If the movie is set before "The Cage", then shouldn't the ship look like that?
After Trek 11 replace TOS 1701 with prequel Enterprise
- Thread starter DumbDumb2007
- Start date
By that logic, the new Enterprise could look like the Battlestar Galactica, only to later be 'refitted' into the shape we know.
For the 'refit' argument of canon to work, it has to look like a logical part of the entire design lineage. Take a look at this post. Does it really look like the new ship comes before the one at the top (the classic design)? Or does it have more in common with the TMP design? Therefore, for those that want to consider the new movie as part of the current canon, the new Enterprise is likely intended to overwrite the TOS look, and is supposed to be what we 'really' saw during TOS. Which I don't buy. Hence, I'm still in the 'Its A Reboot' camp
I'm in the "I Don't Give A Fuck" camp, myself.
Nothing against you, mada101. It's just that I'm already dead tired of this argument and the movie is still a year away. Also, every reincarnation of Trek is a reboot to some extent. For all the lip service given to canon, it was broken by every version of Trek. Romulans get transformed into Klingons late in the script rewrites and suddenly we have them as a warrior race in ST2. Vulcans need to be adversaries for the plot to work and we get the mixed up Vulcans of ENT. The Borg become defeatable in 45 minutes in VOY. And as for ship consistencies? I don't care how hard to try to square the circle, the Refit was, as Capt. Decker points out, "a whole new Enterprise." Besides, as a fan of Star Trek, I'm immune to ship variations. It isn't unusual to see at least two different versions of the Enterprise on screen in a given Star Trek episode. Hell, the writers and producers for Star Trek couldn't even decide how fast the Enterprise could go.
Canon, shmanon. Just give me a good story and two hours of entertainment.
Nothing against you, mada101. It's just that I'm already dead tired of this argument and the movie is still a year away. Also, every reincarnation of Trek is a reboot to some extent. For all the lip service given to canon, it was broken by every version of Trek. Romulans get transformed into Klingons late in the script rewrites and suddenly we have them as a warrior race in ST2. Vulcans need to be adversaries for the plot to work and we get the mixed up Vulcans of ENT. The Borg become defeatable in 45 minutes in VOY. And as for ship consistencies? I don't care how hard to try to square the circle, the Refit was, as Capt. Decker points out, "a whole new Enterprise." Besides, as a fan of Star Trek, I'm immune to ship variations. It isn't unusual to see at least two different versions of the Enterprise on screen in a given Star Trek episode. Hell, the writers and producers for Star Trek couldn't even decide how fast the Enterprise could go.
Canon, shmanon. Just give me a good story and two hours of entertainment.
The nacelle caps/Bussard collector thingys aren't in place yet are they? The inner workings are exposed in this shot and haven't been capped in yet.
My comment was made before the image of the new teaser Enterprise was released. I actually love what I'm seeing.
It also appears that the "fin" ended up being the protrusion we saw on the original model.
Yes, but it's also fun.
No. I'm almost positive it takes place between The Cage and Where No Man Has Gone Before. And as cool as this ship is, it still doesn't really fit. I'm just glad that it's recognizable.
If that is indeed the rebooted E then it merely affirms that this movie has zero connection with TOS' continuity.
And, surprisingly (to some), I don't have a problem with that. It's more honest than futilely asserting that it's all the same continuity. This is an honest restart rather than sneaky retconning.
OTOH, it is about 99% certain that the scene depicted in the trailer takes place before "The Cage", as it almost certainly shows the ship under original construction.
So the remaining questions concern the canonical relevance of the trailer:
1) Did it really happen, because it won't actually be seen in the movie itself?
2) Is the movie itself going to feature the ship seen in the trailer, or possibly a succession of different designs for different timepoints?
The first is a matter of artistic interpretation, and won't be settled by the movie itself. The second... Well, I guess there is zero chance that this new design will not feature in the movie itself. But there is no telling what stretch of time in the ship's life this now revealed design is supposed to represent, not until the movie tells us this.
Looking forward to this movie more now than before the trailer...
But still mainly as an addition to the continuity, not as a reboot. Trek isn't worth much unless taken in the broader context; no single Trek movie should be made on the assumption that its own quality will carry it over, as no single Trek movie so far has succeeded in that.
Timo Saloniemi
Well, I've had my say on this question in the other forum, but to recap... If the TOS Enterprise can be refit into the one we saw in TMP, then this one can be refit into what we saw in TOS. The conceptual problems are nil. There could be a Four Years War and a multitude of missions and even commanders to leave that ship in shape that would necessitate a refit. Furthermore, TMoST says it is limited to an 18 year endurance. Given the Okuda dating, Kirk would get it after almost 20 years of service. 18 years plus a two year refit fit pretty well into their chronology, doesn't it?
Anyhow, the problems aren't likely conceptual, but artistic. I don't think we will see 1940s welders frying away at the hull, and I suspect the highly paid FX teams will come up with interesting scenarios for a ship to be built on the surface and its modular parts taken to orbit for assembly.
What is uncertain, and what matters, is whether any of that serves a worthwhile story, or one that slavishly regurgitates canon points and/or pursues a big audience with pointless layers of "styling". A worthwhile story won't regurgitate lots of canon points, but will go somewhere new. It will do it with style in service of that story and in service of the need to create a setting that really, truly suspends disbelief.
Anyhow, the problems aren't likely conceptual, but artistic. I don't think we will see 1940s welders frying away at the hull, and I suspect the highly paid FX teams will come up with interesting scenarios for a ship to be built on the surface and its modular parts taken to orbit for assembly.
What is uncertain, and what matters, is whether any of that serves a worthwhile story, or one that slavishly regurgitates canon points and/or pursues a big audience with pointless layers of "styling". A worthwhile story won't regurgitate lots of canon points, but will go somewhere new. It will do it with style in service of that story and in service of the need to create a setting that really, truly suspends disbelief.
Took the words right out of my mouth, man.
"If that is indeed the rebooted E then it merely affirms that this movie has zero connection with TOS' continuity.
And, surprisingly (to some), I don't have a problem with that. It's more honest than futilely asserting that it's all the same continuity. This is an honest restart rather than sneaky retconning."
So, is Spock going to be an emotional red skinned Martian?
What about James Kirk having an R. as his middle initial?
USEPA instead of Starfleet?
Biege and Brown instead of Yellow and Red?
Oh, wait...
Star Trek died 1979. Its still 1979. Never mind. :thumbsup:
And, surprisingly (to some), I don't have a problem with that. It's more honest than futilely asserting that it's all the same continuity. This is an honest restart rather than sneaky retconning."
So, is Spock going to be an emotional red skinned Martian?
What about James Kirk having an R. as his middle initial?
USEPA instead of Starfleet?
Biege and Brown instead of Yellow and Red?
Oh, wait...
Star Trek died 1979. Its still 1979. Never mind. :thumbsup:
Maybe we have to see more images before making a decision.
Many of us are hardcore continuity beings when it comes to the NCC-1701.
Many of us are hardcore continuity beings when it comes to the NCC-1701.
Look man... from any design standpoint it's clear that if one were to do Star Trek again, one MUST redesign it. It's a TV show, a film. A work of pop-art. It's not an engineering history. Sorry...
I know you tech guys would prefer a real technical evolution... but really we "art" types depend on your expert retconning of any incandescences... counting on you! 
Why? Because it's not a model being hung by string?
Okay, I realize that you passionately hate everything that is Trek past 1979 to an obsessive degree for some reason (and that is fine - if you don't like it, you don't like it), but I don't get your argument that the pic in the trailer "affirms" that the movie will have zero connection to TOS.
From the extreme close-up that we get, the ship looks pretty damn like the design from the original series. Okay, granted, we have more surface detail, but, honestly, that seems to be about it.
Your comment also makes me wonder why you love TMP so much, given that that movie was COMPLETELY different in visual style from TOS.
I wouldn't be caught dead defending this stuff, sight unseen, but I have to ask...
How do you know? I mean, there could be all the stuff we know from the original, plus a lot more.
Well, as I said, it is one thing if this is supposed to be the 5YM Enterprise. That would be something of a... slap in the face. I seriously doubt that. At least, if that's the case, the whole movie would have to be about why everything is different. Which, it might well end up being about.
But this ship could very well be meant to be the original, at launch. I don't know what it will look like, in toto. Right now, it looks like a cross between deco, TMP detailing and gothic, Gabe Koerner overwrought-ness. A weird mash up of the best and worst Trek designs I've seen. But hell, how can you tell anything from these out of context, distorted images?
And anyway, even if this is the "new" 5YM Enterprise, that means the "real" one is finally being given over to us to take care of and play with.
Get me Jesco von Puttkamer on the phone, pronto!
How do you know? I mean, there could be all the stuff we know from the original, plus a lot more.
Well, as I said, it is one thing if this is supposed to be the 5YM Enterprise. That would be something of a... slap in the face. I seriously doubt that. At least, if that's the case, the whole movie would have to be about why everything is different. Which, it might well end up being about.
But this ship could very well be meant to be the original, at launch. I don't know what it will look like, in toto. Right now, it looks like a cross between deco, TMP detailing and gothic, Gabe Koerner overwrought-ness. A weird mash up of the best and worst Trek designs I've seen. But hell, how can you tell anything from these out of context, distorted images?
And anyway, even if this is the "new" 5YM Enterprise, that means the "real" one is finally being given over to us to take care of and play with.
Get me Jesco von Puttkamer on the phone, pronto!
From what we're seeing (unless this teaser is meant as a red herring) they've taken elements of the TOS E (both the pilot and series versions) and also altered familiar contours of the design. THAT is more telling to me than just adding extra surface detail and "behind the bulkhead" details.
For me that nails it that this isn't the same ship from the same continuity. Throw that in with plot elements we've heard and it's cemented.
Yet as I said earlier I don't have a problem with this approach as long as they're honest about it. In this regard then one can judge the project on its own merits and apart from trying to force-fit it into TOS' continuity.
For me that nails it that this isn't the same ship from the same continuity. Throw that in with plot elements we've heard and it's cemented.
Yet as I said earlier I don't have a problem with this approach as long as they're honest about it. In this regard then one can judge the project on its own merits and apart from trying to force-fit it into TOS' continuity.
Similar threads
