Enterprise Pic

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by bdb, Jan 17, 2008.

  1. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Perhaps I should have specified ... when I said "tampered with" I was referring to the TOS-R stuff. If you don't consider that to be tampering, that's certainly your right, but don't expect me to follow your line of reasoning, such as it is.

    I don't need this 'franchise alive' thing either. As much as I wish there were more FIREFLY or CARNIVALE, I'm happy with what I got, and I treasure that.

    Regarding CR ... If killing spies for their cell phones is the height of plotting, it makes you wonder how things were done back in the day when you MEMORIZED important phone numbers ... gee, y'know, they probably still do that rather than put the vital info in the celphone!
     
  2. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Clarity, definition, full tonal range ... there's pretty much no basis on which to compare this murky trailer image with most ship shots in EVENT HORIZON.

    In fact, if you try comparing it to something else done in a murky environment, say BLADE RUNNER ... I think you'll find this entirely lacking.

    I don't know how else to explain it to you ... it'd be like showing somebody a scene from one of these overly monochromatic horror movies that look like they were shot through a pair of sunglasses (y'know, that CHAINSAW remake look) and hearing from them that it was a lot more beautiful than any shot in BUTCH CASSIDY. I don't know the kind of thought that goes into a perception like that, and I doubt I can explain anything to a person with those perceptions.
     
  3. ST-One

    ST-One Vice Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
    I know both these films (I own them on DVD) but cannot agree with you.
     
  4. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    That's okay, clearly we're looking at things differently.
     
  5. Holytomato

    Holytomato Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    "Kirk : Scotty, Let's see if this baby will go warp 12 !

    ~ Go Greased Lighting, Go Grease Lightning ~"

    The saran wrap in the movie was a condom joke in the stageplay.

    "Kirk: "Say, Scotty, how about...:waggle eyebrows:"

    Scott: ":sigh: No."

    Hey bunny, who tampered with my tricks?

    Hi. I'm Old Holytomato from p. 123. Geez...
     
  6. ST-One

    ST-One Vice Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
    Yes. One of us is (trying to be) objective...
    You are not...
     
  7. JBElliott

    JBElliott Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    It's not the welding per se, it's what the welding represents. That is welding represents a 20th and 21rst century level of technology while the movie is set in the 23rd century where things like welding would be antique at best. Welding shows a lack of imagination and a reliance on what's been done so many times before. The same goes for the "aztecking" or panelled look. It's old had and makes the ships look more like something our of the present and less like something out of the future.
     
  8. JBElliott

    JBElliott Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Access for workers would be trivial for a civilization with transporters.

    The same goes for a "scratch build from in zero G vacuum environment." Using the energy (E) from the same power source that makes warp drive possible, the transporter could beam into existence all the mass (m) needed for the entire ship in a single pass (E=mc^2) making sure that every detail of the ship was perfect, or at least was exactly how it was designed down to the quantum level (a la Heisenberg compencators).

    With the above method no EVAs by humans would be required.
     
  9. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    So much for a conciliatory gesture ... well, that's used up all my goodwill for the year.
     
  10. Woulfe

    Woulfe Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Location:
    3rd Rock From The Sun
    Condom joke ?

    I'll never view that film in the same light ever again !

    - W -
    * Shakes his head sadly *
     
  11. FlyingTigress

    FlyingTigress Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Well, most of your ordinary engines only go up to [Warp] 10. But ours go up to "11"

    /The Spinal Tap Corps of Engineers
     
  12. ST-One

    ST-One Vice Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
    How was the 23rd century?
     
  13. evilalienbraga

    evilalienbraga Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    -Gold medal with extra gold to you, Cary. I've always been struck here by the amount of posters who seem, not to want to share their opinion about Trek, or state positives in response to those who moan, but rather are looking for *any* excuse to lay into those they feel are (presumably) obsessives, geeks/nerds etc.

    I appreciate these posters (not being specific about anyone here) want to prove 'yes I like Star Trek but I'm also a cool guy with a hot girlfriend, a nice job and an ace car - not like those NERDS who normally like Trek' - but there's better ways of going about it than looking to instantly attack those who may express criticisms, or anally retentive symptoms.

    For what it's worth - I got into Star Trek because I did like the continuity of the series, 'canon' has some appeal for me. Still, as long as the new film sticks to the progressive ideals of Trek, and doesn't get too dark, then it should be good.

    To me the ship looks like the Ent-A - which is fine by me as I like the design of that ship. It seems like this may make it a reboot though - oh well. The fact it seems to be being built on a planet seems slightly baffling to me. Surely it's easier to build it in space? And wouldn't it look more cinematic being built in space? I realise it's been done before so many times and maybe it being built planet-side is an attempt to make it stand out from other previous 'construction' sequences - but it's just a bit of a rubbish idea. Shouldn't they be using some sort of super-space laser tool rather than sparky welders like my old granddad used) to make a starship as well? ;-)
     
  14. JBElliott

    JBElliott Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Really? Well, I don't know about the other guys, but my background is that I got my Ph.D. in physics in 1995 and have been gainfully employed in research in basic physics since then. So the statement that "guys who have backgrounds in science and technology are rejecting . . ." is flat out wrong. :)

    As for the rest, this post captures the points I was trying to make.

    The difference in appearance, construction materials, construction methods and so on between the most advanced things we have now and Kirk's Enterprise should be many times greater than the differences in all those things between the airplanes of the Wright brothers (debut in the early 1900s) and the stealth fighter (debut in the late 1990s). Surely a 240 year difference should show greater advances than a 90 to 100 year difference.

    Technological progress has been exponential during the 20th century and if things like warp drive and transporters are to come into existence (as they have in Star Trek) that exponential rate of change must continue. Thus, the welding in the teaser is woefully antiquated. :)
     
  15. JBElliott

    JBElliott Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    It was great. There was this great joke about how many TrekBBS posters it takes to weld in a light bulb. But I guess you had to be there.
     
  16. Jackson_Roykirk

    Jackson_Roykirk Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    In fact, here's a picture of Ship's Engineer Lt. Cmdr. Nigel Tufnel pointing out the warp speed controls for those big engines on ST:XI's Enterprise:

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Sharr Khan

    Sharr Khan Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    USA Ct
    I love statements like this, since they presume to know the shape of the future. Regretfully the best most reliably gauge for that is taking a glance at the past since the future is always rooted in it.

    If scifi is supposed to be extrapolating (if? I'm not sure it does that very well...) then it should be taking its cues from the NOW.

    Sharr
     
  18. ancient

    ancient Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    United States
    Are we still going on about the g**damn welders?! Allow me to explain this from the non-fan, non-way-too-much-thought POV:

    The ship is under construction: what is the most recognizable way to depict that? Welders. Joe Schmo, the potential consumer, will recognise what is going on with no explanation. They're welding a hull = big ship being built.

    The alternative is to use some more advanced, 'realistic' depiction, such as growing the ship with crystals or using some nano-bot thing, which would require ten minutes of geeky documentary exposition for Joe Schmo to understand, at which point he'll have decided three things:

    1. Not seeing that bullshit.
    2. Must get another chilli-dog.
    3. Fondle girlfriend.

    Welders are definitly the way to go.
     
  19. aridas sofia

    aridas sofia Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    The fact that you question the role of extrapolation in SF explains why you constantly berate any and every post that asks the film to, you know... look futuristic. To many moviegoers, "looks futuristic" will mean some effort put into logical extrapolation. Will it be "taking its cues from the NOW"? Sure. Just like the airplane took cues from birds.

    It's funny how today we laugh at past depictions of the flying future that depicted men flapping wings, isn't it?
     
  20. Sharr Khan

    Sharr Khan Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    USA Ct
    And the "extrapolation" is more often then not off the mark. Since we don't have any flying cars, tubes that we use to teleport with ect. Way back in the 50's futurists were thinking we'd have fully automatic kitchens - I have yet to see that come to be.

    What I'm saying is, if our past and present is any indication our future will likely look and feel more like Babylon 5 then Star Trek. There will be familiar methods of doing things.

    And I do not "berate any and every post that asks the film to, you know... look futuristic." I do however expect a more grounded functional depiction of the future here. One that joe whomever will think ok that makes sense. Not something Jetsons like with technology overriding the human elements.

    Sharr