View Single Post
Old May 4 2013, 10:36 AM   #56
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

BillJ wrote: View Post
The Enterprise is a vehicle of the imagination not a real starship. Does it's size in relation to other fantasy starships really matter?
What annoys me is the arrogance of fanboys who insist they know better than the people who made the movie. The people who can see the enourmous engine room and go, "that's a mistake" because it wouldn't fit in the 1966 or 1979 versions of the Enterprise, despite those who made this one saying for four years now that they made it much bigger.
trevanian wrote: View Post
Probably at least as much as the size of the flying monkeys in OZ, or the size of the firebelcher in GODZILLA. Benchmarks of credibility enhance an enterprise rather than detract from it.
But too many are confusing "benchmark of credibility" with "the way it used to be."

Can anyone give me one good reason why the new Enterprise can't be 700+ meters long? I've heard "It doesn't make sense." but absolutely no reasoning why beyond it being a change from the old. The windows are too big? One look at the ship and you see they're the same size as the one on the bridge. Is that too big? Does one of Roddenberry's rules stipulate a standard window size for Federation starships? The hatches are too big? I posted pictures showing that wasn't the case. Too many decks? Based on what??

In-universe and out of universe, there is NO reason why they can't have resized the Enterprise, or build even bigger starships like the Vengeance. None at all.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3

Last edited by F. King Daniel; May 4 2013 at 02:29 PM.
F. King Daniel is online now   Reply With Quote