RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,795
Posts: 5,325,668
Members: 24,548
Currently online: 536
Newest member: wrestlefreak36

TrekToday headlines

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

New Trek Home Fashions
By: T'Bonz on Jul 4

Star Trek Pop-Ups Book Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3

Cho: More On Selfie
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3


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 Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 16 2013, 10:22 AM   #1
grendelsbayne
Commander
 
grendelsbayne's Avatar
 
Location: Netherlands
STID realistic?

I was reading an article this morning which was discussing their analysis of starship sizes on fictional shows/films across the decades - apparently ships got increasingly larger through the 80s and 90s and then started to shrink again. They attributed this to the idea that Science fiction in the 80s and 90s dared to dream big, trying to imagine what living in space would be like far in the future (their examples including Star Destroyers and the massive motherships from ID4), but that by the 2000s, the genre was settling back into a much more 'realistic' view of what space travel would be like. One of their examples for this increased 'realism' was STID.

Now, I don't really want this to turn into another discussion about who liked the movie or not, and I want to make it clear that I'm not saying the movie is bad just because I don't find it 'realistic', but I want to ask this one question:

Is there any particular aspect of space travel in ID which people believe is truly 'realistic'?

I just don't really see how that description applies here...
grendelsbayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 10:33 AM   #2
iguana_tonante
Admiral
 
iguana_tonante's Avatar
 
Location: Italy, EU
Re: STID realistic?

grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
I was reading an article this morning which was discussing their analysis of starship sizes on fictional shows/films across the decades - apparently ships got increasingly larger through the 80s and 90s and then started to shrink again. They attributed this to the idea that Science fiction in the 80s and 90s dared to dream big, trying to imagine what living in space would be like far in the future (their examples including Star Destroyers and the massive motherships from ID4), but that by the 2000s, the genre was settling back into a much more 'realistic' view of what space travel would be like. One of their examples for this increased 'realism' was STID.
The ships in STID are fucking huge. The Enterprise is 3 times bigger than the original one. The Vengeance is one big motherfucker. Not to mention ST09's Narada, which is so big it's not even funny. They are not exactly city-ships, but they are still pretty large. So I don't see the link with ship "shrinkage".
__________________
Scientist. Gentleman. Teacher. Fighter. Lover. Father.
iguana_tonante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 10:35 AM   #3
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: STID realistic?

Well if you're looking for realism, science fiction probably isn't your best bet. As technology gets better things have a tendency to get smaller, not larger.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 10:41 AM   #4
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: STID realistic?

grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
analysis of starship sizes on fictional shows/films across the decades - apparently ships got increasingly larger through the 80s and 90s
1977, Death Star, somewhat large.


T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 01:26 PM   #5
wjaspers
Lieutenant Commander
 
wjaspers's Avatar
 
Re: STID realistic?

GoRe Star wrote: View Post
Well if you're looking for realism, science fiction probably isn't your best bet. As technology gets better things have a tendency to get smaller, not larger.
And that ofcourse was what ST always was about, get realism into the show, and this ofcourse is now gone.
wjaspers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 01:27 PM   #6
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: STID realistic?

I don't think there's much realistic about any of Trek's ships. The odd shape, for starters. And the insanely enormous spacedock in the new movies and it's multistory city in the central sphere.

Looks damn cool, though
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 01:31 PM   #7
wjaspers
Lieutenant Commander
 
wjaspers's Avatar
 
Re: STID realistic?

[QUOTE=iguana_tonante;8777350The ships in STID are fucking huge. [/QUOTE]

They are not fucking huge, they are ridiculous.

But hey, let's face it, it is now "canon", so ST is now ridiculous, and you liked it, you embraced it , it is over and done for ST.
wjaspers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 01:41 PM   #8
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: STID realistic?

wjaspers wrote: View Post
GoRe Star wrote: View Post
Well if you're looking for realism, science fiction probably isn't your best bet. As technology gets better things have a tendency to get smaller, not larger.
And that ofcourse was what ST always was about, get realism into the show, and this ofcourse is now gone.
Show me the realism of Kirk being beamed into good and evil halves or Spock being half-human despite having copper-based blood, cos you won't find any.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 01:49 PM   #9
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: STID realistic?

wjaspers wrote: View Post
]
And that of course was what ST always was about, get realism into the show, and this of course is now gone.
"Of course" is two words thank you.

Are you joking? Star Trek was never, ever, ever, ever, realistic. A ship with magical gravity? Transporters? Oh yeah, realistic all right.
__________________
*Tim Duncan fills glass with milk*
"Hm, you know what..."
*adds squirt of chocolate syrup*
"Tonight's a special night."
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 02:47 PM   #10
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: STID realistic?

I don't know if it's realistic or whatever. But until Abrams came along, Star Trek's ships were pretty small compared to other sci-fi franchises.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 03:02 PM   #11
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: STID realistic?

wjaspers wrote: View Post

And that ofcourse was what ST always was about, get realism into the show, and this ofcourse is now gone.
What was realistic about any of the shows?

I started watching Star Trek when I was four because it had great action, cool aliens and kick-ass spaceships. I continue to watch TOS, early-TNG and the Abrams films because they are fun to watch. Fun is an element that is sorely missing from most of Modern Trek.

And I'll take fun over realism every day of the week and twice on Sunday. If I want realism, I'll watch my nation default, kids getting murdered and the latest terrorist attack on the news.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 03:03 PM   #12
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: STID realistic?

wjaspers wrote: View Post
GoRe Star wrote: View Post
Well if you're looking for realism, science fiction probably isn't your best bet. As technology gets better things have a tendency to get smaller, not larger.
And that ofcourse was what ST always was about, get realism into the show, and this ofcourse is now gone.
Realism in starships? REALISM? In what context? Faster than light travel? Artificial gravity that makes life aboard the ship as comfortable as walking around a mall? Please don't tell me these things are really possible in any way that would approach 0.1% of how they are presented in ANY version of "Star Trek".

There isn't a reputable physicist out there who would say we'll someday traverse the stars like in "Star Trek".

I think ships probably got larger in some sci-fi (including Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which was the 1970s) as a concession to the reality that star travelling cultures would be in space for a long time. As the ship voyaged to wherever was intended at near-light speed, entire generations would live their lives out in those huge ships that were entirely self-sustaining worlds.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 04:16 PM   #13
YellowSubmarine
Commodore
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: STID realistic?

Sadly, it wasn't much realistic, but it was more realistic than most I've seen in Star Trek (if not all), so it will have to do. The improvement in special effects in recent years has contributed to the realism of films that lacked in other places, and that's generally a good thing. Things feel more real now. Also the darker theme and the character flaws contribute to the perception of realism, even if some of them seem contrived under closer scrutiny – and that's already much better than, say, TNG where nobody ever made a mistake.
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 04:47 PM   #14
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: STID realistic?

GoRe Star wrote: View Post
Well if you're looking for realism, science fiction probably isn't your best bet. As technology gets better things have a tendency to get smaller, not larger.
That mostly applies to smaller electronics though, and there's a purpose for them to get smaller.

With starships it makes sense for them to get bigger. With an improving economy would come better living accommodations for those aboard and that would include bigger living spaces and more recreational facilities. I'm not sure if that applies to a warship like the Vengeance, but it probably does at least for the Enterprises.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 04:52 PM   #15
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: STID realistic?

Realism and Star Trek have never occupied the same solar system simultaneously. No reason to believe that will change any time, well...ever, really.
Ovation is offline   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 05:20 AM.

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