Reveal: New transporter design!

[Mudd]

Much more sophisticated than TOS graphics.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

A graphic from Enterprise as mentioned in post #250

I got that, I was just confused about it. My fault, not yours or his. Thanks for pointing that out however,

 

[Jesse1066]

Much more sophisticated than TOS graphics.

Yes, much as it would be if they updated the TOS look for Discovery. I would expect nothing less.

 

[Mudd]

Expect whatever you like; they're doing something new.

 

[Jesse1066]

Expect whatever you like; they're doing something new.

My expectations now are based on what we've seen. I don't expect to see anything that resembles TOS. That's just what I'd like.

 

[fireproof78]

I expect nothing, at the moment. Don't have enough information. I'm more curious than anything else to see how it plays out.

 

[Mr Awe]

Well, sort of.

They're updating it to look like what people who love Star Trek and its aesthetic and don't want it to really change are willing to accept that the future might look like - on Star Trek.

Huge solid-body spacecraft designed to look like traditional Earth-bound ships and vehicles. One over-sized gadget for voice-only communications that's entirely separate from the oversized gadgets they use for information collection, retrieval and display. Rooms full of great big consoles with pretty displays that require lots of people to monitor and interact with them on a moment-to-moment basis to accomplish relatively simple repetitive tasks. Uniforms that look flashy, mean nothing and would be pains-in-the-butts to work in ( oh, say "Hi" to Nicholas Meyer)!

They're still coloring inside the Star Trek lines as best they can, which must make it tremendously frustrating when they criticized by very conservative fans by not respecting the history of the thing.

I mean, Hell, the Trek future could at least look something like Avatar - that's still so conservative as to be unlikely.

Aw, poor baby. Best you get to bed so you're less cranky.

 

[fireproof78]

Aw, poor baby. Best you get to bed so you're less cranky.

Why?

 

[Mr Awe]

Why?

S/he just sounded exceedingly fussy.

 

[uniderth]

Should we take shots everytime someone attempts to dismiss a point by arguing that few people support it.

"Shrinking number"
"Small segment of the fanbase"

Aw, poor baby.

That better be a Jingle All The Way quote.

 

[Jesse1066]

Should we take shots everytime someone attempts to dismiss a point by arguing that few people support it.

Very few people support that.

 

[SPCTRE]

I like it! Weird and thus awesome.

Plus - body armour!

STD is all about that bass
'bout that bass, no treble

 

[Mudd]

Should we take shots everytime someone attempts to dismiss a point by arguing that few people support it.

"Shrinking number"
"Small segment of the fanbase"

The thing most important to the studio is that Discovery be successful.

It sounds as if the most important thing to the producers and artists, other than perhaps success, is that the show be good.

"This is what conservative fans want" doesn't happen to be particularly relevant to either of those objectives. It's clearly a nice-to-have for the folks actually working on the show to make everyone in the world happy and to service the fan base, but that can't be and isn't one of the primary goals of the project.

 

[SPCTRE]

This is why I think it may be more distressing, as it unfolds, for very conservative fans than the nuTrek movies ultimately were.

if you had told me in 2008 that eventually there would be something even more distressing to conservative fans than the 2009 reboot, I would have called you a crazy person, capital C, capital P

Big E built on the ground!
NCC numbers with a leading zero!
brewery engine room!
iBridge!
etc etc

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

There are biplanes there too. Figure Discovery can use them as shuttlecraft?

Nope. They should use the SR-71 for that obviously.

Yep, its not in there because it fits Trek, its there because it launched trek. Look at all the canon ships, all the styles, the TOS connie is the one that does not belong in the lineup. You can see the TMP ship as a legacy of the NX, but not the TOS ship, it does not belong in the lineages.

I know you guys don't like hearing the truth but that ship simply no longer fits in the Federation ship lineage and has not since ENT. It simply is a child of the 60's and does not fit, nor does it make any kind of sense.

Who gives a crap about starship lineups? Those who care about Federation ship lineage are a "shrinking number in an already small segment of the fanbase".

Now the TMP ship fits, heck maybe even the Phase II ship( which was Roddenberry throwing out the TOS design), but the TOS ship just does not logically fit in any way. Its more primitive than the NX, it screams "Hey I am from the 60's and I am Groovy baby"

So yeah, its trek Lameduck ship design, one its creator tossed away at his first, 2nd and 3rd chance.

You're under the impression that Gene Roddenberry is the "creator" of the TOS Constitution-class. He wasn't. Matt Jefferies was the designer of the TOS Enterprise. Walter Matthew "Matt" Jefferies was an aviation and mechanical artist, production designer, and art director. Nobody tossed away anything. In fact they're still following his designs (ships, sets, phasers, etc.) almost 53 years later.

 

[SPCTRE]

Nope. They should use the SR-71 for that obviously.

 

[Mudd]

if you had told me in 2008 that eventually there would be something even more distressing to conservative fans than the 2009 reboot, I would have called you a crazy person, capital C, capital P

Big E built on the ground!
NCC numbers with a leading zero!
brewery engine room!
iBridge!
etc etc

Yes...and Discovery is going to unfold week after week, for at least several years, adding fresh items to the list of things that confound and upset folks who want Trek to remain fundamentally what it was in its earlier incarnations. A lot of the "damage" looks like it's going to be in the tone and approach of the stories.

 

[Stuart404]

If you don't think Discovery "looks like crap", then I apologise for concluding it, but I continue to be astonished at the absolutism of fans. Any astetic, casting, design, or setting choice that a fan dislikes, it is then concluded that that is a failure, or terrible, etc which is then concluded means certain doom for the show.

I can't understand if these fans are just unable to see beyond their own subjective opinions to see that there aren't universal truths, or if they have prejudices that won't let them be open to anything new or different.

Same here, growing up with star trek all over the place, then BOOM, nothing for years. When I heard a new show was coming out I gleefully went to the internet to bask in the joy of other trekkers and....well... you all can read...

 

[fireproof78]

S/he just sounded exceedingly fussy.

He was expressing an opinion

 

[mos6507]

Most have no clue there is anything before Kirk shows up as Captain

TOS has been rerun endlessly for the last 50 years and that includes The Menagerie.

Just as the general public seems to remember one-off TOS episodes to the point of becoming pop-cultural icons (like the Gorn in Arena), a LOT of the general public remember The Menagerie, not just obsessive Trek nerds. If there's a reaction-GIF of it, it resonates.

In addition to that you had the prominent use of Pike in the Kelvin timeline. Stylistically different, of course, but a reminder of what came before Kirk.