James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful)
- Thread starter General_Custer
- Start date
- Status
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
Hate to say it, but you're kind of wrong there. The basic design of the Enterprise can still work, though you obviously can't just use the original 12 foot model on the big screen and get away with it. What I was kind of hoping for was a bit of added detail, something that pops out at you; a more textured hull, detail inside the windows, airlocks, docking ports, phaser banks and torpedo launchers. Heck, even make the hull perlescent like it was in TMP. But to design a completely new Enterprise worries me. Maybe I'll end up liking it when I see it, but I have to go with James on this one; don't completely discard what was there because you can.
Hate to say it, but you're kind of wrong there. The basic design of the Enterprise can still work, though you obviously can't just use the original 12 foot model on the big screen and get away with it. What I was kind of hoping for was a bit of added detail, something that pops out at you; a more textured hull, detail inside the windows, airlocks, docking ports, phaser banks and torpedo launchers. Heck, even make the hull perlescent like it was in TMP. But to design a completely new Enterprise worries me. Maybe I'll end up liking it when I see it, but I have to go with James on this one; don't completely discard what was there because you can.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
Guess what?
I don't care what he thinks. I never have.
Does that mean I hope his endeavors crash and burn?
No, so fuck off.
Guess what?
I don't care what he thinks. I never have.
Does that mean I hope his endeavors crash and burn?
No, so fuck off.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
That's NOT the original model. It's refined. But it would work just fine.
"Fixing" things that aren't broken inevitably results in breaking those things, in my experience.
So, aside from saying "it's from the 1960s" (which is true but totally meaningless), I'd love to hear a logical, reasoned argument for what SPECIFICS of this design are "bad."
This is the Enterprise. It's not the original model,and more detail is added (and more polish applied to that which is there). And I think this, exactly as seen here, would illicit GASPS out of a sizeable portion of the audience the first time they saw it in ultra-fine resolution projected from 70mm stock on a big screen.
That's NOT the original model. It's refined. But it would work just fine.
"Fixing" things that aren't broken inevitably results in breaking those things, in my experience.
So, aside from saying "it's from the 1960s" (which is true but totally meaningless), I'd love to hear a logical, reasoned argument for what SPECIFICS of this design are "bad."
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
Sorry, who has ever said that it's been completely redesigned? Don't forgot as far as Cawley is concerned even the changes you mention wouldn't be acceptable.
I'd happily bet money that if you were to put a silhouette of the original Enterprise and the new one side-by-side they'd look the same.
Sorry, who has ever said that it's been completely redesigned? Don't forgot as far as Cawley is concerned even the changes you mention wouldn't be acceptable.
I'd happily bet money that if you were to put a silhouette of the original Enterprise and the new one side-by-side they'd look the same.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
It's too bland and featureless. Thirty years of far more detailed models and CGI have given the audience expectations that reach beyond something that looks like it should be hanging from a pices of fishing wire.
It's too bland and featureless. Thirty years of far more detailed models and CGI have given the audience expectations that reach beyond something that looks like it should be hanging from a pices of fishing wire.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
Oh so I get warned by a mod for calling someone a "dumbass" but you're going to get away with this kind of shit?
Listen, son. The Enterprise looked great for the 1960s, but in a world where Treknology looks like old broken tech you can buy at the Salvation Army or Goodwill, those sorts of designs won't cut it.
Yeah, put the communicators from "The Cage" up on screen and listen for the laughter.
I suppose you'd also like a little sign on the Enterprise that says, "Tail pipe socket adjustment access." Since the original had that?
Oh and while we're at it, Dr. McCoy will fix all wounds with a bottle of windex. Because that looks legit!
Get with the program. It's a reboot, and nomatter how much you kick and scream they won't make the movie a two hour example of fan-wank. Check out New Voyages to revisit the original series. The new Star Trek is coming December 2008. Seeya there.
Oh so I get warned by a mod for calling someone a "dumbass" but you're going to get away with this kind of shit?
Listen, son. The Enterprise looked great for the 1960s, but in a world where Treknology looks like old broken tech you can buy at the Salvation Army or Goodwill, those sorts of designs won't cut it.
Yeah, put the communicators from "The Cage" up on screen and listen for the laughter.
I suppose you'd also like a little sign on the Enterprise that says, "Tail pipe socket adjustment access." Since the original had that?
Oh and while we're at it, Dr. McCoy will fix all wounds with a bottle of windex. Because that looks legit!
Get with the program. It's a reboot, and nomatter how much you kick and scream they won't make the movie a two hour example of fan-wank. Check out New Voyages to revisit the original series. The new Star Trek is coming December 2008. Seeya there.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
I've been skimming through some of the posts above. I haven't quite made it through all of them because there's a lot, and I wanted to put this down while it was still fresh on my mind. If it has already been mentioned, then my apologies.
I can understand how people would be upset about this. I, myself, would like to see the Enterprise as it was or pretty close to as it was on the big screen again. Would I like an update? Sure, if it stays true to the original, after all, it is an icon. I saw a design in one of the Ship of the Line calendars that was a mix of the TOS design and the movie design. I liked it, and I thought it would be cool to use that in the new movie.
Someone said what if this was mistaken for another ship? It's possible. After all, there are Romulans in this movie, and during TOS, the Romulan bird-of-prey had wings. Maybe it's a redesign of the BoP that he saw. Who knows? It could be a simple mistake. I'm going to wait for the first production sketches or photos of the new Big E to hit the web (if they ever do) or wait for the reported teaser (in which we'll see the Big E built apparently) before worrying about its design. BTW, if this new design is so radical and different from the original concept, why would this teaser reportedly show its construction if not to shout "Here's Star Trek!"???
Last, I know people are upset about the recasting. Okay. Well, there are people who are wanting to see Kirk and Spock, but only in the forms of Shatner and Nimoy. I would like to see them both put on the uniforms, but I feel that they're too old to do so and carry a movie. What they're doing with Nimoy (according to rumor) is great, but he's also in a limited role. I think there comes a point where a role has to be recast in order for it to continue. That's why we've had multiple actors play James Bond. Will subsequent actors be as good as the originals? Probably not, because they defined that role. But at least they could bring their own spin and expand upon that role, just as actors such as George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig have done in Bond. To various degrees of success, but each has brought something new and different to the role, and I can watch all of them. I eagerly await to see what Quinto and Pine bring to Spock and Kirk and Pegg and co. to Scotty and the rest. It could be awesome! But I think we have to be open-minded as fans in order for it to succeed. Someone is taking a risk here. Abrams didn't have to dig into the Trek box, but he apparently pursued it, something that many Hollywood big names don't do these days, and I want to see what he can bring.
As for the Enterprise...well, I've read on other boards (sorry, I do read other boards) that recasting actors is one thing, "recasting the Enterprise, them's fightin' words". I must say, I'm shocked by this. No one is recasting the Enterprise. It's being redesigned. The Enterprise is a ship, a set, a model about "that big" (sorry for the Galaxy Quest reference). It's a thing, and while we put a lot into the Enterprise (I love the Enterprise and what it represents), I think we should remember that it's not about the ship. It's about the characters and the story. And I remember reading somewhere that's how Roddenberry felt. He felt that it wasn't about the Enterprise and didn't want people to think that it was a character, because it wasn't. It was a spaceship and the people were the focus. I'm not normally one to ring the "Roddenberry's vision" bell, but I know that there are people who do that a lot, and if any of them do that and feel that the Enterprise shouldn't be messed with or say it's being "recast", then I think they should recheck how Roddenberry felt about it and stop making assumptions based upon their idea of what his vision was. I remember reading that somewhere, and if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong and none of what I just wrote matters. But if I'm right, I hope it will at least remind everyone to re-examine some of their opinions and re-think some of the things that they say and accuse others of.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, some times I'm embarrassed to be a Trek fan because of all the crap that "Trek fans" say and do and nitpick about. It's not so much their ever expansive knowledge or commitment to knowing all that there is to know about Trek. That's wonderful. It's the nitpicking and the constant "this is what it's supposed to be" or "this is the only way" attitude. There are fans who even what this movie to fail. I say to you, if this movie fails, we won't get Trek for a long time, and those of you who want it to fail because Shatner isn't in it, then you'll never get Shatner in it because by the time Paramount finds Trek again, Shatner will most likely be in a wheelchair, if not six feet under. I want this movie to succeed, and I'm excited by the potential. And if Nimoy likes the script, and we all know he passed on Generations because of its flaws and he was right, then doesn't that say something about it?
I've been skimming through some of the posts above. I haven't quite made it through all of them because there's a lot, and I wanted to put this down while it was still fresh on my mind. If it has already been mentioned, then my apologies.
I can understand how people would be upset about this. I, myself, would like to see the Enterprise as it was or pretty close to as it was on the big screen again. Would I like an update? Sure, if it stays true to the original, after all, it is an icon. I saw a design in one of the Ship of the Line calendars that was a mix of the TOS design and the movie design. I liked it, and I thought it would be cool to use that in the new movie.
Someone said what if this was mistaken for another ship? It's possible. After all, there are Romulans in this movie, and during TOS, the Romulan bird-of-prey had wings. Maybe it's a redesign of the BoP that he saw. Who knows? It could be a simple mistake. I'm going to wait for the first production sketches or photos of the new Big E to hit the web (if they ever do) or wait for the reported teaser (in which we'll see the Big E built apparently) before worrying about its design. BTW, if this new design is so radical and different from the original concept, why would this teaser reportedly show its construction if not to shout "Here's Star Trek!"???
Last, I know people are upset about the recasting. Okay. Well, there are people who are wanting to see Kirk and Spock, but only in the forms of Shatner and Nimoy. I would like to see them both put on the uniforms, but I feel that they're too old to do so and carry a movie. What they're doing with Nimoy (according to rumor) is great, but he's also in a limited role. I think there comes a point where a role has to be recast in order for it to continue. That's why we've had multiple actors play James Bond. Will subsequent actors be as good as the originals? Probably not, because they defined that role. But at least they could bring their own spin and expand upon that role, just as actors such as George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig have done in Bond. To various degrees of success, but each has brought something new and different to the role, and I can watch all of them. I eagerly await to see what Quinto and Pine bring to Spock and Kirk and Pegg and co. to Scotty and the rest. It could be awesome! But I think we have to be open-minded as fans in order for it to succeed. Someone is taking a risk here. Abrams didn't have to dig into the Trek box, but he apparently pursued it, something that many Hollywood big names don't do these days, and I want to see what he can bring.
As for the Enterprise...well, I've read on other boards (sorry, I do read other boards) that recasting actors is one thing, "recasting the Enterprise, them's fightin' words". I must say, I'm shocked by this. No one is recasting the Enterprise. It's being redesigned. The Enterprise is a ship, a set, a model about "that big" (sorry for the Galaxy Quest reference). It's a thing, and while we put a lot into the Enterprise (I love the Enterprise and what it represents), I think we should remember that it's not about the ship. It's about the characters and the story. And I remember reading somewhere that's how Roddenberry felt. He felt that it wasn't about the Enterprise and didn't want people to think that it was a character, because it wasn't. It was a spaceship and the people were the focus. I'm not normally one to ring the "Roddenberry's vision" bell, but I know that there are people who do that a lot, and if any of them do that and feel that the Enterprise shouldn't be messed with or say it's being "recast", then I think they should recheck how Roddenberry felt about it and stop making assumptions based upon their idea of what his vision was. I remember reading that somewhere, and if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong and none of what I just wrote matters. But if I'm right, I hope it will at least remind everyone to re-examine some of their opinions and re-think some of the things that they say and accuse others of.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, some times I'm embarrassed to be a Trek fan because of all the crap that "Trek fans" say and do and nitpick about. It's not so much their ever expansive knowledge or commitment to knowing all that there is to know about Trek. That's wonderful. It's the nitpicking and the constant "this is what it's supposed to be" or "this is the only way" attitude. There are fans who even what this movie to fail. I say to you, if this movie fails, we won't get Trek for a long time, and those of you who want it to fail because Shatner isn't in it, then you'll never get Shatner in it because by the time Paramount finds Trek again, Shatner will most likely be in a wheelchair, if not six feet under. I want this movie to succeed, and I'm excited by the potential. And if Nimoy likes the script, and we all know he passed on Generations because of its flaws and he was right, then doesn't that say something about it?
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
The "kitbashing" approach to modeling, first seriously used in Star Wars, is now passe. Look at more recent stuff and you'll see a shift away from building a model out of plywood and then layering tons of small model kit parts onto it.
You say "bland" but that's not a technical critique. And very few people really agree with you that "not covered with meaningless bits of junk" equals bland, I think. You're stating an opinion, and yeah, that's fine. But opinion is not the same as a reasoned critique. Remember that prior o the Enterprise, most models of spaceships were covered with all variety of "Greeblies." So by this argument, the "Rocky Jones, Space Ranger" and the original serialied "Flash Gordon" spaceships were actually more modern.
I think that a smoother appearance makes more sense. It's more REASONABLE as a design style. You won't find real spacecraft, or real aircraft, or real seacraft, or real AUTOMOBILES for that matter, that are considered "more advanced" for having lots of bits of junk stuck all over their outsides.
In fact, looking at motorcycles, the ones that are considered the most "cool" and most "advanced" tend to be the ones where the mechanical bits show the least.
So it's really a matter of what you EXPECT, based upon having grown up post-Star Wars. Right?
Oh, and the ship I just put up doesn't look to ME as though it's hanging from fishing wire. The "over-greeblied" stuff from Star Wars, on the other hand, does.
CGI doesn't mean "more detailed." Typically far from it.
The "kitbashing" approach to modeling, first seriously used in Star Wars, is now passe. Look at more recent stuff and you'll see a shift away from building a model out of plywood and then layering tons of small model kit parts onto it.
You say "bland" but that's not a technical critique. And very few people really agree with you that "not covered with meaningless bits of junk" equals bland, I think. You're stating an opinion, and yeah, that's fine. But opinion is not the same as a reasoned critique. Remember that prior o the Enterprise, most models of spaceships were covered with all variety of "Greeblies." So by this argument, the "Rocky Jones, Space Ranger" and the original serialied "Flash Gordon" spaceships were actually more modern.
I think that a smoother appearance makes more sense. It's more REASONABLE as a design style. You won't find real spacecraft, or real aircraft, or real seacraft, or real AUTOMOBILES for that matter, that are considered "more advanced" for having lots of bits of junk stuck all over their outsides.
In fact, looking at motorcycles, the ones that are considered the most "cool" and most "advanced" tend to be the ones where the mechanical bits show the least.
So it's really a matter of what you EXPECT, based upon having grown up post-Star Wars. Right?
Oh, and the ship I just put up doesn't look to ME as though it's hanging from fishing wire. The "over-greeblied" stuff from Star Wars, on the other hand, does.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
I'll have to agree with Cary - if the Enterprise were to look like the CG ship in his avatar
Then I would barf.
Luckily, it doesn't.
Chill out.
One of the key reasons for the redesign, if you want to talk technically, is to allow for more dramatic camera angles. If you watch Trek Remastered, you'll see that the good old Connie' doesn't look too great pulling off extreme maneuvers. A brick with streamlined fins would look even better.
This was addressed in the design of the Enterprise refit for TMP, and just as they were right then to make the change, Bad Robot is right now.
I'll have to agree with Cary - if the Enterprise were to look like the CG ship in his avatar
Luckily, it doesn't.
Chill out.
One of the key reasons for the redesign, if you want to talk technically, is to allow for more dramatic camera angles. If you watch Trek Remastered, you'll see that the good old Connie' doesn't look too great pulling off extreme maneuvers. A brick with streamlined fins would look even better.
This was addressed in the design of the Enterprise refit for TMP, and just as they were right then to make the change, Bad Robot is right now.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
'all I feel comfortable sharing'? How pretentious. Either spill it all or don't say anything.
What an attention grab.
'all I feel comfortable sharing'? How pretentious. Either spill it all or don't say anything.
What an attention grab.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
You noticed that too? How interesting.
Perhaps it's the fact we don't worship at the alter of JC.
You noticed that too? How interesting.
Perhaps it's the fact we don't worship at the alter of JC.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
In general I agree with you but for a different reason. It doesn't look good pulling Gs because it never has moved dramatically. It would be sort of like seeing a defensive tackle in a tutu. He might be immensely coordinated but he'll never look graceful. In spite of all of this, the TOS-R folks did a pretty good job with an emergency warp 8 power turn in the latest episode, The Deadly Years.
The same thing is true of the E-D, BTW. It was even more of a whale, maneuvering-wise. I remember a DS9 episode where they moved the station to protect the wormhole better. No. That didn't work, either.
I think you just lost half your audience with that last wisecrack.
In general I agree with you but for a different reason. It doesn't look good pulling Gs because it never has moved dramatically. It would be sort of like seeing a defensive tackle in a tutu. He might be immensely coordinated but he'll never look graceful. In spite of all of this, the TOS-R folks did a pretty good job with an emergency warp 8 power turn in the latest episode, The Deadly Years.
The same thing is true of the E-D, BTW. It was even more of a whale, maneuvering-wise. I remember a DS9 episode where they moved the station to protect the wormhole better. No. That didn't work, either.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
Well, I'll go as far to say that they're beautiful fraternal twins. Both far more beautiful than anything else out there. Guess that's the rub, here. How do you gild the lily?
It still amazes me that some of the most passionate postings and contentious threads about this movie are about the Enterprise above all else. They could've cast Carrot Top as Scotty, and it'd caused less a stir than a RUMOR of how the Enterprise will look.
They could say the movie revolves around keeping the Dodgers from moving to Los Angeles, and folks would say, "As long as they didn't fuck with the Enterprise."
This movie may sink or swim on how that ship looks. Seriously (I think).
JBElliott said:
Franklin said:
And after all, the STMP refit turned out to be more beautiful than the original.
Not hardly. TOS Entperise is the nicest looking of the lot by a wide margin.
Well, I'll go as far to say that they're beautiful fraternal twins. Both far more beautiful than anything else out there. Guess that's the rub, here. How do you gild the lily?
It still amazes me that some of the most passionate postings and contentious threads about this movie are about the Enterprise above all else. They could've cast Carrot Top as Scotty, and it'd caused less a stir than a RUMOR of how the Enterprise will look.
They could say the movie revolves around keeping the Dodgers from moving to Los Angeles, and folks would say, "As long as they didn't fuck with the Enterprise."
This movie may sink or swim on how that ship looks. Seriously (I think).
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
You are certainly entitled to your preference for the 60's era smooth scheme enterprise but i think making a comparison in terms of "real" craft is largely pointless since
1. we have no idea how an ftl ship should look and
2. even not knowing anything about the above it is reasonable to say that the saucer-hull-nacelle configuration we are used to is not the most sturdy arrangement.
Personally I find brunettes far more attractive than blondes - the next guy will have his own opinion.
For those who prefer the old version you've had 3 seasons worth of TOS and now the New Voyages for that ship - I'd say there's room enough to accomodate those of us who'd like to see a fresh permutation on the old gal.
You are certainly entitled to your preference for the 60's era smooth scheme enterprise but i think making a comparison in terms of "real" craft is largely pointless since
1. we have no idea how an ftl ship should look and
2. even not knowing anything about the above it is reasonable to say that the saucer-hull-nacelle configuration we are used to is not the most sturdy arrangement.
the dirty ship look predates star wars, refer to the artwork of Chris Foss and others of that time period. I think the point of the "greebles" or whatever is not to render anything more believable per se but to make it more visually interesting for the audience.
and there it is. I suppose the two sides of this debate will never see eye-to-eye because it is just a matter of visual preference.
Personally I find brunettes far more attractive than blondes - the next guy will have his own opinion.
For those who prefer the old version you've had 3 seasons worth of TOS and now the New Voyages for that ship - I'd say there's room enough to accomodate those of us who'd like to see a fresh permutation on the old gal.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
JC admits to being a purist and doesn't want any design changes to Enterprise. It's a point of view that I can understand and respect, though not agree with.
If I am interpreting his remarks on trekmovie.com correctly, he prefers the original Enterprise to the refit TMP enterprise. I actually prefer the TMP Enterprise (probably my favorite Trek spaceship). If they are making similar type changes for this movie then I'll probably like it.
JC admits to being a purist and doesn't want any design changes to Enterprise. It's a point of view that I can understand and respect, though not agree with.
If I am interpreting his remarks on trekmovie.com correctly, he prefers the original Enterprise to the refit TMP enterprise. I actually prefer the TMP Enterprise (probably my favorite Trek spaceship). If they are making similar type changes for this movie then I'll probably like it.
Re: James Cawley (New Voyages) has seen the Ship (Its Aweful
In most fans opinions the most boring part of the movie. It's very cool when you see the shot of the front, but come on, it lasts like an hour.
Listen folks, because James Cawley doesn't like it doesn't mean you should base your opinions on his. His production has pieces so ACCURATE to the original, that the REAL Star Trek borrowed from them. (In A Mirror Darkly)
New Voyages is on one extreme side, and the reboot "Star Trek" is on the other extreme side. I think they both provide lots of good fun and entertainment for either camp. I encourage everyone to go DL some New Voyages episodes right away. It's TOS Trek without the dust and scratches of film. Great show.
In most fans opinions the most boring part of the movie. It's very cool when you see the shot of the front, but come on, it lasts like an hour.
Listen folks, because James Cawley doesn't like it doesn't mean you should base your opinions on his. His production has pieces so ACCURATE to the original, that the REAL Star Trek borrowed from them. (In A Mirror Darkly)
New Voyages is on one extreme side, and the reboot "Star Trek" is on the other extreme side. I think they both provide lots of good fun and entertainment for either camp. I encourage everyone to go DL some New Voyages episodes right away. It's TOS Trek without the dust and scratches of film. Great show.
- Status
