Aw, come on. Of course you want to argue with me.I'm fine with that. I love arguing. And it appears that I'm wrong anyway. You know what that means, right ? Yep, I'll have to see the movie again !

Aw, come on. Of course you want to argue with me.I'm fine with that. I love arguing. And it appears that I'm wrong anyway. You know what that means, right ? Yep, I'll have to see the movie again !
Excelsior's "new" warp drive would be so called because unlike the old engines it would be theoretically capable of entering transwarp, in much the same way that a jet aircraft -- unlike a propeller driven aircraft -- would be capable of breaking the sound barrier.It's a possibility, also, assuming the TNG books are wrong. It's never mentioned as such, however, and with Voyager saying Transwarp is something the Federation don't have, I think it's unlikely.
Yes we do. The same overly large window appears on the refit as it did in that one brief scene where the bridge window appeared oddly enlarged to zoom in on kirk. My distinct impression was that this was a second version of the CG Enterprise model with the window shape and proportions altered and that ILM "cheated" and used the new model (shown only from the front) earlier in the movie because the same shot didn't look right using the older one.No I checked very closely when I saw it the second time around. We don't see the ship from the front.
This.In a 200 million dollar production, there is no such thing as a VFX oddity. The camera zooming in on Kirk standing behind the bridge window is an elaborate shot that needed a specifically created CG model. So if that one is different to the other model, it is clearly because the filmmakers favor composition over continuity. They didn't go: "oh gee, we wanted Kirk standing behind the big glass viewscreen, but the model doesn't have that window, so let's skip that shot".Oh and I wasn't the one talking about the bridge window, that was King Daniel Into Darkness.
Yeah, but he's just discussing it as a curiosity. You extended it to a commentary on the entire film and the filmmakers, instead of just a VFX oddity, which is silly.
It's basically the same thing as 78 decks on the Enterprise-A in The Final Frontier. Shatner wanted an exciting scene in a turbolift shaft. So he decided continuity wasn't as important as the excitement of the sequence.
It really isn't.That is plainly wrong.
So, we'll add infallibility not only in themselves but also in everyone that works for them to the list of alleged directorial superpowers.
Yes we do. The same overly large window appears on the refit as it did in that one brief scene where the bridge window appeared oddly enlarged to zoom in on kirk. My distinct impression was that this was a second version of the CG Enterprise model with the window shape and proportions altered and that ILM "cheated" and used the new model (shown only from the front) earlier in the movie because the same shot didn't look right using the older one.No I checked very closely when I saw it the second time around. We don't see the ship from the front.
Ironically, it's kind of like what happened with TNG between the 4 foot and the 2/6 foot models. The 4 footer, built much later into Trek's run, looks VERY different from the 2-footer OR the 6-footer, has different textures, different proportions, different window sizes, etc.
Probably because the window proportions of the old model didn't work for that shot so they filmed it with the new one instead, realizing that nobody would notice the switch.Yes we do. The same overly large window appears on the refit as it did in that one brief scene where the bridge window appeared oddly enlarged to zoom in on kirk. My distinct impression was that this was a second version of the CG Enterprise model with the window shape and proportions altered and that ILM "cheated" and used the new model (shown only from the front) earlier in the movie because the same shot didn't look right using the older one.No I checked very closely when I saw it the second time around. We don't see the ship from the front.
A distinct possibility. I just don't know why they'd cheat, since they presumably didn't delete the files of the "old" model.![]()
My issue with the ship scales for JJ's reboot is that the ships seem too big. A super-ship for no reason just seems dumb.
If Starfleet was planning to go to war larger ships would be a necessity to carry troops and supplies. A ship like the Vengeance would be very useful under that type of scenario.
These ships are grains of sand on a beach compared to the size of a star system. I don't think the larger sizes really constitutes an issue except for those who are locked in on how big ships should be based on the prior series/movies.
Why would a capital ship be transporting soldiers and equipment into a battle? Wouldn't that function be better handled by a dedicated transport?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.