ST-One
Vice Admiral
...and I rather LOVE your ugly-as-hell Cour de Leon Class battlewagon, Mister Forbin sir!
I'm sorry...I just love ugly ships...
Yeah, that one is really great.
I mean it. I like this one.
Poll: The new Starship Enterprise
- Thread starter Professor Moriarty
- Start date
Yeah, that one is really great.
I mean it. I like this one.
I certainly don't. Both variations on a theme are equally valuable in my mind. That is what we have here. We KNOW this new film is clearly designed to "reinvent and reinvigorate" the franchise.
Personally, I think this new design is awkward and unappealing. I do not believe it even remotely resembles any design sketch or doodle that MJ would have deigned to approve of or condone. It certainly bears no resemblance to Mister Franz's collective works, and finally, it has no familiarity hallmarks that could be associated with the Sternbach/Okuda design philosophy.
I suspect it tends to lean more towards the Eaves-era design philosophy, but at the and of the day, this design just looks....awkward. Nevertheless, I will be going to see the film, but in all honesty, it will not change my thinking about what is best about Trek in general. I would say though, if they were going for a complete makeover, they should have created a complete makeover (Much as did nuBSG) complete with new uniforms (The TOS-style uniforms just look...out of place in this new effort) and starship design concepts (Ugly-as-hell spacecraft with lots of greebles and gimbles) all wrapped around a re-telling of the story of a group of people we are already familiar with (as was done with pulp sci-fi and the age of Bucky Rogers).
In the end, the best of Star Trek, in my view, has always existed on paper and in written word. I don't nescesarily need a new picture show to increase or decrease my love for the concept of Trek (Fan series and webisodes will be come more common place I'm sure, thus filling our cups with visual familiarity), and my respect for the film industry in general (But when oh when do we get Art for the sake of itself?) will remain healthy.
I'm not sure what your definition is for "analogy," but it sure doesn't apply here, SP. One of the big problems with the majority of these arguments is one side tries to make a point about the time in which the films/series are made, confusing it with the timelines being portrayed in the film/series, which is exactly what you've done here.Neither is J.J. Abrams. It's pretty clear that he expects everyone to notice that this movie is being made in the twenty-first century and that nothing in it looks like it did in 1966. There's no problem or contraction there. The analogy works just fine.
It doesn't matter whether the movie is made 40 years after the series - the timeline that is being promoted is one that occurs before TOS. You don't Photoshop a non-existent person into an old photo and say, "He's actually the father of the other guy in the photo, even though the son is wearing a striped longjohn swimsuit and the 'father' is wearing a Speedo, because, well, we were wearing Speedos when the Photoshop was done." Same logic.
Nah, the analogy works fine.
The only way that there is a problem, here, is when people adopt the critical position that this is real - that it represents something like actual history, a past which is in some respects immutable. It's from this kind of erroneous premise that we get all kinds of silliness about jets in WW II movies, or other obvious historical distortions.
This is a new version of a piece of fiction. There are no established facts about history or the appearence of anything that must be adhered to in order to be "accurate" or to "avoid mistakes."
Abrams isn't "telling us that this Enterprise looks like the 1966 Enterprise or in only a few short years it will look like the 1966 Enterprise." This version of "Star Trek" will never look like the forty year old version, and no one imagines that anyone will mistake one for the other.
It happens that the 2009 "Star Trek universe" doesn't look like the 1966 "Star Trek universe" - but there is no actual 23rd century history against which one can be judged to be accurate and the other not - all that can be established is which came first.
I agree with this. The new Trek is not being sold as TOS. It's being sold as a new version of TOS. The Mustang example is spot on.
There is no 'revisionist history' going on. That would mean actually taking TOS and altering it, which is not happening here. No one is trying to tell us this is what the 1966 TV show really looked like.
I guess I confused your hatred of Enterprise for fun, then.
I never did.
I hated Enterprise, so I was a lot less bothered by his stubborn streak then than I am now.
Guess it depends on whose ox is getting gored.
Although it occurs to me that I haven't been waiting nearly so long or in such frustration for the "return of 'Star Trek'" as some folks have, since I was enjoying it as late as 2005. Abrams and company are taking pretty much the approach to this thing - as far as I can tell - that I would have hoped new producers would, and that I hoped in the beginning the producers of "Enterprise" would. I guess what that series demonstrated in the end is that you really have to get the long-term protectors of the status quo out of the firing line before you can do anything really new and interesting.
There should be two polls IMO. One for the external re-imaging and one for the interior. I 'm not too sure about the internals yet. I always liked the open, bleak hall ways of TOS with the exception of the random, plastic, non-descrip do-dads hanging off the walls.
I'd tend to agree. I'm pretty happy with everything in the way of space shots, ship exterior designs etc shown in the trailer at this point. I'm a bit disappointed with the set designs aboard the Enterprise, though.
In other words, change the entire design.
Works for me.
Works for me.
No just get rid of the greeble parts :-)
When I look at the iBridge I am reminded of TNG "Parallels," where they added odd bits and pieces to make the bridge look different in each universe. I find myself wondering (and hoping) if maybe, when the oft-mentioned-at-trekmovie.com "final solution" goes down, that we will end up with a cleaner iBridge.
Personally, I'd just like to see the damn thing go up like a supernova, but that's probably just me.
If it's anything like my old Chevy Nova, it'll light up the night sky.
