Dusty Ayres
Commodore
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Then it would look as stupid as the look of Battlestar Galactica.
Then it would look as stupid as the look of Battlestar Galactica.
First photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
- Thread starter Gepard
- Start date
- Status
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Sorry, but Moore's BSG has some of the most plausible sets and effects of any TV series since TOS. So they use telephones on the Command Deck; BFD. TOS used roll-over clocks.
That said, the designs on "Enterprise" were fine. Jules Verne and pulp stuff would have looked idiotic.
Sorry, but Moore's BSG has some of the most plausible sets and effects of any TV series since TOS. So they use telephones on the Command Deck; BFD. TOS used roll-over clocks.
That said, the designs on "Enterprise" were fine. Jules Verne and pulp stuff would have looked idiotic.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
As long as you can accept that they can fly through space, travel faster than the speed of light, but that most of their other tech is outdated by TODAY'S standard. I work with submarines, and most of that crap even looks shoddy compared to the 1980s tech I have to interface with. And the black handsets they use to communicate? Right off of a LA-Class sub. I'm holding one right now...
SOME of their tech looks realistic and plausible, some of it looks crappier and older than stuff being planned in the next version of the space shuttle. Or looks like they just bought shit at Staples...
Sorry, but Moore's BSG has some of the most plausible sets and effects of any TV series since TOS. So they use telephones on the Command Deck; BFD. TOS used roll-over clocks.
That said, the designs on "Enterprise" were fine. Jules Verne and pulp stuff would have looked idiotic.
As long as you can accept that they can fly through space, travel faster than the speed of light, but that most of their other tech is outdated by TODAY'S standard. I work with submarines, and most of that crap even looks shoddy compared to the 1980s tech I have to interface with. And the black handsets they use to communicate? Right off of a LA-Class sub. I'm holding one right now...
SOME of their tech looks realistic and plausible, some of it looks crappier and older than stuff being planned in the next version of the space shuttle. Or looks like they just bought shit at Staples...
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
It looks like a large operations center that a lot of people are actually working in. Unlike most of Star Trek, the equipment looks like stuff that people are actually using and have used for a while and the instruments look as if they're providing information to and accepting input from people.
Most sf on TV fails that basic test.
Do the details hold up under examination by people with expert experience? No, but that's not the point. Almost nothing on Star Trek passes that same test, after all. People are simply supposed to be wowed by its shiny unfamiliarity. Look, vacuum cleaners in the future light up blue! Cool!
If Enterprise had been designed differently at all it should have looked like BSG, not Jules Verne.
It looks like a large operations center that a lot of people are actually working in. Unlike most of Star Trek, the equipment looks like stuff that people are actually using and have used for a while and the instruments look as if they're providing information to and accepting input from people.
Most sf on TV fails that basic test.
Do the details hold up under examination by people with expert experience? No, but that's not the point. Almost nothing on Star Trek passes that same test, after all. People are simply supposed to be wowed by its shiny unfamiliarity. Look, vacuum cleaners in the future light up blue! Cool!
If Enterprise had been designed differently at all it should have looked like BSG, not Jules Verne.
Absolutely Right!
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
You're jumping overboard.
And there is. Because it's a science fiction show and that's what I want to see.
And thankfully am getting.
Now that would have been awesome.
You're jumping overboard.
And there is. Because it's a science fiction show and that's what I want to see.
And thankfully am getting.
Now that would have been awesome.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Damned right! I was disappointed that they used beam weapons in Enterprise. I was hoping for good old projectile weapons. Even the damned farmer shot a Klingon with an energy weapon "shotgun".
I loved the sets on Enterprise, though.
Damned right! I was disappointed that they used beam weapons in Enterprise. I was hoping for good old projectile weapons. Even the damned farmer shot a Klingon with an energy weapon "shotgun".
I loved the sets on Enterprise, though.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
The "nuBSG" approach was utterly unconvincing to me because it was just utterly obvious that they were cutting corners in terms of design time (prop, costume, and set) in order to be able to save a few bucks shopping at the local mall, WalMart, or surplus store. It wasn't JUST the phone handsets (which, for the record, have been used by almost EVERYONE with any military background, not just submarine guys) or the HMMWV ("Humvees" or "Hummers") or the contemporary firearms. It's sort of a COMPOSITE.
That's taking things TOO FAR in one direction.
On the other hand, it's correct to point out the "blue lights on vacuum cleaners make them futuristic" Trek conceit, and yes, they really fell into the same "trek trap" on ENT. The biggest complaint most folks had with ENT wasn't necessarily the writing or direction (both of which were... uneven... sometimes reasonably good, sometimes pretty bad) but rather the FEEL. It simply felt like more episodes of TNG, etc. Same set design, same graphical design, same music (except the title), same makeup... EVERYTHING.
Now, there IS a great example of how to take familiar concepts and put just enough of the unfamiliar into them to make it work with audiences without pulling them out of their "willful suspension of disbelief." I'm talking about Jim Cameron's "Aliens."
They had guns. But the guns they had, while believable, were not just off-the-shelf items. They wore clothing which felt real, but it wasn't ever bought "off the rack" at the local shopping center.
I'd love to have seen "ENT" be made with something more along those lines. I have no personal problem with having energy-based weapons rather than old-fashioned bullets, but "phase pistols" which are (for storytelling purposes) no different from the stuff used in every prior Trek show? Big mistake.
The mistake that Moore's BSG has made is just as bad, though. It's just a DIFFERENT mistake.
Cameron's flick is an example of how to do it RIGHT.
There's a happy medium to be found here, and BOTH sides of this argument are guilty of exaggeration of their perspective.
The "nuBSG" approach was utterly unconvincing to me because it was just utterly obvious that they were cutting corners in terms of design time (prop, costume, and set) in order to be able to save a few bucks shopping at the local mall, WalMart, or surplus store. It wasn't JUST the phone handsets (which, for the record, have been used by almost EVERYONE with any military background, not just submarine guys) or the HMMWV ("Humvees" or "Hummers") or the contemporary firearms. It's sort of a COMPOSITE.
That's taking things TOO FAR in one direction.
On the other hand, it's correct to point out the "blue lights on vacuum cleaners make them futuristic" Trek conceit, and yes, they really fell into the same "trek trap" on ENT. The biggest complaint most folks had with ENT wasn't necessarily the writing or direction (both of which were... uneven... sometimes reasonably good, sometimes pretty bad) but rather the FEEL. It simply felt like more episodes of TNG, etc. Same set design, same graphical design, same music (except the title), same makeup... EVERYTHING.
Now, there IS a great example of how to take familiar concepts and put just enough of the unfamiliar into them to make it work with audiences without pulling them out of their "willful suspension of disbelief." I'm talking about Jim Cameron's "Aliens."
They had guns. But the guns they had, while believable, were not just off-the-shelf items. They wore clothing which felt real, but it wasn't ever bought "off the rack" at the local shopping center.
I'd love to have seen "ENT" be made with something more along those lines. I have no personal problem with having energy-based weapons rather than old-fashioned bullets, but "phase pistols" which are (for storytelling purposes) no different from the stuff used in every prior Trek show? Big mistake.
The mistake that Moore's BSG has made is just as bad, though. It's just a DIFFERENT mistake.
Cameron's flick is an example of how to do it RIGHT.
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Thanks for the backup, and for being smart.
Sorry, but Moore's BSG has some of the most plausible sets and effects of any TV series since TOS. So they use telephones on the Command Deck; BFD. TOS used roll-over clocks.
That said, the designs on "Enterprise" were fine. Jules Verne and pulp stuff would have looked idiotic.
As long as you can accept that they can fly through space, travel faster than the speed of light, but that most of their other tech is outdated by TODAY'S standard. I work with submarines, and most of that crap even looks shoddy compared to the 1980s tech I have to interface with. And the black handsets they use to communicate? Right off of a LA-Class sub. I'm holding one right now...
SOME of their tech looks realistic and plausible, some of it looks crappier and older than stuff being planned in the next version of the space shuttle. Or looks like they just bought shit at Staples...
Thanks for the backup, and for being smart.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Soooo, to sum up. NuBSG is bad because they didn't design everything from the ground up?
Phenomenal stories and kickass character development be damned, eh?
Soooo, to sum up. NuBSG is bad because they didn't design everything from the ground up?
Phenomenal stories and kickass character development be damned, eh?
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
We aren't discussing stories, we're discussing art direction; set design, props, costuming. It just feels cheap or unimaginative when you have massive battlestars and awesome space fighters and people walk around in suits from Men's Wearhouse and drive hummers. That recognizable tie to conventional Earth technology may be deliberate and proven by the final episode, but I still find it jarring.
We aren't discussing stories, we're discussing art direction; set design, props, costuming. It just feels cheap or unimaginative when you have massive battlestars and awesome space fighters and people walk around in suits from Men's Wearhouse and drive hummers. That recognizable tie to conventional Earth technology may be deliberate and proven by the final episode, but I still find it jarring.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
I got past all that in about three minutes. I quite like it.
OTOH, Abrams and company modernize anything in Trek and some fans scream blue bloody murder.
Smart and entirely mistaken.
I got past all that in about three minutes. I quite like it.
OTOH, Abrams and company modernize anything in Trek and some fans scream blue bloody murder.
Thanks for the backup, and for being smart.
Smart and entirely mistaken.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
The phaser is fine. It's a bit too shiney to look 100% weapon like - but then again, this is starfleet, so the security guys are all wearing bright red shirts anyway. A big shiney overly visible weapon sort of fits the theme.
I think BSG is a big piece of shit, so I can't really say much about their design. Then again, that's kind of off topic anyway.
The phaser is fine. It's a bit too shiney to look 100% weapon like - but then again, this is starfleet, so the security guys are all wearing bright red shirts anyway. A big shiney overly visible weapon sort of fits the theme.
I think BSG is a big piece of shit, so I can't really say much about their design. Then again, that's kind of off topic anyway.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
It would if you take it literally. However, I suggested it be used as inspiration, a different thing altogether. Indeed, I made the point while saying that I liked the new phaser because it seemed to draw inspiartion from much the same well--pulps, serials, early SF. It's a neat "ray gun," as you would condescendingly remind us.
But you knew that. You were simply being insulting, which is true to form. You have raised snide intellectual dishonesty to high art. I commend you--it takes real brains to do that.
Sorry, but Moore's BSG has some of the most plausible sets and effects of any TV series since TOS. So they use telephones on the Command Deck; BFD. TOS used roll-over clocks.
That said, the designs on "Enterprise" were fine. Jules Verne and pulp stuff would have looked idiotic.
It would if you take it literally. However, I suggested it be used as inspiration, a different thing altogether. Indeed, I made the point while saying that I liked the new phaser because it seemed to draw inspiartion from much the same well--pulps, serials, early SF. It's a neat "ray gun," as you would condescendingly remind us.
But you knew that. You were simply being insulting, which is true to form. You have raised snide intellectual dishonesty to high art. I commend you--it takes real brains to do that.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Ya know, I agree with some of the stuff you say and also disagree a bit,
but I'm kinda getting tired of the feeling that just because You Say It, It means You Are Right All The Time!
It'd be nice if just once in a while, you'd come down off that High-Horse of yours.
As someone else posted somewhere around here, You're apparently getting the type of Trek Movie you really want and I agree to a point that it will probably be very good, I just wish you'd stop rubbing it into other folks noses, that disagree with you!
I like NuBSG, but I can understand Cary and Psions' point's without having to belittle their opinion's about it.
As for the original topic...
Has anybody gotten a close-up look at the new phaser yet to see if the firing mechanism is a Trigger or the whole handle?
I got past all that in about three minutes. I quite like it.
OTOH, Abrams and company modernize anything in Trek and some fans scream blue bloody murder.
Thanks for the backup, and for being smart.
Smart and entirely mistaken.
Ya know, I agree with some of the stuff you say and also disagree a bit,
but I'm kinda getting tired of the feeling that just because You Say It, It means You Are Right All The Time!
It'd be nice if just once in a while, you'd come down off that High-Horse of yours.
As someone else posted somewhere around here, You're apparently getting the type of Trek Movie you really want and I agree to a point that it will probably be very good, I just wish you'd stop rubbing it into other folks noses, that disagree with you!
I like NuBSG, but I can understand Cary and Psions' point's without having to belittle their opinion's about it.
As for the original topic...
Has anybody gotten a close-up look at the new phaser yet to see if the firing mechanism is a Trigger or the whole handle?
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Huh?!
[looks at Starship Polaris ... eyes welling up with tears]
You've been ... be-be-belittling me? All this time? I thought we were just yuh-yuh-yucking it up! My God -- you've been doing this since GEnie, haven't you? How can I bear to go on?
Or is it bare? I always get those two confused.
At least Cary's still my friend.
Huh?!
[looks at Starship Polaris ... eyes welling up with tears]
You've been ... be-be-belittling me? All this time? I thought we were just yuh-yuh-yucking it up! My God -- you've been doing this since GEnie, haven't you? How can I bear to go on?
Or is it bare? I always get those two confused.
At least Cary's still my friend.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
OK.. ok.. I'll just shut-up from now on.... goodness knows one shouldn't try to defend those who don't desire it... especially since it appears...
"...We are All, One, Big, Happy Family..."
(and I guess I misread the quotes...should have typed Dusty Ayres, not Psion.)
OK.. ok.. I'll just shut-up from now on.... goodness knows one shouldn't try to defend those who don't desire it... especially since it appears...
"...We are All, One, Big, Happy Family..."
(and I guess I misread the quotes...should have typed Dusty Ayres, not Psion.)
Last edited:
Why can't the whole front of the handle be colored slightly different AND have the topmost bit be the trigger?The "small light gray patch" near the top of the handgrip is simply a reflection, seemingly of the grey table the phaser is resting on.
If you look closely, a strip of reflection of the exact same shade goes all the way down the front of the handle. That reflection is simply thinner because the front of the handle has a sharper curved edge than the bulge above it.
I'm not sure whether the whole front of the handle is the actual trigger, or if it's the button on the side. Either one would seem somewhat silly, but oddly enough, the trigger definitely isn't in the typical position.
- Status
Similar threads
