Andrew Probert and Rick Sternbach Communicator/Tricorder Props

[ST-One]

Regardless, the design ethic created for TMP has no real connection to the series. They redesigned everything to look cool on the big screen, and justified it with the flimsy argument that they "spent the last 18 months" redesgining the entire Star Trek universe. That's a lot of change from the last TOS episode, but we as fans have accepted that as reasoning for why everything looks so completely different.

Aside from the TOS credit narration, Kirk's log entry in Shore Leave suggests that the NCC-1701 had by that point been away from Earth for an extended period of time, so it is perfectly natural to expect technologies and fashions to continue evolving on the homeworld (along with the rest of the UFP) while remaining comparatively static aboard a starship engaged in an exploration mission beyond the outer periphery.

TGT

It evolved so completely that throughout the Federation nothing resembling anything from TOS was ever seen again (no Starships, no shuttles, (surface-based) starbased, space stations).
Yeah, very plausible.

 

[ST-One]

And as to the other things from TMP like the spacedock and the relay station, we really have no way of knowing how old either is compared to the big E herself. Enterprise had already been through two captains by the time Kirk got to her, amking her a fairly old ship by the time we even saw her in TOS.

One captain.
And, despite that major refit somewhere between Pike's and Kirk's captaincy which changed the Enterprise in a way that she now had an additional 200 crew on board she looked remarkably similar... well... I guess the design aesthetics didn't evolve as much between the 2250s and the 2260s as they did between the 2260s and the 2270s...

 

[GodThingFormerly]

It evolved so completely that throughout the Federation nothing resembling anything from TOS was ever seen again (no Starships, no shuttles, (surface-based) starbased, space stations).
Yeah, very plausible.

There were no starbases or starships aside from the NCC-1701 Refit featured in ST:TMP, and since this was the first time we saw 23rd century Earth (aside from Mojave in The Cage - which was taken from Pike's memories and therefore may not fully correspond with the "real" Mojave) and its on-orbit infrastructure you don't have any grounds upon which to claim that they were drastically redesigned for the film. Indeed, the fact that we glimpse a painting of the original Enterprise in the rec-room alcove along with Franz Joseph's Constitution Class General Plans being displayed on Spock's science console during the plasma-probe sequence sufficiently demonstrates - at least to me - that TMP was intended by Gene Roddenberry to take place in exactly the same universe as TOS.

One captain.

Two.

And, despite that major refit somewhere between Pike's and Kirk's captaincy which changed the Enterprise in a way that she now had an additional 200 crew on board she looked remarkably similar... well... I guess the design aesthetics didn't evolve as much between the 2250s and the 2260s as they did between the 2260s and the 2270s...

Obviously not. But seriously, not every starship refit needs to be as drastic as the one in TMP. As for the crew complement of Pike's ship, who is to say that he was even engaged in a 5YM at the time? There are a multitude of reasons why the Enterprise may have been temporarily carrying far fewer people than the typical 430.

TGT

 

[ST-One]

It evolved so completely that throughout the Federation nothing resembling anything from TOS was ever seen again (no Starships, no shuttles, (surface-based) starbased, space stations).
Yeah, very plausible.

There were no starbases or starships aside from the NCC-1701 Refit featured in ST:TMP, and since this was the first time we saw 23rd century Earth (aside from Mojave in The Cage - which was taken from Pike's memories and therefore may not fully correspond with the "real" Mojave) and its on-orbit infrastructure you don't have any grounds upon which to claim that they were drastically redesigned for the film. Indeed, the fact that we glimpse a painting of the original Enterprise in the rec-room alcove along with Franz Joseph's Constitution Class General Plans being displayed on Spock's science console during the plasma-probe sequence sufficiently demonstrates - at least to me - that TMP was intended by Gene Roddenberry to take place in exactly the same universe as TOS.

Of course it's the same universe, they just changed the look (hence the 'visual reboot').
Once TMP changed the whole aesthetic of Trek, TOS was (design-wise) tossed out of the window.

One captain.

Two.

And, despite that major refit somewhere between Pike's and Kirk's captaincy which changed the Enterprise in a way that she now had an additional 200 crew on board she looked remarkably similar... well... I guess the design aesthetics didn't evolve as much between the 2250s and the 2260s as they did between the 2260s and the 2270s...

Obviously not. But seriously, not every starship refit needs to be as drastic as the one in TMP. As for the crew complement of Pike's ship, who is to say that he was even engaged in a 5YM at the time? There are a multitude of reasons why the Enterprise may have been temporarily carrying far fewer people than the typical 430.

TGT

Conjecture. Nothing more. We Trek-fans excel in it.

The simple fact of the matter is that the TOS design was deemed unsufficient for the big screen and the changed design expectations of the late 70s audiences.
The same is true for Star Trek (even though the creative team seem to provide an [IMO unnecessary] eplanation for the changed look).

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Yes, there is. Epsilon IX for example, whenever it was built, it doesn't have any design element from TOS. Neither do the bits and pieces we see of San Francisco.

Nonsense. There is nothing in Epsilon IX which is CONTRADICTORY to TOS. All we see is the exterior (which I can very easily imagine a TOS-era ship parked next to without any cognitive dissonance whatsoever!), a space-suited figure (which is perfectly fine... you'd expect equipment upgrades to be fairly frequent once "replication" technology exists, wouldn't you?) and a command center with upgraded consoles (which don't really look like the TOS or TMP enterprise, do they?)

"Different" doesn't mean "contradictory."

The Orbital Office, while new, doesn't reflect anything from TOS.

But there's nothing there to infer or imply that it didn't exist during TOS. At most, they may have changed the "internal decorating" a bit.

The Workbee, Airtram, Shuttlepod, Warp-Sled-Shuttle... well they must all have been developed in those seven years unseen (and still no resemblence to anything seen in TOS).

And they also have almost nothing in common with the design of the TMP Enterprise, when viewed in a stand-alone fashion.

I have no problem whatsoever acceptiong the Workbee as having been around during TOS, or even having had the 1701 carry a few of those (I think it was Petri Blomquiest (sp?) who suggested that the rectangle under the hangar was actually a hatch for Enterprise's four workbees?)

The "airtram" is entirely consistent with the TOS "starbase-side" feel, as far as I'm concerned.

The "Starfleet Courier" shuttle (with warpsled) doesn't contradict TOS any more, or less, than it does the TMP Enterprise design. It's covered with exposed details, has a "heat shield," etc, etc. I love it, but it's a unique design.

As for the TRAVEL POD (not "shuttlepod")... it works just fine. The only think missing is the placement of some "standard docking port" on the TOS Enterprise... but that can be fixed by either assuming (1) that the TOS Enterprise had such ports but we couldn't see them (hidden behind panels, or just omitted?) during the series, or (2) that this docking port became standard post-TOS, and was retrofit onto all starfleet ships between the end of TOS and the beginning of TMP (which is perfectly reasonable).

There's no "conflict" there.

TMP was a visual reboot.

That term is nonsensical. It would only be a "visual reboot" if the ship we saw in TMP was supposed to be "the same as we'd seen before," and if the uniforms we saw in TMP were supposed to be "the same as we'd seen before." But they weren't, were they?

It's not a "reboot" to use period costuming in a show set in the 1940s, then to use other period costuming if the same show moves forward to the 1970s, is it? "Change" is not the same as "re-writing."

Star Trek is also just another visual (and perhaps even continuity) reboot. That the writers use that 'alternate timeline felgercarb' to pander to the fanbois like you, should make you feel... important? pandered to?

"Fanbois?" Is it really always important to insult the folks you disagree with?

Ultimately, it is just storytelling... so from that standpoint, you're right. But it's storytelling that a significant portion of the potential audience are PERSONALLY INVESTED IN, to one extent or another... and so, from that standpoint, it's not nearly so simple as you want to make out.

There is no such thing as a "visual reboot." It's a reboot, or it's not... visual is just one aspect of that, no more or less important than anything else (characterization, in-universe history, etc).

If it's a "reboot," on any level, this is telling the audience "forget what you already know."

TMP DID NOT DO THAT.

AT ALL.

TNG-era stuff did, on occasion... and that brought about the first real schisms in fandom (which hang on to this day).

This movie will simply take those fractures and schisms and break them wide open. You, and others, will love it... but as much because it makes folks like CRA uncomfortable as for any other reason, it seems.

People like him will, JUSTIFIABLY, feel as though something they've invested in has been "raped."

And how, exactly, will this internal conflict among the few people who will even remember this freakin' movie a half-hour after walking out "revitalize" the franchise?

 

[ST-One]

TMP was a visual reboot.

That term is nonsensical. It would only be a "visual reboot" if the ship we saw in TMP was supposed to be "the same as we'd seen before," and if the uniforms we saw in TMP were supposed to be "the same as we'd seen before." But they weren't, were they?

The ship is supposed to be the same - only upgraded.
Of course this is nonsense. The shape, the size, the internal layout - all different.
It would have been far more plausible to say that the TMP-Enterprise was indeed an all new ship.

 

[Captain X]

And the JJ-prise is supposed to be the same ship, period. Nothing at all about any upgrades, rather we are supposed to accept it in place of the original design. Why are you and the other proponents ignoring that?

 

[ST-One]

And the JJ-prise is supposed to be the same ship, period. Nothing at all about any upgrades, rather we are supposed to accept it in place of the original design. Why are you and the other proponents ignoring that?

Are you missing the 'alternate timeline' bit?

And, even if that weren't there I would ignoring it because it doesn't cause any offence to me. I can enjoy two (or even more) versions of the same thing.

Why can't you?

 

[Captain Robert April]

It would have been far more plausible to say that the TMP-Enterprise was indeed an all new ship.

But they did.

Will Decker:
Admiral, this is an almost entirely new Enterprise, you don't know her a tenth as well as I do!

 

[ST-One]

It would have been far more plausible to say that the TMP-Enterprise was indeed an all new ship.

But they did.

Will Decker:
Admiral, this is an almost entirely new Enterprise, you don't know her a tenth as well as I do!

Hence my 'all new'.
That line/and the whole 'refit' is a sort of retcon to present the new, far more superior looking miniature as still (basically) the same Enterprise.

 

[trevanian]

]"Fanbois?" Is it really always important to insult the folks you disagree with?

I think maybe folks have settled on that pseudoword as being nasty but unwarnable.

Perhaps whenever we see 'fanbois" in a post, we (meaning everybody on this board) should reply, "we don't speak french," until the irksome phrase and its creative spelling goes away.

Either that or we can reply by name-calling back, perhaps with words like, "you darkies." That would certainly be equally enlightened, and fit with the movie's time travel aspect, since we'd be going backwards.

 

[Captain Robert April]

It would have been far more plausible to say that the TMP-Enterprise was indeed an all new ship.

But they did.

Will Decker:
Admiral, this is an almost entirely new Enterprise, you don't know her a tenth as well as I do!

Hence my 'all new'.
That line/and the whole 'refit' is a sort of retcon to present the new, far more superior looking miniature as still (basically) the same Enterprise.

You don't have a clue what a "retcon" is, do you?

 

[Cary L. Brown]

TMP was a visual reboot.

That term is nonsensical. It would only be a "visual reboot" if the ship we saw in TMP was supposed to be "the same as we'd seen before," and if the uniforms we saw in TMP were supposed to be "the same as we'd seen before." But they weren't, were they?

The ship is supposed to be the same - only upgraded.
Of course this is nonsense. The shape, the size, the internal layout - all different.
It would have been far more plausible to say that the TMP-Enterprise was indeed an all new ship.

Agreed... which is why I've always latched, so hard, onto the "Admiral, this is an almost totally new Enterprise" line, and hold that the "refit" ship is really an all-new ship that (for compliance with some bureaucratic or diplomatic restriction) is "technically" the same ship for bookkeeping purposes.

Maybe they kept a panel or two, someplace in the ship... but it's hard to imagine it.

For me, consistency is a requirement for me to be able to immerse myself in entertainment. The only way that TMP's ship works is if Decker's line is accurate. Which, of course, is probably why the line was added in the first place - to placate folks like me who can't "deal" with that sort of cognitive dissonance.

It's going to be interesting to see if the makers of THIS film have an equally "acceptable" justification. I'm dubious of it, but I'm TRYING to keep an open mind. My opinion isn't being helped by certain things I've seen so far (for instance, "the Revlon Bridge")

 

[ST-One]

But they did.

Hence my 'all new'.
That line/and the whole 'refit' is a sort of retcon to present the new, far more superior looking miniature as still (basically) the same Enterprise.

You don't have a clue what a "retcon" is, do you?

Perhaps not.
But as what else should I view the 'refit'-explanation for a totally new miniature representing the same ship.

 

[Captain X]

Are you missing the 'alternate timeline' bit?

No, because I know it's just a line of 100% pure grade-A bullshit made because JJ is scared people won't go to see the movie if they think it's a reboot like nuBSG was.

And, even if that weren't there I would ignoring it because it doesn't cause any offence to me. I can enjoy two (or even more) versions of the same thing.

Hurray for you then.

Why can't you?

Because it's trite, contrived, weak, stupid, not to mention hypocritical of Abrams to lambaste the entire franchise because of TOS's corniness, only to keep most of it, not to mention the utter bullshit of claiming they went through all this effort to cobble the iMac bridge together by "justifying the existence of" every single button, only to have stupid shit like lights shining right at the eye level of the people sitting at the obnoxiously large consoles. And that really is just a small fraction of it, but since I tire quite quickly of explaining myself when I really don't have to, I'll just leave by saying it sucks and that Abrams should have left well enough alone.

 

[Tigger]

Frankly, TMP was the only part of the entire franchise that actually struck me as looking like the "future"... I buy it visually the most out of all of Trek.

And with TMP we were told by the "Powers That Be" that the Klingons always looked this way, even in TOS, but we just didn't use enough Windex on our television screens which is why they looked human.

Course, DS9 then had to go and blow that out of the water...

 

[Captain Robert April]

Hence my 'all new'.
That line/and the whole 'refit' is a sort of retcon to present the new, far more superior looking miniature as still (basically) the same Enterprise.

You don't have a clue what a "retcon" is, do you?

Perhaps not.
But as what else should I view the 'refit'-explanation for a totally new miniature representing the same ship.

Why am I not surprised that you'd be completely clueless.

"Retcon" is short for "retroactive continuity", i.e., Superman's earlier career as Superboy. Originally, Clark didn't put on the suit until he was an adult, then around the 1950's, we suddenly are told of all these adventures he had as Superboy. The history has been changed, and is thus, a retcon.

This is not to be confused with a reboot, the best example of which (sticking to Superman for the moment), is John Byrne's 1986's "Man of Steel" miniseries; the Superboy stories are out, the Kents are still alive, and the previous continuity, rather than being changed, like the previous Superboy stories did, was completely out and restarted.

TMP is neither. The history is not started over from scratch, nor has it been altered. It's a sequel that takes place several years later, which is why it looks different. The why's are completely irrelevant, the established history is still in place and unaltered, thus no reboot, no retcon.

DO YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND OR DO I NEED TO USE SMALLER WORDS!?!

 

[SonicRanger]

...TMP is neither. The history is not started over from scratch, nor has it been altered. It's a sequel that takes place several years later, which is why it looks different. The why's are completely irrelevant, the established history is still in place and unaltered, thus no reboot, no retcon.

Except that Andorians and Klingons suddenly have forehead ridges when they didn't before, and the given explanation involved hand-waving and saying "Oh, that's the way they've always looked."

 

[Unicron]

Gotta love it when a straw man argument can't even maintain a humanoid shape long enough to withstand the first swipe.

DO YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND OR DO I NEED TO USE SMALLER WORDS!?!

Didn't I already ask for the personal crap to be dropped? CRA, you now have an infraction for flaming.

Except that Andorians and Klingons suddenly have forehead ridges when they didn't before, and the given explanation involved hand-waving and saying "Oh, that's the way they've always looked."

Andorians have ridges? Perhaps you mean Romulans. Yeah, it was hand-waving, but it made some degree of sense in light of the limited TOS budget.

 

[trevanian]

Gotta love it when a straw man argument can't even maintain a humanoid shape long enough to withstand the first swipe.

DO YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND OR DO I NEED TO USE SMALLER WORDS!?!

Didn't I already ask for the personal crap to be dropped? CRA, you now have an infraction for flaming.

Except that Andorians and Klingons suddenly have forehead ridges when they didn't before, and the given explanation involved hand-waving and saying "Oh, that's the way they've always looked."

Andorians have ridges? Perhaps you mean Romulans. Yeah, it was hand-waving, but it made some degree of sense in light of the limited TOS budget.

GEEZUS CHRIST! This ST-ONE case has been breaking balls the whole damn time, and you warn April? Maybe you should cite better examples, cuz that first one (which is about TGT dismantling StOne's argument) sure doesn't constitute a flame.

Can we set up a system where you have to pass a basic intelligence test to get into certain forums here? Or maybe even to moderate them?