RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,164
Posts: 5,402,968
Members: 24,753
Currently online: 412
Newest member: kev404

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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 I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 14 2014, 09:20 AM   #16
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

dswynne1 wrote: View Post
I just want to know if I was the only one disappointed by the look of the NCC-1701-A. Not because it was terrible, but that the studio simply recycled the same prop in order to save money.
Someone more knowledgeable can correct me if I'm wrong, but the reuse of the Constitution class model had nothing to do with being cheap about money.

ILM always hated filming the Constitution model. It was large and unwieldy, and very hard to get good camera angles for it. That's why the Excelsior was originally built: Because the design was more film-friendly for the handlers and cameramen.

It was also originally intended for Kirk and his crew to get the Excelsior at the end of STIV for exactly this reason: For any future TOS films, the model would be easier to manipulate for ILM.

However, fan disgruntlement about this idea at the time made the producers change their minds at the last minute and not use the Excelsior for Kirk's new ship. Unfortunately there wasn't time to built an all new model, and even if they had it would have been cost-prohibitive, as they would have spent a ton of money on a brand-new model that would have only been seen at the end of the movie for just a few seconds before being put in a crate for three years. So they were literally forced to use the original model, much to the dismay of ILM, who would again need to film a model they hated for any future Trek movies.

So NOT having a new model built was actually the best move financially, but not the best move logistically.

As for my opinion on the subject, I think that stylistically, reusing the Constitution model was the best thing to do, because that's what the viewing audience would relate to, not some new ship seen for five seconds that they'd have no attachment to (which is also why I've always hated that they callously destroyed the Enterprise-D just to replace it with the soulless Enterprise-E). But I also feel that for that to really have worked the way it should have, that no more TOS movies should have been made after Voyage Home. Then that would have been the last time we saw the ship right before the start of TNG, so the focus could be 100% on the new Enterprise-D while the ultimate fate of the Ent-A and her crew would remain a blissful mystery.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by Dukhat; May 14 2014 at 10:17 AM.
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2014, 02:21 PM   #17
Lance
Fleet Captain
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

Dukhat wrote: View Post
I think that stylistically, reusing the Constitution model was the best thing to do, because that's what the viewing audience would relate to, not some new ship seen for five seconds that they'd have no attachment to (which is also why I've always hated that they callously destroyed the Enterprise-D just to replace it with the soulless Enterprise-E).
I am glad that I'm not the only person who feels this way. I've seen loads of people saying how much 'cooler' and 'kick-ass' they all thought the 1701-E was... but my God, I've always hated it. As a viewer I feel absolutely no emotional connection to that ship, not like I do to good ol' 1701-D.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 01:33 AM   #18
RyanKCR
Vice Admiral
 
RyanKCR's Avatar
 
Location: RyanKCR is living here in Allentown
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

I was glad to see the refit Connie at the end of IV. I also loved seeing the E after the D. The D never looked or felt right to me. The E brought back the balance that the D was so desperately missing.

For me the Enterprise will always be the original refit from TMP. All others just don't have it. I do like the second pilot version of the TOS Enterprise. That and the Refit are my favorite versions of the Enterprise.
__________________
"I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to.....I guess."
"If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy."
"Not all treasure is sliver and gold, mate."
RyanKCR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 01:52 AM   #19
NewHorizon
Captain
 
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

Personally, I was a bit torn at the end of Trek 4. I had just spent something like 2 years reading the Trek comics, exploring the universe with Kirk and the crew of the Excelsior. I grew to love Excelsior. When the 'A' appeared from behind Excelsior it didn't feel as satisfying. It felt safe and comfortable.

What I had thought they might have done is renamed Excelsior to Enterprise. I think Kirk delivering the line, "My friends, we've come home", upon seeing a rechristened Excelsior would have carried a lot more weight for me. For me it wasn't so much what the ship looked like as much as it was that as long as these people were together, they were home.
NewHorizon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 02:40 AM   #20
J. Allen
I Only Want To Know
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

I was fine with it. I love the Constitution refit design, and I figured they just took the Yorktown, maybe being refitted itself, or something, and slapped the Enterprise badges on it.
__________________
Visit us at Brony Kingdom!
You will never find a more precious hive of love and humility.
---------
"If you'd come today you would've reached a whole nation. Israel in 4 B.C. had no mass communication. " - Judas, Jesus Christ Superstar
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 04:34 AM   #21
Dennis
Commodore
 
Dennis's Avatar
 
Location: Planet Detroit
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

I liked them keeping the Probert/Jefferies design.
__________________
"One day it begins to be borne in on the writer...that he is living in Europe as an American. If he were living there as a European, he would be living on a different and far less attractive continent." - James Baldwin

Dennis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 04:49 AM   #22
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

NewHorizon wrote: View Post
Personally, I was a bit torn at the end of Trek 4. I had just spent something like 2 years reading the Trek comics, exploring the universe with Kirk and the crew of the Excelsior. I grew to love Excelsior. When the 'A' appeared from behind Excelsior it didn't feel as satisfying. It felt safe and comfortable.
I was also an avid reader of the comics at the time, but I never liked that they used the Excelsior instead of another ship. And when it turned out that the comics were essentially invalidated once it was established that IV took place only three months after III (and the crew were on Vulcan for the entire time), then it really didn't matter.

What I had thought they might have done is renamed Excelsior to Enterprise. I think Kirk delivering the line, "My friends, we've come home", upon seeing a rechristened Excelsior would have carried a lot more weight for me. For me it wasn't so much what the ship looked like as much as it was that as long as these people were together, they were home.
So many things would have been stylistically wrong with that scenario though. The Excelsior was established as being the "enemy" ship (as compared to the Enterprise) and too big for her own britches, and certainly Scotty had ill will toward her. Just renaming the ship wouldn't have made it a different ship or taken away all that negativity toward her. Plus, the dramatic tension of the crew flying toward the hated Excelsior only to fly past it toward their "old" ship was such a profound moment in the film. That would have been eliminated (along with some great dialogue by Scotty and Kirk) had the scene played out differently.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 10:10 AM   #23
Khan 2.0
Commander
 
Khan 2.0's Avatar
 
Location: earth...but when?...spock?
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

wonder what the reaction wouldve been had they used the Ent D for the Ent A...
Khan 2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 11:03 AM   #24
Viper78
Lieutenant Commander
 
Viper78's Avatar
 
Location: Scotland
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

Lance wrote: View Post
Dukhat wrote: View Post
I think that stylistically, reusing the Constitution model was the best thing to do, because that's what the viewing audience would relate to, not some new ship seen for five seconds that they'd have no attachment to (which is also why I've always hated that they callously destroyed the Enterprise-D just to replace it with the soulless Enterprise-E).
I am glad that I'm not the only person who feels this way. I've seen loads of people saying how much 'cooler' and 'kick-ass' they all thought the 1701-E was... but my God, I've always hated it. As a viewer I feel absolutely no emotional connection to that ship, not like I do to good ol' 1701-D.
I also wish they had kept the Ent-D, would have loved to have seen it in First Contact. I didn't like the E to begin with but it's grown on me over the years and is now one of my Trek ships.
__________________
IF IN DOUBT, FLAT OUT!!!
Colin McRae 1968-2007
Viper78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 11:05 AM   #25
J. Allen
I Only Want To Know
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
wonder what the reaction wouldve been had they used the Ent D for the Ent A...
Probably something along the lines of "What the hell is this?" since Star Trek IV came out in 1986, and TNG came out in 1987.
__________________
Visit us at Brony Kingdom!
You will never find a more precious hive of love and humility.
---------
"If you'd come today you would've reached a whole nation. Israel in 4 B.C. had no mass communication. " - Judas, Jesus Christ Superstar
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 05:56 PM   #26
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

J. Allen wrote: View Post
Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
wonder what the reaction wouldve been had they used the Ent D for the Ent A...
Probably something along the lines of "What the hell is this?" since Star Trek IV came out in 1986, and TNG came out in 1987.
I think what he meant to say was "What if there was a new model for the Enterprise-A at the end of STIV, and then it was used as the new ship for TNG the next year" (i.e. TNG would be about the crew of the Ent-A, although the filming model itself would have been the same as the D.) At least I think that's what he meant; I could be completely wrong. But with that scenario, basically that would have meant that TNG would have taken place right after STIV, and not in the 24th century 75 years later. The TOS cast could have been gradually replaced by the new cast, and the use of the movie ship models would have been more contemporary. Or they could have set the show five or so years later, with the TOS crew already gone by that point, so the Ent-A would have already had some spacetime logged, have uniform and prop changes made, etc. Also, I don't think that if this scenario actually happened, that the ship would look anything like the D, as it would not have been designed by Andrew Probert but more likely by someone like Bill George.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by Dukhat; May 15 2014 at 06:13 PM.
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 06:17 PM   #27
RandyS
Vice Admiral
 
RandyS's Avatar
 
Location: Randyland
View RandyS's Twitter Profile
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

Lance wrote: View Post
Dukhat wrote: View Post
I think that stylistically, reusing the Constitution model was the best thing to do, because that's what the viewing audience would relate to, not some new ship seen for five seconds that they'd have no attachment to (which is also why I've always hated that they callously destroyed the Enterprise-D just to replace it with the soulless Enterprise-E).
I am glad that I'm not the only person who feels this way. I've seen loads of people saying how much 'cooler' and 'kick-ass' they all thought the 1701-E was... but my God, I've always hated it. As a viewer I feel absolutely no emotional connection to that ship, not like I do to good ol' 1701-D.
Same here. The Enterprise-D was the best of those ships as far as I'm concerned. I always (and still do) hated the Enterprise-E also.
RandyS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 06:19 PM   #28
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

The Excelsior Class design was met with dislike when ST III came to theatres. One of the writers for Cinefantastique wrote an article going in-depth what he felt was wrong with the ILM designs and the Excelsior in particular.

How far this article influenced fans, then, I can't tell but even prominent Bjo Trimble called it a "a pregnant duck".
So when Sulu said at the end of ST IV he was hoping they'd get the Excelsior it seemed deliberate to me to make many fans anticipate the worst, just to get them excited when they saw the actual NCC-1701-A.

At least they should have replaced the "old" warp nacelles with new "transwarp style" ones of the Excelsior to show that they were making an effort not to look that cheap. YMMV.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15 2014, 07:45 PM   #29
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

Sulu managed to make the Excelsior seem hip in Trek VI, but I don't think it ever deserved to have the Enteprise label on it (The -B in generations). It just doesn't have the classic lines, but then again, neither does the -D (IMHO) which is too much of a manta-ray sort of thing.

The Enterprise coming back in the same shape is a resurrection of sorts, which matches Spock coming back basically as-is in Trek IV. It wouldn't have quite the same symmetry had the ship not at least looked the same on the outside, although at the time I was quite thrilled with the flashy touch-panel interior (which I guess was just a redressed Excelsior set).
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook
mos6507 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2014, 01:34 AM   #30
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Should "Star Trek IV" have introduced a different NCC-1701-A?

RandyS wrote: View Post
Lance wrote: View Post
Dukhat wrote: View Post
I think that stylistically, reusing the Constitution model was the best thing to do, because that's what the viewing audience would relate to, not some new ship seen for five seconds that they'd have no attachment to (which is also why I've always hated that they callously destroyed the Enterprise-D just to replace it with the soulless Enterprise-E).
I am glad that I'm not the only person who feels this way. I've seen loads of people saying how much 'cooler' and 'kick-ass' they all thought the 1701-E was... but my God, I've always hated it. As a viewer I feel absolutely no emotional connection to that ship, not like I do to good ol' 1701-D.
Same here. The Enterprise-D was the best of those ships as far as I'm concerned. I always (and still do) hated the Enterprise-E also.
While I take exception to the angular plating on the -E, which looks like it came off the K'tinga from TMP, I find it a signficant improvement over the -D, which I always disliked. I remember somebody getting me the model kit of the -D, and (before I intentionally dropped it from a great height) I deliberately put the nacelles on backwards, which improved the thing a helluva lot in terms of more graceful lines.
trevanian 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 11:18 AM.

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