Jump to content

Home

Star Trek (Pic Heavy)


HerbieZ
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have to say, i like the design. The torpedo launchers and the thrusters are scaled smaller which is better as the launchers on the refit were too big considering they launch human-sized torpedoes. I'm surprised the neck is angled so far back but it has the added benefit of making the deflector dish a more prominent feature. I don't like the nacelles though. They remind me of 60's headlights, but they seem to taper off into an Enterprise-E style.

 

The problem is that the Enterprise NCC-1701 is a known entity with a known history, we even know who was the first captain of USS Enterprise NCC-1701, then it was Christopher Pike, then James T. Kirk. This ship is a classic, what they could get away with concerning the NX-01 is totally different from this ship.

 

If they wanted to do anything, they should have taken the original design and updated it. You don't totally wreck a classic.

 

Also in TOS, the photon torpedo launchers were in the saucer section, they were moved to the secondary hull by the time of TMP. I just noticed this but it also looks like the Impulse engines for the saucer section (Primary Hull) are missing.

 

There are even models in the Observation Lounge one of the TNG sets which portray the Constitution Class NCC-1701.

At the end of the day i just think, they redesigned the enterprise for TMP and threw in the fact that it was a refit and everyone was fine with it. Just one word. Despite the fact that the actual body of the ship had changed, if it was a refit, they took everything out and built up from the framework. It blatently was not a refit, but we were fine with it.

 

TMP occurred after TOS, several years after in fact, the Enterprise went through a major refit, this movie is just before TOS, so this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The Bridge you can maybe get away with, because there are a series of bolts that bolt a bridge to a ship and the bridge can be swapped out in a matter of days.

 

I'm giving these guys the benefit of the doubt because they haven't made everything and tried to clumsily explain how it all fits it into canon.

 

I was inclined to do the same, but they completely wrecked a classic, you don't wreck a classic. It would be like someone coming in and deciding to paint the Millenium Falcon pink it just isn't done.

Edited by GarfieldJL
Adding some sources
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 206
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm glad I'm not a hardcore Star Trek fan, that way I'll probably be able to enjoy the movie without the feeling that they raped the entire show with the new designs and whatnot. o_Q

 

 

Uh they messed up 2 series (TOS and TNG), and called into question stuff from at least 2 movies, probably more (background stuff but still), heck they even messed up the mirror universe episodes for Enterprise (which had a Constitution Class starship in it (the same class the the NCC-1701 is)).

 

The NCC-1701 is too tied into the continuity for Star Trek, to pull something like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now we understand why Roddenberry would argue with Paramount over ship designs. I like this and I hate it. It reminds me of the Lost in Space reboot's technology and ship designs. I don't like J.J. Abrams anyway; thus, I'm going to be very biases. I think he should have stuck to the original design, and then fleshed it out ever so slightly. Those nacelles are dorky. Roddenberry wanted the Enterprise to remain sleek and polished. Now it looks too organic. Too close to Star Wars, and not close enough to NASA.

 

st09ent2_compare.jpg

 

Its a cross between The Next Generation and Star Trek: The Original Series and a 1957 Chevy (headlights and shell curves).

 

Big Reaction To New Enterprise - New Designer Responds

Edited by Yar-El
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh they messed up 2 series (TOS and TNG), and called into question stuff from at least 2 movies, probably more (background stuff but still), heck they even messed up the mirror universe episodes for Enterprise (which had a Constitution Class starship in it (the same class the the NCC-1701 is)).

 

The NCC-1701 is too tied into the continuity for Star Trek, to pull something like this.

 

In the words of Kirk himself - "Young minds, Fresh Ideas".

 

It all depends whether this is meant to be a prequel, or a Re-imagining, such as RDM's Battlestar series.

 

If it's a prequel, i'm not sure i'll like it - if it's a re-imagination (which is looking likely) i'll go into the theater wary, but open to new ideas.

 

Thanks for that article Yar-El - reading it has actually opened my eyes a bit, enough to tentatively say it's an ok design - assuming it's a reimagining.

 

Hell, if Sternbach thinks it works, it's good enough for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that article Yar-El - reading it has actually opened my eyes a bit, enough to tentatively say it's an ok design - assuming it's a reimagining.

 

Hell, if Sternbach thinks it works, it's good enough for me.

I just read some descriptions of the new trailer coming, and all I have to say is "WOW!" I'm warming up to this movie. Yes, I'm a little upset about certain changes to everything; however, how many people protested against The Next Generation? Look at how much of a success that became. Now I can't see Star Trek without a Data or Picard.

 

Star Trek is all about these type of alterations. I just hope they don't loose the human element.

 

Look at the falcon and say that again.

Wasn't the Falcon inspired by a hamburger with olives? :D I wonder what the Falcon would look like after the franchise falls into new hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what the Falcon would look like after the franchise falls into new hands.

 

Quarter pounder with cheese next to a squid.

 

The trailer is out on monday on the official film website. Reportedly this shot isn't in it, you only see it being constructed on Earth and the ship going to warp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read some descriptions of the new trailer coming, and all I have to say is "WOW!" I'm warming up to this movie. Yes, I'm a little upset about certain changes to everything; however, how many people protested against The Next Generation? Look at how much of a success that became. Now I can't see Star Trek without a Data or Picard.

 

Star Trek is all about these type of alterations. I just hope they don't loose the human element.

 

 

Wasn't the Falcon inspired by a hamburger with olives? :D I wonder what the Falcon would look like after the franchise falls into new hands.

 

Yar-El, The Next Generation takes place (in canon) about 80 years after TOS. This movie isn't that long before TOS, we've seen the Constitution Class even when Christopher Pike commended the Enterprise. The problem with this movie is that we're talking about the same ship that is seen in three movies and in TOS. (IV-VI features NCC-1701-A) That's why there is such a large number of complaints, it doesn't fit the timeline at all.

 

Now if they come up with a good way around it, then that'd be good (they could in theory literally blow up the entire secondary hull by the end and leave the saucer relatively intact).

 

The situation with the Galaxy Class Enterprise-D compared to the TOS Enterprise isn't even a relevant comparison because they are two different ships.

 

The TOS Enterprise and seen refitted in Movies I-III (III being where she was blown up), is the same ship quite literally as the one we're seeing in this new movie. That's why there is such an uproar, because it trashes an icon. Some things should be left alone, and the ship's design is one of them. You can make it look more modern without changing the configuration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with this movie is that we're talking about the same ship that is seen in three movies and in TOS. (IV-VI features NCC-1701-A) That's why there is such a large number of complaints, it doesn't fit the timeline at all.

 

You can make it look more modern without changing the configuration.

 

As i've said, I think a reimagining is more likely than this film being slotted into the current continuity.

 

It's likely that CBS/Paramount are going to use this film to maybe launch a new series - a re-imagined series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As i've said, I think a reimagining is more likely than this film being slotted into the current continuity.

 

It's likely that CBS/Paramount are going to use this film to maybe launch a new series - a re-imagined series.

 

Remakes tend to not be as good as the original in some cases. Also the ship looks in some ways even more advanced than Enterprise-D. Seriously, this is messing with an icon, with part of the core heritage.

 

It would be like someone coming in and turning the Falcon into something entirely different and still call it the Falcon. The Enterprise has a style to it, you don't mess with it.

 

This is part of why the series Enterprise didn't do very well, because it was a prequel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remakes tend to not be as good as the original in some cases. Also the ship looks in some ways even more advanced than Enterprise-D. Seriously, this is messing with an icon, with part of the core heritage.

 

In some cases, yes. But we're forgetting that production values and techniques are now 42 years more advanced than what they were in the 60s - it's natural that things will change.

 

And a re-imagining doesn't have to stick to established designs - a new Enterprise, for a new Trek, for a new generation.

 

Also, the film's not even out till May. At least give it a chance before totally condemning it.

 

The Enterprise has a style to it, you don't mess with it.

 

As i've said before, if Nimoy didn't like the direction this was going, he wouldn't be working on it - it's got his blessing, and I think that's good enough for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In some cases, yes. But we're forgetting that production values and techniques are now 42 years more advanced than what they were in the 60s - it's natural that things will change.

 

Some things need to stay the same though, you don't see people going and messing with the Falcon do you.

 

And a re-imagining doesn't have to stick to established designs - a new Enterprise, for a new Trek, for a new generation.

 

There are plenty of letters left in the alphabet.

 

Also, the film's not even out till May. At least give it a chance before totally condemning it.

 

Unless they come up with a way to destroy the entire secondary hull (which is plausible) and leave the saucer intact, this kinda screws everything up from a fan standpoint. Also since a Constitution Class ship was actually in an Enterprise (series) episode, it isn't a matter of 46 years of changes.

 

As i've said before, if Nimoy didn't like the direction this was going, he wouldn't be working on it - it's got his blessing, and I think that's good enough for now.

 

Nimoy isn't always right, I'm still going to say you don't mess with a classic. Update the interior, but keep the basic design. The problem is this is a well documented time period in Trek Lore. Since they are going to have James T. Kirk, there is a problem. We've seen the Enterprise NCC-1701 (Constitution Class) from when it was under the command of Christopher Pike, and when it was under the command of James T. Kirk after that. This new ship model design doesn't fit because it cuts into the middle of when that ship is seen as far as the timeline is concerned. That's the problem with this idea.

 

Remakes are all well and good, but unlike the Knight Rider remake, where it is years later and there are different charecters and thus a new car, the era that we're seeing is an era so well documented, so at the core of canon lore that it makes a lot of people kinda angry.

 

For instance, we've seen this ship (or ship class) in at least 7 movies (sometimes in the background but still), 5 television series (TNG had an episode with a mock version of the bridge from NCC-1701), not to mention the DS9 episode where they had to go back in time, or the mirror universe Enterprise finale where a Constitution Class from this universe ended up in the mirror universe. They even had to conform with some stuff to make the NX-01 fit with the era it was supposed to be in compared to the Constitution Class for crying out loud.

 

The ship is an icon, a legend, a part of culture that transcends the generations. It is something that should be left alone. They want to play with textures to make it look more real, fine, but you don't mess with the original model.

 

Furthermore, it is extremely rare for a movie on the big screen to lead to a television series, if I didn't know better I'd say they are deliberately trying to destroy Star Trek.

 

And btw, there is an interesting Post-Nemesis story-arc that they can pursue, that's currently out there do something from that, so there is stuff out there that they can do without creating prequels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCC-1701? It looks like it falls between NCC-1701 and NCC-1701-A, or it might fit between NCC-1701-A and NCC-1701-B. or it might fit between NCC-1701-B and NCC-1701-C. Its a hybrid of a sorts.

 

Yar-El, The Next Generation takes place (in canon) about 80 years after TOS. This movie isn't that long before TOS, we've seen the Constitution Class even when Christopher Pike commended the Enterprise. The problem with this movie is that we're talking about the same ship that is seen in three movies and in TOS. (IV-VI features NCC-1701-A) That's why there is such a large number of complaints, it doesn't fit the timeline at all.

 

Now if they come up with a good way around it, then that'd be good (they could in theory literally blow up the entire secondary hull by the end and leave the saucer relatively intact).

 

The situation with the Galaxy Class Enterprise-D compared to the TOS Enterprise isn't even a relevant comparison because they are two different ships.

 

The TOS Enterprise and seen refitted in Movies I-III (III being where she was blown up), is the same ship quite literally as the one we're seeing in this new movie. That's why there is such an uproar, because it trashes an icon. Some things should be left alone, and the ship's design is one of them. You can make it look more modern without changing the configuration.

 

Article - Compare: How Radical Is The USS Enterprise Redesign?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some things need to stay the same though, you don't see people going and messing with the Falcon do you.

 

Y'see, the problem with that argument is that George Lucas is still alive, and still the creative director for Star Wars. No one even knows if the most recent series (chronologically, Voyager, and the later TNG movies) are the direction that he would go in.

 

There are plenty of letters left in the alphabet.

 

Again, if it's a re-imagined series, they don't need any letters.

 

Unless they come up with a way to destroy the entire secondary hull (which is plausible) and leave the saucer intact, this kinda screws everything up from a fan standpoint.

 

Not if it's not a part of the existing continuity.

 

Also since a Constitution Class ship was actually in an Enterprise (series) episode, it isn't a matter of 46 years of changes.

 

In the Mirror Universe, and it got there due to a rift in space-time created by a Tholian Web.

 

Nimoy isn't always right, I'm still going to say you don't mess with a classic. Update the interior, but keep the basic design. The problem is this is a well documented time period in Trek Lore. Since they are going to have James T. Kirk, there is a problem. We've seen the Enterprise NCC-1701 (Constitution Class) from when it was under the command of Christopher Pike, and when it was under the command of James T. Kirk after that. This new ship model design doesn't fit because it cuts into the middle of when that ship is seen as far as the timeline is concerned. That's the problem with this idea.

 

Again, you're missing my point - if it's in a re-imagined timeline, a new continuity, it doesn't matter.

 

Remakes are all well and good, but unlike the Knight Rider remake, where it is years later and there are different charecters and thus a new car, the era that we're seeing is an era so well documented, so at the core of canon lore that it makes a lot of people kinda angry.

 

Then people need to let go of it, and try to enter this with an open mind. It's about time Trek had an injection of fresh life.

 

The ship is an icon, a legend, a part of culture that transcends the generations. It is something that should be left alone. They want to play with textures to make it look more real, fine, but you don't mess with the original model.

 

I'm not disputing the original's status as an icon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCC-1701? It looks like it falls between NCC-1701 and NCC-1701-A, or it might fit btween NCC-1701-A and NCC-1701-B. or it might fit between NCC-1701-B and NCC-1701-C. Its a hybrid of a sorts.

 

Problem is that it can't though. The letter designation is the identifier, Enterprise NCC-1701-A was the second starship to bear the same name and registry number. There is no in-between, further NCC-1701-A was a recommisioning of another existing Constitution Class.

 

Ships can be renamed for the duration of a particular mission, but we're looking at a documented era. There was a refit when Kirk took over command from Pike, so this could be a failed refit and they had to switch back, some sort of glitch maybe?

 

In one Star Trek book (noncanon), there was an excuse as to why the main computer of the Enterprise was so out of date in comparison. That the Klingons had come up with a weapon that could short out the computer and thus the Inertial Dampeners as well (you can see the results with the accelerations that ship routinely pulled), but the older computers and systems weren't affected, hence a roll-back. By the time of TMP that problem would have been corrected.

 

In the Mirror Universe, and it got there due to a rift in space-time created by a Tholian Web.

And it was the same ship from a TOS episode which was the same exact class as the NCC-1701.

 

Then people need to let go of it, and try to enter this with an open mind. It's about time Trek had an injection of fresh life.

 

Then why not try to bring in the USS Titan, which is Captain Riker's ship, seriously it is better to not throw something in which messes with known canon, something that takes place after Nemesis would give a lot more freedom and running room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like it's in part based on the old Phase II designs.

 

Personally, I'd still have preferred the TMP design, and IMO the rear half looks incredibly ugly (not to mention about as sleek as the Reichstag...), but it's not my movie, so... *shrug*.

 

To me, it seems rather lower tech then the original series. which is good, they can't out tech the original series, but they can create better effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCC-1701 and its history are engraved in actual space history as well. Changing anything that has historial context is bogus. Fans pushed to have the first NASA shuttle called Enterprise; thus, it would be foolish to redesign something that has historical significance. We are talking about a good 40 years of Star Trek history being blown. NCC-1701 represents a decade of change in the United States and the world. It has a place in both science-fiction and world history. J. J. Abrams was wrong to radically redesign the original Enterprise. I hope there is backlash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...