RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,771
Posts: 5,216,848
Members: 24,218
Currently online: 681
Newest member: momogila

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Fandom > Fan Productions

Fan Productions Creating our own Trek canon!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 14 2011, 12:14 AM   #1126
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

USS Intrepid wrote: View Post
Shaw wrote: View Post
Demanding of what?
Of something that doesn't look like it was made on a shoestring for a TV budget. Something that looks substantial, and that isn't going to fall over if you lean on it. Really, if you can't get that then there's no pint even debating this.
And just who in the frakking hell is arguing for that!?!
Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 12:24 AM   #1127
USS Intrepid
Commodore
 
USS Intrepid's Avatar
 
Location: Dundee, Scotland, UK
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

Okay I'll admit that's belabouring the point, but the simple fact is, a faithful recreation of the original sets simply will not cut it for a multi-million dollar movie.
__________________
Star Trek: Intrepid
USS Intrepid is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 12:27 AM   #1128
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

USS Intrepid wrote: View Post
Of something that doesn't look like it was made on a shoestring for a TV budget. Something that looks substantial, and that isn't going to fall over if you lean on it. Really, if you can't get that then there's no pint even debating this.
You answered this later in your own post... you are arguing points I am not, so you are essentially debating yourself. I know it would be easier if I argued things the way you want me too, but that is a discussion for someone else willing to debate those points... which isn't me.

Hardly. I'm saying those sets will not work today because they do not and will not look in any way convincing compared to contemporary designs. I'm not saying they are right or wrong, just that they will not sell.
There is a problem... I asked about design. And you go on to say...
"Nothing. I never said there was anything *wrong* with it. Nobody did."
But you in fact just did.

Did you mean contemporary construction techniques?

If there is nothing wrong with the design, then it should work. If there is something wrong with the design, point it out.

Simple.

Which again is completely beside the point. Those are period pieces, of course they should use authentic designs. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous. Star Trek is not a period piece. It's a work of fiction that needs to look good enough that its intended audience will suspend belief. Expecting anyone other than dedicated fans to take the original sets seriously is just blinkered.
Star Trek is fictional, it can be it's own period piece if it wants to be.

Better production values, better effects, better set construction... but there was nothing wrong with the essence of the original.

And on that we disagree. Those sets, updated, *might* look good for a TV series, but not for a major motion picture.
Why?

You should be able to point to design elements and say this wouldn't work.

Which is really no different from what anyone else has been saying. So why are we arguing about it?
First, you are trying hard to read me into one side or the other on this. I wasn't picking sides, I was asking a question...

What is wrong with the original designs?

And again, I never said there as anything wrong with Jefferies' work, please stop implying otherwise.
There is no implication... you are saying it.

If you want to stop saying it, I'll stop replying to it.

I'd argue we got just that anyway with the Kelvin bridge.
I couldn't see the Kelvin bridge through the lens flares, so I couldn't tell one way or the other.


__________________________________


CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Please don't presume to know my thought processes.
I was asking... you could haven given an answer that would help, but you had said
"I just don't know how to reply to this."
And that didn't give me much to work with.

But this does...

Given the smoothness of the surface, its polish, and the look of the reflections, the helm and navigation console, for example, looks like wood painted black to me. Unpainted molded colored plastic is often not as smooth and hardly reflects at all. Unpainted metal surfaces might be that smooth, but they produce sharper reflections. Sure, I don't know what it is made of based on appearances alone, but there are plenty of things in my everyday experience that this does look exactly like, and those things are all wood painted black.

And before you say, but it could be painted plastic or painted metal, I have to ask why would it be painted at all? Paint will chip, and a starship should not allow even the possibility of chipped paint on the surface of its consoles. If color is a feature then it should be the alloy or plastic itself that has the color, and that's my expectation.

And anyway, I wouldn't expect console surfaces to be pure metal. I imagine plastic would make a better insulator. Goodness knows how often the crew gets shocked. All this means that the consoles appear too smooth in the TOS sets.
Wow... you can see too smooth on screen and call that wood? I have plastic items around me that reflect as much... are they wood (in your experience)?

Well, the consoles in The Cage were intended to look like metal, but were painted black later to make them feel like acrylic surfaces.

It hasn't been my experience to associate metal, plastic or acrylic with wood... but to each their own.

There are many other examples worth discussing, but not in what feels like a highly adversarial climate.
I was just curious how the designs made things wood. I know the construction was of mainly wood, but I was asking about the designs. I wasn't trying to put you on the spot... but I was also trying not to be left with having to presume to know your thought processes.

Of course a real adversarial climate would include pejoratives like calling people hard core fans... fortunately we haven't had to worry about such things in this thread.


__________________________________


Dennis wrote: View Post
It's not even a matter of "thought processes." It looks like wood...because it looks like wood. More precisely, examined in HD most of the TOS sets either have visible wood grain or are finished in the kind of matte interior wall paints that are hard to mistake for anything else and which betray all kinds of imperfections and seams in the material surface.

I'm guessing that some people don't see this because they choose not to, just as they choose to imagine some possible "control interface" logic to backlit plastic cubes placed in arcs and crosses that are duplicated from "station" to "station" and set to set.
I haven't read every post, but maybe you could point out an example of someone choosing not to see those aspects.

Obviously there must be someone who did that or you wouldn't have brought it up... right?
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 01:55 AM   #1129
USS Intrepid
Commodore
 
USS Intrepid's Avatar
 
Location: Dundee, Scotland, UK
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

I'm sorry, but how is calling someone a hard core fan a pejorative? I happen to *be* a hard core fan, so maybe I just don't see where the insult lies. Regardless, my apologies if you read some sort of insult into that, it was certainly not my intention.

Somewhere along the line I've clearly picked you up wrong. I was under the impression that you were arguing for recreations of the original 60s sets. If that isn't the case, then I apologise for the misunderstanding (which I suspect can be traced back to my use of *designs* when I should have said *sets*). To that end, I concede your point; I don't disagree that an updating of those designs could work, but they would have to be far more elaborate, far more polished and far more 'real' to look at (by modern standards) than the version we got in the 60s.

I will say again, though. Whatever is produced needs to look good enough that its intended audience will suspend belief. Could that be done with the existing designs? Possibly. The layout and shapes are fine (to my eye), but I think you'd need to seriously overhaul the finish, the design of the consoles and control surfaces to come up with something convincing for a modern audience.

I am not saying there is *anything* wrong with Jefferies' designs. Perhaps I was not precise enough in my wording, but all I was saying was that I did not believe they would work *as seen in the original series* for a modern audience of a major motion picture. I am not implying that they are wrong, as much as you keep suggesting otherwise, just that the sets as seen in the original series, are a product of their time, same as the design ethos of the Buster Crabbe Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers.

Perhaps you would kind enough to explain how you would suggest the original *designs* (not the sets) be utilised, and how you would rework them for a modern audience.
__________________
Star Trek: Intrepid

Last edited by USS Intrepid; March 14 2011 at 03:04 AM.
USS Intrepid is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 04:37 AM   #1130
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

More detail, modern materials, the sort of thing where if they reduced the resolution, it would look at home alongside the TOS sets.
Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 06:09 AM   #1131
Potemkin_Prod
Commodore
 
Location: Southwest Georgia
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

So Maurice, how's that edit coming along?
__________________
Randy
--------------------
Project Potemkin
http://www.projectpotemkin.com
Potemkin_Prod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 06:43 AM   #1132
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

USS Intrepid wrote: View Post
Perhaps you would kind enough to explain how you would suggest the original *designs* (not the sets) be utilised, and how you would rework them for a modern audience.
Being kind goes both ways... I'm always will to share ideas and have an honest discussion with those willing to do the same.

Last edited by Shaw; March 14 2011 at 11:58 AM.
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 08:00 AM   #1133
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

It's oh-so-freaking ironic.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 09:04 AM   #1134
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

Yeah. Wow. Who can disagree with that? All those flat, featureless surfaces and identical unmarked buttons. That is so the look of an expensive, successful modern blockbuster.
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 09:20 AM   #1135
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Yeah. Wow. Who can disagree with that? All those flat, featureless surfaces and identical unmarked buttons. That is so the look of an expensive, successful modern blockbuster.
Well, we wouldn't want you fumbling around trying (unsuccessfully) to push buttons.
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 11:29 AM   #1136
USS Intrepid
Commodore
 
USS Intrepid's Avatar
 
Location: Dundee, Scotland, UK
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

Shaw wrote: View Post
USS Intrepid wrote: View Post
Perhaps you would kind enough to explain how you would suggest the original *designs* (not the sets) be utilised, and how you would rework them for a modern audience.
I thought that I had...
Shaw wrote: View Post
A few years back Ptrope did a beautiful reworking of the bridge stations starting with the basic elements from the design as seen in The Cage. Of course, much of what he incorporated the producers of TOS wanted... but couldn't afford (as every active display on the bridge required a projectionist by union rules... and I think there are nearly 60 displays on the TOS bridge).
... I don't recall where I saw his work off hand, but I was so taken with it that I saved a shot of his mock-up.
Hmm, I must have missed that. Nice, but it still doesn't look like a modern, $150 million movie set to me. And I doubt it would to anyone other than a hard core fan (and no, that's still not a pejorative in case you're wondering).

Shaw wrote: View Post
But yeah, I don't think that the new crew would be out of place on the old bridge either. And I tried to illustrate that point back in 2008 when I put this together.
So in fact, despite your comment to the contrary, you do essentially want the exact same sets. Ah, you had me for a minute. So much for 'arguing with myself'.

What looked futuristic to most people 40 odd years ago, is simply not the same today. To expect a modern audience to accept it as such is unreasonable.

Your mileage, clearly, may vary.
__________________
Star Trek: Intrepid

Last edited by USS Intrepid; March 14 2011 at 11:46 AM.
USS Intrepid is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 11:55 AM   #1137
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

USS Intrepid wrote: View Post
So in fact, despite your comment to the contrary, you do essentially want the exact same sets. Ah, you had me for a minute. So much for 'arguing with myself'.
Actually I thought I was sharing something put together long before STXI came out with a friend... but if you want to use it in an attempt to score points, then I'll avoid being as candid and sharing with you in the future.
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 12:20 PM   #1138
USS Intrepid
Commodore
 
USS Intrepid's Avatar
 
Location: Dundee, Scotland, UK
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

Nope, not trying to score points at all. I think it's a fair observation.

I'll grant you this. I don't think it can be absolutely proven that those sets *couldn't* work, unless someone wanted to put their money where their mouth is. Alas, I don't think you'll find a single studio willing to make that gamble. Yes, that's a shame. As I've said already, *I'd pay to see it*, but I've yet to see anything that convinces me it'd be financially viable.
__________________
Star Trek: Intrepid
USS Intrepid is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 02:35 PM   #1139
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

USS Intrepid wrote: View Post
As I've said already, *I'd pay to see it*...
You know what...I'm not sure I would at this point. I got eighty hours of it on DVD, not to mention a couple of Mirror Universe episodes of Star Trek: Enterprise.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14 2011, 03:08 PM   #1140
USS Intrepid
Commodore
 
USS Intrepid's Avatar
 
Location: Dundee, Scotland, UK
Re: Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

Oh I'd definitely pay to see it. Heck, I'd pay to see Exeter, or Farragut, or Phase II on a big screen. I never tire of seeing good stories in that setting. But then, I'm a fan.
__________________
Star Trek: Intrepid
USS Intrepid is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.