit knows "all the little things" that define movie-era Trek ships. And that has nearly every one. It's more movie-era-esque than the Ent-A, Reliant, or Excelsior. In fact, that slavish incorporation of all those little things is what says "fan-made" to me--they're little things that most people don't recognize/realize. It's too much a copy of what's come before, and this movie has clearly shown that "copying existing stuff" is NOT their art direction. Frankly, it's almost like if you took the texture map of the Ent-A, and placed it on a new polygonal model. The shape may be different, but all the little details are the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azrael Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I don't like how forward the deflector or the bulges around the hood of the nacelles. Oh well. The warp nacelles are okay but yeh, I'm not liking how far forward the main deflector is/how far back the neck/saucer-section is. If they could move the neck forward so it's closer to the main deflector, then it would be better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 This is one of the images I've seen most often or other shots with the same design http://www.inobambino.com/gallery/albums/u..._orbit_1080.jpg Now that's not to say it's official, but it does fall more in line with the TOS Enterprise and even sports the radar dish style deflector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 IMHO the problem isn't the overall shape/design, it's the little details. Anyone who has built a movie-era Trek kit knows "all the little things" that define movie-era Trek ships. And that has nearly every one. It's more movie-era-esque than the Ent-A, Reliant, or Excelsior. In fact, that slavish incorporation of all those little things is what says "fan-made" to me--they're little things that most people don't recognize/realize. It's too much a copy of what's come before, and this movie has clearly shown that "copying existing stuff" is NOT their art direction. Frankly, it's almost like if you took the texture map of the Ent-A, and placed it on a new polygonal model. The shape may be different, but all the little details are the same. that pic is the one that Entertainment Weekly is showing as the movie enterprise: http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/11/chec...ise/1#c15516636 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Well the image certainly does look like it's strait from the movie. It has shuttles going towards/docking with it and everything. Might even be from the sequence where we actually get the first look at our rebooted Ent in the movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I'm very surprised. I firmly stand by my "texture map of the Ent-A over altered polygons" statement. Incredibly lazy and uninspired. And funkily proportioned. Very hard to tell from that angle if it follows one of the main rules of Roddenberry's Trek ship design---nacelles must be visible from the front. Effectively that means they have to be above or below the saucer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Well the image certainly does look like it's strait from the movie. It has shuttles going towards/docking with it and everything. Might even be from the sequence where we actually get the first look at our rebooted Ent in the movie. maybe at some point the neck and saucer section get shot off from the main body and then at the end of the movie they re-attach it in the right spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Seems to me like they are viewable over the saucer, thought it is a little tough to tell. The more I look at it, the more I'd like to see the Saucer inch up closer to the deflector. From this angle it makes the secondary hull/engineering section look a little stumpy. Still I don't hate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sh002 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 quick photoshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumdumgai Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Well if it's not from the movie, they used one of the movie shuttles to have it fly towards the Enterprise. I prefer the photochop of the neck moved up to just above the deflector dish. The pylons for the nacelles look strange so far to the aft of the body. The design will grow on me, I'm just weirded out as it's a strange cross between the original TV ship and the classic movie ship, with some new design bits tossed in. The phaser arrays look like the ones used on the classic movie Enterprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 They'd need to tweak engineering or move the pylons with the Saucer moved up like that. Also If I remember right, Neither TOS Ent or Ent A had the Saucer pylon if you will, sitting flush with the deflector, the deflector still stuck out a bit. Still I do like the new look, it's just different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Meh, it was pretty much a given that the hardcore fans would hate the retconned Enterprise no matter what it looked at. Which, in turn, proves once again my point that when attempting something new and different with any given franchise, you should steer clear of what the own-all-the-sourcebooks-and-maintain-the-wiki-page fans want. Or what they think they want. And am I the only one who enjoys the irony of somebody as anal as David H throwing the term "slavish" around? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 With this thread and the other thread about movie remakes, I'm beginning to stop caring what Hollywood attempting to produce now, I will watch it if its watchable. About the new Enterprise, well it give some excuse for model and toy maker to make a new Enterprise line for sale, they need to make money you know. I'm a fan, but not willing to die for it, so I wait for the next trailer to learn if there's anything new besides the news and rumors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumdumgai Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I grew up on the original series and original series movies. I like the new design, it'll just take some getting used to. I like the nacelles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I grew up on the movies and TNG onward and I do overall like the look of the new Ent. Gives me something new to build when the kit comes out . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I agree that the proportions are funky. It looks unbalanced. Of course, that might also be the angle of the shot, so we'll see. I agree that it looks odd with the neck section so far back, but sh002's Photoshop edit places it too far forward. I think midway between that and the actual placement would look best, personally. One thing I find kinda odd, there's a very distinct difference of design aesthetic between the saucer and the rest of the ship. Like the saucer is trying to fit in with the original movie aesthetic, but the rest of the ship was designed by someone else entirely. Of course, that's precisely the case, but design-wise it could be less obvious. I doubt it's something most people will notice, though. I do like that they're going for that "New 70's" look with the Apple style bridge, and all the curved surfaces for this movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 That thing is really fugly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I agree that the proportions are funky. It looks unbalanced. Of course, that might also be the angle of the shot, so we'll see. I agree that it looks odd with the neck section so far back, but sh002's Photoshop edit places it too far forward. I think midway between that and the actual placement would look best, personally. One thing I find kinda odd, there's a very distinct difference of design aesthetic between the saucer and the rest of the ship. Like the saucer is trying to fit in with the original movie aesthetic, but the rest of the ship was designed by someone else entirely. Of course, that's precisely the case, but design-wise it could be less obvious. I doubt it's something most people will notice, though. I do like that they're going for that "New 70's" look with the Apple style bridge, and all the curved surfaces for this movie. no, I noticed it as well. and I agree with you on the neck placement. With the neck and the engine pylons all bunched up the design loses it's sleekness and sense of speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 LOL to Bsu Legato. It's true, and I am, and I revel in it. As for Radd---THAT's what's bugging me. We have a 100% "came from movie 2-6" plated machined saucer, and an organic/bulbous engineering hull and nacelles. Like 2 different ships were welded together. Honestly, the nacelles make me think of Farscape if anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uxi Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 (edited) "Mr Spock. Engage my iphone at max power!" The iBridge looks totally out of place compared to every other Trek. Way more advanced than anything on the Enterprise E for example. Some of it just doesn't make sense and seems to be change for the sake of. The ship itself definitely looks like a kitbash refit of the refit enterprise. Trek itself has never been big on consistency, but satisfying the existing fan base should not be mutually exclusive with doing something new with a fresh take. Reboots are almost totally unnecessary. What would have really changed in BSG, for example, if they said they were a 100 years after the original series and changed the names of their characters? Even keep the ship named Galactica. Make the Adama's descended from the originals or whatever few throwaway lines there are. Making the original series names callsigns fits perfectly with that. Instead of "it's happened before and will happen again" the original never happened at all. Edited November 12, 2008 by Uxi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taksraven Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 What I will be interested to see is how much theft of ideas is going on with this new film. The original series was not too bad but from Next Gen onwards the franchise has stolen ideas on a regular basis from other parts of SF, particularly from some British shows such as Dr Who and Red Dwarf which I guess the creators thought many US fans would be unaware of. An example. I was watching the Voyager episode "Body and Soul", and this episode (Where the Doctor is forced to take over Seven of Nine's body) was a blatant ripoff of the Red Dwarf episode "Bodyswap" Taksraven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 And interestingly, those were among the best eps of each series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.