The Enterprise-E is so ugly
- Thread starter Beyerstein
- Start date
Yeah. It's about the saucer. Shot from the front and below at about three quarters (a typical beauty shot angle for many Enterprises), the ship reminds me of a hooded cobra about to strike. To me, it's a sense of restrained power. Compared to that, the E looks rather static.
But what about the U-shaped pylons? Straight pylons at a 45' angle like TOS or the refit are much more fetching, I think. (This is also part of the reason why the JJ-prise has issues, the bow-legged aspect of the curved pylons.)
Also, the shuttle-bay area on the D is weak, as is the way the hull just pinches into a narrow tail. A curved and segmented observatory-like gate that opens like TOS and the refit is much more dramatic and iconic than a simple up-down door. The E restored that, but then proceeded to emphasize the bays on the main hull (which really were unnecessary).
Also, the D's rounded-off-rectangle nacelles really have a mid-80s Braun shaver vibe to them. They're far more dated looking than the angular nacelles of the E. Trek ships tend to avoid straight parallel lines in favor of tapers and the D's nacelles are all parallel.
I wonder how much the love of the D here is not so much its look but the fact that it was "lived in" for years via TNG, whereas with the E the only screen-time it got was in the movies, which by their nature, are more action-oriented and the crew really didn't make it their "home" to the same extent. The D therefore carries the weight of the memory of all the episodes that took place there.
I didn't mind the Enterprise-E, but I felt it was unnecessary to destroy the Enterprise-D in Generations just to have a new ship in First Contact. The Enterprise-D could have been badly damaged in Generations, perhaps even losing an entire warp nacelle, and then brought back in the next movie as a new upgraded version with maybe sleeker nacelles & support pylons, and even another redesigned bridge.
Ding ding ding! Perfect description right here. Also, the lack of a neck really disturbs me for some reason. I understand the need to make it sleek and cinematic, but it just didn't gel together for me.
I've never ever seen the Intrepid/Voyager as a darker or war-based design. She looked like what she was meant to be: a speedy (possibly recon) vessel. Not a powerhouse like the Galaxy but comfortably at home at warp more than any other ship. Her small size and sleek but non-threatening designs, I felt, added charm to the show's central theme. But she's not padded with armor like the Defiant nor as angular and sharp as the Sovereign. Even her hull is a brighter tint.
Me, too. I've always thought it odd that the Sovereign was supposed to be a step up from the Galaxy, but we never saw anything truly visually innovative within her; even Generations had that mostly pointless but still neat looking scene in Stellar Cartography. They could've kept the Galaxy, maybe refit the Enterprise a bit more.
I think the E-E's bridge looks actually a bit too Cardassian for a Federation ship: brownish-gray colors akin to DS9, panels and black marks everywhere, a bridge with less ceiling space. The brightest spots were under the stairs with neon lighting, and that's very 90s.
-----
On a side note, with Eaves, fan artists, and the Star Trek Online designers, I have to ask: what's this obsession with the "turkey" design of ships? The E-E almost had it, where the nacelles would angle forward and connect near the front of the nacelles, creating the image of the ship looking like a turkey in a pan. But many Starfleet ships in STO have those reverse nacelles built into their default designs.
I thought the Enterprise-D was a ship that was better fit for television. I grew up with the Enterprise-D. It was the first Star Trek ship I had ever seen and even before what I knew what Trek was, I knew that ship and thought it was just really awesome. In 1996, when the Enterprise-E was first seen, I was very disappointed. I remember my eyes brightening up when the Enterprise-D was seen in the display case in Picard's ready room...granted it was a model he really messed up out of anger. But it was the Enterprise-D!
As the years went on, I got used to the Enterprise-E and began to really accept it. I don't know about you guys, but the Enterprise-E is ten times better than that mess of an Enterprise that is currently filling out theater screens. I honestly think the Abramsverse Enterprise is ugly...not the Enterprise-E.
The problem I had with the Enterprise-E was that there was no neck. I didn't like that, but now I think it's my favorite design in all of Trek behind the Constitution-class refit.
As the years went on, I got used to the Enterprise-E and began to really accept it. I don't know about you guys, but the Enterprise-E is ten times better than that mess of an Enterprise that is currently filling out theater screens. I honestly think the Abramsverse Enterprise is ugly...not the Enterprise-E.
The problem I had with the Enterprise-E was that there was no neck. I didn't like that, but now I think it's my favorite design in all of Trek behind the Constitution-class refit.
I'll take the Abramsverse version over the 'E', everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.
I have a pet grump with the E. The registry number.
Why would you paint a registry number in giant letters on your starship's hull (and shine a spotlight on it)? To be read from as far as possible, of course.
But in the E, it's arced in an absurd angle:
From there follows the ship was completely designed with no concern for rationality or believability. Matt Jefferies must have hated it.
Why would you paint a registry number in giant letters on your starship's hull (and shine a spotlight on it)? To be read from as far as possible, of course.
But in the E, it's arced in an absurd angle:
From there follows the ship was completely designed with no concern for rationality or believability. Matt Jefferies must have hated it.
^ The registry # has always followed the arc of the saucer.
Couldn't agree more. I've hated the JJprise since I first saw it, the Enteprise-E is a work of art in comparison. The Sovereign class is second only to the Constitution refit my favourite Enterprise design. It blew the socks off my 7 year old self on the big screen in First Contact.
Not when the saucer is pointy.
Compare USS Voyager, Dauntless, Prometheus, Equinox and Enterprise NX-01.
I also like the Abramsverse version of the Enterprise....
How else would you have preferred them to do it? I mean, I understand what you're saying. It does look squeezed and a bit messed up and all that, but at the same time what would you have done to fix it? I'm just curious. I love the design of the Enterprise-E and it wouldn't make sense to change the entire design just to accommodate the registry. I think it looks fine.
Add me to the list that likes/prefers the Abramsverse Enterprise over the D or E.
I like the E over the D however. The D was the fat chick. The E was the hot chick.
I guess you could say my preference is:
1. Refit NCC-1701 (Star Trek I-III)
2. NCC-1701A (Star Trek IV-VI)
3. NCC-1701 (ST09-STID)
4. NCC-1701 (TOS)
5. NCC-1701-E (FC-NEM)
6. NCC-1701-B (GEN)
7. NX-01 (ENT)
8. NCC-1701-C (TNG)
9. NCC-1701-D (TNG-GEN)
You can say that again!
The thing about the sharp color contrasts on the plating, too, coupled with its spindly design, is that it makes the ship look smaller than it allegedly is.
One strength of the D is how it has an immediate impression of having lots of interior volume, which as I recall was a big deal when it was introduced. "Eight times the volume of Kirk's ship", I believe was the claim...and it looked like it did...
I think the D's "small" nacelles help in this regard, too. Just like in photos of archaeologist's finds, you'll see a hammer, or some such familiar item, next to the object, to give it scale. So it was with the D: we were accustomed to the original Enterprise's nacelles, so the "smaller" ones (proportionally) lead us to seeing a bigger ship.
You just have it go straight across like on Voyager.
Well, (if they must have a saucer so elongated), straight would be ok (like Voyager.)
As it is, the "N" and the "E" are at an angle of almost 90-degree. Not good for visual ID, I think
Well, as long as the topic has established itself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItbjtWa_DNM
What, were they all stoned, or what? Weird times...
It's scary I'm (we're!) old enough to remember this.
Probably. Or, just that sort of Rat Pack-Anything Can Happen attitude.
Agreed with Bill and Joel. I certainly don't think the JJPrise is perfect by any means (I think the nacelles are about to fly off the pylons at any time; the pylons are too close together for my taste; I'd move the neck forward a bit; not a fan of the bussard collectors). As a whole, I think it's visually appealing, bright, hopeful. It doesn't take itself as seriously as the E -- it's not trying to show its teeth like the Sovereign, it's not quite a design that depends on steroids, and its whiteness makes it look like an extension of NASA technology, similar to "harder" sci-fi movies out there.
It's not my favorite design, but it didn't make my eyes squint at the big screen like the Sovereign.
I too would take the Abramsprise over both the D and the E.
The E (although an interesting design) is not my favourite in terms of ships named Enterprise.
The E (although an interesting design) is not my favourite in terms of ships named Enterprise.
Similar threads
