My plan is to squat here long enough that I can adversely possess this website and ultimately claim total ownership of it.
Better you than me. The rivers would run red.
NEW Trailer description online!
- Thread starter James Bond
- Start date
Better you than me. The rivers would run red.
Unfortunately, the balance sheet would run very much the same way, I'm afraid!
My plan is to squat here long enough that I can adversely possess this website and ultimately claim total ownership of it.
Better you than me. The rivers would run red.
AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
I was at trekmovie.com, and read a report from the 12th.
http://trekmovie.com/2008/09/12/star-trek-trailer-description-online/
It quotes someone who's seen the trailer (set to be used in theaters in the not too distant future, apparently). Among other things, this person said the following-
"There look of the crew and the bridge is spot on and the costumes look like the original but with a more modern and practical twist."
Now, I'm going to assume they meant "thEIr", and not "there", but the key point is THE BRIDGE. We've seen pictures that didn't really look like the original bridge. We have seen descriptions of the costumes/uniforms, tho', and supposedly they look so much like the originals, the differences aren't worth mentioning.
Now, there's a reference that puts the bridge into the same "spot on" catagory.
If this person really knows TOS, I think things might be even better than we thought (with regards to things still looking the same as on the original series).
I like.
I was at trekmovie.com, and read a report from the 12th.
http://trekmovie.com/2008/09/12/star-trek-trailer-description-online/
It quotes someone who's seen the trailer (set to be used in theaters in the not too distant future, apparently). Among other things, this person said the following-
"There look of the crew and the bridge is spot on and the costumes look like the original but with a more modern and practical twist."
Now, I'm going to assume they meant "thEIr", and not "there", but the key point is THE BRIDGE. We've seen pictures that didn't really look like the original bridge. We have seen descriptions of the costumes/uniforms, tho', and supposedly they look so much like the originals, the differences aren't worth mentioning.
Now, there's a reference that puts the bridge into the same "spot on" catagory.
If this person really knows TOS, I think things might be even better than we thought (with regards to things still looking the same as on the original series).
I like.
Last edited:
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Why are things looking like they did on the original series makes them better?
Why are things looking like they did on the original series makes them better?
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Is that what we want - "looking the same" - though?
I want it to be the same spirit and direction as TOS. What I don't want is Hunt For The Red October or the Millenium Falcon... I want thoughtful, functional, and the general layout and feel the same. I don't want it "looking the same".
Is that what we want - "looking the same" - though?
I want it to be the same spirit and direction as TOS. What I don't want is Hunt For The Red October or the Millenium Falcon... I want thoughtful, functional, and the general layout and feel the same. I don't want it "looking the same".
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
As was pointed out in some posts above, "Spot On" could be a subjective thing. That one picture we saw of the bridge (the one with Abrams sitting at a console, typing on his laptop) did not show much of the bridge.
The bridge could have totally different consoles, but with the same basic layout (circular with perimeter consoles; captain's chair near the center; nav and helm consoles in front of the captain; main viewer in front of that) and could still be described by some people as "spot on" if the person making that statement thinks the bridge's basic layout is more important than the buttons, consoles, and finishes.
That picture we saw could have been of Abrams at one of the perimeter consoles in a bridge that has a very similar layout to the TOS bridge (but with different controls/finishes).
As was pointed out in some posts above, "Spot On" could be a subjective thing. That one picture we saw of the bridge (the one with Abrams sitting at a console, typing on his laptop) did not show much of the bridge.
The bridge could have totally different consoles, but with the same basic layout (circular with perimeter consoles; captain's chair near the center; nav and helm consoles in front of the captain; main viewer in front of that) and could still be described by some people as "spot on" if the person making that statement thinks the bridge's basic layout is more important than the buttons, consoles, and finishes.
That picture we saw could have been of Abrams at one of the perimeter consoles in a bridge that has a very similar layout to the TOS bridge (but with different controls/finishes).
Last edited:
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Maybe they meant There! Look at the crew and the bridge! It's spot-on and the costumes look like the original but with a more modern and practical twist!
Maybe it's a synthesis of this and the "Apple" look described previously by AICN: same shape, but more intuitive looking controls, smoother lines and curves. The console Abrams was at seemed to have that fanned half-circle look of the TOS bridge consoles but shinier, and possibly touchscreen buttons, like the TNG consoles.gagarin said:
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Don't expect it to be "faithful" in the sense that the more hardcore fans are hoping.
Don't expect it to be "faithful" in the sense that the more hardcore fans are hoping.
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Of course, but I also don't really think it'll be that two-deck thing that was rumored before though. I think the basic shape of two front consoles, a large viewscreen, a captain's chair, a bunch of stations in the back and a turbolift (or two) will be in tact. If it is that basic shape then it would make sense for the scale to be roughly in the ballpark of the show or movies seen so far.
I expect the real departures in set design will be places like engineering, the corridors, and some of the lesser-known rooms.
Of course, but I also don't really think it'll be that two-deck thing that was rumored before though. I think the basic shape of two front consoles, a large viewscreen, a captain's chair, a bunch of stations in the back and a turbolift (or two) will be in tact. If it is that basic shape then it would make sense for the scale to be roughly in the ballpark of the show or movies seen so far.
I expect the real departures in set design will be places like engineering, the corridors, and some of the lesser-known rooms.
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Because it's supposed to be the same continuity.
A while back someone posted some pictures of a TOS Enterprise they'd built digitally but supposedly had altered. I looked at it and said "Ummm....it's the same". Turned out it wasn't. Some others spotted differences. I told the guy "Listen, I'm of the 'CHANGE NOTHING' persuasion, and I can accept this as 'not changed'. Very nice job."
I've also given the example of the uniform collar not having the point at the bottom of it, and instead being straight. If that was done, I'd still have to count it as not changed. As it turns out, something very much along those lines IS what was done.
If the appearance of things isn't jarringly different, but gives the same general look as before, with maybe some tweaks here and there, I'm not going to be distracted. It'll still be essentially the same, and it'll be time to move on and have more TOS-era Star Trek.
Now, as to what is or isn't "jarringly different", I'd have to actually see something that is before being able to say that.
Because it's supposed to be the same continuity.
A while back someone posted some pictures of a TOS Enterprise they'd built digitally but supposedly had altered. I looked at it and said "Ummm....it's the same". Turned out it wasn't. Some others spotted differences. I told the guy "Listen, I'm of the 'CHANGE NOTHING' persuasion, and I can accept this as 'not changed'. Very nice job."
I've also given the example of the uniform collar not having the point at the bottom of it, and instead being straight. If that was done, I'd still have to count it as not changed. As it turns out, something very much along those lines IS what was done.
If the appearance of things isn't jarringly different, but gives the same general look as before, with maybe some tweaks here and there, I'm not going to be distracted. It'll still be essentially the same, and it'll be time to move on and have more TOS-era Star Trek.
Now, as to what is or isn't "jarringly different", I'd have to actually see something that is before being able to say that.
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
They are not "Re-making" TOS.
They are making a film that is supposed to be in the spirit of TOS, with the familiar TOS characters having the same personality traits they did in TOS, and abiding by the same major historical facts as the rest of the Star Trek universe.
To me, that IS existing in the same continuity.
EDIT TO ADD:
If the "in-universe explanation" for TNG's touch screens and displays being more advanced-looking than TOS's gum-drop lights and toggle switches is because TNG was set 80 years in the future, then I would say that was a ridiculous explanation.
It looked different because it was a TV show made 20 years later -- that's all. If I accepted that "in universe explanation" as I described above, then I would have no way of accepting that TOS took place in OUR future.
Bottom line:
If the "look" of the controls is that important to continuity, then there is no logical "in universe" way to explain the differences in the look between TOS and TNG
However, I can easily accept the differences in the look as simply being a later-produced TV show, just as this Film is a later-produced entry into the Star Trek universe.
They are not "Re-making" TOS.
They are making a film that is supposed to be in the spirit of TOS, with the familiar TOS characters having the same personality traits they did in TOS, and abiding by the same major historical facts as the rest of the Star Trek universe.
To me, that IS existing in the same continuity.
EDIT TO ADD:
If the "in-universe explanation" for TNG's touch screens and displays being more advanced-looking than TOS's gum-drop lights and toggle switches is because TNG was set 80 years in the future, then I would say that was a ridiculous explanation.
It looked different because it was a TV show made 20 years later -- that's all. If I accepted that "in universe explanation" as I described above, then I would have no way of accepting that TOS took place in OUR future.
Bottom line:
If the "look" of the controls is that important to continuity, then there is no logical "in universe" way to explain the differences in the look between TOS and TNG
However, I can easily accept the differences in the look as simply being a later-produced TV show, just as this Film is a later-produced entry into the Star Trek universe.
Last edited:
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
gastrof, as this TrekMovie article and the AICN report on the trailer are already being discussed in this thread, why don't I just merge the two threads?
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
So does TOS and TMP (Klingons), TWOK and the TSFS (Saavik), TUC and everything else (Klingon blood colour), TNG and DS9 (Trills), TOS and FC (zefram Cochran), TOS and TOS (Scotty's finger) and so on...
So does TOS and TMP (Klingons), TWOK and the TSFS (Saavik), TUC and everything else (Klingon blood colour), TNG and DS9 (Trills), TOS and FC (zefram Cochran), TOS and TOS (Scotty's finger) and so on...
^Agreed.
If only because it will infuriate the hard-nosers around here.
If the internet can get the "Muthafuckin' snakes" line inserted in Snakes On A Plane, then it should be no problem to post enough responses to get a sombrero shot in Trek XI.
Are you there, J.J.? It's me, Trekkie.
"NOW WATCH ME RAPE YOUR CHILDHOOD! MWAAAAAHAHAAAAHAAAHAAHA"
Re: AICN report from four days ago...the bridge (spoilers)
Next thing you'll be trying to tell me is they're recasting all the mains, with other people playing Kirk, Spock, McCoy... Come on. That'd never work.
Next thing you'll be trying to tell me is they're recasting all the mains, with other people playing Kirk, Spock, McCoy... Come on. That'd never work.
I was thinking the same.
You're showing by those references that you've been around here way, way too long Sam.
As have I. As have I.
Similar threads
