Is it just me...

[A beaker full of death]

I have to explain that I'm talking about the cancelled with that guy from Quantum Leap.

But... why would you?

 

[BillJ]

I have to explain that I'm talking about the cancelled with that guy from Quantum Leap.

So that takes about an extra ten seconds?

 

[The Old Mixer]

Why burden the blissfully ignorant with knowledge of Enterprise?

 

[Melakon]

Yes, because it's the first one to hit your retinas, so it's the simplest thing to retain....?

The first man on the moon was the only real man on the moon, all the others were imposters.

Wow. Not remotely the same thing.

Jefferies had the perfect design the first time around, which is why the franchise has been using it as a template for nearly fifty years.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."

Thanks, BillJ, I wanted to say something but you said it better.

Same. It's difficult to explain the mind's reaction to the Enterprise's design during the 1960s to someone, especially if they weren't at the same level of consciousness during the 1960s. I had been a science fiction fan for 7 years by that point, and it was unlike any space ship I had ever seen. We didn't have all the Kubrick and Lucas influence everyone takes for granted today.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I really dislike the Enterprise series. Starting with the show's title. Because whenever you talk about Enterprise you have to qualify it with by saying "The prequel series not the ship"

I liked T'Pol though. Nice ears.

You do? I would think context would give it away.

Have you ever talked to a non-fan?
If you say something like on "ST:Enterprise...." they tend to not understand the context. They think I'm talking about the OS, TNG, or the movies.

I have to explain that I'm talking about the cancelled with that guy from Quantum Leap.

You call it "ST: Enterprise"? Do you also say "ST: The Next Generation" and "ST: Deep Space Nine"?

I think non fans need a lot more context than fans. Most probably don't know Picard from Sisko without some additional information. The one with the English guy as Captain might be more informative than rattling off "ST: The Next Generation". So yeah, context will matter.

 

[Zaminhon]

Same. It's difficult to explain the mind's reaction to the Enterprise's design during the 1960s to someone, especially if they weren't at the same level of consciousness during the 1960s. I had been a science fiction fan for 7 years by that point, and it was unlike any space ship I had ever seen. We didn't have all the Kubrick and Lucas influence everyone takes for granted today.

I think the design was innovative and unique relative to what came before which were either traditional Flying Saucers (Lost in Space) , or your typical rocket ship with fins and things and stupid looking flames and smoke.

 

[Spock's Barber]

Same. It's difficult to explain the mind's reaction to the Enterprise's design during the 1960s to someone, especially if they weren't at the same level of consciousness during the 1960s. I had been a science fiction fan for 7 years by that point, and it was unlike any space ship I had ever seen. We didn't have all the Kubrick and Lucas influence everyone takes for granted today.

I think the design was innovative and unique relative to what came before which were either traditional Flying Saucers (Lost in Space) , or your typical rocket ship with fins and things and stupid looking flames and smoke.

Yes. GR specifically told Matt Jefferies to avoid all the ridiculous appearances of 1950's science fiction movie spacecraft, but he did say he wanted the Enterprise to look 'powerful'.

 

[Marsden]

Same. It's difficult to explain the mind's reaction to the Enterprise's design during the 1960s to someone, especially if they weren't at the same level of consciousness during the 1960s. I had been a science fiction fan for 7 years by that point, and it was unlike any space ship I had ever seen. We didn't have all the Kubrick and Lucas influence everyone takes for granted today.

I think another thing, adding to what you said, is that the Enterprise design was so different and that it's been imitated so many times over the last 50 years that it doesn't seem as different to a modern perspective that doesn't account for it's history.

 

[The Old Mixer]

One good way to see the influence of Star Trek on the science fiction scene is Legion of Super-Heroes comics. In the 60s they were very much using Golden Age sci-fi tropes...the rockets, saucers, and whatnot. In the 70s, under Cockrum and Grell, things suddenly started looking very Star Trek, especially the design of the Legion Cruiser.

 

[Terok Nor]

Why would anyone mention Star Trek : Enterprise in the first place?

Off topic slightly but I'm rewatching TOS (first time seeing it remastered with new effects) and I love the CGI Enterprise. It's a beauty. The original version always looked like it was a hologram being projected.

I have exactly the opposite reaction. The 11-foot model looked and moved like it had mass and substance. The CGI Enterprise just never looks quite right. The lighting effect in the nacelle domes, in particular, looks cartoony.

When I first saw DS9's tribute episode I wished the Enterprise had looked like that in the original series and now it does.

If you're referring to "Trials and Tribble-ations," the TOS Enterprise in that episode wasn't CGI. It was a physical model built by Greg Jein, and was about 5 feet long IIRC.

I did not know that. Thanks for the info

They look pretty much the same to me but then I'm blind as a bat

 

[Kor]

The surface detailing as well as the way the models were lit and shot in "Trials and Tribble-ations" were more in line with a contemporary aesthetic. More than one viewer has assumed that it's CGI.

Kor

 

[CrazyMatt]

... or would anyone else like to see the Enterprise from TMP replace the CGI TOS Enterprise in the show?

Would it be too jarring?
I've never been a huge fan of the series model but the movie version is still my favorite visually speaking.

Perish the thought!