Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by WarpFactorZ, May 1, 2013.
Okay, the ship isn't 700+ meters long. It's 350 meters, and it's crewed by really tiny people.
The JJPrise is inarguably at least twice the size of the oldTrek Enterprise - it's obvious every time we see a shot into the bridge through the viewscreen window, among other things.
The notion of pointing to other windows through which we can see nothing recognizable and declaring "I know how big those windows are because I know how big they were on the old Enterprise" is a non-starter.
Did they actually say in the movie that Starfleet didn't have warships before 2259? Please tell me they didn't say that.
A heavy cruiser is a type of warship. They classify the Enterprise as a heavy cruiser in the Star Trek dossier. In the prime universe, the Enterprise is identified as a heavy cruiser by the Federation, and a battle cruiser by the Klingons.
If they did say something that idiotic, are they so lazy that they couldn't do a search for "warship def" on the computer and Google heavy cruiser?
In Abrams's first Trek movie, Pike describes the Federation as "a humanitarian and peacekeeping armada."
That covers it, period.
They may be military, but they don't think of themselves primarily as warriors (Kirk: "We've been trained to think in terms other than war," in the episode "Day Of The Dove") or their vessels as warships.
"The Squire Of Gothos:"
You can Google any definitions you like, but you'd be hard pressed to find the Enterprise or other Starfleet vessel described by its crew as a "warship" in TOS.
Sounds like the writers did their research and were less lazy than many fans who are sure they know TOS backward and forward.
I'm certainly glad to know that the writers of these movies are actually taking pains to make the distinction that's always been made in Star Trek between the exploratory and sometimes necessarily defensive missions of Starfleet and a fleet of warships - we do want all these millions of new fans to pick up on that difference, after all. "Gene's vision" and all that. You start treating the Enterprise as a warship and you're diminishing the essential differences between Star Trek and Star Wars.
Tomorrow is Yesterday
Christoper: I see. Did the Navy...
Kirk: We're a combined service, Captain.
Whom Gods Destroy
Garth: You, Captain, are second only to me as the finest military commander in the galaxy.
Kirk: That's very flattering. I am primarily an explorer now, Captain Garth.
Kirk: I agree there was a time when war was necessary, and you were our greatest warrior. (He is speaking to Garth.)
Star Trek II
Chekov: The order comes from Admiral James Kirk.
David: I knew it! I knew it! All along the military has wanted to get their han...
David:I've tried to tell you before. Scientists have always been pawns of the military---
Carol:Starfleet has kept the peace for a hundred years, I cannot and will not subscribe to your interpretation of this event.
It is absolutely arguable, because each person in each window and each shuttlecraft passing through the same bay door produces different scale sizes.
The shpi was originally 350m. It was scaled up in post-production because someone wanted to make something look cool.
No it's not. You've tried, and many others have tried, but your points don't stand up to the evidence.
The ship can be whatever it wants to be originally, which doesn't change how it actually appears in the finished product.
If the ship varies in size from scene to scene and it's demonstrated accurately, then you can say it's not depicted the same size throughout.
The "evidence": when taking off for the Narada, Pike's shuttle swoops over the lip of the stern. It stretches between the "C-17" on the back. If you assume the shuttle is between 3.5m-4m across, you get the width of the shuttle bay door is between 15-20m across. Scaling everything else gives a ship length of between 300-400m, and height of about 60-70m.
So, the ONLY "evidence" that the ship is some ludicrous 750m is the ONE scene of shuttles landing in a ginormous shuttle bay -- something which is never seen again in the whole movie.
Verdict: ship is between 300-400m long.
As Scotty would say: up your shaft.
Research? Howzabout 'enlist in Starfleet?' ENLIST? Well, based on the Abrams09Thing I guess they take just about everybody (if the 3rd parachuter or cupcake are good examples), so it isn't like you have to exude a special quality to get there in this reality ... that makes it quite different from the real Trek universe.
And your TOS quotes are a bit selective ... I'd think the Garth / Kirk exchange in WHOM GODS DESTROY would be more representative, the one where Garth notes that Kirk's record as a warrior is second only to his own, and Kirk's reply that he thinks of himself primarily as an explorer now. There's plenty of trek backstory suggesting war fleets, from the Romulan war onward, certainly something massive over Organia, and that would also imply that you have mission-specific vessels as well as general purpose heavy cruisers.
BTW ... does Pike really say the FEDERATION is a 'peacekeeping armada' -- not STARFLEET? (I'm really asking here, not being sarcastic, because that sounds totally wrong, like saying the United States is a whole bunch of armed cruisers.)
EDIT ADDON: Sorry, I should have scrolled down to see THROWBACK covered most of this and with more detail than I offered.
So, wait a sec here, King-o. I may be a bit slow, but one thing I'm not is a bit slow. You first dismiss with not-so-apparent disdain "Shatner's 78-deck Enterprise," yet in the same breath you use Shatner's shuttle bay as a canon comparison to the nu-Enterprise's shuttle bay.
Help me understand this, since the only time we've ever seen the 1701's shuttle bay (apart from TMP, where it's much bigger), is in Shatner's horribly un-canon movie? You use as evidence... evidence that you yourself discredit?
^The "78 decks" thing was added at Shatner's insistece, over the objections of the producers. The shuttlebay in STV is the same size as the one in TOS-R. The TMP matte painting is, unfortunately, a little oversized for a 1000'/305m USS Enterprise (ditto engineering and the rec deck)
Proof? I've heard you say this a to but each time you've said it, I've shown you you're wrong, and even proved how with diagrams and screengrabs! Yet you persist that the windows and shuttlebay change sizes. The evidence is in this thread.
Wrong again, I'm afraid. You might want to learn about perspective - the shuttle is the size of the "C-" as it flies over the rim of the bay, directly over the camera - exactly the size they are during the earlier scene. The camera was just a lot further away in the prior scene. See the size of the registry numbers in the two scenes.
We also see the huge bay as Pike, Kirk, Sulu and Olsen board the shuttle, and as it leaves the bay through the cockpit window - hardly "only once". The enourmous shuttlebay is featured prominenty in Star Trek Into Darkness.
Did I mention the doors on either side ofthr shuttlebay? Keenser wouldn't fit through them on a 350m Enterprise.
Once again I have to say, they are not hiding a secret smaller Enterprise in there for "true believers" to find.
Thanks for making my point for me. The "Whom Gods Destroy" scene is the one in which Kirk draws a distinction between himself and Garth, making it clear that while Garth was a warrior Starfleet has changed and Kirk considers himself an explorer.
Still waiting for a TOS reference (not a TOS-based movie, but TOS) in which the crew of a Starfleet vessel refers to it as a "warship." Surely you have...one?
You forgot the most important one:
Errand of Mercy
Kirk: I'm a soldier.
Pretty much sums it up right there. Roddenberry didn't start putting flowers in the phaser collimators until TNG.
And all of this has nothing to do with this new Star Trek.
Waiting for that TOS reference to Starfleet cruisers as warships...
To Warpfactor, and as a Texan would say, up yours.
Actually, that's not the whole sentence. From http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/27.htm:
But... but... the people who MADE THE MOVIE said 78 decks! Who are you to argue with Shatner? It's his movie! The arrogance of some fanboys is staggering!
Besides, if you don't trust Shatner on the 78 decks (which of course is ridiculous -- the Enterprise is not that big), why should you trust him on the accuracy of the shuttle bay layout (which was just a recycled TNG set rented on the cheap)?
Says the guy who claims the windows on the rim of the saucer are the same size as the bridge one, because they look the same in a picture (even though the bridge window is at least 50m away from the saucer edge).
No, sorry. I advanced it frame by frame as the shuttle emerged from the bay. It's above the lettering, so there are two possibilities:
1. It's directly over the rim, in which case its size matches precisely to the letter spacing (which spanned C-17).
2. It was further up, in which case the lettering would look BIGGER than the shuttle (see "perspective"). So, even if the shuttle only spanned the "C-", as you claim, it would actually be bigger because it's further away from the camera.
The size of McCoy and Kirk alongside the hull in the underwater scene as well as knowing the size of the torpedoes and comparing that to the ship when they peek from the broadside bays should be a better indication.
Separate names with a comma.