kaiotheforsaken Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I think that the movie will do well as long as it sticks to the ideals Roddenberry pretty much set up as doctrine for the ST mythos. The look of the bridge, the Enterprise and all other visual nit picks are really secondary if the writers were able to keep that intact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myk Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 I'm one of the unsuspecting American fans that didn't realize that ST was blatantly ripping off other SF series, but I can safely say that I'm also one of the unsuspecting American fans that doesn't care. I mean, who cares if a story's ripped and fitted into another universe as long as it's entertaining-the idea of an original idea is deader than dead. Actually, the bottom line is that I don't care about 'Trek anymore anyway; 'Trek is what's deader than dead and I'm sure alot of other people probably feel the same way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 I don't think the ripping off concepts or plot lines from another series really hurts Trek too much. There are very few 100% unique ideas anyways, and one could argue that there hasn't been one in a long long time. Almost everything is based off something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chronocidal Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 (edited) Wow. I dunno if that's just a massive case of forced perspective, but that thing is beyond fugly. The saucer looks like it's sticking out the middle of the hull, unbalancing the whole thing, and the rear hull is just... bleh. What's so bad about it is that the saucer is so much like the old one, but nothing else is... as if they ripped the saucer off the movie-era Enterprise, then had some new-age art-deco interior designer slap a new hull on it. The styles don't match at all. That saucer is nearly identical too.. same exact window arrays on the edge, same phaser arrays, same underside dome... heck, I can pick out the RCS thruster vents that I painted on my old kit, and they haven't changed. There's just no excuse to copy that much of the saucer, but make the rest of the ship so much unlike the original. I can live with the nacelles, they aren't that bad honestly... but that main hull looks.. well.. like crap. I'm probably grasping at straws at this point, but I just rewatched the teaser from way back when... unless they completely ditched the design used for that, the nacelles will be above the saucer.. but some other details don't quite match up to me. The section between the warp pylons in particular doesn't look the same, since you see that clearly in the teaser. Granted, it's under construction, but the shape of the nacelles doesn't look like it matches completely either. I guess maybe there's still hope... but unless this thing looks much better at other angles, I'll probably just ignore it in the film. Btw, is it just me, or does the escape pod Kirk is climbing out of in that one shot look just like one of those pods that used to be on that one rocket ride in Disneyland? The one like Dumbo, but bigger and faster. Edited November 13, 2008 by Chronocidal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyryder Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 I still like it better than the refit/A Enterprise, but the TOS 'Prise is still my favorite. I agree with the observation that the saucer doesn't fit with the engineering section. The saucer looks like typical Starfleet construction, but the rest of the ship looks like it was grown by the Vorlons. Maybe they just haven't finished growing that part of the organic skin, yet. I really don't think the new bridge looks more advanced than a TNG era bridge. To me, the overall construction has a nice utilitarian look, with exposed bolts, and what not. I just don't like the white paint, all over it. It makes it look like something out of a 60s or 70s space opera. I never reall liked that look. I wouldn't want it to look liike the lower decks of the Nostromo, but I think it would look better in the grays of the original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 I don't mind the new bridge, I thought this was supposed to be a kind of reboot anyways? There's just no reason to fill the bridge with a bunch of knobs and levers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowlightman Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 If Macross World had been around in 1983-84, you guys would have hated Macross: DYRL. "Oh, man, the fingers aren't round anymore!" "Those costumes look way too different!" "They RUINED the Fast Packs!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 (edited) meh, I kind of like it. It's kind of all over the place design wise, but it has it's own charm. Edited November 13, 2008 by eugimon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 I've always loved the Ships of Trek and always looked forward to what new stuff they'd bring to the table with each new series, race, story arc or w/e. This movie is no different, I'm just glad to see some new starship designs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taksraven Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 I think that the movie will do well as long as it sticks to the ideals Roddenberry pretty much set up as doctrine for the ST mythos. The look of the bridge, the Enterprise and all other visual nit picks are really secondary if the writers were able to keep that intact. True to an extent, but some of Roddenberry's ideas are looking pretty outdated now. You can always see why hippies liked Trek with a lot of its ideals being very sixties (of course). I guess thats why Trek has never really gelled with me, even though I watch it and enjoy some of it there are a lot of aspects of the philosophies in the show that annoy me. The purpose of this movie has to be to capture new fans as well as retain the old ones and that is becoming a VERY difficult task. Taksraven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Maybe this movie will retcon everything in ST, just like how they reformatted 007 franchise. I bet if the movie is successful, there will be New Star Trek: the TV series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoryHolmes Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 All this babble about how six bolts are misplaced and therefore ruining the ship forEVER (and I'm one of the complainers, I freely admit) compels me to post this picture. I wish I had created it, but I'm glomping it from another forum: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lechuck Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 (edited) ... The purpose of this movie has to be to capture new fans as well as retain the old ones and that is becoming a VERY difficult task. Taksraven That is basically the crux of this movie and in essence completely contradictory. On the one hand Abrams & Co. want a Star Trek movie to appeal to everybody but yet they go back Kirk and the rest of gang. What age demographic are they exactly trying to target here? Anybody that grew up with TOS and the early movies is probably in their 40s and 50s now. The younger generation has most likely been influenced by TNG, DS9 or Voyager and couldn't stand watching TOS. I can't even blame them, as a Trek fan I watched TOS, but there is like one handful of good episodes and the rest is bleh. I never liked the bulbous 60s design of the Enterprise, so ret-conning it won't make it better to my eyes either. Heck I don't even like the Conni-Refit (I know blasphemy to a lot of you) because it oozes too much of that late 70s early 80s slanting-forward design-philosophy. Rather than creating a mishmash in an already strongly established continuum they should have done a complete new reboot without any previous constraints or carried on further into Trek-future with a new crew and ship and maybe a drastic political shift in the milky-way galaxy to make it more interesting. So to sum it up, this new movie is not tickling me as much as I would like it too. And if I as Trek-fan is having problems, then what about all those "Joe - the non-Trekkers" out there? Edited November 14, 2008 by lechuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 All this babble about how six bolts are misplaced and therefore ruining the ship forEVER (and I'm one of the complainers, I freely admit) compels me to post this picture. I wish I had created it, but I'm glomping it from another forum: Thats actually the same version I posted (different image though). You can tell by the deflector. Still the design in w/e form we get is growing on me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radd Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 If Macross World had been around in 1983-84, you guys would have hated Macross: DYRL. "Oh, man, the fingers aren't round anymore!" "Those costumes look way too different!" "They RUINED the Fast Packs!" All this babble about how six bolts are misplaced and therefore ruining the ship forEVER Hyperbole much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobber Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 All this babble about how six bolts are misplaced and therefore ruining the ship forEVER (and I'm one of the complainers, I freely admit) compels me to post this picture. I wish I had created it, but I'm glomping it from another forum: That design is by a guy named Gabriel Kroener (spelling). He made it a few years ago and was seen in the Star Trek Ships of the Line book. It keeps being called or mistaken for the new Enterprise but it is NOT. same with the profile orbital shot that's Gabe's. Wish his design was used but he has already publicly stated it is not the design, which we can now see with the first official image. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoryHolmes Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 ... actually, I posted that picture more for the caption than any specific "version" of the Enterprise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 yes, we get it.. it's wrong for us to critique work. every post should be, "i love it, it's awesome, best design ever!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scream Man Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 i always liked....whatever the last version of the TNG Enterprise was. That and Voyager. I guess i have a thing for pointy bows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 i always liked....whatever the last version of the TNG Enterprise was. That and Voyager. I guess i have a thing for pointy bows. the 'E'? the one from the last few movies? I love that design. One thing I'm kinda sorry about the reboot is that I was looking forward to the next evolution in the design. IMO, the ship designers have done a great job making new ships look like genuine evolutionary steps forward from previous generations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taksraven Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Just saw the pics of the Enterprise for the new film. Meh. I would love to see Eric Bana getting his ears chopped off in this film though!!! Taksraven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoryHolmes Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 yes, we get it.. it's wrong for us to critique work. every post should be, "i love it, it's awesome, best design ever!" Yes. Yes it should. Seriously, as much as I feel that the current pictures being shown aren't TOS enough for a TOS-era movie, there is no denying that the the original NCC-1701 (no bloody A, B, C, D, or E) is one of the most iconic starship designs of all time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Yes. Yes it should. Seriously, as much as I feel that the current pictures being shown aren't TOS enough for a TOS-era movie, there is no denying that the the original NCC-1701 (no bloody A, B, C, D, or E) is one of the most iconic starship designs of all time. well that's why we're talking about the new design, the original is just so iconic, any new version of it has to do justice to the original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the white drew carey Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 (edited) I don't know. I get the impression that Ryan Church (designer of the new Ent) knew that he had to stick with the iconic design but decided that, along with adding a few greeblies, maybe moving certain parts around would "make it his design." It looks swift and would be neat on its own, but compared to the bar which it has to meet, the way the neck is pushed back on the secondary hull looks kind of retarded. It loses the sleak look of all previous versions (even TOS). Edited November 14, 2008 by the white drew carey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyryder Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 I don't think the neck is as pushed back, as it looks. They extended the front of the engineering hull, to encompass the deflector (refit style) Adding a lot more visual mass in front of the neck. The back of the neck blending into the hull with what I can only call a dorsal fin, combined with the flaring out of the bottoms of the nacelle struts makes everything look crowded together. I don't think the center lines have actually been moved all that much. Not that any of that helps the curvy engineering section blend in with with the angular saucer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UN Spacy Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 TRAILER OUT! Yes...it's a shiety fan rip but it's better than nothing. http://www.flickr.com/photos/sfstreetlight/3030211291/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrie Nut Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 Cool trailer, liking how the Enterprise goes into Warp and the battles look good too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UN Spacy Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 http://www.trailerspy.com/trailer/1329/Star-Trek-Trailer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewie Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 /dripping with sarcasm Man, I wish trailers gave away more in them, THAT WAY I don't even have to go see movies anymore. /sarcasm Oh wait.... Still, I am quite interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 Firefly taste Enterprise movie, this will be interesting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chronocidal Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 (edited) Yeah, but the ships still make sounds in space. After seeing that, I wonder if that shot of the ship was the full picture.. I'm still hoping against hope that the main hull is a bit longer/better proportioned when I finally see it. The ship doesn't look bad from front/back though, the engines look to be at pretty decent angles. I think it's the wonky curved pylons that're throwing a lot of it off, since they looked like they were bowed a lot more from the side. My favorite trailer is still this one though. Edited November 15, 2008 by Chronocidal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumdumgai Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 Woaaaah. That was an awesome trailer. Definitely better seen on the big screen than the bootlegs or the official release to the web on monday. Awesome to see the Enterprise come out of warp into a battlefield with the red alert klaxon sounding. I do hope they don't spend much time on Kirk or Spock as kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 So wait, now young adult angsty Kirk just gets to stroll into starfleet, become captain of a ship, and everyone's good to go? What??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 So wait, now young adult angsty Kirk just gets to stroll into starfleet, become captain of a ship, and everyone's good to go? What??? yup, I'm sure that's it. The cop is probably an agent of Kirk's dad, and kirk's dad secretly built the enterprise just for him and kirk will instinctively know how to captain it. And when kirk yells, "photon torpedo attack!" with all his heart, the enterprise gets stronger and defeats romulans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 (edited) You mean the Enterprise was secretly created by Kirks dying grandfather, using a lost ancient technology with the power to become either a god or a demon. When Kirk jumps into his mini shuttle craft & yells "Enterprise GO!" it attaches to the bridge & becomes the super starship Enterprise Z! Edited November 15, 2008 by Keith 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.