I wonder what would happen if they could ever bring back the TOS design aesthetics in a retro like style, what would happen with the ratings? I'd be curious. Could they even do that without paying new designers who feel the need to update it to what they feel are futuristic designs to them where they might not be the type of visionary Gene was, per se. I mean the details can be updated for sure but no touch screens and TNG or Disco type bridge but more psychedelic colors like TOS.
TOS aesthetics
- Thread starter Valenti
- Start date
Did you see the TOS bridge in the game Star Trek Bridge Crew? It’s pretty cool, it looks like the original without being overly teched out. I thought it was a good representation of how it could be modernized.
It would look like Star Trek Continues.
Now that I'd watch and so should have been the look on Discovery! 
JB
JB
I don't think Discovery should have straight adopted the look of TOS. Though I think they could have done a much better job mixing its look with modern production values and aesthetics.
Discovery looks great exactly the way it is!
I actually like the Discovery exterior, though it doesn't really remind my of anything from TOS. None of the ships remind me of TOS, not even the Enterprise.
It's easy to jump to a "modernized Star Trek aesthetic" but I find it much more compelling to discuss in the term directly copying the style. Meaning a direct copy of the aesthetic with no modernization. King Daniel Beyond was correct in that it would look like Star Trek Continues. However Star Trek continues was not just imitating the aesthetic, but also the camera work. Camera work is a HUGE part in capturing that '60s Star Trek feel.
I think that the 60s aesthetic would be more acceptable to modern audiences than the 60s camera work. You could also get a lot of mileage by showing that the tech has immense capabilities. That way the audience can see that the tech may "look" clunky, but it certainly is not clunky. Take ECHenry's look at the desktop viewer as a good example.
I think that the 60s aesthetic would be more acceptable to modern audiences than the 60s camera work. You could also get a lot of mileage by showing that the tech has immense capabilities. That way the audience can see that the tech may "look" clunky, but it certainly is not clunky. Take ECHenry's look at the desktop viewer as a good example.
Let it look like the one in Ticonderoga.
That's pretty good, but they still don't have seat-belts.
That's pretty good, but they still don't have seat-belts.
They have TAS-style force-field belts.
I actually feel the reverse is true. I think TOS looks more modern, even now, than TNG ever did.
I do agree that TOS set design needs to be lit and shot a certain way for maximum effect. There's a blog post out there somewhere that explains that TOS was shot like B&W but with color added in the sense that it has lots of zones of light/dark, more noir-like or expressionistic. It reflects that transition period from B&W to color where the crew of their day were still thinking in terms of B&W. It's a very stylized look whereas most TV shows these days is either very documentarian in its realism or digitally manipulated to the point of looking like a videogame cut-scene (Discovery is like that).
Personally all the knows and switches and dials on TOS seems very dated to me. The LCARS system on TNG with touch screen interface seems a lot more modern, if they made the screens look a little flashier i think its still quite up to date.
And I LOVE the TOS asthetic but im thinking about modern audiences.
Of course the movie Tos ascetic was a different kettle of fish
I think even the designers on Enterprise liked the toggle switches better and pushed for them. I never bought into the whole Okuda/Sternbach approach and the special effects for TNG were dreadful compared to the 60's style. It got better in DS9 and much better in Voyager and Ent..
Why not have either or both?
For instance there's two new commercial crew spaceships that will fly late this year/next year, the SpaceX Crew Dragon and the Boeing Starliner.
SpaceX being from a different background uses touchscreen almost entirely. There are maybe 7 buttons on the entire panel.
Starliner uses conventional airliner style discreet switches and buttons. Both have advantages. An experienced crewmember on a long voyage would know their controls blindfolded, regardless.
For instance there's two new commercial crew spaceships that will fly late this year/next year, the SpaceX Crew Dragon and the Boeing Starliner.
SpaceX being from a different background uses touchscreen almost entirely. There are maybe 7 buttons on the entire panel.
Starliner uses conventional airliner style discreet switches and buttons. Both have advantages. An experienced crewmember on a long voyage would know their controls blindfolded, regardless.
Similar threads
