Remember this?! Doesn't look so bad now does it???

[CaptainHawk1]

Any yes, there are enough similarities that Gabe himself has begun another redesign to avoid confusion between his ship and the Abramsprise.

I mean seriously, how can one not at least think that Church ripped off Koerner.

I obviously don't have anything concrete to prove it other than MY OWN EYES but you have to be blind or delusional not to at least entertain the idea that Mr. Church was -- shall we say, "inspired?"-- by Koerner's work.

I don't see the similarities. The nacelles look a lot different in my opinion. The saucer section and bridge area looks more like the movie Enterprise's than Koerner's to me. The dishes look about as dissimilar as dishes can be, but hey, the original had a dish too, so what can you do? And, realistically, how many unique things can you really do that will keep to the original basic design, but not actually appear to "copy" from someone else?

^ Exactly. Church didn't rip off anyone.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I mean seriously, how can one not at least think that Church ripped off Koerner.

I obviously don't have anything concrete to prove it other than MY OWN EYES but you have to be blind or delusional not to at least entertain the idea that Mr. Church was -- shall we say, "inspired?"-- by Koerner's work.

Or you may simply have to have enough respect for two artists whom you don't know that you don't choose to accuse one of theft from the other because you perceive similarities in their work.

If you're uncomfortable with or dubious about the enormous likelihood of coincidence in any field creative endeavor - writing, visual arts, music - then you're either underexposed to much of either or not paying attention (there's a reason that legal charges of musical plagiarism are generally adjudicated by specialists, after all).

Would you as blithely say "Matt Jefferies stole his set designs from Alfred Hirschmeier?" I'll bet you wouldn't (and if you would, I wouldn't respect that either).

There's really only one significant element of resemblance in the two designs that doesn't track pretty obviously to the fact that they're both variations on Jefferies' original, and that's the fact that both have cowlings of some sort on the front of the engines - cowlings that resemble those on jet engines of various kinds, oddly enough; cowlings that also resemble elements on previous "Star Wars" designs. That's peculiar - certainly both of these guys has seen the "Star Wars" movies; which of them has worked on one?

Why don't you go ask Gabe how "ripped off" he thinks he was, rather than blustering about here calling someone a thief because you think two things look alike?

 

[Sector 7]

IMO, it boils down to 'sour grapes'. Many are fans of other takes on the original, but Ryan Church's Enterprise made it to the big screen. Although I like Church's E the best, it doesn't mean it was stolen any more than Koerner's was stolen from Matt Jeffries'. Both take the original in a different direction.

 

[THE CHEBB]

My favorite still is Gabe Koerner's and is it just me or did Church rip off a whole lot of design elements from Gabe?

I'm a pretty big fan of Gabe's work, and would have loved to see his design as the rebooted Enterprise, not that I don't like Church's take either.

 

[Vektor]

I feel the need to point out that the Foolerprise shown at the top of page 1 of this thread was never intended to be a serious design, it was intended to do exactly what it did, make people gasp in a sort of fascinated horror at the thought that it just might be real. When Anthony Pascale first proposed the idea to me, the plan was to create a fairly typical, blatantly ridiculous April Fool's joke of a starship design, but I thought it would be more fun to create something with just enough plausibility to it that people wouldn't immediately know it was a joke.

There was a lot of speculation at the time over what the new ship might look like, much of it driven by cynical expectations that Abrams and company would screw it up in some outrageously fanboyish way. I deliberately set out to play on those fears, incorporating as many of those speculations as I could into the Foolerprize, everything from TNG-style warp grills to battleship-like phaser turrets (you can imagine my amusement when the Kelvin was first revealed and turned out to have an array of weaponry not unlike battleship gun turrets!). I didn’t just Frankenstein it all together, though, I tried to make it look like something that at least a small, deranged segment of the fan base might actually like. I consciously mimicked John Eaves’ graphic style with a smattering of others thrown in for some added ambiguity, then staged the photograph to look like a janitor or some other passerby might have snapped it with a cell phone. I even altered the time stamp to place it during the lunch hour when such an opportunity might be more likely to occur. Anthony and I figured a few people might be taken in by it but I think we were both surprised by the reaction and the controversy it kicked up, even from some people within the industry.

So, in answer to the question posed by the original poster: Yes, it still looks that bad, as it was meant to.

Personally, I’m not 100% thrilled with the new Ryan Church Enterprise but it has grown on me since I first saw it. I respect his artistic talents and design sensibilities, even if the direction he went is not quite the one I would have chosen. I’m sure many of you have seen my own take on an updated TOS Enterprise design (click for larger versions):






Obviously, I have a more traditional view of what the Enterprise should look like, at least when I’m not trying to pull an April Fool’s joke with it. I do have to mention, though, that if you look very closely, you may notice that the warp nacelles are nearly identical to the Foolerprise, minus the glowing grills on top. Sometimes you find things you really like in unexpected places, something everyone would do well to keep in mind as they go off to see the new movie.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

I mean seriously, how can one not at least think that Church ripped off Koerner.

I obviously don't have anything concrete to prove it other than MY OWN EYES but you have to be blind or delusional not to at least entertain the idea that Mr. Church was -- shall we say, "inspired?"-- by Koerner's work.

Or you may simply have to have enough respect for two artists whom you don't know that you don't choose to accuse one of theft from the other because you perceive similarities in their work.

Settle down there, tiger, I never called him a thief, so don't put words in my mouth. What I suggested is that it looks like the elements were ripped off. Your'e stating it matter-of-factly that he didn't copy from Koerner, with nothing to back it up. I simply offered my own opinion in that there are features that look very similar. Your argument is that if you have enough respect for the artist you have to throw objectivity out the window and can never even consider such a thing. Bullshit.

If you're uncomfortable with or dubious about the enormous likelihood of coincidence in any field creative endeavor - writing, visual arts, music - then you're either underexposed to much of either or not paying attention (there's a reason that legal charges of musical plagiarism are generally adjudicated by specialists, after all).

Yawn.. you bore me. You've got nothing so you resort ot painting me as ignorant. Nice try but

Would you as blithely say "Matt Jefferies stole his set designs from Alfred Hirschmeier?" I'll bet you wouldn't (and if you would, I wouldn't respect that either).

There's really only one significant element of resemblance in the two designs that doesn't track pretty obviously to the fact that they're both variations on Jefferies' original, and that's the fact that both have cowlings of some sort on the front of the engines - cowlings that resemble those on jet engines of various kinds, oddly enough; cowlings that also resemble elements on previous "Star Wars" designs. That's peculiar - certainly both of these guys has seen the "Star Wars" movies; which of them has worked on one?

The devil is in the details. Of course the ships are going to follow the same basic pattern: saucer, dorsal, engineering, nacelles, pylons. But when you look at the individual design elements they share several similarities. It's disingenuous and yes, delusional to suggest that they don't.

Why don't you go ask Gabe how "ripped off" he thinks he was, rather than blustering about here calling someone a thief because you think two things look alike?

Yawn... you still bore me. I didn't call anyone a thief. I suggested that it looks like several elements were ripped off. That's my opinion and it isn't wrong because some blowhard says it is. Grow up. Why don't you stop blustering and carrying the torch for something that you have no first-hand knowledge of. You have no idea what goes on in the mind of someone else during their creative process. And not for nothing, evn if he did intentionally use the same elements, I never suggestedthat there was anything wrong with that. Inspiration comes from a lot of sources.

 

[Michael]

I never called him a thief, so don't put words in my mouth. What I suggested is that it looks like the elements were ripped off.

I didn't call anyone a thief. I suggested that it looks like several elements were ripped off.

Do you even know what to rip off means?

 

[CaptainHawk1]

So, in answer to the question posed by the original poster: Yes, it still looks that bad, as it was meant to.

I knew that and the saucer is what really makes it look ridiculous (as intended) but the rest of it, sans the glowing grills on the top of the nacelles actually seems to make sense.

Personally, I’m not 100% thrilled with the new Ryan Church Enterprise but it has grown on me since I first saw it.

I kind of feel the same way. I really don't like it but its growing on me. I'm tolerating it and I'm I'll be the first to buy a case of kits of it whenever its released as a model kit.

 

[Gepard]

sans the glowing grills on the top of the nacelles actually seems to make sense.

Oh, come on. The glowing grilles are awesome.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

I never called him a thief, so don't put words in my mouth. What I suggested is that it looks like the elements were ripped off.

I didn't call anyone a thief. I suggested that it looks like several elements were ripped off.

Do you even know what to rip off means?

Yes, junior I do. Do you know how to read and comprehend English? I know from prior postings that you don't know how to completely read a post so I'm not surprised that I have to explain things in detail for you to keep up. What part of looks like don't you get?

Also, calling him a thief would imply that I believe that there is some kind copyright violation/theft of intellectual property. I never remotely suggested that and in fact, if you read the last line of the post you selectively quoted from (and the one prior), you'd notice that I made the point to say that I didn't suggest that there was anything wrong with using someone else's work as inspiration even if it was ripped off.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

sans the glowing grills on the top of the nacelles actually seems to make sense.

Oh, come on. The glowing grilles are awesome.

Well, maybe if they weren't on top.

 

[Gepard]

Well, maybe if they weren't on top.

To be fair, the new Enterprise has glowing blue grilles on the bottom.

 

[milo bloom]

Just quickly glancing at this and I totally see the new design under different lighting, it's that close to my eyes.

And I still think the proportions of the new one just seem "wrong". And don't give me the "altered timeline" baloney, I don't have a problem with it looking different, I have a problem with it looking "wrong".


And I'd love to see those old alternate Enterprise sketches realized as ships in some future production.

 

[Captain Pike]

rip off, Slang.
a. to steal or pilfer.
b. to rob or steal from.
c. to swindle, cheat, or exploit; take advantage of: phony charity appeals that rip off a gullible public.
http://dictionary.reference.com

 

[Captain X]

There are still people who claim to see no similarities between the NX-01 and the Akira, too.

As for Gabe's thoughts, they're posted at SFM: link

[Text removed, per board policy. Just follow the link, if you wish to read what Gabe said. - M']

(hopefully he doesn't mind me posting this...)

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I didn't call anyone a thief. I suggested that it looks like several elements were ripped off.

Yeah...why don't you look up the term "rip off" or "ripped off." Start with this one, but you'll find plenty to back it up and be hard-pressed to find one that you can twist sufficiently to support your interpretation:

1. To steal from: thieves who ripped off the unsuspecting tourist.
2. To steal: ripped off a leather jacket while ostensibly trying on clothes.
3. To exploit, swindle, cheat, or defraud: a false advertising campaign that ripped off consumers.

You posted that it was "reasonable to think" Church is a thief. Otherwise, I wouldn't have wasted a moment on your silly claim.

Now, your attempts to deny that your posts say what your posts say...well, bore me.

 

[The Doctor]

There are still people who claim to see no similarities between the NX-01 and the Akira, too.

As for Gabe's thoughts, they're posted at SFM: link

[Text removed. Follow the link to read. - M']

(hopefully he doesn't mind me posting this...)

I saw Gabe's post on SFM and it seemed awfully like sour grapes to me.

In any case, there is only the most superficial similarities between Gabe's take and Church's, mostly because they were working from the same source material.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

In any case, there is only the most superficial similarities between Gabe's take and Church's, mostly because they were working from the same source material.

Exactly so.

I saw Gabe's post on SFM and it seemed awfully like sour grapes to me.

[Text removed. - M']

Gabe shouldn't post drunk, is all.

 

[datas_cat_spot]

I don't get how the Abramsprise can be a direct ripoff of a supposedly perfect update of the original, and at the same time still look nothing like the original. It hurts my brain.

 

[Tralah]

I really feel as though I'm missing something in my Trekkie brain that should make me want to care about this. People talk about the proportions not being right, but I truly can't see it. I see that they proportions vary from design to designs, but I'm not seeing how one way for a make believe spaceship is more "correct" than the other.