Why not just use the pilot design?

[Vance]

I swear, some people place Matt Jefferies and the Original Series on a Pedestal just a BIT too high for reality.

'kewl' as in faddish, representing the current trend of the day. In 1965, when she was first speced out, she would have had fins everywhere, chrome, and a LOT more whirling light effects. Ironically, she would have looked a lot more like the 'new' one.

'cool' as in something that WORKS and is impressive on its own merits. The only thing really wrong about the TOS design is that it lacks some details, the nacelle caps, and the dish. Each of which can be rather easily redone (and has been, indeed, in TOS-R). Heck, even my own drawings of the gray lady ADDS details which aren't on the 11-footer. But I do recognize that the basic design elements work.

So, that said, yes, the 'cool' TOS/TOS-R Enterprise, to me, looks more realistic and believable than the 'kewl' NuTrek Enterprise.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

I've used the P-38 analogy, where if you were doing a WWII flick, you'd be wrong to substitute stock footage of an F-35 (assuming that it would look better and that the audience wouldn't care but would rather see a newer-looking ship). Well, if you're talking about style... consistency matters.

There is one problem with your analogy it basically requires the mainstream audience to be dumb enough not to know that jets espeacially ones built in the 2000s didn't exist in World War II.

I mean I'm not trying to offend anyone but that is a pretty big hole in your theory.

 

[Praetor]

Make your time.

Some one set us up the bomb!!!

Take off every zig!

For great justice!

 

[Vance]

I mean I'm not trying to offend anyone but that is a pretty big hole in your theory.

Sadly, I bet if you put up a movie of the "Attack of Pearl Harbor" where a bunch of M-29s downed the USS Nimitz, you would have a LARGE section of the audience SWEAR that's how it really happened.

 

[Devon]

The only thing really wrong about the TOS design is that it lacks some details, the nacelle caps, and the dish. Each of which can be rather easily redone (and has been, indeed, in TOS-R)

There was more wrong with it than just that. As I said before, the Enterprise was a death trap if you look at how it is designed.

 

[Vance]

There was more wrong with it than just that. As I said before, the Enterprise was a death trap if you look at how it is designed.

Though you say that, most of the flaws to which you're alluding are still very much present in the new design.

But, like I said, it's not that I think the TOS-R really would be the best choice for the big screen now, it's that it would be a better choice than what's being put on the screen in NuTrek.

 

[Australis]

The original Ent design was very much a child of its era. It was cool then. Not so cool now.

Look, the future is constantly changing. Back in the 1950s there was "a flying car in your future!" Hell, we've hardly got to smart houses yet! How we see the future constantly changes. Imagine trying to make Star Wars with the ship design from Destrination Moon.

Not completely sold on the new design, but like it a bit more than the Ent-A and possibly the Ent-E. Really, it isn't about any of thge ships. It's about the people, how they react, how they change things, the journey they take. All this obsessing on keeping the original design 'pure' is fanboi wankery of the highest order.

Talk to someone who isn't a fan, show them the old and new ship, ask which they'd rather watch. Any successful series, movie or TV, has to be able to appeal to a wide range and add new fans.

If you don't like that this HAS to happen, do as others do and make a fan-based production - Star Trek: Phase II (f/k/a Star Trek: New Voyages) sounds about your speed.

At the end of May I'll ask you what you thought of the film (there's little doubt you'll go). Your responses will be interesting.

 

[Vance]

At the end of May I'll ask you what you thought of the film (there's little doubt you'll go). Your responses will be interesting.

The soonest I'll see the film is on it's DVD release. Definately not going to see it in a theatre.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The only thing really wrong about the TOS design is that it lacks some details, the nacelle caps, and the dish. Each of which can be rather easily redone (and has been, indeed, in TOS-R)

There was more wrong with it than just that. As I said before, the Enterprise was a death trap if you look at how it is designed.

People have been looking at it for forty years. People recognize it as an old design that they've seen over and over. Time for something new, to get their attention.

 

[Blue_Ranger]

At the end of May I'll ask you what you thought of the film (there's little doubt you'll go). Your responses will be interesting.

The soonest I'll see the film is on it's DVD release. Definately not going to see it in a theatre.

Oh please. You'll be here on opening night giving us excrutiating detail on why the movie sucked...

 

[Vance]

Oh please. You'll be here on opening night giving us excrutiating detail on why the movie sucked...

With due respect. You do not know me. And, if anything, you're steeling my resolve NOT to see this movie at all. To this day I have yet to see Nemesis, I have not watched any but two episodes of Enterprise, and anything much past the second season of Voyager.

This movie looks, right now, like crap to me. Why would I waste my time and money on it, particularly to pander my internet rage to a bunch of fellow geeks, when I can do something ELSE with my time? That makes no sense.

 

[Trekker4747]

The only thing really wrong about the TOS design is that it lacks some details, the nacelle caps, and the dish. Each of which can be rather easily redone (and has been, indeed, in TOS-R)

There was more wrong with it than just that. As I said before, the Enterprise was a death trap if you look at how it is designed.

People have been looking at it for forty years. People recognize it as an old design that they've seen over and over. Time for something new, to get their attention.

Again, if it takes flashy effects and neat-o retro designs to get people's attention their attention isn't worth having and if their attention is NOT going to be drawn because of an "old looking" design then, again, their attention isn't worth having.

I really, really, hope people are better and smarter than that; than to go/not go to a movie simply because of/lack of a nifty designed CGI starship in it.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Now I like the original design and thought it was cool to see it in IN A Mirror Darkly, and while I think it could be used in a TV series in the 2000s I'm not sure it would work in a 2009 movie.

Plus something to keep in mind is that the more I find out about Phase II (the original idea not the fanfilm series) and Planet of the Titans. It sounds like the people involved with Star Trek in the 70s thought that the original design had to be changed.

 

[Vance]

Something to keep in mind the more I find out about Phase II (the original idea not the fanfilm series) and Planet of the Titans. It sounds like the people involved with Star Trek in the 70s thought that the original design had to be changed.

There were a lot of issues legally as well. The design rights had been sold off, questionably, to Franz Joseph and other entities. The models themselves were either lost or donated, etc etc...

Also, yes, there was a desire to 'update' the look of the Enterprise to '1970s' standards (keep in mind what 1970s really WERE)... but, really, we should be pretty damn thankful that it didn't happen and we got the TMP Enterprise instead.

Even then, none of the Phase II designs were that off. And pretty much everyone agrees that the Star Destroyer with a Bun design was just solidly OFF as an Enterprise.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Something to keep in mind the more I find out about Phase II (the original idea not the fanfilm series) and Planet of the Titans. It sounds like the people involved with Star Trek in the 70s thought that the original design had to be changed.

There were a lot of issues legally as well. The design rights had been sold off, questionably, to Franz Joseph and other entities. The models themselves were either lost or donated, etc etc...

Also, yes, there was a desire to 'update' the look of the Enterprise to '1970s' standards (keep in mind what 1970s really WERE)... but, really, we should be pretty damn thankful that it didn't happen and we got the TMP Enterprise instead.

Even then, none of the Phase II designs were that off. And pretty much everyone agrees that the Star Destroyer with a Bun design was just solidly OFF as an Enterprise.

Personally I thank god we didn't get the Stardestoyer thing pertending to be the Enterprise from Planet of the Titans.

I mean some people don't like the Enterprise from the new movie, but the one from Planet of the Titans was uber fugly.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

There was more wrong with it than just that. As I said before, the Enterprise was a death trap if you look at how it is designed.

People have been looking at it for forty years. People recognize it as an old design that they've seen over and over. Time for something new, to get their attention.

Again, if it takes flashy effects and neat-o retro designs to get people's attention their attention isn't worth having ...

If it puts butts in the seats, it's worth doing as far as the studio is concerned. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work - but don't imagine that there's some "higher good" to be served by producing droning, didactic and repetitious Trek stories that make the faithful feel smart in exchange for ten bucks and two passive hours in the dark.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It sounds like the people involved with Star Trek in the 70s thought that the original design had to be changed.

They did.

 

[Trekker4747]

People have been looking at it for forty years. People recognize it as an old design that they've seen over and over. Time for something new, to get their attention.

Again, if it takes flashy effects and neat-o retro designs to get people's attention their attention isn't worth having ...

If it puts butts in the seats, it's worth doing as far as the studio is concerned. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work - but don't imagine that there's some "higher good" to be served by producing droning, didactic and repetitious Trek stories that make the faithful feel smart in exchange for ten bucks and two passive hours in the dark.

Right now all I'm talking about is the ship. The actors, the way it's filmed its overall look is all stuff I'm right now fine with but am reserving final judgement on the full theatrical trailer.

Not talking about the story, the pedestrian music, the ho-hum directing and all of the other vanilla and unitrestingness that've plagued the bulk of the movies since TNG took over. (FC excluded.)

Just talking about the ship. Everything else right now from my chair can remain the same. I'm just talking about the ship's design. I'm sure some, er, enterprising young person will be able to re-edit the movie and insert in the TOS Enterprise and I'm sure the trailer will be just as good and attractive and just as many "outsiders" will have their interest piqued.

 

[Devon]

Again, if it takes flashy effects and neat-o retro designs to get people's attention their attention isn't worth having and if their attention is NOT going to be drawn because of an "old looking" design then, again, their attention isn't worth having.

Yeah! In fact, I think it's REALLY stupid that they don't have the ship hanging on a string. If we can't suspend our disbelief of cheap looking models hanging on a string, then let's boycott the other movie going audience. Yeah! Totally rad dude!

 

[Tom Servo]

Again, if it takes flashy effects and neat-o retro designs to get people's attention their attention isn't worth having and if their attention is NOT going to be drawn because of an "old looking" design then, again, their attention isn't worth having.

Yeah! In fact, I think it's REALLY stupid that they don't have the ship hanging on a string. If we can't suspend our disbelief of cheap looking models hanging on a string, then let's boycott the other movie going audience. Yeah! Totally rad dude!

In the defense of the original show, they did great with what they had at the time, and the original model is a thing of beauty.

However, I see this movie as JJ's interpretation of the story of Star Trek. I mean my god people are freaking out about this film as if its new BSG compared to the original. Not even close. I mean all the characters have the same name, same gender, and it seems the same personality. The ship looks mostly the same, and the universe as well. Its a different interpretation of the original story. It doesnt make it better or worse then the original, just different.