For those of us who don't hate the Nu Enterprise but don't love it

[True Trek Fan]

I do not care for the "Nu" Enterprise, but with some photoshop magic here's my attempt at bringing it closer to the original TV classic design; no bloody A, B, C or D.

And here are the comparison ships

By sonofsparta at 2009-03-13

 

[miraclefan]

I certainly LOVE the ''RED'' bussards (I Prefer it that way) but everything else you did is, Meh...

 

[Cary L. Brown]

^Why is this design ''OKAY'' for the TNG-era, but not the TOS-era?

Because of the stylistic approach taken.

It pretty much completely abandons any stylistics element of the TOS era. What it DOES do is takes the TMP Enterprise and shifts a number of elements of the design more into accordance with the TNG-era design style.

So if that was what it was intended to represent, I'd be happy with it.

It's sort of like if you took a modern aircraft carrier design, added hoverpads and laser defense systems and big neon signage, and put it into a WWII-era flick. It just feels "wrong" stylistically, even if the "wrongness" won't be noticed by people who don't know anything about ships. On the other hand, if this were being presented as a carrier design from decades into our future, these things might be justifiable and even expected. They wouldn't come across as "wrong."

 

[ST-One]

It's sort of like if you took a modern aircraft carrier design, added hoverpads and laser defense systems and big neon signage, and put it into a WWII-era flick. It just feels "wrong" stylistically, even if the "wrongness" won't be noticed by people who don't know anything about ships. On the other hand, if this were being presented as a carrier design from decades into our future, these things might be justifiable and even expected. They wouldn't come across as "wrong."

Why do you keep comparing a real period in history with a totally made-up time-period of a totally made-up future?

 

[Cary L. Brown]

It's sort of like if you took a modern aircraft carrier design, added hoverpads and laser defense systems and big neon signage, and put it into a WWII-era flick. It just feels "wrong" stylistically, even if the "wrongness" won't be noticed by people who don't know anything about ships. On the other hand, if this were being presented as a carrier design from decades into our future, these things might be justifiable and even expected. They wouldn't come across as "wrong."

Why do you keep comparing a real period in history with a totally made-up time-period of a totally made-up future?

I'm not, and you know it. If you can't tell the difference between comparing styles to comparing calendar dates, that's not my problem.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The JJPRise looks a lot better than this Photoshop job, sorry.

 

[miraclefan]

^Agreed, but I do like the ''red'' ( as they shuld be) Bussards.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

^Agreed, but I do like the ''red'' ( as they shuld be) Bussards.

Doesn't really matter. The blue ones look good in the movie.

 

[miraclefan]

^I ''HATE'' to admit it, but They are starting to ''GLOW'' on me!

 

[Gojira]

I love the new Enterprise. I love the size of the Nacelles and the blue bussard collectors. I was not crazy about the size of the lower secondary hull but after seeing this model I think the proportions are better than the original picture shows.

 

[miraclefan]

^Agreed I love this model. I'm hopeing ''somebody'' will release this as a model kit

 

[Gojira]

^Agreed I love this model. I'm hopeing ''somebody'' will release this as a model kit

Playmates is releasing an already put together toy.

I'm glad it is already put together, I'm terrible with model kits.

 

[miraclefan]

^Yah I know, don't get me wrong I'm going to buy two of them when they come out( I'm hearing in april from varias sources at several WAL-MART AND TARGET'S in my area) but I would ''STILL'' like to get a model

 

[ST-One]

It's sort of like if you took a modern aircraft carrier design, added hoverpads and laser defense systems and big neon signage, and put it into a WWII-era flick. It just feels "wrong" stylistically, even if the "wrongness" won't be noticed by people who don't know anything about ships. On the other hand, if this were being presented as a carrier design from decades into our future, these things might be justifiable and even expected. They wouldn't come across as "wrong."

Why do you keep comparing a real period in history with a totally made-up time-period of a totally made-up future?

I'm not, and you know it. If you can't tell the difference between comparing styles to comparing calendar dates, that's not my problem.

Okay, then why do you keep comparing the styles of a real period in recent history with that of the fictional 23rd century?

WWII - real, it happened. You can't change the styles unless you want to be historically incorrect.
23rd century - fictional, it will never look like how it was envisioned in the 1960s (our early 21st century already looks more advanced) nor will it ever look like it is envisioned now in the new Trek-film.

 

[Kirk1980]

Hey ST-One, since you and Polaris agree often enough, maybe you can answer Ptrope's call.

WHY wouldn't modern audiences accept the Jefferies design? Please, I'd love to hear your reasoning, as well as Polaris's.

EDIT: I add this caveat..pretend nobody had ever seen Matt Jefferies' Enterprise before, pretend this was the new design being shown on our screens in 2009.

Tell me why it doesn't work in this situation.

 

[ST-One]

Hey ST-One, since you and Polaris agree often enough, maybe you can answer Ptrope's call.

WHY wouldn't modern audiences accept the Jefferies design? Please, I'd love to hear your reasoning, as well as Polaris's.

EDIT: I add this caveat..pretend nobody had ever seen Matt Jefferies' Enterprise before, pretend this was the new design being shown on our screens in 2009.

Tell me why it doesn't work in this situation.

It isn't so much that we agree but rather more that we are open to new interpretations and different approaches to the subject matter.

The simple (thus giving the impression of being functional) lines of the old design place it firmly into the design aesthetics of the 1950s and 60s, and no amount of added detail could, IMO, change that.
The vision of how the future will look like has changed, and it will go on to doing so.

The added problem is, that the design IS around for over 40 years. Nothing can change that.

 

[Kirk1980]

EDIT: I add this caveat..pretend nobody had ever seen Matt Jefferies' Enterprise before, pretend this was the new design being shown on our screens in 2009.

Tell me why it doesn't work in this situation.

It isn't so much that we agree but rather more that we are open to new interpretations and different approaches to the subject matter.

......

The added problem is, that the design IS around for over 40 years. Nothing can change that.

That's all very true. My whole point was this.... what IF we didn't have the 1964 Enterprise to compare this design to? What if it never existed at all? What if the 1964 design was what we saw on screens this May?

If you'd still feel the same way, that's fine, I'm just trying to separate the old design from the new, allowing either to survive on its own merits.

 

[ST-One]

EDIT: I add this caveat..pretend nobody had ever seen Matt Jefferies' Enterprise before, pretend this was the new design being shown on our screens in 2009.

Tell me why it doesn't work in this situation.

It isn't so much that we agree but rather more that we are open to new interpretations and different approaches to the subject matter.

......

The added problem is, that the design IS around for over 40 years. Nothing can change that.

That's all very true. My whole point was this.... what IF we didn't have the 1964 Enterprise to compare this design to? What if it never existed at all? What if the 1964 design was what we saw on screens this May?

If you'd still feel the same way, that's fine, I'm just trying to separate the old design from the new, allowing either to survive on its own merits.

I cannot objectively say whether I would see it the same way.
It would probably look very old-fashioned to me.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Hey ST-One, since you and Polaris agree often enough, maybe you can answer Ptrope's call.

WHY wouldn't modern audiences accept the Jefferies design? Please, I'd love to hear your reasoning, as well as Polaris's.

EDIT: I add this caveat..pretend nobody had ever seen Matt Jefferies' Enterprise before, pretend this was the new design being shown on our screens in 2009.

Tell me why it doesn't work in this situation.

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_456.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_477.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_217.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_868.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_746.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_868.jpg


Obviously there ISN'T any good reason...the Great Grey Ladies look just fine, inside and out.

I can accept they WANTED to make changes, but to insist they HAD to is laughable.

 

[Gojira]

Hey ST-One, since you and Polaris agree often enough, maybe you can answer Ptrope's call.

WHY wouldn't modern audiences accept the Jefferies design? Please, I'd love to hear your reasoning, as well as Polaris's.

EDIT: I add this caveat..pretend nobody had ever seen Matt Jefferies' Enterprise before, pretend this was the new design being shown on our screens in 2009.

Tell me why it doesn't work in this situation.

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_456.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_477.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_217.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_868.jpg

http://ent.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/4x19/inamirrordarkly2_746.jpg




Obviously there ISN'T any good reason...the Great Grey Ladies look just fine, inside and out.

I can accept they WANTED to make changes, but to insist they HAD to is laughable.

I think they had to change it. I agree with what others have said. The original design, which I do love, just screams 1960s to me. You cannot divorce things from the time period in which they were made.