It looked great in 1979 in the theatre, but in close examination on the DVD with its relentless detail, I am forced to agree.
However, ILM used different lenses and mostly corrected that in subsequent flicks IMO.
Redesign RANT!!!! (Plus, an op to post my model pic again)
- Thread starter Chrisisall
- Start date
However, ILM used different lenses and mostly corrected that in subsequent flicks IMO.
Exactly... which is why I consider my daily trip to the airport totally unrealistic. After all, each day I'm faced with seeing airplanes that look essentially unchanged since 1965.
Where are the "futuristic", "21st century" special airplanes?
I mean if I was time traveling from 1965 to 2010, the first place I would have gone was the airport to look at the cool new designs for airplanes... and then been totally disappointed.
The original Enterprise wasn't an attempt at style... it was an attempt to portray a utilitarian design around the fictional world's technologies. Style was something that Jefferies was attempting to avoid... Function over style.
After all, what style elements were used in the design of the USS Nimitz? Because they continued using the design up to the USS Bush.
The original Enterprise is awesome for the very reason that it doesn't have any of the artsy elements of the TMP design and later (specially the STXI version).
But hey, artsy people make up the entertainment industry, so artsy looking designs are what we'll be getting from now on (even if the real world doesn't work that way).
In films, as in all fiction, the lamest excuse for the implausible is "it happens in real life." The only measure of plausibility is what an audience will accept, and there's no reason to think that what the few traditionalists want in this case would have impressed anyone else.
Subjective opinion. No one has ever made a solid case that a mildly tweaked original TOS E design wouldn't work on the big screen. It's been said enough so a lot of people might assume so, but that doesn't make it factual.
I question your logic in this matter, Dennis.
There's no reason to think that what the few traditionalists want in this case would NOT have impressed anyone else.
But Trumbull was coming from 2001 and Silent Running.
The TMP Enterprise was larger than the Phase II Enterprise (8 feet compared to just over 5 feet for the Phase II model). But ILM hated the TMP Enterprise for it's size, which is why the Reliant model was about two-thirds the scale of the refit model (and both models got the same up close types of shots in TWoK).
But you are right... for somethings you need something more than the hero models, and both the refit and Reliant had "bigiatures" stand-in sections made for them.
Funny... audiences have proven that they are capable of accepting a great spectrum of things. But of course I wasn't advocating one over the other, just addressing this quote...
"Well technology moves on you know...as credible as the design was in the 60s, its just not for today."
You could address that quote as well. 
Just a thought.
That's funny, I thought it was called "verisimilitude."
Reinterpreting an established design doesn't always work.
Current Mustang is a generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Beetle is a generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Mini is a generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Camaro is generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Charger looks nothing like the original and is ugly as sin.
JJprise superficially resembles MJ's design, but totally lacks majesty, grace and visual balance of the original.
Current Mustang is a generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Beetle is a generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Mini is a generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Camaro is generally good redesign of the original concept.
Current Charger looks nothing like the original and is ugly as sin.
JJprise superficially resembles MJ's design, but totally lacks majesty, grace and visual balance of the original.
But Trumbull was coming from 2001 and Silent Running.
The TMP Enterprise was larger than the Phase II Enterprise (8 feet compared to just over 5 feet for the Phase II model). But ILM hated the TMP Enterprise for it's size, which is why the Reliant model was about two-thirds the scale of the refit model (and both models got the same up close types of shots in TWoK).
But you are right... for somethings you need something more than the hero models, and both the refit and Reliant had "bigiatures" stand-in sections made for them.
Funny... audiences have proven that they are capable of accepting a great spectrum of things. But of course I wasn't advocating one over the other, just addressing this quote..."Well technology moves on you know...as credible as the design was in the 60s, its just not for today."You could address that quote as well.
Just a thought.
During the original debate, the same posters would often claim in one post that the general public couldn't even tell one E from another but that they somehow wouldn't accept the classic design (which actually has more surface detail than the new design--just compare the old intercoolers to the fins they've been replaced with). I think that the nostalgia quotient--a big deal for the casual viewer who may be fond of trek but not an obsessive fan--would have been better served had we seen a ship that looked more like the one we saw on TOS.
I just got it last week and is at the top of my "to build" pile. The detailing looks wonderful on it and is very crisp. It included full aztecing decals, which I was impressed with. From my understanding, the kit was basically the same model as the studio scale PL kit (1/350 scale), just scaled back.It finally came out!
My Art Asylum Wrath of Khan E, with many custom paint corrections.
Do you have a picture of your Polar Lights E?
Chrisisall said:
LOL WUT?!
No kidding? 
I love both the TOS and the TMP versions. Both are beautifully designed and realized vessels. My only real problem with the Abrams Enterprise is with the nacelle struts. They make the ship look very blocky in the back (and not in a hot Jennifer Lopez way). It looks like someone backed into a wall and pushed it flat. While the original struts went straight up, and not angled back like TMP, they splayed out and put more distance between the nacelles. I find that more visually appealing. The thing that I like about the TMP design is that the "neck" angles out front, while the nacelle struts angle back (like a wide "V" connecting all that stuff to the lower hull). It's symmetrical and graceful. The new version has a nice, angled feel up front, and then shifts to a flat feel in the back. It's much more severe than the original and seems weird to me. Otherwise, I'm fine with it, on the outside.
My question is, why is this more "credible" a design than the prior versions? Why is the 60's model "less credible?" Aside from SFX technology, the design is actually timeless. Roddenberry wanted it that way: no rocket exhaust, fins, or weird art deco style architecture. Check out the TOS-R episodes; the ship does not display a 60's sensibility, like the Seaview from Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea which had Cadillac fins. There are details to be seen, but more could always be added without changing the design. The big dish antenna is the only thing I can see demanding replacement. Everything else is smooth, sleek, and removed from our era. And since Treknology has remained smooth and sleek, for the most part, this is not an aspect in any alleged dating of the design. Filming methods have dated, not the ship itself.
I'm not saying changes should never be made, and beauty is subjective, but there really isn't anything "wrong" with the original design, and considering that the only changes to it have been fairly minor cosmetic alterations, I'd say TPTB agree. The most recognized Enterprise is, and always will be, a saucer, lower section, and two warp nacelles. Changing the angles of some struts seems like a way of making a change in order to make it "their" Enterprise. I can't imagine it would have made any difference to the general audience who made the film a huge hit. I hardly think the Enterprise had that much to do with it.
*No twirling round lit up things in the front of 2 the big cylindrical tubes *
Well... asking politely for, anyway.
That dish, so copper and so retro, is one of my favorite things about the design. Of course, I realize just how much of a dog pile I'm inviting by using the word retro but eh, what are ya gonna do?
Well, it is funny that the dish was one of the last major elements added to the final design considering how people look at it today. Before there was a dish in that spot there was a cone structure there.
In the end, I really don't care too much what others think of the TOS Enterprise. I like it and spend a ton of time happily looking at my model of it...
I imagine I'll keep looking at that model until my second attempt is finished.
In the end, I really don't care too much what others think of the TOS Enterprise. I like it and spend a ton of time happily looking at my model of it...
I imagine I'll keep looking at that model until my second attempt is finished.