Ryan Church's design, don't mince words, what do you really feel?

[Captain_Rogers]

Rogers, who was saying that we should use 1960s SFX and the model in the Smithsonian ... just checking here. I'm not seeing anyone.. nope... nope.. still checking.. nope... no one... nope.... okay, zero.

I have a dream, a dream where people who like the new movie can discuss it, and its flaws, and its strengths, without shitting on everything from the generations before. After all, without all that, you wouldn't even HAVE this movie.

Sorry, where are you seeing mention of the 60's model in this thread? Not seeing anyone, ..nope...nope.... Still checking......nope..... no one....zero.

Oh wait, you went to my profile AFTER you got the last thread closed, read all my posts looking for something to start trouble with and found me mentioning someone ON ANOTHER Forum ranting about models hanging from wires etc. Check.

No relevance to this thread at all. Check.

Have a nice night.

 

[M'Sharak]

Looks to me like the new phaser wasn't too far of a stretch from John Eaves concepts for Enterprise phasers.
http://johneaves.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/ent-prop-2.jpg?w=655&h=485

http://johneaves.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/ent-prop3.jpg?w=655&h=567

[Hotlinked images converted to links. Images posted inline should be hosted on webspace belonging to you. - M']

Johnnymuffintop, I've already converted a hotlinked image you posted in another thread today, and I'm doing the same here. Please do not hotlink images; refer to TrekBBS image-posting policy here.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

Same here. Not because I don't love the original ship, but just because I want to see something NEW.

The thing I was most looking forward to with this movie wasn't the story or characters-- it was seeing how they'd reimagine and rethink the original designs. I just love that kind of shit.

I agree.

If they had used the original TOS enterprise, it would be like going to a dealer (with a boatload of money) to buy the Rolls Royce Phantom, and being presented with the Rolls Royce Phantom from 1925 (photo from the back). It's a lovely car for the period but damn, it is quite dated; just like the TOS enterprise.

If design sensibilities would always stay the same, we wouldn't need many designers nowadays, would we? We could just keep using the same logos, business identities and product designs we used a hundred years ago.

 

[Gepard]

If design sensibilities would always stay the same, we wouldn't need many designers nowadays, would we? We could just keep using the same logos, business identities and product designs we used a hundred years ago.

You fail to understand that the original Enterprise isn't a dated design because it's not a 1960s interpretation of what the 23rd century might look like. No. It is a design from the 23rd century. You see, Gene Roddenberry wasn't always a writer for television. He used to be a cop. (Shocking!) And the secret they don't tell you is, he was on the beat the day Kennedy was shot. All that stuff he wanted to put in movies about Spock being the shooter on the grassy knoll? All true. He was there. And he got the drop on the time-traveling alien from the future who had traveled to the past, and made him tell everything about the future that that same alien had come from, via the time travel he used to go into the past. Really. The story about Matt Jefferies designing the Enterprise in 1964 was just cover for the amazing future knowledge that they had, about events that would effect us...in the future.

Anyway, that's why Ryan Church is a hack.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

You fail to understand that the original Enterprise isn't a dated design because it's not a 1960s interpretation of what the 23rd century might look like. No. It is a design from the 23rd century.

If it was a design from the 23rd century, it would be designed in the 23rd century, but it is not. It's a design for what something in the 23rd century might look like, designed and interpreted by someone from the 60's. So, it's a 1960's design.

Really, by your logic, today's household would look like in those 30's and 40's comic strips. In those days, people extrapolated the technology of the year 2000 to look like rocket-shaped vehicles. And they'd vehemently defend that idea. The only problem being that, now we've actually arrived in that century, we see that those ideas are ludicrous at best.

Any design made for the future is, by nature, dated to the period it was made in. There is no argument that can be made otherwise.

You see [...] Anyway, that's why Ryan Church is a hack.

You know, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be people who'd argue that you are absolutely right about Gene.

But still, I'm not going to delete my post -- took me to long to type. So there.

 

[Chrisisall]

it's not a 1960s interpretation of what the 23rd century might look like. No. It is a design from the 23rd century.

Not any more. Because it was employed in THIS time period, it will no longer be NEW in the future, so a different design will come to pass.

Future Temporal Mechanics Professorisall

 

[Gepard]

But still, I'm not going to delete my post -- took me to long to type. So there.

I like that you took me seriously there for a second.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

But still, I'm not going to delete my post -- took me to long to type. So there.

I like that you took me seriously there for a second.

There was this nagging sensation in the back of my brain that you were probably sarcastic, but the alarm bells only started ringing at the last sentence, so you certainly fooled me there.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Rogers, who was saying that we should use 1960s SFX and the model in the Smithsonian ... just checking here. I'm not seeing anyone.. nope... nope.. still checking.. nope... no one... nope.... okay, zero.

I have a dream, a dream where people who like the new movie can discuss it, and its flaws, and its strengths, without shitting on everything from the generations before. After all, without all that, you wouldn't even HAVE this movie.

So you want the Trek fandom to stop doing what members of it have been doing on and off for the past 40 years?

 

[M'Sharak]

But still, I'm not going to delete my post -- took me to long to type. So there.

I like that you took me seriously there for a second.

There was this nagging sensation in the back of my brain that you were probably sarcastic, but the alarm bells only started ringing at the last sentence, so you certainly fooled me there.

I find that entire exchange reassuring.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

...a dream where people who like the new movie can discuss it, and its flaws, and its strengths, without shitting on everything from the generations before.

So you want the Trek fandom to stop doing what members of it have been doing on and off for the past 40 years?

Oh, snap!

 

[Chrisisall]

So you want the Trek fandom to stop doing what members of it have been doing on and off for the past 40 years?

I remember in the 70's as a kid having an argument with another fan over whether another planet could evolve the same flag as us because of Omega Glory, LOL.
It never ends.