Star Trek: Axanar - Page 13

Mage · February 24 2013, 10:02 AM

A good story is about the story, not the vehicles used to tell a story.

Vieux Normand · February 24 2013, 03:22 PM

Mage wrote:

A good story is about the story, not the vehicles used to tell a story.

For such as you, perhaps.

A more direct vision: the vehicles are the story.

Loken · February 24 2013, 06:21 PM

dayxday1000 wrote:

Wow. Talk about minutiae. I'm hoping those in charge of this production focus on writing a good story, finding decent actors, and maintaining the highest production values possible for a fan film. If there's time and inclination after that, they can worry about making sure the red matter sub-space flux capacitor fits correctly in the Mcguffin polaritrometer. Given the time span it takes to complete a fan film, there will certainly be plenty of time to work on those things later.

You are EXACTLY right.

Vieux Normand wrote:

Mage wrote:

A good story is about the story, not the vehicles used to tell a story.

For such as you, perhaps.

A more direct vision: the vehicles are the story.

Vehicles are not story. That is quite ridiculous. At BEST they are characters.

The Enterprise has never been the story in Star Trek. You may love ships (as I do), but that doesn't make a film.

A film requires a great story, good acting and professionals executing the vision. That could happen on a garbage scow and be compelling.

I just happen to love starships, so the USS Ares is cool. That won't make the movie.

Alec

dayxday1000 · February 24 2013, 10:49 PM

And then there are those of us who both understand that story and characters are far more relevant than the straw man you set up, and want the technical aspects of the ship to make sense and remain consistent.

I agree. The two are not mutually exclusive. Another production I follow on this forum is Starship Polaris. Principle photography was completed in July, 2011 but their graphic artist continued thinking through the details of how the ship works and refining the design accordingly for months afterward. From what I've seen, the story sounds great, the actors are solid, the production values are excellent, and the ship looks fantastic and is well thought out.

Vieux Normand · February 25 2013, 02:28 AM

Loken wrote:

Vehicles are not story. That is quite ridiculous. At BEST they are characters.

Ships, their characteristics, the places they go to, the conflicts they engage in, are all one actually needs.

Relatively-small lifeforms, with their puny issues, are fit only for building the ships (until the latter can replicate themselves). After this, they may provide enemy vessels with convenient target practice: a direct score equals a certain number of spaced and/or charred remains.

What else you like in a story is, of course, your preference.

Loken · February 25 2013, 06:27 AM

Vieux Normand wrote:

Loken wrote:

Vehicles are not story. That is quite ridiculous. At BEST they are characters.

Ships, their characteristics, the places they go to, the conflicts they engage in, are all one actually needs.

Relatively-small lifeforms, with their puny issues, are fit only for building the ships (until the latter can replicate themselves). After this, they may provide enemy vessels with convenient target practice: a direct score equals a certain number of spaced and/or charred remains.

What else you like in a story is, of course, your preference.

I assume you are being sarcastic.

Psion · February 25 2013, 06:52 AM

Loken wrote:

Vieux Normand wrote:

Loken wrote:

Vehicles are not story. That is quite ridiculous. At BEST they are characters.

Ships, their characteristics, the places they go to, the conflicts they engage in, are all one actually needs.

Relatively-small lifeforms, with their puny issues, are fit only for building the ships (until the latter can replicate themselves). After this, they may provide enemy vessels with convenient target practice: a direct score equals a certain number of spaced and/or charred remains.

What else you like in a story is, of course, your preference.

I assume you are being sarcastic.

No ... I think we now know what happened to V'Ger.

Loken · February 25 2013, 07:22 AM

Interesting watching teh Oscars tonight. My favorite part is always the "In Memorium" section. So tonight when showing Richard Zanuck, the show him saying...

"The most important thing IS the story, not the script but the story."

Nuff said.

Alec

Mage · February 25 2013, 08:38 AM

Vieux Normand wrote:

Mage wrote:

A good story is about the story, not the vehicles used to tell a story.

For such as you, perhaps.

A more direct vision: the vehicles are the story.

No. Taking Star Trek as an example, it wasn't written to show of the starships. Never the intent of any of the writers and creators involved.
Now, it might be the part that you liked best, but no, sorry. That's not why or how the show was written. But have fun watching it anyway.

Vieux Normand · February 25 2013, 06:41 PM

Loken wrote:

Vieux Normand wrote:

Loken wrote:

Vehicles are not story. That is quite ridiculous. At BEST they are characters.

Ships, their characteristics, the places they go to, the conflicts they engage in, are all one actually needs.

Relatively-small lifeforms, with their puny issues, are fit only for building the ships (until the latter can replicate themselves). After this, they may provide enemy vessels with convenient target practice: a direct score equals a certain number of spaced and/or charred remains.

What else you like in a story is, of course, your preference.

I assume you are being sarcastic.

Now, now.

Who would dare to troll a trekkie fan site thus?

Being the savvy little species that they are, the denizen trekkies would see through the trolling immediately and refuse to feed the troll.

The result, of course, would be a total lack of responses to the troll's posts. Blank screen, as it were...

Johnny · February 25 2013, 07:47 PM

dayxday1000 wrote:

Vieux Normand wrote:

Johnny wrote:

The transitions between the Excelsior and Galaxy I thought was like going from a submarine to a luxury liner,

Subs and luxury liners serve completely different purposes. As far as I can tell, both Galaxy-class and Excelsiors served as explorers/heavy cruisers.

Personnel serving on both Excelsior and D'Deridex-class ships (the latter considerably bigger than the Galaxy) vessels couldn't see out of all those windows?

That might make sense if we were discussing cephalopods. However, vertebrates seem mostly arranged by limbs, body, neck and head. The body is where the heart (power source, analogous to the warp core) is placed, the head is where the brain (analogous to the main computer and bridge on a starship) resides and the limbs/wings are pretty close, in placement and purpose, to the struts and nacelles of a starship.

Rockets (using a Newtonian principle commonly found in nature, as evidenced by any sea-going creatures which use a well-placed jet of water to escape predators) are quite real. Since Trek starship-designs are exercises in total fantasy, I suppose one can make a head and chest analogous to an oversized saucer if one wishes.

Dreadnoughts need not squeeze through a tight gap. As the AGT-prise showed against two Negh'Var-class ships, dreadnoughts make the gap bigger.

I like the way the two-nacelle version as the the side profile of the saucer (which I always compare the a plane wing) isn't interrupted by another nacelle.

The side view of the Gal class was certainly better than other elevations because it de-emphasized both the saucer's size (relative to the rest of the ship) and the relatively-thin neck section just above the secondary hull. The amount of energy wasted in structural-integrity fields, trying to hold all that together under rapid-manoeuvre situations, may well have been one reason why the far-superior Sovereign design had no "neck".

Cheers,

|//|

Wow. Talk about minutiae. I'm hoping those in charge of this production focus on writing a good story, finding decent actors, and maintaining the highest production values possible for a fan film. If there's time and inclination after that, they can worry about making sure the red matter sub-space flux capacitor fits correctly in the Mcguffin polaritrometer. Given the time span it takes to complete a fan film, there will certainly be plenty of time to work on those things later.

Haha, brill! Though I think minutiae in respects to creative mediums like writing becomes very opinion based. Depends how much influence it has on the story. Though I do love a good chat-tet on the old perceived 'pointless'!

Vieux Normand · February 26 2013, 01:57 AM

Johnny wrote:

dayxday1000 wrote:

Vieux Normand wrote:

Subs and luxury liners serve completely different purposes. As far as I can tell, both Galaxy-class and Excelsiors served as explorers/heavy cruisers.

Personnel serving on both Excelsior and D'Deridex-class ships (the latter considerably bigger than the Galaxy) vessels couldn't see out of all those windows?

That might make sense if we were discussing cephalopods. However, vertebrates seem mostly arranged by limbs, body, neck and head. The body is where the heart (power source, analogous to the warp core) is placed, the head is where the brain (analogous to the main computer and bridge on a starship) resides and the limbs/wings are pretty close, in placement and purpose, to the struts and nacelles of a starship.

Rockets (using a Newtonian principle commonly found in nature, as evidenced by any sea-going creatures which use a well-placed jet of water to escape predators) are quite real. Since Trek starship-designs are exercises in total fantasy, I suppose one can make a head and chest analogous to an oversized saucer if one wishes.

Dreadnoughts need not squeeze through a tight gap. As the AGT-prise showed against two Negh'Var-class ships, dreadnoughts make the gap bigger.

The side view of the Gal class was certainly better than other elevations because it de-emphasized both the saucer's size (relative to the rest of the ship) and the relatively-thin neck section just above the secondary hull. The amount of energy wasted in structural-integrity fields, trying to hold all that together under rapid-manoeuvre situations, may well have been one reason why the far-superior Sovereign design had no "neck".

Cheers,

|//|

Wow. Talk about minutiae. I'm hoping those in charge of this production focus on writing a good story, finding decent actors, and maintaining the highest production values possible for a fan film. If there's time and inclination after that, they can worry about making sure the red matter sub-space flux capacitor fits correctly in the Mcguffin polaritrometer. Given the time span it takes to complete a fan film, there will certainly be plenty of time to work on those things later.

Haha, brill! Though I think minutiae in respects to creative mediums like writing becomes very opinion based. Depends how much influence it has on the story. Though I do love a good chat-tet on the old perceived 'pointless'!

Careful there, you might be accused of discussing unimportant matters or some such drivel.

Question: given your opinion of the Galaxy class, what is your take on other ships that follow similar design pattern?

I refer to the Nebula, New Orleans, Cheyenne and Freedom and Challenger class vessels.

In terms of Axanar, I wonder why a two-vertically-arranged-nacelle ship (think Akula or Challenger class) wasn't included in the EarthReich BlitzFleet roster.

After all, if terror is to be maintained, the more means, the better.

Loken · February 26 2013, 03:56 AM

Please take any discussion of other ships to the appropriate thread. This thread is about the production of "Axanar".

Alec

Vieux Normand · February 26 2013, 03:43 PM

Loken wrote:

Please take any discussion of other ships to the appropriate thread. This thread is about the production of "Axanar".

Alec

Oh that's right: there are no ships in Axanar.

Garth the nutcase-to-be is zipping around the quadrant on looney-power alone.

Noted.

|//|

Psion · February 26 2013, 08:55 PM

^

That's the way I do it.

February 24 2013, 10:02 AM	#181
Mage Fleet Captain	Re: Star Trek: Axanar A good story is about the story, not the vehicles used to tell a story. __________________ Niner. Lurker. Browncoat.

February 25 2013, 07:22 AM	#188
Loken Lieutenant	Re: Star Trek: Axanar Interesting watching teh Oscars tonight. My favorite part is always the "In Memorium" section. So tonight when showing Richard Zanuck, the show him saying... "The most important thing IS the story, not the script but the story." Nuff said. Alec __________________ Star Trek Axanar on Facebook The Star Trek Prop, Costume & Auction Blog

February 26 2013, 03:56 AM	#193
Loken Lieutenant	Re: Star Trek: Axanar Please take any discussion of other ships to the appropriate thread. This thread is about the production of "Axanar". Alec __________________ Star Trek Axanar on Facebook The Star Trek Prop, Costume & Auction Blog

February 26 2013, 08:55 PM	#195
Psion Commodore Location: Lat: 40.1630936 Lon: -75.1183777	Re: Star Trek: Axanar ^ That's the way I do it. __________________ First delete the default cube.

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US