New series: Enterprise-B or -C?
- Thread starter MarsWeeps
- Start date
No, nor do today's rumors blasting across the internet. Your post sounds like GOP candidate Ben Carson on the debate stage.
Those scematics are for the (nearly identical) refit 1701 (which is Constitution class). A registry was never shown. 1701A being Enterprise Class is supported by FASA and the book "Mister Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" (written by Shane Johnson). Scotty is torn. He disagrees and agrees with both of us.
@PhaserLightShow
That's just some unofficial nonsense.
Not according to naval traditions which are laid on with thick liberty in both of Meyer's outings.
Hair spltting, and ultimately irrelevant. It's lineage is very very old, and has already been under the gun for being old, and outmoded, throughout the movie series.[/QUOTE]
Last edited:
Why would Scott be looking at schematics for a ship that wasn't his own headed into battle? FASA and Shane Johnson are wrong. It happens.
You do realise that Yesterday's Enterprise was filmed more than a quarter of a century ago, and as such the actors will look 26 years older. The actor who played Castillo is in his sixties! I think they'd have to recast.
Oh yeah!You do realise that Yesterday's Enterprise was filmed more than a quarter of a century ago, and as such the actors will look 26 years older. The actor who played Castillo is in his sixties! I think they'd have to recast.
@PhaserLightShow
"You do realise that Yesterday's Enterprise was filmed more than a quarter of a century ago, and as such the actors will look 26 years older. The actor who played Castillo is in his sixties! I think they'd have to recast."
This was what I was thinking. What a great opportunity to recast Captain Garrett. If an ep/eps actually feature the Enterprise C, I wonder who they will get?
This was what I was thinking. What a great opportunity to recast Captain Garrett. If an ep/eps actually feature the Enterprise C, I wonder who they will get?
I honestly don't see a point in doing that. What do you get from squeezing into that era that you wouldn't get and also be freer from starting further out in the timeline or just going for a full restart? Some nostalgia? The Ambassador Class? The red tunics?
I can see why a lot of people wanted to see the Sulu series take off, and I think back in 2000/2001 that might have been the better route to go because I think George Takei can lead the show. When he's allowed to do stuff he does a good job, but beyond that, forcing a creative team to work in between other stuff on a series that is NOTORIOUS for it's fanbase being continuity hounds it's just... It's a bad idea, ultimately. Better to follow the Russel T. Davies approach and generate a huge dramatic shuffling of the deck so that you can basically start fresh.
I'm not really sure I get the point, either. I mean, if the Enterprise B or C had a myriad of compelling stories to tell i'm sure Gene would have just started with them in the first place. The whole point of Next Gen moving as far away as it did and having those two ships in between was to be as fresh as possible. Doing a full-on prequel to the whole of Trek made sense because, in theory, you were also going to be starting fresh and have a few dramatic hooks to tie into the future history. In theory, of course... I just don't see a big point in shoehorning into these gaps. Especially because they'll need to be reinvented for 21st Century standards. We're far passed that technology now in a lot of ways.
Besides, what really big things could have happened between TUC and TNG? The Cardassian War which is closer to TNG, anything with the Stargazer which is also closer to TNG, The uneasy peace between the Klingons and the Federation? That's only worth a couple episodes at most, and we already know how that sorts out. So what would that show really be about?
I can see why a lot of people wanted to see the Sulu series take off, and I think back in 2000/2001 that might have been the better route to go because I think George Takei can lead the show. When he's allowed to do stuff he does a good job, but beyond that, forcing a creative team to work in between other stuff on a series that is NOTORIOUS for it's fanbase being continuity hounds it's just... It's a bad idea, ultimately. Better to follow the Russel T. Davies approach and generate a huge dramatic shuffling of the deck so that you can basically start fresh.
I'm not really sure I get the point, either. I mean, if the Enterprise B or C had a myriad of compelling stories to tell i'm sure Gene would have just started with them in the first place. The whole point of Next Gen moving as far away as it did and having those two ships in between was to be as fresh as possible. Doing a full-on prequel to the whole of Trek made sense because, in theory, you were also going to be starting fresh and have a few dramatic hooks to tie into the future history. In theory, of course... I just don't see a big point in shoehorning into these gaps. Especially because they'll need to be reinvented for 21st Century standards. We're far passed that technology now in a lot of ways.
Besides, what really big things could have happened between TUC and TNG? The Cardassian War which is closer to TNG, anything with the Stargazer which is also closer to TNG, The uneasy peace between the Klingons and the Federation? That's only worth a couple episodes at most, and we already know how that sorts out. So what would that show really be about?
I agree, which is why I think the JJ films should have just started afresh and left Nimoy out. The way they did it, fans will bitch for an eternity that Vger is still going to turn up right on schedule, or the Planet Killer, or the Whale Probe, etc. By paying lip service to continuity, they ended up making the people who care about it more angry, and those who don't care aren't bothered anyway. A clean reboot would have been wiser.
But sod it, it was Nimoy and he was amazing. I'd take any number of ironic canon violation avatars to have seen him as Spock again!
Why not both?
All we really know about the two ships is that the E-B was launched in 2293 with Harriman and the E-C was "destroyed" in 2344 with Garrett.
That's a 50 year gap.
Hypothetically, we could see a new captain and a new crew that followed Harriman and first served on the Excelsior Class B, but finished their journeys on the bridge of the Ambassador Class C, before Garrett.
This could be a cool way for a new series to "bridge the gap" between the larger Trek saga and the narrative of the Enterprise herself. For the first two seasons, our new heroes are on an aging Excelsior. It's destroyed at the end of Season 2 and the shiny new Ambassador is unveiled. We get to see a new crew of heroes on two different Enterprises and it would all sync up canonically.
Make it fresh and interesting. Weave the rich history into it in a intelligent and intriguing way.
All we really know about the two ships is that the E-B was launched in 2293 with Harriman and the E-C was "destroyed" in 2344 with Garrett.
That's a 50 year gap.
Hypothetically, we could see a new captain and a new crew that followed Harriman and first served on the Excelsior Class B, but finished their journeys on the bridge of the Ambassador Class C, before Garrett.
This could be a cool way for a new series to "bridge the gap" between the larger Trek saga and the narrative of the Enterprise herself. For the first two seasons, our new heroes are on an aging Excelsior. It's destroyed at the end of Season 2 and the shiny new Ambassador is unveiled. We get to see a new crew of heroes on two different Enterprises and it would all sync up canonically.
Make it fresh and interesting. Weave the rich history into it in a intelligent and intriguing way.
I don't think Gene had anything specifically against the lost gap period. He just chose about 100 years and a few starship designation letters away from Kirk, Spock, and the A.
And there's no reason anything "big" needs to be happening at all times in the new series in terms of interstellar politics (ie. Klingons, Romulans, Cardies, etc).
Go explore. Be creative. Still haven't touched the Beta Quadrant. Could get sucked into some intergalactic wormhole and end up in the Andromeda Galaxy. Anything.
I'd go with NCC-1701-B. We all know the fate of NCC-1701-C (Battle of Narenda).
Going over the Star Trek map, I kind of wonder how the Federation managed to cover more space on the other side of the Klingon and Romulan territories.
Going over the Star Trek map, I kind of wonder how the Federation managed to cover more space on the other side of the Klingon and Romulan territories.
Yes, I understand that they are 2D, but I'm talking about the far side of the Klingon and Romulan territories.
On the graphic attached, it shows blue Federation territory on the far eastern side, well into the Beta Quadrant. One star system that surprised me was the location of the Amargosa system (Star Trek Generations). That's clear across the Klingon Empire. Did the Federation claim that side of the Galaxy after the Khitomer conference?
On the graphic attached, it shows blue Federation territory on the far eastern side, well into the Beta Quadrant. One star system that surprised me was the location of the Amargosa system (Star Trek Generations). That's clear across the Klingon Empire. Did the Federation claim that side of the Galaxy after the Khitomer conference?
My problem with the above is that I really don't give a crap about the Enterprises B or C, or anything that happens in that time period.
Similar threads
