The changes in the Enterprise-D bridge in Generations...

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Lance, May 23, 2012.

  1. Flake

    Flake Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Pretty sure they wanted to put the stations on the sides of the bridge from Day 1 but it was Gene who said no.
     
  2. BillJ

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    It was the budget that said no. But I always thought the 'fewer stations/less cluttered' look made the Enterprise-D bridge the most advanced looking of them all. :shrug:
     
  3. Allyn Gibson

    Allyn Gibson Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Location:
    South Pennsyltucky
    It was either Gene or Bob Justman.

    The problem with the extra bridge stations is that you need people to man them. That means hiring non-speaking extras to stand around and look busy during shots. That costs the production money. So the bridge side stations were nixed as a money-saving move.

    That's why I think it was a Bob Justman move.
     
  4. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Except the movie was in 2.35:1

    Thomas Doherty once wrote that submarine movies are made for widescreen, and I think the same is usually true for starships (though I'd make an exception for the DARK STAR.)
     
  5. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    The bridge didn't have extra stations because they didn't want a bridge full of control consoles. It was the whole "technology unchained" idea: with all the high tech, you don't need a bunch of people sitting at stations all day. The rear stations were they for the odd times they wanted/needed them. It wasn't a matter of money, 4x3 considerations or whatever else you want to invent.

    And you don't need a wide set to shoot widescreen, you just have to know how to frame a shot.
     
  6. wingsabre

    wingsabre Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    I understand the whole technology unchained concept since the bridge crew felt a lot smaller, and for the most part Riker and Troi never had an official station. They just sat there and advised for the most part. Troi was counselor, and theoretically communications, but Worf handled hailing. So overall, the most vital sections on the bridge were Ops, Security, and Helm. The design was appropriate for that.

    However I think it was not that pragmatic of a design. There's been so many episodes where Data was in the rear section, and had to turn around to either talk to the captain, or view the view screen. When Gordi goes on the bridge, he would transfer controls to that stations. The rear stations looked like they were designed to be axillary stations or multipurpose stations. Additionally, half the bridge was higher than the captain's chair, requiring most major battle scenes to be done with Picard standing. It was a huge blind spot. Yes for filming, standing automatically implies more action, however from a pragmatic perspective it was needed to allow Picard a greater view of the bridge and stations to assess the situation. You could contrast that with TOS bridge, Voyager's bridge, Ent-E's bridge or the Defiant's bridge where the captains could assess thing easily while on their chair. Moving science, engineering and communications to the sides and elevating the captain's chair makes sense because it's a more efficient design. The back stations could simply be axillary and they don't have to have extras for that. That's how they handeled the bridge on Voyager and the subsequent Ent-E.
     
  7. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, Missouri, USA
    Is it really necessary for a captain to see every station on the bridge? Kirk's bridge allowed him to do that, but that may have been more of a luxury than an absolute necessity. I think on some real navy ships, the captain's chair is at the front of the bridge with various stations behind it.
     
  8. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Framing Worf in was hard even in 4:3. I'm kinda surprised they didn't wind up dutching low-angle shots past Picard looking up at him. Ideally, they should have built a little sinkhole for him to stand in to bring him down in the frame (especially given the actor's height.)
     
  9. wingsabre

    wingsabre Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    It's not really necessary for a captain to see every station on the bridge, but it's more efficient, more pragmatic. I never said the changes were necessary, just said the changes to the bridge made sense because it was more pragmatic.
     
  10. wingsabre

    wingsabre Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    The captain's chair was also set several feet below where Worf stood.
     
  11. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    That's what I mean, you needed a drop to plop Worf into so he wasn't this big vertical crossbar at odds with 4:3 framing (unless you're 4:3 IMAX with the '4' being the vertical dimension rather than the horizontal one.)
     
  12. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, Missouri, USA
    Not really. It truly is more of luxury than a necessity. The more important thing is for a bridge station to be within earshot of a captain.
    It's not even pragmatic. It's just something some fans are used to seeing from TOS.
     
  13. publiusr

    publiusr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    I rather liked the movie bridge myself. On widescreen, it was probably thought that the mostly empty design wouldn't film well. I seem to remember a documentary well they had to tell Frakes and Stewart to not stand so close to one another, which they had to do for TV.
     

Share This Page