It's a PG-13 Rating, and Bridge panoramas are online...

[StarTrek1701]

And Galactica got canceled, whimpering out like a lifeless husk. Star Trek is getting new exciting life. Terrible choice for comparison too.

It always shocks me how easily people will trade whatever credibility they might have had for a lackluster cheap shot based on obvious distortion of the truth.

Its always funny to see people without any credibility to begin with think they can pass judgement just because they cannot even handle the truth.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Well, not for nothing, the Air Force has gone to Trek to consult with production for their own Command Centers based on the Enterprise bridge(s).

Versions of this story date back to "The Making Of Star Trek."

Anyone got a picture of any military command or communications center that incorporates any aspect of the Enterprise bridge which was not seen in such installations previously?.

XM uses a "Captain's Chair".

The Navy was using 'em for a generation before TOS:

http://drexfiles.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/chair_comp.jpg

Of course, the XM "captain's chair" resembled Kirk's due to a deliberate bit of whimsy on the part of CEO Mel Karmazin, not because of any specific functional virtue.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Hey, these guys managed better than PG-13 for their Star Trek movie:

Not Star Trek

"Oh, my!"

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Hey, these guys managed better than PG-13 for their Star Trek movie:

Not Star Trek

"Oh, my!"

You can google the production up over at io9/fleshbot and find out...all kinds of interesting things, and perhaps more than you wanted to know about "Scotty."

And check out "Khan" - I never forget a, uh, "face"...

TOS purists, though, should approve of the loyalty of the filmmakers to Jefferies' original Bridge designs. Clearly their movie doesn't take place in any "alternate timeline."

 

[StarTrek1701]

Hey, these guys managed better than PG-13 for their Star Trek movie:

Not Star Trek

"Oh, my!"

Can't wait!

 

[CaptainHawk1]

There's a big difference between being a hater (and there are a ton of them around here) and just being critical because it doesn't appeal to you.

Actually, there are very few people in this forum that fit your description, so your oversimplifications are either based on your experiences elsewhere or are flat out wrong.

There are plenty of haters around here. You're flat out wrong.

It's fun to watch "the haters" define the "the cheerleaders," and then watch "the cheerleaders" use that exact same definition (reversing the labels first, of course) to define "the haters" (and somehow never realize that they have done so).

It's fun to watch run-on sentences that say nothing yet go on for a whole paragraph.

It usually boils down to one person describing how irritating the people of the other side of the fence are, all the while becoming more irritating in the process (and then patting himself on the back for having done so).

Please... more wisdom.

For the most part, individuals are: excited about the film, relatively neutral, cautiously optimistic, outright hostile, or just can't be bothered.

Oooh... there we have it. Not only have you defined every single poster on this board to a "T" but I think you've also answered the fundamental questions of man's existence... and in you did it in one sentence.

The rest is just those same irritating individuals from above trying to mentally project their opinion as the correct majority, and then demonizing the perceived minority.

All very entertaining, of course.

Brilliant! Thank you so much for that. You're so smart, inspiring, clever and witty and your command of Webster's High School Thesaurus is awe-inspiring, seriously.

 

[miraclefan]

For what it's worth I like the bridge. It's not the design I would have gone with, but I like it.

 

[Sector 7]

As I have said since the beginning: take away the bright, in-your-face spotlights; the waitress podiums and accompanying plexiglass walls. The bridge would be 100% spot on, IMO.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

You're flat out wrong.

You're right. I didn't think you could possibly be any more irritating than you already have been. But I stand corrected.

Point goes to CaptainHawk1.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

And Galactica got canceled, whimpering out like a lifeless husk. Star Trek is getting new exciting life. Terrible choice for comparison too.

It always shocks me how easily people will trade whatever credibility they might have had for a lackluster cheap shot based on obvious distortion of the truth.

Its always funny to see people without any credibility to begin with think they can pass judgement just because they cannot even handle the truth.

Let me try this again, at a level you will probably be more comfortable with:

I know you are, but what am I?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

As I have said since the beginning: take away the bright, in-your-face spotlights; the waitress podiums and accompanying plexiglass walls. The bridge would be 100% spot on, IMO.

In other words, take away anything that looks different from what we're used to and it's okay.

 

[M'Sharak]

And Galactica got canceled, whimpering out like a lifeless husk. Star Trek is getting new exciting life. Terrible choice for comparison too.

It always shocks me how easily people will trade whatever credibility they might have had for a lackluster cheap shot based on obvious distortion of the truth.

Its always funny to see people without any credibility to begin with think they can pass judgement just because they cannot even handle the truth.

There's a big difference between being a hater (and there are a ton of them around here) and just being critical because it doesn't appeal to you.

Actually, there are very few people in this forum that fit your description, so your oversimplifications are either based on your experiences elsewhere or are flat out wrong.

There are plenty of haters around here. You're flat out wrong.



It's fun to watch run-on sentences that say nothing yet go on for a whole paragraph.



Please... more wisdom.

For the most part, individuals are: excited about the film, relatively neutral, cautiously optimistic, outright hostile, or just can't be bothered.

Oooh... there we have it. Not only have you defined every single poster on this board to a "T" but I think you've also answered the fundamental questions of man's existence... and in you did it in one sentence.

The rest is just those same irritating individuals from above trying to mentally project their opinion as the correct majority, and then demonizing the perceived minority.

All very entertaining, of course.

Brilliant! Thank you so much for that. You're so smart, inspiring, clever and witty and your command of Webster's High School Thesaurus is awe-inspiring, seriously.

StarTrek1701 and CaptainHawk1, it would have been far better to recognize what has already been shown several times over to be a joke for what it was, and to have responded accordingly, rather than to respond in hostile manner to it several times with what in the end amounts to no more than:

...

...

...

I know you are, but what am I?

Points to Sam for recognizing that much, but it's not enough to save the thread. I've asked once, and then once again, for the sniping to stop (I believe I addressed you on the second one, CaptainHawk1, didn't I?) and I asked both times for a return to discussing the topic, yet here we are taking potshots at each other again.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: stop looking for things at which to take offense; do not take personally what what was not directed at you personally and do not take personal jabs at others. Failure on the part of more than one person to adhere to these simple behaviors is what keeps crapping up the thread, and three strikes means this one's out.

CaptainHawk, you in particular need to stop trying to make everything into a fight; it's gone beyond being merely tedious.

Thread closed.