Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoilers)

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Plum said:
^^^
What an empty come back. there was 'nothing' to begin with, that was his point.

Actual production staff (SOMETHING) who WORKED ON THE MOVIE (more SOMTHING) vs anonymous BBS poster with no known credentials to have inside information about Trek XI (NOTHING)...

Guess who I'm inclined to belive, unless SP wants to come up something with substance...

 

[Kegek]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:
I may have been here awhile, but I don't know all the "secret identities" of some of the posters...I knew that some of the "Enterprise" people posted here, and several authors post in Trek Lit and the Zone. I know Dennis Bailey, Rick Sternbach, and Mike Okuda have posted here too.

Starship Polaris is Dennis Bailey.

 

[Plum]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

^^^
Not an insider, just that he is a designer. And a pretty darn good one.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

darkwing_duck1 said:
ya got NOTHING...

Nor do you.

When we see the ship, either your narrowly literal reading of something you saw on the Internet will be correct or it will be wrong.

I have a formal interview by a named publication with a PRODUCTION INSIDER who gives information, not "something I saw on the Internet"...unless you are prepared to call Dawn Brown and SyFi Portal liars.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:I may have been here awhile, but I don't know all the "secret identities" of some of the posters...I knew that some of the "Enterprise" people posted here, and several authors post in Trek Lit and the Zone. I know Dennis Bailey, Rick Sternbach, and Mike Okuda have posted here too.

Are you claiming that SP is an "insider" on ST XI? Otherwise I don't see how his statement can even come CLOSE to trumping a statement from a certified and credentialed real insider on this matter.

"Starship Polaris" is Dennis Bailey... I don't think I'm letting any cats out of the bag there, am I? Dennis has done some work in the industry, and is a fine 3D modeler (I love his CGI 1701(r), for instance). So he is an authority at some level (talking about how to sell a script to a TV series, for example, is an area I think we'd all have to concede he knows quite a bit more about than most of us do).

But in this case, he's not involved in this film (are you, Dennis?) So he's no more, and no less, of a "voice of authority" than anyone else on this board. And less than a couple of people who are on here, who DO have connections to the film (and no, I won't name names! )

He's just posting his own opinion... exactly as you are. It's just that annoying tendency to speak from "authority" even when it's not there that he has which grates on many of us.

If it weren't for that, though... I find myself agreeing with many of his statements, even if I often dislike his TONE. Ya know?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:
I have a formal interview by a named publication with a PRODUCTION INSIDER who gives information, not "something I saw on the Internet"...unless you are prepared to call Dawn Brown and SyFi Portal liars.

I am prepared to see what is actually true. What will you do with the "formal interview" that you saw on the Internet if it turns out that you have taken it more literally than is reasonable or warranted?

We'll soon see if the new ship is "virtually identical" - your words - to the TOS ship. If it is not, you're wrong.

 

[number6]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

^Sounds simple enough.

You don't need to be an "insider" to have that kind of information.

 

[Plum]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

^^^
What are you talking about? This is all a matter of semantics over a few words. It's silly to the extreme.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

number6 said:
^Sounds simple enough.

You don't need to be an "insider" to have that kind of information.

Exactly so.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

darkwing_duck1 said:I have a formal interview by a named publication with a PRODUCTION INSIDER who gives information, not "something I saw on the Internet"...unless you are prepared to call Dawn Brown and SyFi Portal liars.

I am prepared to see what is actually true. What will you do with the "formal interview" that you saw on the Internet if it turns out that you have taken it more literally than is reasonable or warranted?

We'll soon see if the new ship is "virtually identical" - your words - to the TOS ship. If it is not, you're wrong.

Not so fast... we're talking semantics here.

Does "virtually identical" mean that the impulse engine housing must have fabric mesh glued on? Does it mean that the color must be the exact same shade of neutral grey used on the original miniature? Does it mean that the bussard collector effect must be accomplished using Christmas lights, broken mirror bits, and fan blades?

If so, he's going to inevitably be "wrong." But I think that a sound argument could be made that those things aren't what we're talking about.

GEOMETRY... that's what I'm concerned about. And I doubt that the GEOMETRY of the ship exterior will be significantly different.

If the geometry is the same but the "finish" is different... if there are visible weld lines and rivets (don't groan, please)... or additional fine detail along the edges... is that "virtually identical" or not?

I'm betting that NEITHER argument being made here is really 100% accurate. I think that the exterior of the ship will be VERY CLOSE to the original in terms of shapes, textures, detailing, etc... but that it will show us stuff that we won't notice at first... that won't distract us from the fact that we're seeing THE ENTERPRISE. And if we DO notice this stuff... we'll simply think to ourselves "well, that's what it always really looked like, I just never noticed that detail before."

Vektor's recent teaser poster was interesting in this regard... it was NOT "virtually identical" from some people's perspective, but it WAS from others.

I'd be thrilled if that was the ship we see as the Enterprise, personally. Wouldn't you all? Regardless of whether or not we think it's "virtually identical" or not?

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Kegek said:

darkwing_duck1 said:
I may have been here awhile, but I don't know all the "secret identities" of some of the posters...I knew that some of the "Enterprise" people posted here, and several authors post in Trek Lit and the Zone. I know Dennis Bailey, Rick Sternbach, and Mike Okuda have posted here too.

Starship Polaris is Dennis Bailey.

Ok, fair enough...I know Dennis, and I generally like him as a poster. I'd still like to know though what his SOURCE is for his statements...is he working on the film himself?

 

[number6]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Can you explain why a simple statement like "we'll soon see" would need some kind of credible source? This makes no sense at all.

The trailer comes out Friday and it is rumoured that we will see the ship in it.
Failing that the film comes out on 12/25. We will definitely see the design then. What is so hard to understand about that and why would someone need to be a "credible source" to make that kind of statement?

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Cary L. Brown said:
He's just posting his own opinion... exactly as you are. It's just that annoying tendency to speak from "authority" even when it's not there that he has which grates on many of us.

If it weren't for that, though... I find myself agreeing with many of his statements, even if I often dislike his TONE. Ya know?

It's NOT "my opinion" it's the QUOTED statement of an actual PRODUCTION TEAM MEMBER. That carries a lot more weight than the statement of someone who ISN'T (as far as we know) a member of the team, no matter his other credentials as a creative.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:
It's NOT "my opinion" it's the QUOTED statement of an actual PRODUCTION TEAM MEMBER. That carries a lot more weight than...

Nothing carries any "weight" in this regard except for the actual design. It trumps your literal reading of a statement on the Internet.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Starship Polaris said:

darkwing_duck1 said:
I have a formal interview by a named publication with a PRODUCTION INSIDER who gives information, not "something I saw on the Internet"...unless you are prepared to call Dawn Brown and SyFi Portal liars.

I am prepared to see what is actually true. What will you do with the "formal interview" that you saw on the Internet if it turns out that you have taken it more literally than is reasonable or warranted?

We'll soon see if the new ship is "virtually identical" - your words - to the TOS ship. If it is not, you're wrong.

If I'm wrong, I'll "man up" and admit it. Then I'll ask the obvious question: why did she make that statement if it in fact wasn't so?

 

[Kegek]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

Why did James Cawley make his statement about not liking the design, having purportedly seen it - and he, being a purist, is the kind of person who would only like a faithful recreation?

I'm still of the opinion when Brown says the exterior is the same, it means that it has not been drastically redesigned. It's the same, but not the exact same, and certainly far more familiar than the interiors are.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:

Cary L. Brown said:
He's just posting his own opinion... exactly as you are. It's just that annoying tendency to speak from "authority" even when it's not there that he has which grates on many of us.

If it weren't for that, though... I find myself agreeing with many of his statements, even if I often dislike his TONE. Ya know?

It's NOT "my opinion" it's the QUOTED statement of an actual PRODUCTION TEAM MEMBER. That carries a lot more weight than the statement of someone who ISN'T (as far as we know) a member of the team, no matter his other credentials as a creative.

Well, Dawn's comments aren't really based upon her knowing anything about the outside of the ship, though. I trust that what she's saying is accurate, as far as she knows... but as both Dennis and I pointed out earlier, SHE IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE OUTSIDE DESIGN OF THE SHIP... AT ALL. Hell, by her own words, she's not nearly as involved in the INSIDE of the ship as she believes she should be (see the "green screen" bit).

Personally, I LIKE the idea of some greenscreen for big interior sets. I'm imagining how the TMP "Rec Deck" might have turned out if it had been someone building the virtual set INSIDE THE PRIMARY HULL rather than someone who didn't care if the set didn't fit into the space alloted for it. With a big CGI hangar set, for example... we can have a seamless blend from a shuttle coming in for a landing, to the interior set (which actually FITS for once!), without a cut or perspective change.

But Dawn has her own concerns, and they're valid enough, I'm sure we'd all agree.

The point is that she's ONE PERSON working on a BIG FILM, and her knowledge of the exterior of the ship is probably based entirely upon "the memo" distributed to the staff describing the general intent.

There are only a handful of people I'd treat as "authorities" on the entire show. Abrams would be one of those. The FX coordinator would be another. The writers, the director staff (I'm talking about all the assistant directors, the cinematographers, etc). And most of THEM will have big gaps in their knowledge as well.

Dawn Brown may be an expert on some bits of the show, but trust me, she's not "the authority" on everything. She's just one cog in a big freakin' machine.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

darkwing_duck1 said:

Starship Polaris said:

darkwing_duck1 said:
I have a formal interview by a named publication with a PRODUCTION INSIDER who gives information, not "something I saw on the Internet"...unless you are prepared to call Dawn Brown and SyFi Portal liars.

I am prepared to see what is actually true. What will you do with the "formal interview" that you saw on the Internet if it turns out that you have taken it more literally than is reasonable or warranted?

We'll soon see if the new ship is "virtually identical" - your words - to the TOS ship. If it is not, you're wrong.

If I'm wrong, I'll "man up" and admit it. Then I'll ask the obvious question: why did she make that statement if it in fact wasn't so?

She didn't. She used the phrase "the same" and you've translated that to literally mean "virtually identical to the ship used in the original TV series."

It's not even clear from context or anything else we know that Brown would be thinking about the differences between the TOS ship, the TMP ship and the TNG ship. She is not one of the designers of the ship exterior. She worked on sets.

Based on what I have heard from several sources - and yep, what Cawley said is one of three and the only one on the Internet - I'll be quite surprised if the new Enterprise is "virtually identical on the outside" to the ship from the original TV series.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

number6 said:
Can you explain why a simple statement like "we'll soon see" would need some kind of credible source? This makes no sense at all.

The trailer comes out Friday and it is rumoured that we will see the ship in it.
Failing that the film comes out on 12/25. We will definitely see the design then. What is so hard to understand about that and why would someone need to be a "credible source" to make that kind of statement?

I'm not challenging "we'll soon see", I'm challenging Dennis' flat out denial of Dawn Brown's statement that the ship's EXTERIOR appearance WILL be "virtually unchanged" from the original at the order of the higher ups, but that the INTERIORS will NOT be.

 

[Plum]

Re: Anyone else GAGGING over the AICN-based article? (spoil

^^^
You're inferring from that statement though... that much is clear.