ENTERPRISE design in the new film? (How many changes?)

[gastrof]

What changes could you accept in the design of the Enterprise before you feel they've gone too far and have "ruined everything"?

Personally, I'd really prefer them to change NOTHING, not inside, not out*. (Same goes for uniforms and equipment.) If they do change the ship, tho, I really can't accept anything beyond the type of thing they did for TMP. (Same general configuration we know with saucer above, engineering hull beneath and extending behind, connected to the saucer by a neck, and nacelles roughly at the level of the saucer, connected to the engineering section by struts.)

What do YOU think?


*(If they do change things, I'll have to view this as a parallel universe to the Trek we know, and thus a whole new continuity...I'll also be ticked.)

 

[PowderedToastMan]

to the "I really can't accept any change" crowd....my only suggestion is to bring a valium to the theater and relax

 

[ancient]

Obviously it'll be recognizable. I doubt it'll be changed too much aside from greater detail.

They might add a bright red flaming exhaust vent and smoke trail to make it more realistic.

 

[gastrof]

PowderedToastMan said:
to the "I really can't accept any change" crowd....my only suggestion is to bring a valium to the theater and relax

To the "no freedom of thought" crowd, I suggest returning to their 1984 universe and leaving the rest of us alone.

 

[gastrof]

ancient said:
Obviously it'll be recognizable. I doubt it'll be changed too much aside from greater detail.

They might add a bright red flaming exhaust vent and smoke trail to make it more realistic.

And lots of flashing lights on the hull. MUCH brigher than in TOS and much bigger!

 

[Akiraprise]

They can change it as much as they want. I don't care. I'll still go and see the movie.
In fact, they can use this one and I'd be very happy with it.

There won't be too many changes to the ship. Like others have said it'll probably be the same, just more detailed. I don't expect to see too many doodads added to the ship.

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

Whilst I would be disapointed if it wasn't pretty close to Matt Jeferies design, it wouldn't stop me seeing the film if they went with something else.

 

[Stardate]

IT has to be some homage to the Enterprise Refit,thou the long thin neck haved to be fixed. I am also open for something NEW but still recognizable as Star Trek. I favor sleek, compact sporty Enterprise.

 

[Susurrus]

NX-01 & NCC-1701 lovechild.

 

[Roger Wilco]

Exaggerated canon dogma could kill Star Trek for good. As far as I'm concerned the producers can and should change anything they feel they need to change to give Star Trek some mass appeal again.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

PowderedToastMan said:
to the "I really can't accept any change" crowd....my only suggestion is to bring a valium to the theater and relax

Hmm...for some reason I misread that as "bring vaseline to the theater and relax," which may be just as well.

Let them change whatever makes sense to them. You're going to get a certain number of disgruntled yahoos like the ones who complained about Ron Moore's improved version of the Battlestar Galactica, no matter what you do.

 

[starbuck]

Space Janitor said:
Exaggerated canon dogma could kill Star Trek for good. As far as I'm concerned the producers can and should change anything they feel they need to change to give Star Trek some mass appeal again.

Why does star trek have to have mass appeal again if thats the case why going back to the tos era,why not do a new feature on trek that way the have more freedom,they only want to appeal to the new kids on the block who dont know what trek is about its not all special effects and big space ship battles.If they think they need to bring trek into the 21st century why change what has been stnv does a kick ass job of keep to what trek is with new effects , why not use there ship or the one from ds9 , i expect it to be true to how TOS was

 

[Franklin]

Considering the "refit" of NCC-1701 in STMP was basically a rationalization of the production decision to change the ship to look better on the big screen, I wouldn't be surprised to see some differences this time.

Still, I can't imagine them messing around with the design too much. I will bet that quaint satellite dish on the front of the bottom hull will go. (Do you suppose it's for DirecTV or the Dish Network?)

As long as Enterprise doesn't turn out looking like the ship from "Pigs in Space", or anything like that, I'll be OK with it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Space Janitor said:
Why does star trek have to have mass appeal...

So that the studio will have some reason to produce it.

 

[ancient]

Franklin said:

Still, I can't imagine them messing around with the design too much. I will bet that quaint satellite dish on the front of the bottom hull will go. (Do you suppose it's for DirecTV or the Dish Network?)

I don't get what's quaint about a sensor dish. But I suppose they could replace it with a blue light-bulb. Now that's futuristic!

 

[Captaindemotion]

Something along the lines of the TMP Enterprise or the way it looked in DS9's Trials & Tribble-ations or the way that the Defiant was reworked in ENT's Through a Mirror Darkly.

I honestly think that the original design is classical, elegant and iconic. I don't think it requires anything beyond minor tweaking. Even the general public know what the USS Enterprise looks like and will expect this movie's version to look the same.

 

[RookieBatman]

I really fervently hope that the design is mostly unchanged, but it won't ruin my life if they do change it. I'm not gonna say "I won't accept any but minor changes," but I will say that the closer it is to the original, the more happy I'll be, and the greater likelihood that I'll return to the theater for multiple viewings purely for the starship porn.
I really hate the Gabriel Koernor version (no offense, Akiraprise), so if they did something like that, I would not be happy at all, but I wouldn't storm out of the theater, and by the end of the movie, I'm sure I'd be grudgingly used to it.
But then, I suppose it's kinda like Zorro's moustache. For those of you whose first exposure to that legendary heroic figure was Antonio Banderas in The Mask of Zorro, let me explain that Zorro has always had a moustache. I'm pretty sure there was never any description or physical depiction of him where he didn't have one. But then came along TMoZ, and Diego has a nice moustache, great; Alejandro has a thick moustache when he's playing proto-Zorro, but then shaves it off when he actually really becomes Zorro for serious, and puts on a fake one as Don Alejandro just specifically to annoy me personally. Now, we know from Spy Kids (and I'm sure there were others) that Antonio Banderas looks just fine in a moustache, and he wore one as Don Alejandro anyway, so it's not like it was vanity. Every time I watch that movie, I just shake my head and say, "Why?" or rather, "Why not?" What would have been the detriment of Zorro having a moustache, fulfilling that decades-old iconic image? It just seemed to me an utterly pointless aesthetic change.
But the fact is, I still watch and enjoy TMoZ and its sequel, even though everytime he breaks out the razor I get a little frustrated all over again. But it doesn't utterly spoil the movie for me, because it's just an aesthetic detail, and the characters, the acting and the writing are more important. So I think that's what Star Trek will be like; if they do change the ship, I won't let that ruin the movie for me, but every time I see it, I'll be thinking "Why? Why would you take away this opportunity for me to see the original Gray Lady in all her glory?" But I'll still watch the movie, and if it's good, I'll enjoy it.
But you know, and this might silly, but in all honesty, I'd pay real American dollars if some CGI wizard made me a version of TMoZ where Zorro had a moustache throughout the whole movie. No lie.

 

[Sharr Khan]

starbuck asked: Why does star trek have to have mass appeal

Ah... you're kidding right? Star Trek is first and foremost entertainment it thrives on "mass appeal", that was its reason for being the same as any tv show. "Star Trek" isn't a freaken cult meant for the elite few...

To respond to the "Why go back to this era" - Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the Enterprise are what the general public thinks of as Star Trek - I'm also reasonably sure Paramount has some numbers that tell them this.

Star Trek has become to cultish for its own good.

Sharr

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

I don't care if they make changes.

I just hope they don't spend 30 minutes on a plotline that involves Starfleet designers going back in time, creating the changes in pre-ENT-launch spacedock, and say it's an alternate reality just to explain why the Enterprise has changes. That would be incredibly lame, geeky, inaccessible, and most importantly stupid and VOY/ENT-ish.

 

[Knucles2]

Here's onechange that will set the traditionalists off...

POCKETS!!!