That's not MY ship...!
- Thread starter Praetor
- Start date
The main complaint she had? "Where are the red doors???"
That is amazing
I guess I do have a bit of an attachment to the Enterprise-D as something more than a ship. I grew up with TNG on syndication in the 90s... I remember going with my dad to see First Contact... one of the few times I remember actually waiting in a line to go to a movie.
I thought the Enterprise-E was cool (at the time anyways) but something bothered me, something I couldn't quite put my finger on. Took me a while to realise it, but I missed the Enterprise-D. The -E could never really replace my Enterprise. It was like watching your childhood home get bulldozed and replaced with a flashy nightclub. I certainly relate to many persons who intensley dislike the NuEnterprise for this very reason.
I thought the Enterprise-E was cool (at the time anyways) but something bothered me, something I couldn't quite put my finger on. Took me a while to realise it, but I missed the Enterprise-D. The -E could never really replace my Enterprise. It was like watching your childhood home get bulldozed and replaced with a flashy nightclub. I certainly relate to many persons who intensley dislike the NuEnterprise for this very reason.
Am I the only one who liked the Enterprise E better than the Enterprise D? A lot of people here seem to be against it. I was immediately impressed upon seeing the new uniforms and new ship when I watched "Star Trek: First Contact" for the first time (hadn't seen DS9 yet at that point) and thought they were huge improvements over what had come before on TV. People say the E started looking ugly in Insurrection and Nemesis, but I don't remember those movies well enough to decide whether I agree. All I know is that I thought it was a lot cooler and more appropriate-looking for the big screen when it was introduced in "Star Trek: First Contact".
^ I always liked the ENT-E over the -D's design. Between the dinky-sized nacelles and the huge saucer section, the latter just always looked odd to me.
That being said, I didn't like the way the ENT-E was "introduced" in FC. That could've been handled/done a lot better, IMO.
Cheers,
-CM-
That being said, I didn't like the way the ENT-E was "introduced" in FC. That could've been handled/done a lot better, IMO.
Cheers,
-CM-
I haven't seen the film yet and doubt I will because of some things I've read here and in other threads about the film! In a few posts I've seen referances to a J.J., who is this?
The reason I'll probably not see this film, it seems like someone is rewriting TOS from the beginning!
James
The reason I'll probably not see this film, it seems like someone is rewriting TOS from the beginning!
James
Thread necromancy!!! 
Thanks, Aneas.
I was actually very, very excited at the time. I remember buying a Trek magazine just to read details about the E, that only had one tiny picture. I was unhappy that the D had been destroyed, but I thought the E looked good when I first saw it in FC. However, something still felt a little off and I couldn't figure out what. Still, I enjoyed the movie so I paid little attention. Then, I was underwhelmed by the quality of the CGI effects in "Insurrection" and noticed more that things felt off. By the time "Nemesis" rolled around (and it got it's horrible face-lift
) I finally realized that it just didn't feel like TNG.
Later, I developed problems with the way the ship was actually introduced and the problems it creates with the dynamics of the crew itself, not unlike the problems I have with TVH. (So the ship blows up, and the crew, the whole crew, save Worf, just gets a new ship? Riight. Makes Starfleet's mistrust in Picard FC a little more well-placed.
)
Herkimer Jitty really nails it for me:
The D was that special ship of my childhood for me, too. So it's really not that I dislike the design or the E itself, it's more that I diliske the way it was introduced and dislike why it was created, because without the ship, it didn't felt like TNG to me. I'm one who was always fascinated with machinery - ships, planes, cars, and so forth. I get very protective of my own cars, so I completely get the notion of the crew getting attached to their ship, and I completely see the ship as another character. You lose or change that character, you lose something.
And, even though I've grown to actually like the nuEnterprise (well, the exterior) much more than I ever thought I would, I also completely understand why many people hate it.
That's your call, but I would go see it, at least once, if you have the cash to spare. And don't wear your nitpicker's cap. I left mine at home. Also, remember it's not a prequel or rewrite, per se.
Thanks, Aneas.I was actually very, very excited at the time. I remember buying a Trek magazine just to read details about the E, that only had one tiny picture. I was unhappy that the D had been destroyed, but I thought the E looked good when I first saw it in FC. However, something still felt a little off and I couldn't figure out what. Still, I enjoyed the movie so I paid little attention. Then, I was underwhelmed by the quality of the CGI effects in "Insurrection" and noticed more that things felt off. By the time "Nemesis" rolled around (and it got it's horrible face-lift
) I finally realized that it just didn't feel like TNG. Later, I developed problems with the way the ship was actually introduced and the problems it creates with the dynamics of the crew itself, not unlike the problems I have with TVH. (So the ship blows up, and the crew, the whole crew, save Worf, just gets a new ship? Riight. Makes Starfleet's mistrust in Picard FC a little more well-placed.
)Herkimer Jitty really nails it for me:
The D was that special ship of my childhood for me, too. So it's really not that I dislike the design or the E itself, it's more that I diliske the way it was introduced and dislike why it was created, because without the ship, it didn't felt like TNG to me. I'm one who was always fascinated with machinery - ships, planes, cars, and so forth. I get very protective of my own cars, so I completely get the notion of the crew getting attached to their ship, and I completely see the ship as another character. You lose or change that character, you lose something.
And, even though I've grown to actually like the nuEnterprise (well, the exterior) much more than I ever thought I would, I also completely understand why many people hate it.
That's your call, but I would go see it, at least once, if you have the cash to spare. And don't wear your nitpicker's cap. I left mine at home. Also, remember it's not a prequel or rewrite, per se.
You're not alone, Too Much Fun! I've always adored the Enterprise-E. The Sovereign is one of the most beautiful ships in science fiction to me.
What. So...is there a torpedo threshold we should be aware of? Where if it has more torpedoes than X a mount,a ship is no longer a Star Trek ship?
What. So...is there a torpedo threshold we should be aware of? Where if it has more torpedoes than X a mount,a ship is no longer a Star Trek ship?
I wouldn't say it made it "Star Wars-y" per se... but there are two big problems for me with all those torpedo launchers from "Nemesis." One is that in TNG-era Trek we know that a single torpedo launcher can fire multiple torpedoes at once, so that would seem to decrease the benefit of multiple launchers. The second is that many of those launchers are in locations where it would seem difficult to load the torpedoes into them.
Also, you must remember that the E already not only had the main "turret" that fires the quantorps (and IIRC, it was the original notion that the turret was the only place that could, due to whatever special requirements the quantorps imposed) but two launchers forward below the deflector and two aft, at the bottom of the secondary hull undercut. "Insurrection" also suggests another one on the spine of the secondary hull.
I don't mind the changes to the nacelle pylons for "Nemesis" and the additional phasers, but I still think the torpedo launchers and the blending between the saucer and secondary hull back around shuttlebay one was a bit much.
Also, you must remember that the E already not only had the main "turret" that fires the quantorps (and IIRC, it was the original notion that the turret was the only place that could, due to whatever special requirements the quantorps imposed) but two launchers forward below the deflector and two aft, at the bottom of the secondary hull undercut. "Insurrection" also suggests another one on the spine of the secondary hull.
I don't mind the changes to the nacelle pylons for "Nemesis" and the additional phasers, but I still think the torpedo launchers and the blending between the saucer and secondary hull back around shuttlebay one was a bit much.
I also preferred the E to the D. It looked more graceful, and the proportions remind me of the ol' movie-era Enterprise refit/Ent. A.
I think the hull should be smoothed out, though. It has too many 'racing stripes'
Too many lines and gizmos everywhere.
I think the hull should be smoothed out, though. It has too many 'racing stripes'
Too many lines and gizmos everywhere.
If it's not a prequal or a rewrite, what is it!
James
James
Too True!
I grew up with Trek from TNG on. I had issues with a few ships, not just the Enterprise, but with the Intrepid class and Ambassador class mainly. I have been and always will be in love with the Big A. And I cannot describe why. Perhaps it was the huge Polar Lights Enterprise-A model kit my mom bought for me one Christmas when I was 11 or so. I dont hate the Excelsior class persay, but like Scotty said "Why would you want that bucket of bolts?".
I always thought Ferengi ships looked like horseshoe crabs...
I always thought Ferengi ships looked like horseshoe crabs...
You're not alone, Too Much Fun! I've always adored the Enterprise-E. The Sovereign is one of the most beautiful ships in science fiction to me.
What. So...is there a torpedo threshold we should be aware of? Where if it has more torpedoes than X a mount,a ship is no longer a Star Trek ship?
I dunno. the Ent-E in FC seemed right. after that it was firing torpedoes from up the wazzoo! kinda ruined the beauty & balance a little.
3-5 is a pretty reasonable loadout for a Federation ship. Any more than that and you're gonna start taking up more space than is necessary. (Tube length and clearance, loading mechanisms and storage magazines. I doubt there's one central magazine - there has to be a decent supply near each tube, I'd imagine.)
the Ent-E starts off with a decent number 2 aft, 2 fore 1 fore q-torp turret.
they then add another tube in front of the bridge. they than add a ugly dual launcher behind the bridge (it really stands out) then they another dual behind the shuttle bay(i think). they go way OTT.
they then add another tube in front of the bridge. they than add a ugly dual launcher behind the bridge (it really stands out) then they another dual behind the shuttle bay(i think). they go way OTT.
Similar threads
