Yeah, I was just saying that I like the look of the new Constitution better than those ones, but in the end its subjective because everybody is going to have their own preferences.
Here it is - no bloody "A", "B" "C" or "D"
- Thread starter Admiral Buzzkill
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, I was just saying that I like the look of the new Constitution better than those ones, but in the end its subjective because everybody is going to have their own preferences.
It's not the butt ugliness of the design, so much, or that it looks a lot more like a product of the late 50's - early 60's than the original ship ever did.
It's the simple fact that we've seen what Pike's Enterprise looked like and that ain't it!
This is.
It's the simple fact that we've seen what Pike's Enterprise looked like and that ain't it!
This is.
Not with that lighting or level of detail, but there's not a thing wrong with the design.
But it's someone else's design. Art directors and designers have to earn their money. You can't expect them to not create their own design, even if the original was perfect.
---------------
"I know engineers. They love to change things."
And my dad could beat up your dad.
I turned down a three-way with two other girls last Friday night. They were practically begging. Seriously.
And I'm still not thrilled with the new Enterprise.
So now what?
Nowhere Man
Commodore
True dat
All this "hoopla" over one picture reminds me of when the new batmobile was introduced for Batman Begins. It also reminds me to be thankful everyday that I have interests outside of Trek. Good lord people, its a picture of a fictional ship. Get some perspective.
I for one, think it looks great. Certainly what I imagine a ship of that time to look like.
I for one, think it looks great. Certainly what I imagine a ship of that time to look like.
I turned down a three-way with two other girls last Friday night. They were practically begging. Seriously.
And I'm still not thrilled with the new Enterprise.
So now what?
Call 'em up. Commiserate together.
Nardpuncher
Rear Admiral
I think the new ship looks a bit like that oold one from the animated Trek:
http://66.113.217.85/AnimatedSeries/Bonaventure01_Big.jpg
http://66.113.217.85/AnimatedSeries/Bonaventure01_Big.jpg
Still looks like the Enterprise. I was impressed with what they did with the deflector dish.
3D Master
Rear Admiral
Except for that annoying problem that the 60s Batmobile was made for comedy, a campy, totally silly, and ridiculous design. It was ridiculous in 60s and they did so DELIBERATEDLY. The Enterprise in contrast, was a serious design, and it still is; especially considering that the design of Starfleet ships in between hasn't changed much if any. The same basic things that made the original Enterprise look amazing, futuristic, and almost alien (rightly so) in design, is what made all subsequent ships and Enterprise do exactly that.
You can see from the model's made by fans how a faithful update makes the Enterprise looks every bit as amazing now, as it did when it first appeared on tv screens back in the day.
Instead, we get this missmatched abortion of a ship. It looks like they had a saucer of one ship left over, the neck of another, the engineering hull of a third, and somewhat new nacelles and then cobbled the thing together best they could. There is nothing in that ship that looks even remotely like a functional single design, and even if it did, it is ugly as hell to boot. Tiny, crunched together, with a seemingly puked out deflector dish as an afterthought, there is not a single bit of it that even remotely looks majestic - and indeed sleek; this turd is not sleek, not even close - as the Enterprise should.
In fact, the only thing that would allow me to look at that ship as functional; is if the original Enterprise is restored as an altered timeline is restored, and they deliberately made this new ship ugly as hell to highlight just how amazing the original ship really is. That way it would have a function.
Oh, god no, not this again. You see, unlike you, I actually understand exactly what technological advances have and have not been made in the past 40 years. You see, those cell phones, are piles of primitive junk. They wouldn't even allow you to speak to someone on the other side of a small town if there weren't a shitload of relay booster antennas in between. The communicators of Star Trek however, are fully self-contained subspace FTL transmitters that allow one to talk to a ship in orbit of a planet and even a good bit away from that with absolutely nothing in between.
And if audiences are too stupid to realize this, it probably should have to point that out to them in the movie - which is embarrassing, really. Once again we see how bad education really is.
Not to mention; even more embarrassing that simple fantasy movies like Star Wars get away without having to give Jedi Knights cool Jedi cell phones but still "stay current", but Star Trek that had more advanced technology ten years in advance of Star Wars, must turn their communicators into "cool cell phones, for the hip crowd."
When an artist creates a new painting, he actually creates a NEW painting. He doesn't "reimagine", "reboot" or "remake" his own creations. Nor does any artist later have the audacity to remake another artist's creation, like say, the Mona Lisa, give her eye shadow, thick lipstick, Gillian Anderson's face and blond hair, and claim it needed to be done to keep it "current" with the audience.
Oh, I don't know, because I actually want to be able to enjoy new GOOD Star Trek, that looks GOOD, and not more crap that gets dumped upon the old shows, and have it tarnish the original and get the reputation of the new crap.
No, actually, it cannot do whatever the hell it wants. A WARP drive actually has to WARP space and time, or else it's not a WARP drive. This isn't rocket science folks, it's simple language. A WARP drive has to WARP. If it doesn't WARP it's not a WARP drive.
Ah, yes, I see. 40 years of television history, technical manuals, and 14 years of an actual scientific mathematical theory, that's constantly being worked on, refined and discussed, but a few "rebooters" know better, and turn the warp drive into an impulse drive.
Or in other words; meaningless fantasy junk.
I'm so
But not really.
I've talked about that one when it first came out as well:
ANOTHER time travel story?
Like we didn't have enough of those already; 2 friggin' movies, and episode after episode. Couldn't they have come up with something... oh, I don't know... DIFFERENT? Something NEW? Something with... CHANGE?
That's because that's a toy, but eh.
Let me show you a redesign, that keeps the original ship basically intact, and suffers no such trouble (as it's not a toy):
http://www.vektorvisual.com/projects/TrekXIEnt/gallery/wip_002.jpg
http://www.vektorvisual.com/projects/TrekXIEnt/gallery/wip_003.jpg
http://www.vektorvisual.com/projects/TrekXIEnt/gallery/wip_006.jpg
http://www.vektorvisual.com/projects/TrekXIEnt/gallery/wip_007.jpg
[Those images are oversized and they were hotlinked - M']
Last edited by a moderator:
After 24 hours Ive started to like it, it wont beat the Refit in my mind (time, more photos and video may say otherwise)
I love how many off you seem to think you know that Jefferies would most deffinatly 'turn in his grave' and hate this ship, its a shame we will never get the chance to really know what he might think.
I love how many off you seem to think you know that Jefferies would most deffinatly 'turn in his grave' and hate this ship, its a shame we will never get the chance to really know what he might think.
He'd either like it, or he wouldn't. I guarantee he wouldn't lose any sleep over it. As professional designer, he knows how these things work and wouldn't get his feelings hurt.
Thats what I was thinking, there are alot of example where fans of a subject seem to scream disrespect for the original but then when persons conected to the original subject comment its obvious they arent too bothered.
Except for that annoying problem that the 60s Batmobile was made for comedy, a campy, totally silly, and ridiculous design. It was ridiculous in 60s and they did so DELIBERATEDLY. The Enterprise in contrast, was a serious design, and it still is; especially considering that the design of Starfleet ships in between hasn't changed much if any. The same basic things that made the original Enterprise look amazing, futuristic, and almost alien (rightly so) in design, is what made all subsequent ships and Enterprise do exactly that.
You can see from the model's made by fans how a faithful update makes the Enterprise looks every bit as amazing now, as it did when it first appeared on tv screens back in the day.
Instead, we get this missmatched abortion of a ship. It looks like they had a saucer of one ship left over, the neck of another, the engineering hull of a third, and somewhat new nacelles and then cobbled the thing together best they could. There is nothing in that ship that looks even remotely like a functional single design, and even if it did, it is ugly as hell to boot. Tiny, crunched together, with a seemingly puked out deflector dish as an afterthought, there is not a single bit of it that even remotely looks majestic - and indeed sleek; this turd is not sleek, not even close - as the Enterprise should.
In fact, the only thing that would allow me to look at that ship as functional; is if the original Enterprise is restored as an altered timeline is restored, and they deliberately made this new ship ugly as hell to highlight just how amazing the original ship really is. That way it would have a function.
Oh, god no, not this again. You see, unlike you, I actually understand exactly what technological advances have and have not been made in the past 40 years. You see, those cell phones, are piles of primitive junk. They wouldn't even allow you to speak to someone on the other side of a small town if there weren't a shitload of relay booster antennas in between. The communicators of Star Trek however, are fully self-contained subspace FTL transmitters that allow one to talk to a ship in orbit of a planet and even a good bit away from that with absolutely nothing in between.
And if audiences are too stupid to realize this, it probably should have to point that out to them in the movie - which is embarrassing, really. Once again we see how bad education really is.
Not to mention; even more embarrassing that simple fantasy movies like Star Wars get away without having to give Jedi Knights cool Jedi cell phones but still "stay current", but Star Trek that had more advanced technology ten years in advance of Star Wars, must turn their communicators into "cool cell phones, for the hip crowd."
When an artist creates a new painting, he actually creates a NEW painting. He doesn't "reimagine", "reboot" or "remake" his own creations. Nor does any artist later have the audacity to remake another artist's creation, like say, the Mona Lisa, give her eye shadow, thick lipstick, Gillian Anderson's face and blond hair, and claim it needed to be done to keep it "current" with the audience.
Oh, I don't know, because I actually want to be able to enjoy new GOOD Star Trek, that looks GOOD, and not more crap that gets dumped upon the old shows, and have it tarnish the original and get the reputation of the new crap.
No, actually, it cannot do whatever the hell it wants. A WARP drive actually has to WARP space and time, or else it's not a WARP drive. This isn't rocket science folks, it's simple language. A WARP drive has to WARP. If it doesn't WARP it's not a WARP drive.
Ah, yes, I see. 40 years of television history, technical manuals, and 14 years of an actual scientific mathematical theory, that's constantly being worked on, refined and discussed, but a few "rebooters" know better, and turn the warp drive into an impulse drive.
Or in other words; meaningless fantasy junk.
I'm so
But not really.
I've talked about that one when it first came out as well:
ANOTHER time travel story?
Like we didn't have enough of those already; 2 friggin' movies, and episode after episode. Couldn't they have come up with something... oh, I don't know... DIFFERENT? Something NEW? Something with... CHANGE?
That's because that's a toy, but eh.
Let me show you a redesign, that keeps the original ship basically intact, and suffers no such trouble (as it's not a toy):
[Hotlinked images removed]
Why that would just be silly! This is an obvious attempt to make the design more modern looking and add big screen appeal by putting more detail on what is an obviously antiquated 1960's design! <facetious comment>
Oh well- the new movie enterprise has a refit enterprise saucer glued onto some odd looking engineering hull
that's got some retro deco flash gordon-esque nacelles, held up by 1970's Enterprise concept struts- it's original
It's really a shame something like the attached picture isn't going to be in the movie (now I am NOT kidding) and we're stuck with a piece of junk. Hopefully the movie will be good, none-the-less.
Last edited by a moderator:
I love the posts that start with a paragraph about how the poster is a "lifelong fan" who "saw Where No Man Has Gone Before when I was a child during the Napoleonic Wars" etcetera, as if it lends gravitas to their "take" on Trek 11. Like anyone gives a flying fuck. Well done, you had a tv in your house. Your medal's in the post.
We're all fans here, each one of us is entitled to like or loath the JJprise for whatever reason.
We're all fans here, each one of us is entitled to like or loath the JJprise for whatever reason.
- Status
