That's not MY ship...!

Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Praetor, May 3, 2009.

  1. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    The recent argument regarding fan reaction to the redesign of the Enterprise for XI has made me ponder the past reactions to 'redesigns' of the ship. (And if you decide to mention that here, don't forget the spoiler code!!)

    Now, I grew up on TNG, the first six films, and TOS, so for me, the original 1701, refit, Excelsior, and Enterprise-D were all equally valid ships to fly the Trek flag. I understand that the refit met with some misgivings at the time, that many fans were upset with the prospect of Excelsior becoming Kirk's new ship in the films, and the D was viewed variously as 'too big' or 'disproporitionate' or whatever, and therefore each met with some controversy at the time of their introduction that was before my time, so I'd quite like to hear about that.

    I imagine there may be some who disliked the Cardassian architecture of DS9, or the 'warship' that was the Defiant, or the Voyager (which is one of my all-time favorites.) And of course, I'm not a fan of the reasons behind the destruction of the D and it's replacement with the E, even though I like the E, and I certainly wasn't fond of the NX-01 when I first saw it mostly because of the resemblance to the Akira class, but have grown to like it.

    So let's hear it. Have you ever felt like a 'new' ship, any of them, from refit to XI, didn't 'belong' in Trek? If so, which ones, and why?
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2009
  2. sbk1234

    sbk1234 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    My only concern about the new ship was how it would contradict a continuity with what has gone on before. I find I really have to push the bounds of plausibility to say that this is the same ship that we saw all those years on TOS.

    As for how it looks, I think it's a neat looking vessel, otherwise.
     
  3. miraclefan

    miraclefan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    The F U state of TEXAS!
    You do know that this is a nu-universe right? this isn't supposed to be the ''original'' ship.
    Praetor, you and I must be near the same age range because I too grew up with just TNG & the TOS movies! Also I don't think I ever thought of a starfleet TREK ship as ever being out of place or strange. Now the Klingon d-7 type battlecrusier in the ENT ep unexpected WAS deffinatly out of place, but other then that NO!
     
  4. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    Ah, we must be about the same age then, miraclefan. (I'm 24.) And I'm also then not surpised and indeed glad to hear that we are of similar minds about it. :)
     
  5. Jaespol

    Jaespol Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    There's a difference between making a new ship and redesigning an existing one for the same time period.
     
  6. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    Yeah, but even with the idea of redesigning, some people have clearly found a newer ship to not be 'worthy' in the past. Consider the backlash at the prospect of giving Kirk and company the Excelsior.
     
  7. sbk1234

    sbk1234 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
     
  8. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    Eek, ya got some messed up quotes there, sbk1234.

    I think I still understand what you're saying. Are there any ships you particularly dislike for the 'worthy' reason?
     
  9. The Wormhole

    The Wormhole Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    That wasn't a D-7, that was a K't'inga, which was definately out of place. A D-7 might have been easier to accept, but a K't'inga definately had no place in the 22nd century.
     
  10. Xerxes1979

    Xerxes1979 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Location:
    Gamma Hydra Section 10
    IMHO this new Enterprise is not capable of the range of beauty shots as either the original or refit. Where is the beauty in this design? The Galaxy had a wonderful side profile, the Excelsior class looked good from below and front, Ambassador class had a few. This Enterprise brings nothing new to the table.

    Its not going to wreck the movie for me since its design is clearly Federation inspired. Some of its features make sense given the massive stresses of contructing a ship under Earth gravity. The weight of the saucer would have snapped the original Jeffries neck off.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2009
  11. miraclefan

    miraclefan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    The F U state of TEXAS!
    I'm 23.:techman:
    My mistake! but you can see what happens when a ship looks just a little out of place, it messes with your mind!:shifty:
     
  12. sbk1234

    sbk1234 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Yeah. I figured if I tried to fix it, I'd just make it worse. As for not worthy, I've never really had any problem with any. Although, I also find the Defiant an ugly ship, but it's completly acceptable for a worthy Trek ship.


    I call it the "War Tortoise."
     
  13. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    I didn't like the Enterprise D when I first saw it, but got to like it quite a bit.

    I thought the Enterprise E was hideous at first, and still do.
     
  14. miraclefan

    miraclefan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    The F U state of TEXAS!
    I was the same as you with regards to the 1701-D, but I disagree with you on the 1701-E I love that ship!:techman:
     
  15. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia
    It's never gone so far for me as thinking any ship didn't belong. I was never wild about the 1701-D and still am not, but it's part of Trek. I liked the Defiant, have no quibble at all with Voyager and think the NX-01 looks great. (I had no idea there was any such thing as the Akira class before I got here, but learning about it later didn't diminish the NX-class design for me one bit.)

    The one which gave the the "what did they do that for?" feeling was the refit in TMP. I got over it pretty quickly, of course, and suffered no lasting trauma, but the high regard many other people have expressed and continue to express for that design is something I've never felt. Sure, it's got some pretty features, but I couldn't ever quite manage to see the whole as an improvement over the original 1701.
     
  16. Xerxes1979

    Xerxes1979 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Location:
    Gamma Hydra Section 10
    I am still partial to the Constitution refit.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. curson

    curson Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2009
    Location:
    London, UK
    I'm not a big fan of the original 1701, but I've always liked the refit a lot.

    This said, I have to admit the new JJ inprint on the re-designed Enterprise it's nice to my eyes, and definitely ticks some boxes here. In other words, I think I like it, a lot more than I like the whole idea of this upcoming movie. I've tried my best to stay positive, but all this "reboot/prequel" thing simply doesn't work for me.
    It didn't work with ENT, it didn't work with the Star Wars prequels, and I fear it's not going to work with JJ's Star Trek... but at least, I won't blame the ship :P
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2009
  18. Karnbeln

    Karnbeln Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    This is a topic I would love to see visited by those who were around in the early days of post-TOS Trek. It seems like, nowadays, the refit is the one ship that everyone considers to be beautiful. But I know that couldn't have always been the case. There had to be people who couldn't stand the many changes to the TOS model. I imagine we don't hear from them too much anymore because they fell out of fandom as the franchise rapidly changed, or they are just quiet after so many years of arguing the point.

    If the latter is the case, I assure anyone that I, at least, will be most interested in what you have to say. As a 21 year old, I have never known a time before the Enterprise-D was on screen or the TOS movies were completed. The original 1701 was delightfully cheesy until I was old enough to appreciate its simple design on my own. A differing take on the refit would be most interesting.

    As for myself, I've never had a problem with an Enterprise design, even the NX-01. It probably helps that I was unaware of the Akira when Enterprise premiered, but even now I can stomach the similarities to the Akira easily- it's only in their top-down profiles that they are the same, afterall. And knowing that the producers wanted to stick in the Akira wholesale makes me appreciate just how much love and effort went into Doug Drexler and the rest of the art department's efforts to de-evolve the ship into a passible pre-tos design that would make it past the suits. I could see why the D was sacrificed for the E- the E just has a better profile for movies. We see the D has a beautiful piece of design, but we're Trekkies. We understand the ships like the average movie-goer doesn't. From that perspective, the aerodynamic (yes, in a vacuum) shape of the E is much more appealling to the eye than the top-heavy D. It looks like it can go fast, and the fact that it is more reminiscent to the refit when filmed from certain angles probably makes the images shout "Star Trek".
     
  19. Cyke101

    Cyke101 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    I'm still pleasantly amazed at the number of refit elements that made it into the Abramsprise. Someone's been doing their homework when, really, they had every right not to. I appreciate those details. It might also imply that if the timeline is indeed changed, Abrams Trek is at a technological and engineering level that's above TOS but approaching the movies, therefore technology is slightly more advanced.

    Anyway... I want to like the Ambassador. I really do. A midway design between the Excelsior and the Galaxy makes sense, but ultimately the ship feels like it really was designed as if the Galaxy came first and then trimmed down with a few Excelsior elements here and there. It doesn't feel like a true vessel in her own right, but rather just a slightly polished kitbash, in my opinion. Almost there, but not quite fit to carry the mantle of the Enterprise.
     
  20. caisson2delta

    caisson2delta Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    The South of Florida
    I, for one, never had an issue with the refit. I found it far more pleasing visually as well as liking the improvements. It never bothered me that the TOS ship was changed so much. I grew so accustomed to this design, that I could not accept the E-D for many years.

    This new ship, I'm not so sure about. Perhaps, in time, it will grow on me as well. I can't help but think that perhaps, in a sequel, we may see something a bit more familiar in regards to an upgrade or something.
     

Share This Page