Why not just use the pilot design?

[Cary L. Brown]

If Rick Sternbach's estimates are correct, here's the kind of size discrepancy we're looking at...

I think you are scaling the BC deck of the original to the bridge of the new one. The smallest dome on top is not the bridge on the new ship I think.

This estimation of size is based, primarily, on the little people seen in the first trailer, up on top of one of the nacelles. I didn't believe that could've been the nacelle, due to scale issue... I was hoping it was just a goofy look at the back of the secondary hull without pylons in place yet, but no such luck.

Go back and frame-cap the shot from trailer #1 showing that. This is the best resource for scaling the ship I've seen.

I see the "little guy" in this shot, as well. What this says is that the images in the two trailers are utterly inconsistent in terms of scale... and that's all it really says. So we don't know how big the ship is... do we?

(FYI... the "guy" you see above could be a 20-foot "power loader" for all we can be sure of. There's no clear indication that's a 6' tall human male... though it seems like that's PROBABLY the intent.)

 

[Shaw]

This estimation of size is based, primarily, on the little people seen in the first trailer, up on top of one of the nacelles. I didn't believe that could've been the nacelle, due to scale issue... I was hoping it was just a goofy look at the back of the secondary hull without pylons in place yet, but no such luck.

I'm still happy (and standing by) my original estimates of the ship from the studies I did of the original trailer.

 

[Tom Servo]

If Rick Sternbach's estimates are correct, here's the kind of size discrepancy we're looking at...

I think you are scaling the BC deck of the original to the bridge of the new one. The smallest dome on top is not the bridge on the new ship I think.

This estimation of size is based, primarily, on the little people seen in the first trailer, up on top of one of the nacelles. I didn't believe that could've been the nacelle, due to scale issue... I was hoping it was just a goofy look at the back of the secondary hull without pylons in place yet, but no such luck.

Go back and frame-cap the shot from trailer #1 showing that. This is the best resource for scaling the ship I've seen.

I see the "little guy" in this shot, as well. What this says is that the images in the two trailers are utterly inconsistent in terms of scale... and that's all it really says. So we don't know how big the ship is... do we?

(FYI... the "guy" you see above could be a 20-foot "power loader" for all we can be sure of. There's no clear indication that's a 6' tall human male... though it seems like that's PROBABLY the intent.)

I don't think that the teaser trailer can be used for scaling, since I don't believe that the VFX people bothered with determining scale in that trailer. I think it was just to make the Enterprise look HUGE.

However, since the new trailer is a shot from the movie itself, I believe that can be used to judge the size of the ship.

 

[Sci]

It's not like Trek has ever done a very good job of scaling the ship to the people. Consider Star Trek V's eighty-deck Enterprise-A, or Star Trek Generations's incredibly tiny people aboard the Enterprise-B at the end of the prologue, or the way the Defiant was ridiculously undersized compared to the Enterprise-E in Star Trek: First Contact.

 

[Vance]

In all fairness, the Teaser was not ever meant to be taken as literal, in terms of what the ship will exactly look or scale like. It's best NOT taken as any visual evidence.

 

[Captain X]

Never once have I bashed the old series with the distain that people here are bashing the new film. I love TOS for what it was, a product of the 60s. A fun TV show that spawned a franchise, and a show that used itself to sometimes send a message about real world events. However, for every one of these so called "message" episodes, was an episode based around monsters, explosions and Capt. Kirk making out with green women. And yes I completely disagree with TOS Fundamentalists, and thats what they are, because they expected something that looked like a 60's TV show in a 2008 movie interpretation of said show. I don't understand how anyone expected that. However, if someone has criticisms based on the movie itself...the movie as it's own thing, thats fine. But the people bashing it, using TOS as the basis I think are totally off base. They have kept the basic designs of everything in the original show, the circular bridge with the center seat, the shape of the Enterprise, the uniforms, and so far it seems, the characters, and given them there own twist, and I see nothing wrong with that.

As for the TOS design, she is a beauty, a classic design. However, I accepted long ago she was going to be redesigned for this film, and I like what we got.

And guess what, I AM A NERD. WE ALL ARE. Hell we post on a fucking Star Trek message board, we are the nerdiest of the nerds. However, this is one nerd who is not so caught up in the show, that I can't see the real life reasons the filmmakers decided to change things. And hell, this is before the movie even comes out. It could suck, it could be great and from many of the footage reports, minus a few, the reaction has been very very positive.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

 

[Tom Servo]

Never once have I bashed the old series with the distain that people here are bashing the new film. I love TOS for what it was, a product of the 60s. A fun TV show that spawned a franchise, and a show that used itself to sometimes send a message about real world events. However, for every one of these so called "message" episodes, was an episode based around monsters, explosions and Capt. Kirk making out with green women. And yes I completely disagree with TOS Fundamentalists, and thats what they are, because they expected something that looked like a 60's TV show in a 2008 movie interpretation of said show. I don't understand how anyone expected that. However, if someone has criticisms based on the movie itself...the movie as it's own thing, thats fine. But the people bashing it, using TOS as the basis I think are totally off base. They have kept the basic designs of everything in the original show, the circular bridge with the center seat, the shape of the Enterprise, the uniforms, and so far it seems, the characters, and given them there own twist, and I see nothing wrong with that.

As for the TOS design, she is a beauty, a classic design. However, I accepted long ago she was going to be redesigned for this film, and I like what we got.

And guess what, I AM A NERD. WE ALL ARE. Hell we post on a fucking Star Trek message board, we are the nerdiest of the nerds. However, this is one nerd who is not so caught up in the show, that I can't see the real life reasons the filmmakers decided to change things. And hell, this is before the movie even comes out. It could suck, it could be great and from many of the footage reports, minus a few, the reaction has been very very positive.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

No, I am engaging in what one would call debate, or a discussion. If thats what you consider whining, what have the TOS fundies been doing ever since this movie was announced?

 

[Vance]

No, I am engaging in what one would call debate, or a discussion. If thats what you consider whining, what have the TOS fundies been doing ever since this movie was announced?

Basically putting up with your constant insults?

 

[DonIago]

I somehow see this moving towards a thread closure...

 

[Tom Servo]

No, I am engaging in what one would call debate, or a discussion. If thats what you consider whining, what have the TOS fundies been doing ever since this movie was announced?

Basically putting up with your constant insults?

Well if thats what he considers whining, then thats what everyone has been doing, not just those defending the film.

Back on topic I suppose...

 

[Captain X]

No, I am engaging in what one would call debate, or a discussion. If thats what you consider whining, what have the TOS fundies been doing ever since this movie was announced?

No, I call whining about "TOS fundies" not liking the movie or even just aspects of the movie whining. And for the record, I'm not even really a TOS fan - it ranks just above VOY as far as I'm concerned. There is an entire franchise being invalidated here you know.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Invalidated???? Explain that to me.

 

[Captain X]

What part of "reboot" doesn't make it completely obvious?

 

[Tom Servo]

No, I am engaging in what one would call debate, or a discussion. If thats what you consider whining, what have the TOS fundies been doing ever since this movie was announced?

No, I call whining about "TOS fundies" not liking the movie or even just aspects of the movie whining. And for the record, I'm not even really a TOS fan - it ranks just above VOY as far as I'm concerned. There is an entire franchise being invalidated here you know.

I will give you credit for the "Did You Know" image, that is hilarious...

However, I don't understand the argument about how an entire franchise is being invalidated. Alternate timelines are as much a part of Trek as the Enterprise. I mean, even now, or own universe is an alternate timeline from the Trek verse. I don't think anything from this movie, so far, has invalidated the rest of the franchise.

 

[Captain X]

Let it not be said I have no sense of humor.

I feel this invalidates the whole of the previous franchise because this is being pushed forward as somehow taking its place. It could either be a full on reboot, or it could be an in-universe reboot, but either way I'm going to guess that all the visual changes they made are going to stay. In that way it invalidates TOS, and since TOS is the one that spawned all of the shows and movies, it invalidates all of them too.

 

[Devon]

What part of "reboot" doesn't make it completely obvious?

The only person who can invalidate it is YOU, the consumer.

 

[3D Master]

However, for every one of these so called "message" episodes, was an episode based around monsters, explosions and Capt. Kirk making out with green women.

:sighs: Nope, Kirk never made out with a single green woman, let alone multiple ones. Which pretty much tells your so-called being a fan of the show.

And yes I completely disagree with TOS Fundamentalists, and thats what they are, because they expected something that looked like a 60's TV show in a 2008 movie interpretation of said show.

And apparently you can't read either, because no, NONE of us ever demanded it look like a 60's tv show. But keep on lying about what we wrote, maybe one day you believe it yourself.

 

[Nerys Myk]

What part of "reboot" doesn't make it completely obvious?

Its some TV shows and some movies. They aren't going away and will most likely inform the future iterations. Yeah a few of the "details" might change, so what? At worstit means you might lose a triva contest. Reboot doesn't have to be a dirty word. A slavish continuity is the hobgoblin of little minds.

 

[Sisko_is_my_captain]

.

 

[M'Sharak]

From this thread:

However, for every one of these so called "message" episodes, was an episode based around monsters, explosions and Capt. Kirk making out with green women.

:sighs:

And from other recent threads in this forum:

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs:

3D Master, you've been running this number for a long time, and that shit is officially tired. I'd like you to stop it.

Now would be a good time.