Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread

[SJGardner]

Indeed. "Respect" has come to mean "strict adherence" rather than allowing for individual artistic interpretation. I've know many artists over the years and few enjoy getting in to art to replicate perfectly past art.

Mileage will vary.

Inspiration exists at multiple levels. Strict adherence to the past would be more souless to me.

Hell, my own national government has spent the last decade and more than a billion dollars of taxpayer's money to tear down modern civic buildings that exhibit considerable artistic value as examples of modernist architecture from the communist era and sometimes even modern additions to existing 19th century office and residential buildings, just so that they could replace them with "faithful reconstructions" of the original, historic and therefore "more beautiful" baroque revival edifices that end up being squeaky-clean historicist façades (albeit painstakingly reconstructed façades) on concrete frames and house nothing but empty conference centres and overpriced restaurants, cafés and state-owned luxury folk art stores that no one ever visits after the politicians arrive there once to cut the ribbon on live TV. Almost everyone agrees that they look soulless and artificial, and our capital is losing bits of its soul with every "restoration". But as far as our government is concerned, all is well, because the original, "true look" of the city that the communists have robbed us of by utilizing 20th century styles in 20th century buildings has been "restored."

 

[137th Gebirg]

I didn't know cinderblocks and concrete slabs were considered a "style". The term "Brutalism" comes to mind, actually.

I guess that's a style...

 

[fireproof78]

What I would have done - not that anyone asked but hey, that's what this board was designed for - was do more or less what ENT did for the TOS Defiant. Recreate the original 1960s aesthetic largely unchanged but expand on what we saw in TOS by making the bridge station indicator light readouts touchscreen displays that you can touch to bring up additional information before returning to the blinky indicator lights. Make the desktop computers more "modern" with little digital beeps and buzzes. Have the overhead display screens at each station be dynamic flatscreen monitors that show constantly changing graphs, stellar images and data.

There are ways of keeping the old and making it all just fresh and new enough to make it feel fresh for a modern audience. Sure, the panels have tons of multicolored blinking lights but now they show more than that.

I would be curious to see that. I think a little bit more updating would be necessary because the tech focus is so prevalent that the buttons would need to be able to show a function, and not just beep and buzz.

 

[cooleddie74]

Or at least have little numbers and lettering. TNG Era Okudagrams are often just numbers and lettering. But there's a way of leaving the TOS Enterprise tech look almost unchanged and still please both Classic fans and new audiences. TOS tech was so futuristic in so many respects I can totally buy some blinking Jolly Rancher buttons on a console doing far above and beyond what real life, modern day computer keyboards accomplishing or even what we saw in ENT.

 

[fireproof78]

TOS tech was so futuristic in so many respects

How so?

 

[cooleddie74]

Really?

Big flatscreen displays, not needing labels on everything to show a practical function, compressing information into small displays of data, voice activated computers with interactive voices. Sickbay bed readouts that require only a small dangling sensor to read a patient's vitals. Antigravs the size of a large Black & Decker hand tool.

I know that doesn't satisfy even some TOS hardcores but for a futuristic spaceship designed from 1964-66 it was pretty far ahead of its time for a long time. It took the TOS Movie Era aesthetic to one-up it and even then some of the TOS tech looks better even if in-universe it isn't as advanced.

 

[137th Gebirg]

They also had communicators that turned into cell phones. Hell, Motorola's first mass-production flip-phone was called the StarTAC, in direct homage to the TOS communicator. They had the first tablets (later called "PADD"s in TNG) that turned into iPad's. From a 1960's perspective, they were a good 30 years ahead of their time.

Edit: Oh yeah, and their colored "tapes" were the inspiration for the 3.5" floppy disk.

 

[fireproof78]

Really?

Big flatscreen displays, not needing labels on everything to show a practical function, compressing information into small displays of data, voice activated computers with interactive voices. Sickbay bed readouts that require only a small dangling sensor to read a patient's vitals. Antigravs the size of a large Black & Decker hand tool.

I know that doesn't satisfy even some TOS hardcores but for a futuristic spaceship designed from 1964-66 it was pretty far ahead of its time for a long time. It took the TOS Movie Era aesthetic to one-up it and even then some of the TOS tech looks better even if in-universe it isn't as advanced.

For it's time, of course. I was referring to now, and how we interpret technology shown in TOS.

I'm not looking from a 60s' POV.

 

[cooleddie74]

As you say, to each their own. Mileage will vary.

 

[fireproof78]

As you say, to each their own. Mileage will vary.

So, you think for now TOS appears futuristic?

 

[BillJ]

As you say, to each their own. Mileage will vary.

I have three main issues with the DSC Enterprise when compared to the TOS version: the slanted pylons, the size of the bridge and the Discovery viewscreen.

We’ll see if they address any of them.

 

[cooleddie74]

In some respects, yes. Again, to each their own.

Then again, there are aspects of TNG that feel like a 1980s documentary on technology so each generation of Trek tech has its shortcomings once we're 20 or 30 years past the time of production.

 

[fireproof78]

In some respects, yes. Again, to each their own.

Then again, there are aspects of TNG that feel like a 1980s documentary on technology so each generation of Trek tech has its shortcomings once we're 20 or 30 years past the time of production.

Well, that certainly clarified things...

There are aspects I find high tech, and some I find lacking. If we were to do as you suggest how would we approach it to make it discernable as to what each tech does? In this day and age of HD and people demanding to know what everything does flashing buttons doesn't strike me as cutting it. I might be wrong.

 

[cooleddie74]

I have three main issues with the DSC Enterprise when compared to the TOS version: the slanted pylons, the size of the bridge and the Discovery viewscreen.

We’ll see if they address any of them.

And all three can be fixed easily. It's just a matter of choice.

Also, the deckplates don't need to be shiny. Take it down a notch. Some matte floors won't hurt this version of the ship.

 

[fireproof78]

Anti-fatigue mats.

 

[BillJ]

So, you think for now TOS appears futuristic?

TOS tech isn’t just from our future, it is from the futures from the dozen worlds that make up the Federation and Starfleet.

 

[cooleddie74]

In this day and age of HD and people demanding to know what everything does flashing buttons doesn't strike me as cutting it. I might be wrong.

That's on them. I don't ask what every button and switch does, I just trust that the creators know and keep it fairly consistent.

 

[fireproof78]

TOS tech isn’t just from our future, it is from the futures from the dozen worlds that make up the Federation and Starfleet.

Yes...and?

I feel like this is one those things that falls under the obscenity rule: "I can't describe it but I know it when I see it."

Again, to each their own.

Apparently.

 

[BillJ]

Yes...and?

If people use a bit of imagination then there aren’t many things that need changed, just built to modern TV quality.

 

[fireproof78]

If people use a bit of imagination then there aren’t many things that need changed, just built to modern TV quality.

I agree. Like what?