The TMP warp jump gave the impression that warp drive was immensely powerful. The TNG+ jumps were just flashes in pans, literally.
The Pacing of Space Battles: Old vs. New
- Thread starter Stadi
- Start date
I like both styles of combat, but, I believe that such styles should be commensurate to ship's size, mass, etc.
In other words: When dealing with the large, lumbering capital ships, I expect to see the ships moving slowly, deliberately, with weapons fire being traded off like broadsides in a naval battle. Contrast this with, oh, say, runabouts or Peregrine class courier ships converted into semi-starfighters. I think they should be the ones darting about, almost dogfighting each other, and making strafing runs on the larger ships.
One of the things that turned me off about the ships in The Next Generation through Voyager, and Enterprise was that the large capital ships seemed to maneuver almost like starfighters. It was as if they completely lost their menacing gait. To me, the Enterprise vs Reliant battle, and the Enterprise vs Romulan Bird of Prey are still the quintessential Star Trek space battles.
One of the things I loved about Return of the Jedi and Revenge of the Sith was that they really contrasted the multifaceted nature of their epic space battles. The capital ships squared off against each other, trading barrages and broadsides while the starfighters dogfought and darted and zipped about, taking advantage of the weak spots of capships whenever they could.
DS9 tried to emulate this somewhat with their large fleet battles...and I think they were better than the zippy space battles I'd seen before even on "Emissary" with the Wolf 359 battle. Even the battle in First Contact just seemed wrong to me. Yes, those capital ships look like fighters when compared to the massive Borg cube, but still, I don't think they should've been that spry.
(Personal opinion only.)
I always remember something Geordi said to Scotty in "Relics". Something to the effect of "I bet an old ship like the Jenolen could run circles around the Enterprise at impulse speeds." And that's what seems to support my notion that the DS9 fleet battles were fairly well carried out in terms of visuals.
I thought that the Abrams movies did a pretty nice job of the large, lumbering starship effect in their space battles/chases....especially the Kelvin vs. Narada. In Into Darkness, I darn near shat myself when the Vengeance came zooming up on the Enterprise, and then started to unload on her. That was almost frightening in its scope.
The preceding were merely my personal opinions. I like this discussion.
In other words: When dealing with the large, lumbering capital ships, I expect to see the ships moving slowly, deliberately, with weapons fire being traded off like broadsides in a naval battle. Contrast this with, oh, say, runabouts or Peregrine class courier ships converted into semi-starfighters. I think they should be the ones darting about, almost dogfighting each other, and making strafing runs on the larger ships.
One of the things that turned me off about the ships in The Next Generation through Voyager, and Enterprise was that the large capital ships seemed to maneuver almost like starfighters. It was as if they completely lost their menacing gait. To me, the Enterprise vs Reliant battle, and the Enterprise vs Romulan Bird of Prey are still the quintessential Star Trek space battles.
One of the things I loved about Return of the Jedi and Revenge of the Sith was that they really contrasted the multifaceted nature of their epic space battles. The capital ships squared off against each other, trading barrages and broadsides while the starfighters dogfought and darted and zipped about, taking advantage of the weak spots of capships whenever they could.
DS9 tried to emulate this somewhat with their large fleet battles...and I think they were better than the zippy space battles I'd seen before even on "Emissary" with the Wolf 359 battle. Even the battle in First Contact just seemed wrong to me. Yes, those capital ships look like fighters when compared to the massive Borg cube, but still, I don't think they should've been that spry.
(Personal opinion only.)I always remember something Geordi said to Scotty in "Relics". Something to the effect of "I bet an old ship like the Jenolen could run circles around the Enterprise at impulse speeds." And that's what seems to support my notion that the DS9 fleet battles were fairly well carried out in terms of visuals.
I thought that the Abrams movies did a pretty nice job of the large, lumbering starship effect in their space battles/chases....especially the Kelvin vs. Narada. In Into Darkness, I darn near shat myself when the Vengeance came zooming up on the Enterprise, and then started to unload on her. That was almost frightening in its scope.
The preceding were merely my personal opinions. I like this discussion.
Space battles just don't seem to be high on anyone's priority list with these new movies. Kind of feels like if the action doesn't directly involve the characters in the most direct kind of way, it's not worth doing. There will probably never be a space battle in this new take that are played out as fully fledged sequences that really involve the characters as well as the audience. Every time there is a potential space battle situation with the big bad enemy ship, the Enterprise's is crippled with only a few hits and before she can even fire a shot to defend herself. For the flagship of the Federation, she's got one heck of a glass jaw. It's even more sad when you consider that the only time she ever attacked an enemy vessel was when said vessel was already being destroyed by a black hole and couldn't even fight back.
Is there actually a reason for the ships to lumber around? They have very powerful engines and reaction thrusters everywhere. With the amount of thrust they can put out there really is nothing that should stop a starship from doing tight turns and jukes. It is not like they are in an atmosphere, nor does it seem like the dampeners would have issues with impulse turns if they can turn at warp speed.
In honesty, I personally am not qualified to make a scientific say on exactly how a large ship would traverse and maneuver space, but, for the reasons of simple visual storytelling, the larger the ship, the more appealing it is to have it lumber menacingly.
I know that in Star Wars I would not want to see an Imperial Star Destroyer make high speed banks and turns the way the capital ships did in The Next Generation and early Deep Space Nine. I could be scientifically wrong in my thinking, but the space fantasy nut in me says that it would just look wrong to see a capital ship maneuver with such agility.
It wouldn't resonate with me. (Again, personal opinion only)In other words: these films have character-driven action scenes and not mindless CG-'splosion-fests.
But, I'm sure that, if there had been more prolonged space-battle scenes in these two films, yours would would be one of the loudest voices crying "This is Star Trek and not Star Wars! Trek isn't supposed to be about space-battles!"
In honesty, I personally am not qualified to make a scientific say on exactly how a large ship would traverse and maneuver space, but, for the reasons of simple visual storytelling, the larger the ship, the more appealing it is to have it lumber menacingly.
I know that in Star Wars I would not want to see an Imperial Star Destroyer make high speed banks and turns the way the capital ships did in The Next Generation and early Deep Space Nine. I could be scientifically wrong in my thinking, but the space fantasy nut in me says that it would just look wrong to see a capital ship maneuver with such agility.
Very well put, it's the same reasoning we can hear stuff in space despite it being scientifically inaccurate, it's entertainment.
Both styles of battle have their place, but as others have said ST was damned if they do and damned if they didn't. ST had to adapt to what modern audiances wanted from a film and the box office return would seem to indicate they gave the audiance want they wanted.
If we look back to the last TNG film, NEM it was a failure, and what about TV Trek it was sheding viewersw sure some of that might be down to increasing competition but at the end of the day it was simply re-telling the same old stories in more or less the same old ways. Viewers want something different, remember VOY was sometimes referred to as TNG-lite, sure DSN also shed viewers and ENT hemorrhaged viewers.
Simply put ST had to adapt or die.
If we look back to the last TNG film, NEM it was a failure, and what about TV Trek it was sheding viewersw sure some of that might be down to increasing competition but at the end of the day it was simply re-telling the same old stories in more or less the same old ways. Viewers want something different, remember VOY was sometimes referred to as TNG-lite, sure DSN also shed viewers and ENT hemorrhaged viewers.
Simply put ST had to adapt or die.
...whatever. I'm just saying that it's totally possible to have a dedicated action sequence devoted to a space battle that is character driven, and that's something we have yet to see done in these new movies. A true ship vs. ship action scene where our heroes have to rely on the Enterprise's capabilities instead of resorting to some technobabble method or hope that the enemy is so stupid that they'll happily welcome explosive torpedoes inside their own ship.
I couldn't agree more I think it's an excellent scene, that noise in the cinema was absolutely amazing, I just wish it went on for longer...
This.I fail to see a difference.
First of all, I think the "submarine" analogy is often over-stated. There are only a few examples of this throughout all of Trek, and the sub-maritime aspects only relate to the atmosphere. And in all these cases, some plot device needed in order to create said atmosphere, Mutara, being the most obvious example.
I've always seen Star Trek battles to be more like 18th century maritime battles: two pirate captains exchanging blows with cannon vollies as they pass each other in the night. Even in the submarine bits, this is inevitably the case. As in the aforementioned Mutara battle, while the first part is strait out of Run Silent, Run Deep, the weapon exchange is nothing submarine-like. Once Chekov starts playing with his joystick, it's all "Zee veapons be ready, Capteen."
This style holds true for all phases of Trek. While it wasn't necessarily true for TOS, the stories didn't often call for space battles. The ones that did were limited by the technology, but it was definitely implied.
However, this "cannons at the ready" style started with TWOK as noted above and continued through the films and subsequent series, evolving with the technology. TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT each advancing the style. nuTrek is nothing but the next step in this evolution.
And when the Enterprise/Vengeance battle is reduced to its most basic element, it's just Spock and Khan loading his cannons to fire at the other guy next time he comes round.
There's really nothing "Star Wars" about it at all.
That is one of the worst examples of space battle ever. The CGI is really good, but by CGI I mean strictly the textures and the modeling and the lighting and such. (minus the fucking virtual lens flares and lens smudges/dirt. It really grates that they did on purpose things photographers tried to avoid for all the history).
Now the choreography is a putz. In the very first shot (of the Kelvin) you can't tell which way the ship is moving, nor which side is up even.
The battle itself is summed by "face one another and shoot". Of course audiences (and moviemakers, it seems they are people too), been for more than one generation so educated by videogames, have imprinted by now that a battle is: pew pew pew then boom when damage is 100%.
The design of the Narada is awful. If I had to describe it, I think I would say it looks like a sea porcupine that was cut in pieces and restitched out of order. Doesnt look like a spaceship at all, even considering it's alien. Looks like the designer didnt think any more besides "pointy and dark things = scary"
When Reliant shot the Enterprise you could tell exactly what was going and on and where, and what that meant (with a little help in the form of a scene of Kirk and Spock consulting a computer graphic and discussing the consequences).
In the seminal Star Wars they even had a briefing on the tactics on the attack on the Death Star (ROTJ had one too).
pew pew, repeat until boom is boring. (and making a Kamikaze isnt too bright either, Captains Picard and Kirk's dad.)
Last edited:
This is exactly what I'm looking for in ST3. A tear-up with a D7. Pretty please.
At least it was a battle. I don't count the one in STID as a battle, surely a 'battle' is two side fighting. There was only one side doing any fighting in that scene. Maybe 'assault' is the correct term.
Me too!
Although I would like to see the next movie be more about exploration and such, a knock down, drag out with a D-7/K't'inga would not be amiss.
Although The Undiscovered Country is my favorite of the Original Series era movies, I was very disappointed by the misleading movie poster, which showed the Enterprise being fired upon not only by a Bird of Prey, but a K't'inga! When Q'onoS wa' (Kronos One) came about and fired up her torpedo bay, I was screaming out (on the inside, of course) "Come on! Just one good shot!"
Even one of the trailers was misleading, suggesting there would've been a battle between the Enterprise and the K't'inga battlecruiser....this is why I really hate watching trailers anymore. So misleading.
So yes, please, next movie.....slugfest between the Big E and a Klingon battlecruiser!
I remember reading Roger Ebert's review of Star Trek Nemesis (which is my favorite of the TNG movies). He said something to the effect of "I don't think I can stand to hear 'shields down to 60 percent' one more time!"
I rather liked how they introduced the Kelvin in Star Trek, with the upside down flyby resolving itself into a right side up aspect. I thought it was a nice way to represent the three dimensional nature of spaceflight. In space, no one can say which way is up, except within the confines of their own starship.
A lot of what is done in space battles is for the visual impact. Yes, it might seem stupid that consoles suddenly burst into a shower of sparks after the ship takes a hit, but as I pointed out earlier, and Smellmet rightly pointed out the notion about sound in space....it's all for the excitement of the moment.
Yes, it might be scientifically accurate to have a beam weapon strike a ship's hull, and blast away part of the hull, with the brief flash of air escaping the targeted ship, with any fire being extinguished in the vacuum of space, and a couple of bodies flying out, with absolutely no sound whatsoever....and for some of us, that might even enhance the wow factor of the battle....but for the general viewer (even in the time of the original Star Trek), sound in space, and exploding consoles sells the battle because they want something a bit more gripping in their action beats.
No sound in space is great for non-action beats, where we see a ship simply traveling amidst the stars. It even seemed to work well in the movie Serenity (Firefly's jump to the big screen) (for those of us who could dig the "no sound in space" thingie) during the epic final battle/chase, until the ships hit atmo, and then sound was restored to the battle. Alas, clearly it did not sell the battle (or the movie) well enough. That was just one minor factor in a number of others why Serenity failed at the box office.
As a musician on Bourbon Street in New Orleans, sometimes we face the often thankless task of having to cater to the "lowest common denominator". (We have to play Sweet Home Alabama, Don't Stop Believin', Brown Eyed Girl, Summer of '69, etc.) It would seem that once someone steps into the French Quarter (specifically Bourbon Street) their musical I.Q. goes abysmal. When we're lucky, we get to play Pink Floyd, U2, and other stuff that is not heard often on Bourbon Street....but such luck is rare.
Same thing with movies, ultimately, to sell a battle, it has to work for the lowest common denominator...the folk who don't care that there's no sound in space, or that panels really shouldn't violently short out when struck by energy weapons fire, or that the crew get thrown one way when the camera tilts another way. In the end, it's all about making the battle exciting. It's the same reason that a car might blow up in a movie after it takes a 9mm hit to the gas tank....or worse, to the front grille.
It's not that folk aren't intelligent or are hopelessly ignorant. It's just that they want some bang for their buck.
As a kid, I knew there wasn't sound in space....but watching those TIE Fighters scream past the Millennium Falcon, or hearing the X and Y wings drone their way toward the Death Star back in '77 was just so visceral.
Last edited:
Okay, let's see:
The Motion Picture: no battle involving the Enterprise
The Wrath of Khan: the Enterprise is so heavily damaged after Khans first volley, that only trickery, lying, luck and lack of knowledge saves her; and the Reliant gets shot in the back - Khan at least faces Kirk head-on.
The Search for Spock: the Enterprise is still heavily damaged and undermanned; she can only fire one shot and is knocked out after one hit
The Voyage Home: no battle involving the Yorktown/the Enterprise
The Final Frontier: she dodges one torpedo, but otherwise there is no fighting involving the Enterprise
The Undiscovered Country: the Enterprise fires one shot and then destroys and incapacitated enemy-ship
Generations: the Enterprise fires, what?, one phaser-blast and one torpedo, and she burns and crashes
First Contact: thanks to Picard's link to the Borg, the Enterprise and the rest of the fleet can destroy the Cube, she manages to destroy the Borg escape-Sphere
Insurrection: the Enterprise is outmatched and has to light up the Briar Patch to win - also: "manual steering-column"
Nemesis: the Enterprise fights the kind of battle you want to see in this one
Star Trek: the Enterprise is outmatched, she only fires directly at the enemy after he's incapacitated
Into Darkness: the Enterprise is outmatched, she doesn't fire one shot
Out of twelve movies, only one delivers the kind of battle you describe above. Somehow many fans think that film stinks.
Take that any way you want.
^ I believe the battle in TWOK, it was much more detailed than that. In the first attack Reliant was waiting fdor the Enterprise very near Regula, we see the engine room hit, then we are infomed the main energizer was put offline, with consequencies that last throughout the movie. The counter attack puts Reliant's warpdrive out of comission too, so Khan goes hid behind the planetoid and all the fighting after that has to be sublight and confined to the Regula system. We learn trhu a cool tactical CGI where are the ships relative to the planetoid and each other, we get informet about why go inside the nebula.... it's a full-course strategic meal.
If look at the storyboards, the planetoid Regula is there providing reference in several views. I don't know why they choose not to put it in the space shots.
For example: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/bonus_twokhd/storyboards/storyboard062.jpg
Battles don't tend to be "full course strategic meals." It is not chess or the systematic unfolding of a step-by-step plan. Read about most battles (especially in the Civil War), and the plans go out the window not long after the first shot is fired. "The fog of war" is almost an axiom.
The battle between the Enterprise and Reliant in TWOK relied on Kirk's experience over Khan's as a tactical expert, but little could be planned or orchestrated. Luck was still very important.
The Kelvin v. Narada was chaotic and hard to follow on screen. To that end, for what it's representing, it was quite real. The opening scene of "Saving Private Ryan" is often called one of the most realistic battle scenes ever filmed. It's a disorganized and bloody struggle for survival.
The battle between the Enterprise and Reliant in TWOK relied on Kirk's experience over Khan's as a tactical expert, but little could be planned or orchestrated. Luck was still very important.
The Kelvin v. Narada was chaotic and hard to follow on screen. To that end, for what it's representing, it was quite real. The opening scene of "Saving Private Ryan" is often called one of the most realistic battle scenes ever filmed. It's a disorganized and bloody struggle for survival.
The point is: what decides the battle in The Wrath of Khan is, to make it short, Khan's stupidity - one of Jeyl's criteria of what doesn't make for a good battle-scene in Star Trek.
Similar threads
