No matter what they design, some people will see what they want to see.
/Star Trek: The Sci-Fi Religion that doesn't take ALL your money.
ENTERPRISE design in the new film? (How many changes?)
- Thread starter gastrof
- Start date
No matter what they design, some people will see what they want to see.
/Star Trek: The Sci-Fi Religion that doesn't take ALL your money.
If they're respecting canon, then it should fit and tie into canon and not add complex detailing for it's own sake. Leave classic designs alone. It's not a '57 chevy. IMO transluceny is a must. But since Star Trek will exist as long as it makes money, for the rest of us it will be night of the living dead and Frankenstein's monster, I guess.
You're right about folks being tightly wound!
I agree with you, as Roberto Orci seemed to indicate this when he brought up both the Enterprise & the design of the movie - I said in the McCoy thread it gave me goosebumps - it will likely look more like the tv version then we've got before.
If it doesn't however I won't feel a need to commit ritual suicide over it or make a website decrying JJ Abrams and his team.
What I personally care about most is seeing new blood offer their own vision on Trek from story to design. In the end I might not like it, or I might love it. As of this moment things are looking good.
What I don't want is anything bland or timed.
Sharr
Well, it will be interesting to see how they overcome certain design deficiencies, and 60s effects deficiencies. For instance, where exactly are the phaser emmitters or photon tubes? Will the ship be self-illuminated at all, like TMP Enterprise? It will be fun to see how they "bring the ship to life".
There were scores of details--painted on, lightly pencilled on, sculpted on--on the original model which we never saw because of the limitations of photography at the time. If the new film were to move in that direction--filling in details which were there or very well could have been there--that would give us all the eye candy we need. That's what Cary was saying above. This analogy is not mine but it's a good one: a submarine or battleship hull looks almost perfectly smooth from a distance but, when you get right up on top of it, you can see the hull plates under the paint. This movie gives us a chance to get right up on top of the old gal and see stuff we've never seen before. I'd much rather have that than another derivative, overly busy iteration from the Trek ship factory.
As I alluded to above, TOS had an 11 foot model which was revamped extensively between pilots and before regular production yet was presented as one ship thanks to the magic of stock footage. In addition, a 3 foot model of different dimensions also played her, as did an AMT model kit. There are good reasons (no matter what the great and powerful Starship
decrees) why the "new" ship should fit somewhere in that family--albeit with more detail--rather than introduce a new design. We've had enough of them.
As I alluded to above, TOS had an 11 foot model which was revamped extensively between pilots and before regular production yet was presented as one ship thanks to the magic of stock footage. In addition, a 3 foot model of different dimensions also played her, as did an AMT model kit. There are good reasons (no matter what the great and powerful Starship
decrees) why the "new" ship should fit somewhere in that family--albeit with more detail--rather than introduce a new design. We've had enough of them.
Hi, I'm new. 
My opinion:
I think they should indeed be using the Bridge from "the cage".
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Image:Constitution_class_bridge_2250s.jpg
I think it looks awesome and I think it's way better than the more colorful bridge they use later on.
Sure they can overwork the consoles and uniforms, but the general style is something they sure could work with. TOS had touchscreen (or gesture controls) already (WNMHGB), so they could use that as well. The "lamps" would have to go of course...maybe replace it with Sulu's targeting monitor.
If they change essential things like the uniforms or the Ship, and create "anachronisms" and contradictions they will have lost most of the canon "Purists" anyway.
So in that case they could as well go for a more radical reboot like BSG. More "alien" Klingons, giant badass battlecruisers, a female Chekov, whatever. The "modernists" will gobble it up.
A little bit of canon is like no canon imo.
BTW Nimoy playing Spock in a movie that effectively decanonizes TOS would be kinda absurd.
I say they should try to keep it real and make this movie enjoyable for everyone. Splitting the fandom is totally unnecessary.
My opinion:
I think they should indeed be using the Bridge from "the cage".
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Image:Constitution_class_bridge_2250s.jpg
I think it looks awesome and I think it's way better than the more colorful bridge they use later on.
Sure they can overwork the consoles and uniforms, but the general style is something they sure could work with. TOS had touchscreen (or gesture controls) already (WNMHGB), so they could use that as well. The "lamps" would have to go of course...maybe replace it with Sulu's targeting monitor.
If they change essential things like the uniforms or the Ship, and create "anachronisms" and contradictions they will have lost most of the canon "Purists" anyway.
So in that case they could as well go for a more radical reboot like BSG. More "alien" Klingons, giant badass battlecruisers, a female Chekov, whatever. The "modernists" will gobble it up.
A little bit of canon is like no canon imo.
BTW Nimoy playing Spock in a movie that effectively decanonizes TOS would be kinda absurd.
I say they should try to keep it real and make this movie enjoyable for everyone. Splitting the fandom is totally unnecessary.
I'm still not convinced a bunch of battleship plates and doohickeys makes something look more convincing or futuristic. To me, the show got it right by producing something sleek and free of the busy-ness of so-called modern design. The movies took a step back by making the ships look more like Star Wars wannabes -- it worked in that movie mostly because of both ripping off 2001 and giving the audience the sense they more or less were watching a WWII movie with space Nazis and air battles in space.
Well, the original ship model did have pencil lines drawn on it to suggest spots where plates had been joined together. It also had a weird little dingus hanging from the planetary sensor dome on the bottom of the primary hull. Neither of these things were visible on tv. Stuff like that (well, maybe not the dingus) is what I'm talking about.
This is a good point, and a strong indication that it doesn't decanonize anything - I just can't imagine him giving such praise to a project that nullifies in the eyes of a vocal few all that he's worked on.
As I've also said before it doesn't make such sense that those working on this movie would add a hurtle when it would be far simpler to just start clean.
Sharr
My inside source says it wil look just like the Akira class ship only slightly changed a la the Enterprise NX-01. Be prepared for the Akiraprise threads to pop up ad naseum!
3D Master
Rear Admiral
The refit was a refit. It said that the show existed, and the ship looked exactly like it was shown in the show. This isn't a refit, this is retroactively saying: you know, that ship, bullshit, it never looked that way - also incidentally invalidating TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise all who have featured the original NCC-1701 exactly as shown in the show right along with it.
In short, it's crap.
from IESB.NET
Unfortunately it is to late for that 
because they have already cast curly Russian guy as Chekov
If this news is accurate, it would be best thing i have heard regarding Star Trek XI. Thank god, common sense prevails.
This is a great idea. We actually need more females roles in XI, so turning Chekov from Russian man into Russian women would resolve that. Also remember the first woman in space was also a Russian
Unfortunately it is to late for that because they have already cast curly Russian guy as Chekov
Even though Roddenberry wanted there to be an onscreen reason for why the Enterprise looked different, as far as I remember, the real reason it was redesigned was a production decision to make the ship look better on the big screen. That is, "fit" the big screen.
TOS Enterprise is a fine ship. On TV. But its looks won't hold on a large cinema screen. It'll need some details, and other things to take up screen space and look "right."
As beautiful as the design is, its smoothness and lack of details will actually make it look less real. The bigger something is to appear, the more detail it needs to show.
I'd be very surprised if the first shot of the Enterprise in XI doesn't get the same gasps and wows that I remember the refit getting in the theater in STMP.
3D Master
Rear Admiral
Again, that's not changing the Enterprise, that's enhancing it - adding layers. Changing the Enterprise is putting something along the lines of Gabe's reimagination posted above on the big screen as if that was what the Enterprise always looked like. The latter is a no-no, then I won't be watching. The earlier is the right way to go.
"Respecting canon" does not equate to "obsessively copying all the visual minutae of the television series." Fans who think that's what's being promised will indeed be shocked.
True, a '57 Chevy is a real automobile - if one substitutes a Thunderbird and then refers to it in dialogue as a "Chevy" one has made a factual error. The same is not true of the Enterprise; it never existed and one can no more make a factual error regarding it than one can by representing Santa Claus as having a full head of white hair and wearing a bright red suit when Thomas Nast drew him as balding and wearing a star-spangled jacket. Popular mythology and associated images change over time, and "Star Trek" is no different than any other example.
Stay away from my childhood. I warn you. Stay away from it.
Nice points, BTW. The Enterprise will look different. I'm looking forward to those differences.
It isn't like they will go back in and paste the new Enterprise over all of the ship shots in TOS. That version of the Enterprise will still exist.
Hmm, into which of the logical fallacy categories does this argument fall? Argumentum ad dennisum, perhaps?Plum said:
^^^
Well, I think I could make the argument. Your own modernized Enterprise design would be a fantastic design and feel for the new movie. A detailed and realistic "refurbishing" of the original, with minimal additions. Would work just fine for me.
At least not until "Star Trek Remastered: The Final Battle, Part IV."
