Reactions To The New USS Enterprise

TrekToday · November 13 2008, 09:46 PM

With the details of the new Enterprise appearing recently, professionals and fans alike are weighing in with their opinions of the newly-designed ship.

As reported by TrekMovie, to some fans, a ship is just a vehicle to get to the story or on which a story takes place, but to others, a ship is much more than that, and every bit of design is carefully scrutinized and critiqued.

Former Star Trek designer Rick Sternbach, responsible for the design of many Star Trek ships and stations, had this to say about the new Enterprise. "I get the distinct impression that to do the nacelles and secondary hull, someone stared at the USS Pasteur for a while," he said. "Just a thought. But even the Pasteur's Bussard collectors had line of sight to open space, which the nacelles on this new ship don't seem to have. Perhaps the designers didn't know exactly how the different hardware bits worked (I violated this rule a little here and there, but I knew when I was doing it.)" Sternbach went on to say that "There's room in this Trek world for healthy design criticism, as well as simply sitting back and enjoying a well made SF film. I hope the film is well written and clever and has good proportions of action, humor, tech, etc. but I'm also prepared to analyze the design work to see, perhaps, how far the shapes and colors and functions stray from forty years of evolved gear."

The designer of the new Enterprise, Ryan Church registered his reactions to the comments made by Sternbach and others. "I'm not going to get involved in the mud slinging, here, but needed to assure you guys and gals: we've built you a fine ship."

Fans have also weighed in with their opinions, as reported by TrekBBS. Some liked the new design. "Looks good," said TrekBBS poster JRS. It's a nice mixture of something old (TOS and TMP) and something new. It has sense of power in it, but not without some grace and elegance added to the mix." Plum also liked the new Enterprise. "Very radical design. Has a futuristic retro style with it's sleek form but offset with technical detail. Notice the photon-torpedo tube mount as from the TMP design. Do I like it? It's great and seems to fit the design styles the film seems to be going for. I find this design to be wonderfully contemporary, sophisticated and appealing to today's eyes. Well done I say!"

Other fans weren't as enthusiastic. JBElliot was short and to the point. "Looks horrible." But Ethros injected a bit of humor into the discussion, borrowing a line from The Trouble With Tribbles when commenting on the new design. "I didn't mean to say the Enterprise should be hauling garbage. I meant to say that it should hauled away as garbage."

Some fans had mixed feelings about the Enterprise. "I hate the nacelles," said cultcross. "Otherwise, it's beautiful." "I actually like the nacelles," said Manticore. "And I really don't like the secondary hull. It just 'feels' very back heavy. With the way that the neck is centered over that ridiculously long cutout, it looks like it's about to tip over backward."

To read more, head to the article located here and the post located here.

Augustus · November 13 2008, 09:55 PM

have Trek BBS postings ever been quoted in a trektoday "news" story before? kind of cool...

Ethros · November 13 2008, 10:16 PM

^ Aye, tis cool

Thanks for mentioning my post!

Jarrott2 · November 13 2008, 10:46 PM

since this is a prequel, this is an early form of what we are used to seeing in TOS, how do we know that later in the movie that there won't be a refit say after a battle?

T'Bonz · November 14 2008, 12:01 AM

Ethros wrote:

^ Aye, tis cool

Thanks for mentioning my post!

You're welcome. See, reason to read the news!

I think in the past stuff might have been used, if memory serves. This is the first time I've done it. It probably will not be the last time.

So beware!

J. Allen · November 14 2008, 12:05 AM

My posts never get used, and I practically vomit wisdom!

J.

Samuel T. Cogley · November 14 2008, 12:09 AM

T'Bonz wrote:

This is the first time I've done it. It probably will not be the last time.

So beware!

I just don't get how you could have accidentally forgotten to include my comparison of the new ship to an erect dog's penis.

number6 · November 14 2008, 12:31 AM

J. Allen wrote:

My posts never get used, and I practically vomit wisdom!

J.

As do I.

Equally

T'Bonz · November 14 2008, 12:58 AM

Samuel T. Cogley wrote:

I just don't get how you could have accidentally forgotten to include my comparison of the new ship to an erect dog's penis.

Oh my gawd! That AVATAR!!

Spaceman Spiff · November 14 2008, 01:05 AM

When will this show air?

Mr. Adventure · November 14 2008, 03:30 PM

Does having mixed critical reactions to the new ship design pass the "Man Bites Dog" test of newsworthiness?

Rick Sternbach · November 15 2008, 07:13 AM

As I posted elsewhere on this board -

Yes, I was slightly disappointed in the initial viewing of the design, what with the elements of the Refit and what to me are odd-looking nacelles and pylons and the proportions of the engineering hull. In a question of pure mechanics, yes, I was puzzled by what appeared to be an incorrect placement of the nacelles so that the Bussard collectors didn't see open space, but that turned out to be an illusion, and I did get to see an ortho view of a port side elevation that confirmed it. Yes, I used a colorful metaphor related to elephants and committees, in the sense that the major assemblies did not look like they all came from the same "foundry," so to speak.

All that said, however, I do think that the new Enterprise design fits the rest of what appears in the trailer, so for me, it's the entire aesthetic that is skewed. Will it all work as a film? Probably. Does it feel like it fits with the rest of the 40-some years of the franchise? No, but that's just my opinion. Will I see the movie? Sure. Will I debate design points? Sure again; it's good to study and critique and exchange ideas but without trampling on the people who created the designs in a personal way. I'm sure Ryan Church and the other designers are okay folks; I just don't respond as positively to their concepts the way some others have, or feel that Star Trek needs to be radically updated or made more hip and cool for another new generation of filmgoers. Anyhow, May 09 will come soon enough, and we'll all have fun going to the flicks.

Rick
www.spacemodesystems.com

Finnegan · November 15 2008, 09:00 PM

TrekToday wrote:

With the details of the new Enterprise appearing recently, professionals and fans alike are weighing in with their opinions of the newly-designed ship.<IMG SRC="http://www.trektoday.com/images/news/New-Enterprise.gif" WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="86" ALIGN="RIGHT" BORDER="0">As reported by <A class="link" HREF="http://trekmovie.com">TrekMovie</A>, to some fans, a ship is just a vehicle to get to the story or on which a story takes place, but to others, a ship is much more than that, and every bit of design is carefully scrutinized and critiqued. Former Star Trek designer Rick Sternbach, responsible for the design of many Star Trek ships and stations, had this to say about the new Enterprise. "I get the distinct impression that to do the nacelles and secondary hull, someone stared at the USS Pasteur for a while," he said. "Just a thought. But even the Pasteur's Bussard collectors had line of sight to open space, which the nacelles on this new ship don't seem to have. Perhaps the designers didn't know exactly how the different hardware bits worked (I violated this rule a little here and there, but I knew when I was doing it.)" Sternbach went on to say that "There's room in this Trek world for healthy design criticism, as well as simply sitting back and enjoying a well made SF film. I hope the film is well written and clever and has good proportions of action, humor, tech, etc. but I'm also prepared to analyze the design work to see, perhaps, how far the shapes and colors and functions stray from forty years of evolved gear."The designer of the new Enterprise, Ryan Church registered his reactions to the comments made by Sternbach and others. "I'm not going to get involved in the mud slinging, here, but needed to assure you guys and gals: we've built you a fine ship."Fans have also weighed in with their opinions, as reported by <A class="link" HREF="http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=73387">TrekBBS</A>. Some liked the new design. "Looks good," said TrekBBS poster JRS. It's a nice mixture of something old (TOS and TMP) and something new. It has sense of power in it, but not without some grace and elegance added to the mix." Plum also liked the new Enterprise. "Very radical design. Has a futuristic retro style with it's sleek form but offset with technical detail. Notice the photon-torpedo tube mount as from the TMP design. Do I like it? It's great and seems to fit the design styles the film seems to be going for. I find this design to be wonderfully contemporary, sophisticated and appealing to today's eyes. Well done I say!"Other fans weren't as enthusiastic. JBElliot was short and to the point. "Looks horrible." But Ethros injected a bit of humor into the discussion, borrowing a line from The Trouble With Tribbles when commenting on the new design. "I didn't mean to say the Enterprise should be hauling garbage. I meant to say that it should hauled away as garbage." Some fans had mixed feelings about the Enterprise. "I hate the nacelles," said cultcross. "Otherwise, it's beautiful." "I actually like the nacelles," said Manticore. "And I really don't like the secondary hull. It just 'feels' very back heavy. With the way that the neck is centered over that ridiculously long cutout, it looks like it's about to tip over backward." To read more, head to the article located <A class="link" HREF="http://trekmovie.com/2008/11/12/big-reaction-to-new-enterprise-new-designer-responds/">here</A> and the post located <A class="link" HREF="http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=73387">here</A>.<center></center>

Well, I thnk she's pretty sleek and sexy--can't wait to see her in action!!

Finnegan · November 15 2008, 09:02 PM

Jarrott2 wrote:

since this is a prequel, this is an early form of what we are used to seeing in TOS, how do we know that later in the movie that there won't be a refit say after a battle?

Exactly! I think JJ is being pretty and cagey and clever about his new take on Trek. Something like what you suggest would not surprise me at all.

Finnegan · November 15 2008, 09:03 PM

J. Allen wrote:

My posts never get used, and I practically vomit wisdom!

J.

Indeed--you are the "Mr. Creosote" of this board. Lol!

ArthurKing · November 16 2008, 09:50 PM

Rick Sternbach wrote:

As I posted elsewhere on this board -

Yes, I was slightly disappointed in the initial viewing of the design, what with the elements of the Refit and what to me are odd-looking nacelles and pylons and the proportions of the engineering hull. In a question of pure mechanics, yes, I was puzzled by what appeared to be an incorrect placement of the nacelles so that the Bussard collectors didn't see open space, but that turned out to be an illusion, and I did get to see an ortho view of a port side elevation that confirmed it. Yes, I used a colorful metaphor related to elephants and committees, in the sense that the major assemblies did not look like they all came from the same "foundry," so to speak.

All that said, however, I do think that the new Enterprise design fits the rest of what appears in the trailer, so for me, it's the entire aesthetic that is skewed. Will it all work as a film? Probably. Does it feel like it fits with the rest of the 40-some years of the franchise? No, but that's just my opinion. Will I see the movie? Sure. Will I debate design points? Sure again; it's good to study and critique and exchange ideas but without trampling on the people who created the designs in a personal way. I'm sure Ryan Church and the other designers are okay folks; I just don't respond as positively to their concepts the way some others have, or feel that Star Trek needs to be radically updated or made more hip and cool for another new generation of filmgoers. Anyhow, May 09 will come soon enough, and we'll all have fun going to the flicks.

Rick
www.spacemodesystems.com

I'm going to have to disagree (in a highly positive way) with you here. Based on your experience and the contributions you've made to Star Trek, I'd say that your opinion is a bit damning, and it's one that I think many fans of Star Trek would agree with. I think, frankly, you were being generous in your comments. What they managed to get 'right' about the ship design was simply a function of what they didn't alter. What they didn't get 'right' was a function of whatever they attempted to change. Not to say that I wouldn't have been happy with a change, but a change that made sense and was aesthetically pleasing.

As usual with this movie - and this is my third post on the subject in the last few days, so I'm going to have to pull myself back or I'll bias myself against the movie in May, which I don't want to do! - I get the sense that there was a lot of lipservice paid to the traditions and the fans and the people that made Star Trek what it was over 4 decades and then, behind closed doors, all of that facade was tossed off before the idols of modern marketing and making things look 'cool' (see, e.g. Transformers and other crap from Hollywood.)

In short, the design alterations seem thoughtless. I'm not a canon maven, but I have little tolerance for people who aren't willing to think seriously about what they do within and to this universe. The ship is a character - some contingents of fans consider her the primary character. I wish I had the sense that the movie makers actually cared about this.

Pioneer · November 19 2008, 08:50 AM

Nothing on the RSS feed for what seemed like weeks and now this exciting flurry of activity. And comments from Rick Sternbach, no less.

I must agree with all of those who lament the decision of J.J. Abrams and company to (re-)make this new Star Trek movie to be more "hip" or "cool" for a "new generation of filmgoers". This new audience may turn out to be a very small minority of those who actually buy a ticket and see the film. It seems to me that any filmmaker should serve the known, existing fan base first, then throw a few bones to the newcomers. The inverse seems to have happened. So, we'll just have to see.

Bad Bishop · November 19 2008, 04:35 PM

J. Allen wrote:

My posts never get used, and I practically vomit wisdom!

Since when?

TIBERIUS42BC · November 20 2008, 04:31 AM

Well I have to say that the ship design was not well thought out. basically, the new movie is changing history. so imagine the old 63 Impala SS you used to drive was told to you by people to not be what it was. but now you drove a 1972 Ford Pinto. the re-casting of characters was needed to tell the story I agree, but to have someone look at a mishmash of ships that came after and slap parts together is not what I would have expected to see. I will see the movie, but I see a sad trend in ripoff artists remaking series in their own image to gain a buck. lets low tech the show and make it so people can relate. hmmm seems to be dumbing down imagination for the sake of money. wonder why the US economy is in the tank and the world is upside down? the new trailer looke like A GM commercial- I thought it was an introduction for the new ZR1 corvette,using a classic to introduce the model. another remake I remember seeing in recent history was BattleStar Galactica. although the stories were interesting and it was able to go farther than the original-it was not what is was. as this will not be. to do a new vision but go backwards is a hard pill to swallow. saying it's a prequel so mine came first is all bull. thats a counterfeit Enterprise built by Ferenghi in the pursuit of gold pressed latinum. I think if JJ Abrahms tried his hand at Star Wars, George Lucas would be sure to see that Darth Vader reomoved his "credentials"