Next Trek script likely done at end of March
- Thread starter Admiral Buzzkill
- Start date
Hope we get a short refit scene DB
I hope it's good!
Given the style of these films I doubt that even if the ship looks very different they'll take a scene to explain that - they'll simply roll with a revised ship. Crossing those "t"s and dotting those "i"s is very oldTrek.
Ah, McWeeny will review it next week.
Don't wish Farraci on us, please.
This what I predicted in the other thread. Good news.
Given the style of these films I doubt that even if the ship looks very different they'll take a scene to explain that - they'll simply roll with a revised ship. Crossing those "t"s and dotting those "i"s is very oldTrek.
All the same, I really hope that, at some point, Scotty turn to the camera and says "It's seven hundred meters long, lads. Deal with it." And then they put the ship next to a giant yardstick in space so we can watch Bernd's head explode.
^I shit you not, but the 7' tall bridge window and 40' long shuttles parked in the bay require the Enterprise to be an almighty 1,200 meters long
.
Then again, the TOS Enterprise needs to be about 50% bigger than it's supposed 289 meters in order to fit the actual sets from the TV show, and if the Excelsior was the size it's supposed to be, ceiling height would be six foot
It took me all of five minutes in Paint Shop Pro to realize just how nonsensical Trek ship scales are. The real size of any ship in Trek is "generic unspecified don't-look-too-closely huge"
.Then again, the TOS Enterprise needs to be about 50% bigger than it's supposed 289 meters in order to fit the actual sets from the TV show, and if the Excelsior was the size it's supposed to be, ceiling height would be six foot
It took me all of five minutes in Paint Shop Pro to realize just how nonsensical Trek ship scales are. The real size of any ship in Trek is "generic unspecified don't-look-too-closely huge"
Last edited:
When I was young enough to be wrapped up in trying to connect the dots where Trek is concerned - that is, when it was on NBC and supporting information about the interior logic of the series was very sparse - I was really troubled by the dissonance between ad copy descriptions of the Enterprise as "a city in space" and statements on the show that it had a crew of four-hundred something. I was obviously ill-equipped at the time to appreciate metaphorical hype.
It may have been in the second year of the series that Analog ran an article about Trek that included a reproduction of that three-view drawing of the Enterprise exterior. I treated that issue like a precious relic...it was about a year later, I think, that The Making Of Star Trek was published.
It may have been in the second year of the series that Analog ran an article about Trek that included a reproduction of that three-view drawing of the Enterprise exterior. I treated that issue like a precious relic...it was about a year later, I think, that The Making Of Star Trek was published.
^I shit you not, but the 7' tall bridge window and 40' long shuttles parked in the bay require the Enterprise to be an almighty 1,200 meters long
Then again, the TOS Enterprise needs to be about 50% bigger than it's supposed 289 meters in order to fit the actual sets from the TV show, and if the Excelsior was the size it's supposed to be, ceiling height would be six foot
It took me all of five minutes in Paint Shop Pro to realize just how nonsensical Trek ship scales are. The real size of any ship in Trek is "generic unspecified don't-look-too-closely huge"
so true, most who came out with these measurements had bad math scores in their highschool
It took me all of five minutes in Paint Shop Pro to realize just how nonsensical Trek ship scales are. The real size of any ship in Trek is "generic unspecified don't-look-too-closely huge"
Except you got all your measurements and details wrong, along with all your assumptions.
Similar threads
