My Thoughts

[Kirk1980]

I'll start with the good...

- The uniforms are pretty good. From a distance, you'd be hard-pressed to be able to tell the difference between the classic era uniforms and these.

- The sound effects seem to be consistent (specifically: the red alert klaxon) with the old show. Very nice touch they didn't have to add.

- I like the fact they're making this their own thing. With this being 2008, I do not expect nor would really want to see right down to the last detail the 1966 look. However....

The Bad

- Enough has been said about how thankful people are that it's not like the DS9/VOY/ENT design aesthetic but I would note that I am sad to see the 60's aesthetic is not present. I DON'T WANT A REPLICA but the bright white bridge just does not look good, in my considered opinion. I liked the dark color palette with the bright splashes of color of Matt Jefferies' design.

- I hope they also took the same seriousness to designing the bridge as the original designers did. Every button, every panel had to have a function, a specific purpose. I liked that and I hope the same care goes into this bridge as the 66 one.

- Now this is where I might get into trouble but I'm not going to couch it in terms of canon or faithfulness or whatever buzzwords the anti-11 crowd have been using.
I'm not a fan of Abrams' work thus far. Neither do I have much faith in Orci and Kurtzman to write at the level of a Sam Peeples, Gene Coon, Robert Bloch or even good ol' Harlan. These guys had Optimus Prime, the noble leader of the Autobots, saying 'my bad'. They seem like 'cool' writers and not really writers.

Now here's where I ramble a bit. Feel free to ignore the rest of this post if you feel it falls into the 'TL;DR' category.

Before I get jumped on by the squee crowd, let it be known I don't really care where the Enterprise gets built. I'll admit, I think building it whole on the ground smacks of 'easy' dramatic moment writing but...not a big deal.

Look of the Enterprise is kinda blah to me but not a deal breaker. It's still a Starfleet ship.

Just based on what I've seen so far, though, I just get this vibe which says it's aiming to be 'cool' and in no way a Star Trek movie. I DESPERATELY WANT TO BE WRONG. I hope I am, I really do. I want this movie to succeed.

However, a minor worry as I've noticed on the board so far, is that fans who prefer the 60's era version of the classic characters and ship and so on will be considered regressive primitives. Already there's been plenty of attacks on TOS for the cheapness of it's sets and so on. That sort of criticism always rubs me the wrong way. What should be more important is if the idea is interesting, thought-provoking and will give you ideas to consider you hadn't before.

Boldly go.

[M]

kirk1980 wrote:

---

I just get this vibe which says it's aiming to be 'cool' and in no way a Star Trek movie.

Are a 'cool movie' and a 'Star Trek movie' two mutually exclusive terms? I hope you're wrong.

[J. Allen]

NCC-1701 wrote:

---

Are a 'cool movie' and a 'Star Trek movie' two mutually exclusive terms? I hope you're wrong.

I think he means 'cool' as in 'vacuous', or 'slam bang shallow'.


J.

[Kirk1980]

Nah, not saying that... I'm saying 'cool' as in just attempting to have cheaply derived emotional thrills like the car chase thing. I hope that's just a hook to get the 'non-fan' into the seat and doesn't indicate the tone for the rest of the movie.

A movie can be cool but it should never go over the top in trying to be 'cool'. Either it's cool or it's not, there is no try

[tauntme]

Apparently, what Star Trek's "about" to some people are senior member meetings and dramatic music fade-into-commercial moments.

[JoeZhang]

I hope they also took the same seriousness to designing the bridge as the original designers did. Every button, every panel had to have a function, a specific purpose. I liked that and I hope the same care goes into this bridge as the 66 one.

Shame nobody told the actors who would hit any number of random coloured buttons.

I'm saying 'cool' as in just attempting to have cheaply derived emotional thrills like the car chase thing.

Old Star Trek was sick and had to be taken out the back and shot. It *has* to appeal to a mainstream audience or it is DEAD. Mainstream audiences want to see cool stuff and I don't have a problem with that - as someone else mentioned, cool isn't mutually exclusive with Good.

[Kirk1980]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

Shame nobody told the actors who would hit any number of random coloured buttons.

Old Star Trek was sick and had to be taken out the back and shot. It *has* to appeal to a mainstream audience or it is DEAD. Mainstream audiences want to see cool stuff and I don't have a problem with that - as someone else mentioned, cool isn't mutually exclusive with Good.

Right. Except for the whole fact the actors did what they were told to do by directors. I was not saying what actually happened on screen, I was talking about the design. Read any interview with Jefferies and he always said he designed that bridge to WORK.

Indeed, there is a famous story regarding Takei and firing phasers. He was forced by a director to fire a button different from what he had always done and had been told was the right way to be done.

That was all I was referring to.

And um... that was a colorful image, Joe. And we've already sorted quotation marked 'cool' with actual cool, but thanks for the pointer.

[Kirk1980]

Awwww, come on, nobody responds to measured calm posts? Should I title it I HATE IT, I HATE IT to get some chatter going on here?:P

[gastrof]

Just a little bit of a side comment here.

I found online a video of a Harvard graduation speech by Seth MacFarlane, who does several voices on the show Family Guy.

Speaking as the kid Stewie, at one point he said to the graduates-
"Do not create a television series about a group of people who crash land on an island if you don't know where you're going with it. Don't just make it up as you go along, because if you do it's going to start sucking very quickly."

End of side comment/commentary.

[Kirk1980]

Gastrof....you get the prize of...making me laugh!

Yeah, I just never GOT Abrams' stuff. If that's my own failing, I accept that but...I do get Classic Trek.

And I don't see him as having the capability to make it as good as the old show.

[roguephoenix]

speaking as a sole tng era fan (sans ds9), i would like to say that i like the overall design of the interior. very up to date. i'm so glad it's not 60s lol. as far as the exterior though... that leaves much to be desired. it's ok, but i wish it looked diff. though they probably kept it the same looking as the old trek era just so old fans don't have a heart attack. i really don't like the old enterprise look. again, coming from a tng era fan so i'm biased.

the uniforms are... well... very 60s i guess. guess they had to keep something. weird seeing that wonderful interior with those uniforms though. much like seeing beehive hair in say the new battlestar galactica lol.

bright bridge - i love bright bridges. reminds me of enterprise d bridge. don't want an emo bridge. a bright bridge somehow makes it look refreshing rather than depressing. i guess they couldn't keep the gogo lights they had in the old trek lol.

overall i like it so far. the tech is believable even though the exterior and outfits don't seem to go with the interior and look and feel of the film. then again, neither would the tng era uniforms. anyway, i'll be looking forward to this film. been a while since i looked forward to a movie. x3 kind of ruined my hopes for movies. ah well.

[Kirk1980]

Well, this is probably just me being...you know... old or something (does 28 qualify as old around here?) but I like the look of the old bridge. It just felt very functional.

But you are right, it does seem kinda incongruous between the uniforms and the interior look but... I don't see that as a huge problem.

[roguephoenix]

oh one thing they can't do anymore with the bright interiors is the face spotlight closeups lol. you know what i mean when they do a closeup on someone's face and everything around becomes dark and a spotlight just shines on their face lol. i just thought that was really funny. i hope they do little salutes like that in the movie. maybe even rocking back and forth during hits just once before they "buckle up" as was said.

[Kirk1980]

Yeah, dramatic lighting! Where would we be without Shatner's face leaning into the camera!

[davejames]

kirk1980 wrote:

---

- Enough has been said about how thankful people are that it's not like the DS9/VOY/ENT design aesthetic but I would note that I am sad to see the 60's aesthetic is not present. I DON'T WANT A REPLICA but the bright white bridge just does not look good, in my considered opinion. I liked the dark color palette with the bright splashes of color of Matt Jefferies' design.

I love those dark and moody bridges of the past too (my favorite probably being the one from Yesterday's Enterprise)... but it's been done to death already in Trek. Abrams needed to come up with something that looked new and fresh, and I think this does. Plus the bright, high tech look suggests a much more fun kind of Trek movie, which was probably the biggest reason behind it.

- Now this is where I might get into trouble but I'm not going to couch it in terms of canon or faithfulness or whatever buzzwords the anti-11 crowd have been using.
I'm not a fan of Abrams' work thus far. Neither do I have much faith in Orci and Kurtzman to write at the level of a Sam Peeples, Gene Coon, Robert Bloch or even good ol' Harlan. These guys had Optimus Prime, the noble leader of the Autobots, saying 'my bad'. They seem like 'cool' writers and not really writers.

Yeah from Orci and Kurtzman's previous work, I don't expect anything very deep or profound (and some of the dialogue we've heard so far DOES sound a bit corny). But their writing is still servicable enough, and I'm holding out hope that Abrams and Lindlehoff are going to bring some of that special Lost magic to pick up some of the slack.

In fact, as long as the magic, fun, and heart is there, I can probably live without some of the deeper themes and ideas this time around (besides, it's not like those "deeper ideas" made INS or NEM any good).

However, a minor worry as I've noticed on the board so far, is that fans who prefer the 60's era version of the classic characters and ship and so on will be considered regressive primitives. Already there's been plenty of attacks on TOS for the cheapness of it's sets and so on. That sort of criticism always rubs me the wrong way. What should be more important is if the idea is interesting, thought-provoking and will give you ideas to consider you hadn't before.

Boldly go.

I'm sure most of us here are huge fans of TOS, but that doesn't mean we aren't also excited to see it reinterpreted and reimagined in a new way. And it doesn't mean we can't poke fun at some of the stuff on the old show or point out why it wouldn't work today.