Should 1701-A just have been another refit Constitution class?

[enterprisecvn65]

For films V and VI, the symbolism of the Old Generation commanding the face of the New Era could have been so much more effective than simply putting them on another refitted Connie. To the average viewer --or even the casual Trekkie --giving them another Connie also cheapened the death of the original 1701. It was a reset button of sorts. But it wouldn't have been if Our Heroes would have been given an Excelsior class. And the conversations and themes they had in both TFF and TUC could have been even more vivid if the 1701-A would have been an Excelsior class.

From what I understand, you have pissy fans to thank for that.

Apparently the whole point of building the Excelsior model was that it would have eventually been Kirk's new command after the NCC-1701 was destroyed. It was built the way it was by ILM because it was a much easier model to film than the unwieldy TMP Enterprise.

But apparently a bunch of self-serving fans wrote letters complaining that they hated the Excelsior and that they didn't like the rumor that it was going to be Kirk's new ship. So instead of ignoring these whiny assholes, the movie producers decided to cater to them and bring back the TMP Enterprise, which caused consternation at ILM because they always hated filming it.

Yeah I heard how several ILM people were thrilled with the prospect of destroying the model of the 1701 in TSFS because it was such a pain in the ass to work with and shoot but Paramount told them basically "Are you out of your fucking minds? We spent a quarter of a million bucks on this thing we're not going to have you destroy it just for joy because it makes your job harder.....build a cheaper one for the destruct scene" Which is what the did.

I never thought Excelsior was "ugly" per say I just thought it looked kind of ungangly and clunky and lacked the graceful lines of the Enterprise refit. It's like comparing one of the classic ocean liners like the Queen Mary or the United States to one of those modern Royal Caribbean mega cruise ships. They're both impressive in their own way but the older liners just have a grace and beauty about them that the new ones cant match.

Personally (I know I'm going to catch major shit for this) I always thought Enterprise-D was ugly. It kind of reminded me of a slug the way the main deflector dish was shaped and the way the saucer was an oval and the whole thing was rounded and didn't have many sharp corners, plus just too many damn windows. I grew a certain fondness for it over time and even bought the toy of it, but it never mesmerized me like the 1701 refit did. Just the same way a Ticonderoga class cruiser will never mesmerize me the way an Iowa class battleship will, it just doesn't have that something special that makes it truly beautiful IMHO.

 

[urbandefault]

Count me as one who never liked the Excelsior class.

As far as giving Kirk another refit Connie, I remember the reveal in the theater. No other ship could have generated the same emotional response from the audience. No, it wasn't Kirk's ship, but it brought our heroes home. I think Kirk actually said as much.

I'm sure it's been discussed at length but I don't remember reading it -- why didn't ILM like shooting the refit model as built for TMP? I know they repainted it for TWOK, and I think it was a shame to waste the beautiful original finish.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

Count me as one who never liked the Excelsior class.

As far as giving Kirk another refit Connie, I remember the reveal in the theater. No other ship could have generated the same emotional response from the audience. No, it wasn't Kirk's ship, but it brought our heroes home. I think Kirk actually said as much.

I'm sure it's been discussed at length but I don't remember reading it -- why didn't ILM like shooting the refit model as built for TMP? I know they repainted it for TWOK, and I think it was a shame to waste the beautiful original finish.

First of all it was huge, over 8 feet, which was a good thing for the first reveal and slow actions in TOS but not so good when filming quicker paced scenes like in TWOK and TSFS. So it took a long time to reposition when they shot it from different angle and apparently the interior lighting was a pain in the ass to keep in working order and if something needed to be fixed the model wasn't built with many removeable panels to access things inside easily so it was difficult to work on the interior of it. Also it was hard to get the lighting on it right for scenes like the nebula because it had been painted in such a specific way for TOS and even repainting it couldn't totally fix that issue.

Ironically it was almost TOO detailed to make look real on film because any little fault would be so noticeable so basically it took a lot of hard work to get it to look just right on film and ILM guys just griped about it. But of course when they did get it shot right which was the vast majority of the time (I'm not counting the guy working out of his basement in New Jersey who did TFF) It looked amazing on film.

Reliant, Excelsior and Grissom were apparently much easier to work with and film, which is why they were on TNG so much and you never saw a Constitution refit. Also ironically the model of the Enterprise was about a foot bigger that the Excelsior one. When in the film the Excelsior was supposed to dwarf the Enterprise.

Like i just said many ILM people were excited to blow it up when they heard the Enterprise was going to be destroyed in TSFS Paramount said "Uh....$250,000 to build....you ain't destroying it for cathartic reasons" and they built a much smaller, cheaper one for the destruct sequence.

 

[Vger23]

For films V and VI, the symbolism of the Old Generation commanding the face of the New Era could have been so much more effective than simply putting them on another refitted Connie. To the average viewer --or even the casual Trekkie --giving them another Connie also cheapened the death of the original 1701. It was a reset button of sorts. But it wouldn't have been if Our Heroes would have been given an Excelsior class. And the conversations and themes they had in both TFF and TUC could have been even more vivid if the 1701-A would have been an Excelsior class.

From what I understand, you have pissy fans to thank for that.

Apparently the whole point of building the Excelsior model was that it would have eventually been Kirk's new command after the NCC-1701 was destroyed. It was built the way it was by ILM because it was a much easier model to film than the unwieldy TMP Enterprise.

But apparently a bunch of self-serving fans wrote letters complaining that they hated the Excelsior and that they didn't like the rumor that it was going to be Kirk's new ship. So instead of ignoring these whiny assholes, the movie producers decided to cater to them and bring back the TMP Enterprise, which caused consternation at ILM because they always hated filming it.

I find this whole sentiment fascinating. The fans are "whiny assholes" NO MATTER WHAT. Change something? They will revolt. Keep something the same? Revolt.

It's why Star Trek will never return in its television form (and probably won't continue past the next film). You can't please the fanbase, no matter what you do.

 

[Ithekro]

And yet Doctor Who presses onwards.

 

[Dukhat]

I find this whole sentiment fascinating. The fans are "whiny assholes" NO MATTER WHAT. Change something? They will revolt. Keep something the same? Revolt.

It's why Star Trek will never return in its television form (and probably won't continue past the next film). You can't please the fanbase, no matter what you do.

But these days it's not about "pleasing the fanbase." It's about getting the general audience (of which there are far, far more people) to spend money to see a Star Trek movie that under normal circumstances they wouldn't have bothered with in a million years. That's why Star Trek '09 was such a financial success and Star Trek: Nemesis was such a flop.

Also, I love the Abrams films, but absolutely hate the nuEnterprise design. However, unlike those whiners from yesteryear, I'm not about to contact Paramount with my displeasure, even though it would be a lot easier for me to do so via the internet than writing snail-mail letters like they did. Why? Because I know (and so does Paramount) that the design of the ship is not going to stop me from continuing to watch the films. And the general audience doesn't give a shit what the ship looks like; they just want to see an entertaining movie.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I find this whole sentiment fascinating. The fans are "whiny assholes" NO MATTER WHAT. Change something? They will revolt. Keep something the same? Revolt.

It's why Star Trek will never return in its television form (and probably won't continue past the next film). You can't please the fanbase, no matter what you do.

But these days it's not about "pleasing the fanbase." It's about getting the general audience (of which there are far, far more people) to spend money to see a Star Trek movie that under normal circumstances they wouldn't have bothered with in a million years. That's why Star Trek '09 was such a financial success and Star Trek: Nemesis was such a flop.

Yep. The latest movie received somewhat mixed reaction among the die-hard Trekkie fanbase, but look at the user reviews on Rotten Tomatoes - a whopping 90% positive score. Moviegoers loved it. It's wider appeal is why it made half a billion dollars.

 

[dub]

Re: Should 1701-A just have been another refit Constitution clas

The latest movie received somewhat mixed reaction among the die-hard Trekkie fanbase, but look at the user reviews on Rotten Tomatoes - a whopping 90% positive score. Moviegoers loved it. It's wider appeal is why it made half a billion dollars.

The reason is obvious, I think. General moviegoers don't instantly recognize TWOK dialogue when they hear it. Trekkies do. That's why it's wildly popular generally, but varied among Trekkies. Some Trekkies love the lifted dialogue because of the twist and how nicely it fits into the movie. Others not so much because it feels like a parody. Both opinions are valid. Both are subjective. Of course there are more/other reasons on both sides, lens flares, too actiony, underwater Enterprise, yada yada, but just based on the opinions I've read (not based on a scientific poll or anything) that's the heart if the issue with STID. Well, at least it is for me. If I wasn't so familiar with TWOK, I bet I'd be right in there with the 90%. But you can't unsee what you've seen. You can't unknow what you know. And frankly, as much as you might want to, you can't unfeel what you feel.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

I find this whole sentiment fascinating. The fans are "whiny assholes" NO MATTER WHAT. Change something? They will revolt. Keep something the same? Revolt.

It's why Star Trek will never return in its television form (and probably won't continue past the next film). You can't please the fanbase, no matter what you do.

But these days it's not about "pleasing the fanbase." It's about getting the general audience (of which there are far, far more people) to spend money to see a Star Trek movie that under normal circumstances they wouldn't have bothered with in a million years. That's why Star Trek '09 was such a financial success and Star Trek: Nemesis was such a flop.

Also, I love the Abrams films, but absolutely hate the nuEnterprise design. However, unlike those whiners from yesteryear, I'm not about to contact Paramount with my displeasure, even though it would be a lot easier for me to do so via the internet than writing snail-mail letters like they did. Why? Because I know (and so does Paramount) that the design of the ship is not going to stop me from continuing to watch the films. And the general audience doesn't give a shit what the ship looks like; they just want to see an entertaining movie.

Basically Star Trek did what Batman did in reverse. Batman started out trying to cater to real fans and the mass audience, but with each new film it became more and more about making it for the masses and not the hard core fans until it reached it's ridiculous climax in "Batman and Robin" where it was so stupid that even the general audience didn't want to see any more.

So Batman Begins decided to go back to the roots and appeal to the core fans, but the film was so damn good that even the massed liked it too, not an easy trick to pull off. James Bond has done it several times where they've had a run of films that started off for the serious Bond goers but got more and more silly for the masses until it hit critical mass and they hit reset and went back to darker films that seemed to please both groups. Moonraker to For Your Eyes Only and Die Another Day to Casino Royale being the best examples.

TMP was obviously made for hard core Trekkers, but after it flopped critically they lightened up on the cerebral stuff to make it more friendly for all goers, and still keep the fan base happy, and did successfully for the most part with TWOK, TSFS, TVH and TUC (That's it, there were 4 more TOS movies made after TMP just 4...do you hear me?)

Starting with the TNG films it seemed each new film was made more and more for the core fans and turned the masses off, only problem is the films weren't even very good by most core fans standards.

So with "Star Trek" they did the anti-Batman begins. They got away from trying to please the fanboys to a more widespread audience kind of film and the financial results speak for themselves. Some Trekkers were ok with it, some hate it, but that's the way it is.

George Lucas on the other seemed determined to make a series of "Star Wars" films that both die hard SW fans AND the general public would think were completely stupid and come to loathe with a passion......and he succeeded spectacularly.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Some Trekkies love the lifted dialogue because of the twist and how nicely it fits into the movie. Others not so much because it feels like a parody.

I had to restrain myself from laughing out loud during the death scene. I was entertained...I was enjoying it...but I have to wonder if I was enjoying it the way the filmmakers intended....

 

[publiusr]

I think the 1701-A should have been freshened up a bit--as in here:
http://timflattery.com/work/star-trek/

Or the Balson prise http://i.imgur.com/9TYY7iB.jpg

That bottom drawing to me looks more like what we got on screen anyway.

The 1701-A should be recognizable, a bit sleeker, but still definitely not the Excelsior.
Nothing to interfere when Kirk says "We've come home."

 

[Maurice]

Okay, first of all, ILM would never have considered blowing up the Enterprise hero model. First, models not designed for pyro are not used for it (they don't blow up right), and once you blow up a model you can never go back if you need to redo or add a shot. Sure, some of the ILM guys loved the idea of blowing up the ship (in the film) because they probably figured they'd never have to work with it again.

Second, the model was not "too detailed". The original pearlescent paintjob was so reflective it caused issues, and those issues were worse at ILM because they used bluescreen as opposed to the hi-con matting technique Trumbull used. ILM ended up dulling down the paintjob to make it less reflective.

It's amusing to see what a game of "telephone" it becomes when people repeat these stories and end up embellishing them.

 

[Dukhat]

I think the 1701-A should have been freshened up a bit--as in here:
http://timflattery.com/work/star-trek/

Or the Balson prise http://i.imgur.com/9TYY7iB.jpg

That bottom drawing to me looks more like what we got on screen anyway.

The 1701-A should be recognizable, a bit sleeker, but still definitely not the Excelsior.
Nothing to interfere when Kirk says "We've come home."

Both of those designs are just examples of changing things just for the sake of changing them, not because they serve any real purpose. That's why the nuEnterprise looks the way it does. If you're going to make a new ship, then make a new ship. Don't make an old ship with different nacelles.

 

[InklingStar]

Someone on another thread mentioned how TWoK was about changing the direction of the series, and TSfS and TVH were about resetting it to what was familiar and comfortable. When TWoK begins, the crew have all been reassigned - Chekov is on Reliant, Kirk is at Starfleet Command, Spock is a teacher, and Uhura, Scotty, and Sulu are apparently only along for the ride, presumably to head off to new assignments after the training cruise. The movie introduces David and Saavik, new characters to take the mantle from the old crew. By the end of the movie, Spock is dead.

Imagine if TSfS did not happen. What comes next? The franchise could go anywhere from here. But Spock came back. Then they destroyed the Enterprise, but then it came back too. By the end of TVH, everyone is in the exact same position they were in at the end of "Turnabout Intruder". The franchise flirted with growth and change for a moment, but then returned to what was safe, comfortable, and familiar. Replacing the Enterprise with a ship that looked just like the old one was one more symptom of this return to safety.