Well unless I am misinterpreting you here, you say it looks like the Star Trek that we have now, the kind people don't like....
Then why is everyone complaining?
The New Enterprise Reveald
- Thread starter Jefferies
- Start date
Well unless I am misinterpreting you here, you say it looks like the Star Trek that we have now, the kind people don't like....
Then why is everyone complaining?
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Excellent ancient, wow if you got the nacelles sises right it is huge compare to original Enterprise. I think most guys are going to have inferiority complex when they see the movie in Mai(not me of course). On the serious note its too big in my opinion.Here's my improved front view w/ comparison. This new ship has large thingies.
A thought occurs...
It doesn't really make sense to me that the earlier version of the Enterprise would have such a large forward hull that whole sections of it would be removed during the refit to the TOS version. I think the diameter of the forward hull should be the constant for comparison, and the later refit would add larger components (aft hull, pylons, nacelles, etc.)...
I'm saying that to non-fans, the trailer is full of the kind of stuff that they probably recognize as Star Trek, not being compulsive nit-pickers like the rest of us
. So I can already see a lot of them staying away from this in the same way they would stay away from a film that stuck more closely to the original template. The Batman trailers had enough in them to differentiate them from the public's memories of Adam West, and later of George Clooney and Ahhnuld. Unless the public is going to go based upon Kirk watching Uhura undress or him getting busy with another chick who is (probably intentionally) not obviously alien, I don't see a lot in that trailer to differentiate it from the mainstream's perception of Star Trek. Which is why I don't see any justification for the changes they've made - unless you show someone both ships simultaneously, most non-fans don't have any idea that they're different at all - they just don't care. I see a film that serves two masters, and neither effectively. I'm with Probert - either change it the whole way, or work with what you've got and do it well, rather than only going halfway with everything.
I'd like to know what deal was done in the back office between Paramount and JJ to even allow JJ to take this project on. We know that JJ has the starpower to do whatever he wants, but I'm curious how he sold this desire to them, specially after nemesis failed.
Knowing paramount is was probably pretty easy.
-JJ "you know all those reset movies happening right now"
-PM "i think i think i like where this is going"
--JJ "yeah we go back to Kirk and make everything updated"
-PM "greenlight"
Knowing paramount is was probably pretty easy.
-JJ "you know all those reset movies happening right now"
-PM "i think i think i like where this is going"
--JJ "yeah we go back to Kirk and make everything updated"
-PM "greenlight"
It was the other way around. Paramount asked Abrams to take this on and develop it as the producer.
More specifically, they broached the subject to one of his collaborators. That Abrams himself would direct it was not settled until a draft script was in hand.
Maybe he wants you to be.
I'm saying that to non-fans, the trailer is full of the kind of stuff that they probably recognize as Star Trek, not being compulsive nit-pickers like the rest of us
The trappings of the movie are probably similar, its the film-making STYLE that will be different. That's where we will see the most changes and possibly an increase in the fanbase.
RAMA
The problem with Nemesis wasn't that it was "fan-wank" or "anti-fan". It's that it was a bad movie. Honestly, I could care less about the shape of the corridors or barcode scanners on the bridge, as long as the new movie is true to Trek's optimistic spirit, the characters' cores, and, most importantly, is a good movie.
Exactly.
That said, one of the things that made it a bad movie from a non-trekkie P.O.V. was the number of Trek cliche elements repeated from movie to movie. There are things used in Trek to create suspense that are just failures at this point.
Roger Ebert nailed this in his review:
Link
Which is why despite the supposed "scientific" feasibility of building the ship on the ground gives me hope for the film. Why? Because it breaks the cliche of introducing the hero ship in the filigree of an orbital dock. We've seen it, in one form or another, since TMP. It was awe inspiring then, but has become ho-hum since. It shows me that the writers asked themselves how they could break or make "fresh" the trappings of Trek. If they could do that with the introduction of the Enterprise, then it gives me hope that they asked similar questions about other cliche elements that are as stale as year-old crackers.
So, instead of Amanda giving birth to Spock, he can just hatch from a giant egg.
Hey, if we're gonna break with established conventions...
Hey, if we're gonna break with established conventions...
Hmm...well, it's not like the current version of Spock's birth as shown on screen is scientifically defensible on any level. So in that regard a giant egg couldn't be worse.
It's remarkable how quickly some defenders of TOS jump to complain about plausibility where the question of Enterprise's construction is concerned, and yet never bat an eyelash at nonsense like Spock's parentage. It apparently doesn't really matter whether what's been established is any good, as long as it's been established.
It's remarkable how quickly some defenders of TOS jump to complain about plausibility where the question of Enterprise's construction is concerned, and yet never bat an eyelash at nonsense like Spock's parentage. It apparently doesn't really matter whether what's been established is any good, as long as it's been established.
^Screw the egg birth, let's get back to Roddenberry's original plans for Spock-- red skin, Martian background and absorbing energy through a stomach plate for nutrients. Hey, if it's a Roddenberry idea, it must be canon or whatever.
Roddenberry did work up a more detailed explanation of Spock's conception and birth, via an "interview" with Sarek (voiced by Mark Lenard, on the "Inside Star Trek" record album, currently sold as a two disc package with the soundtrack to TMP). In short, it involved a great deal of genetic engineering, Spock being more of a guest in Amanda's uterus than a permanent resident, and spending the last four months of Vulcan term pregnancy in specially designed incubator (apparently, Vulcan pregnancies are four months longer than human ones).
Not canon, as it was ignored in the "Star Trek" movies. We saw Spock born in "Star Trek 5."
That record (which I own, in CD form) is a curiosity that has had no influence on the later portrayal of...well, almost anything in "Star Trek."
As has been pointed out by more scientifically literate folks, it is more likely that a human being and mildew could produce viable hybrid offspring than that humans could successfully interbreed with any extraterrestrial form of life.
Last edited:
I dont recall a birth scene in ST6. You could say he was born in ST3 though.
We saw whales born in ST4
We saw whales born in ST4
The only portrayal of Spock's birth that we've been presented with on screen is in ST V, and frankly, the idea that he was born in a cave makes building the ship on the ground look like Nobel Prize material.
(I suppose it could be excused as the dubious memories of a newborn, but I still prefer the angle that the whole movie, from the first campfire scene onward, was McCoy and Kirk indulging Spock with yet another ritual associated with "camping out", specifically, the telling of a ghost story, in this case, after several helpings of McCoy's secret ingredient.)
As for that other human/Vulcan hybrid, Trip's and T'Pol's little bundle of pointed eared joy died early because of the genetic mismatching of human and Vulcan DNA, which not only bolsters the statements in the Sarek interview regarding the extreme measures required for Spock to survive gestation, but also the statement that Spock was not the first human/Vulcan hybrid, but was "the first to survive."
(I suppose it could be excused as the dubious memories of a newborn, but I still prefer the angle that the whole movie, from the first campfire scene onward, was McCoy and Kirk indulging Spock with yet another ritual associated with "camping out", specifically, the telling of a ghost story, in this case, after several helpings of McCoy's secret ingredient.)
As for that other human/Vulcan hybrid, Trip's and T'Pol's little bundle of pointed eared joy died early because of the genetic mismatching of human and Vulcan DNA, which not only bolsters the statements in the Sarek interview regarding the extreme measures required for Spock to survive gestation, but also the statement that Spock was not the first human/Vulcan hybrid, but was "the first to survive."
Similar threads
