Another fan attempt at TOS deck plans

[CuttingEdge100]

Outstanding work

[Captain Robert April]

I suppose I should drag my thread back from the abyss...

[Shaw]

Captain Robert April wrote:

---

I suppose I should drag my thread back from the abyss...

How close can any of these projects be to the abyss? There are more threads on the TOS Enterprise than on the STXI version... and that is a major (current) motion picture event!

Yeah, people are as interested in the original Enterprise now as they have ever been.

[CuttingEdge100]

Shaw,

How close can any of these projects be to the abyss? There are more threads on the TOS Enterprise than on the STXI version... and that is a major (current) motion picture event!

Yeah, people are as interested in the original Enterprise now as they have ever been.

All good points


CuttingEdge100,
BTW: Congratulations on your promotion

[Captain Robert April]

"The abyss" being the point where I have to change the search parameters in order to find the damn thread again.

[CuttingEdge100]

Captain Robert April,

Well then, drag it back from the abyss

[Cary L. Brown]

Shaw wrote:

---

How close can any of these projects be to the abyss? There are more threads on the TOS Enterprise than on the STXI version... and that is a major (current) motion picture event!

Yeah, people are as interested in the original Enterprise now as they have ever been.

Oh yeah...

I have this mental image of what's going to come from this new Trek movie... I suspect that it won't be "forgotten" exactly... just not referenced, directly, ever again. Sort of like the Ang Lee "Hulk" movie.

If we see another Trek movie, and if it's an "NCC1701" movie, we'll either see something totally new (again) or something much more "TOS-ish." (Regardless of what some of the "tweak the fans to make them squirm" types on this BBS would like to tell us.)

The original design simply looks better, simply WORKS better... and has 40+ years of audience familiarity. Most folks who see this new movie will either not "really" notice that it's not the same ship, anyway. Those who do notice will, for the most part, be bugged by it. I can live with it, if (and only if) we get the "reset button" at the end. Which I'm convinced is the case, actually... though what gets reset remains to be seen.

But the ship you're devoting your time to is THE Enterprise to me... everything else is, to one extent or another, just an imitation.

[Shaw]

CuttingEdge100 wrote:

---

BTW: Congratulations on your promotion

Well, see... the TrekBBS finally noticed I was worthy of promotion.

Cary L. Brown wrote:

---

I have this mental image of what's going to come from this new Trek movie... I suspect that it won't be "forgotten" exactly... just not referenced, directly, ever again. Sort of like the Ang Lee "Hulk" movie.

I wasn't as worried about this movie until recently when I heard that Mandel was fired for simply putting together a comparison diagram of the new ship with the old one (they seemed to think he was too attached to old Trek to keep his job).

[Praetor]

Shaw wrote:

---

I wasn't as worried about this movie until recently when I heard that Mandel was fired for simply putting together a comparison diagram of the new ship with the old one (they seemed to think he was too attached to old Trek to keep his job).

If that's true, then he should sue and make a big PR fiasco of it for them. That's absolutely outrageous.

[USS Mariner]

Shaw wrote:

---

I wasn't as worried about this movie until recently when I heard that Mandel was fired for simply putting together a comparison diagram of the new ship with the old one (they seemed to think he was too attached to old Trek to keep his job).

Links, please. As little confidence as I put in JJ, this sounds suspect.

[Tallguy]

Yeah, that would be bad. Of course Paramount was very anti-TOS when TMP came out too.

Wait, look! It's Shaw's blueprints! Oh, yeah, that was the topic, wasn't it?

[Shaw]

USS Mariner wrote:

---

Links, please. As little confidence as I put in JJ, this sounds suspect.

Well, as I was expressing my opinion (and what it was based on) and not trying to shape anyone else's (seeing as people reach their own conclusions just fine without my help), I don't see why it would matter one way or the other how I got the information.






But if it matters that much to ya (and my accounting of information like this doesn't stand on it's own), maybe this will meet your standards...

John Eaves, March 16, 2009 at 1:15 pm
I did make it on the new one!!! My friend Geoffry Mandell and I were some of the only folks that worked on any of the previous Treks to get on the new one. One day Geoff had to scale the Enterprise and he did so by picturing the new ship in comparison to the previous ships,, He was let go the next day for being to attached and close to the older shows,,,,, I stayed very very quiet after that dark day I can tell you!!! HAAAA!

Or maybe not.

Should I start providing links for everything I post now? I wasn't aware that my credit had dropped that low.

[Tallguy]

Shaw wrote:

---

Should I start providing links for everything I post now? I wasn't aware that my credit had dropped that low.

Your credit is still high, it's just a pretty formidable - accusation isn't the word I'm looking for, but it will do. So a source isn't a bad thing to have.

And now that we have it -- Wow.

As I've said before, I have no problem with a total remake keeping nothing more than the most basics of character and setting. But I wish they wouldn't keep saying how faithful they're being when they're not. That story is a pretty sizable nail in a pretty full coffin.

Back on topic, what's the next steps that you're working on (or will be working on, or whatever).

[Cary L. Brown]

Shaw wrote:

---

Well, as I was expressing my opinion (and what it was based on) and not trying to shape anyone else's (seeing as people reach their own conclusions just fine without my help), I don't see why it would matter one way or the other how I got the information.






But if it matters that much to ya (and my accounting of information like this doesn't stand on it's own), maybe this will meet your standards...

John Eaves, March 16, 2009 at 1:15 pm
I did make it on the new one!!! My friend Geoffry Mandell and I were some of the only folks that worked on any of the previous Treks to get on the new one. One day Geoff had to scale the Enterprise and he did so by picturing the new ship in comparison to the previous ships,, He was let go the next day for being to attached and close to the older shows,,,,, I stayed very very quiet after that dark day I can tell you!!! HAAAA!

Or maybe not.

Should I start providing links for everything I post now? I wasn't aware that my credit had dropped that low.

Hey, this is the internet... where people can assume you of raping your kitten and unless you provide clear proof that your kitten hasn't ever been abused, you're assumed guilty!

Seriously, though... I didn't doubt your claim, but I also like seeing the original reference (which I was unaware of). I'm surprised that Eaves didn't lose HIS job over saying that... and I doubt very much he'd have said if if he thought he had any future working with this particular gang, anyway, huh?

Geoff Mandell is one of the "biggest names" in Trek fandom... a bit more "Street cred" with TOS-era fans than Sternbach, even... running up in the same general realm as M.J. (though a floor or two lower in the office-building! ) That he was FIRED over this... well... I see no reason that Eaves would lie about it, and I've since confirmed that Eaves did actually say this... so I agree, it's GREAT cause for concern.

Re: "suing" over it, though? Not-so-much. Most employment is technically "employment at will." I've never worked any other way, even when working on a contractual basis... either party can dissolve the arrangement at any time for any legal reason. I could quit, or they could terminate me. And unless they were doing it for demonstrably illegal reasons (ie, a boss firing me because I wouldn't wash his car on my weekends), I wouldn't have any say in the matter.

So PPC could fire J. Mandell for any reason at any time, if it was related to their belief in his ability to do the job he was hired to do (or if they just didn't have enough $$$). It was STUPID for them to do so, but they're permitted to be morons. We, of course, get a vote on the matter... that vote being cast through our wallets.

[CuttingEdge100]

That is pretty messed up that they fired a guy because he was "too attached" to the original Star Trek. Not to mention quite lame.

CuttingEdge100