But the refit was called Constitution Class in STVI.
Enterprise Class or Constiution-refit?
- Thread starter asdf1
- Start date
But the refit was called Constitution Class in STVI.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
That is because on TUC Okuda was conforming to his own stuff from TNG, which ignores Probert and Enterprise-class.
I know this is TNG, but in "Relics," Captain Picard referred to the Enterprise as it was during Kirk's original 5-year mission as "Constitution class."
It doesn't matter the RL-reason "why" something happened. If you want an in universe answer to an in universe question you can't use "Okuda".
trevanian
Rear Admiral
The real reason is what matters, not some retcon postdated rethink.
I suppose you've got an in-universe explanation for Saavik's appearance changing between TWOK and SFS, too (and that's not even getting into the character alteration, which is really a huge dif ... you replace a soso actress working from good material with a good actress who has to labor under direction designed to make her seem feeble, while the very aspects of the character that were appealing in the previous film get thrown out the airlock.)
The in-universe question is significant when it is a major story point, like how Starfleet and the Federation changed from TMP to TWOK and especially TSFS ... but you have to go to reallife folks for the explanation there too (Sowards had postulated Starfleet abandoned 'boldly go' in favor of protecting its territories.)
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Same reason I don't want to see an interactive choose your own adventure version of MOBY DICK where Ahab gets a bionic leg and uses his old peg to poke Moby's eye out, because I want the creator's version of the story or some reasonable facsimile.
Likewise, I reject the new Bond because they've chosen to portray him as a jerk who has less maturity than Bond would have had as a teenager, and it invalidates not only what has gone before in the films, but it makes a lie of the whole 'going back to Fleming' aspect they've pushed so hard and managed to sell to most people.
But here you seem to be arguing that you shun the version where the middle name of Ahab is Ezekiel, whereas the never-mentioned middle name Melville intended was Geosaphat. That's at least a "reasonable facsimile", and probably even a superior product because Melville's intended but never-explicit name had a stupid spelling.
That is, if you are arguing the class name thing and not some more explicit aspect of ST6 for which you despise the work of Nick Meyer or Mike Okuda over the previous work of N.N in some other Trek film. Which is where it would indeed get to matters of taste.
Timo Saloniemi
That is, if you are arguing the class name thing and not some more explicit aspect of ST6 for which you despise the work of Nick Meyer or Mike Okuda over the previous work of N.N in some other Trek film. Which is where it would indeed get to matters of taste.
Timo Saloniemi
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Huh?
Similar threads
