The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!

[Son_of_Soong]

The first Transformers teaser showing a Decepticon on Mars wasnt accurate. Whoever that transformer was he didnt make it into the movie. They just created a quick 3 second silhouette to let people know that the movie is coming, to announce the release date, and that their serious about making it.

Whos to say the Star Trek teaser isnt any different? It might not even make it into the movie, it could be something just to show the world that the movie is coming. I dont understand why anyone would say its a waste of time based on what little we know so far.

I should also point out that the teaser the images came from finish with the words "UNDER CONSTRUCTION"... for all you know that means the ship designs as well, not just the whole movie itself.

 

[Forbin]

Sheep = those who accept anything the powers-that-be dole out, subsuming reason or artistic taste, as long as they get their fix.

Trevanian - easy, dude. We miss you over at HobbyTalk, don't get banned from here too.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Forbin said:
Sheep = those who accept anything the powers-that-be dole out, subsuming reason or artistic taste, as long as they get their fix.

No, actually it's Sheep = "those who strongly hold an opinion the labeler dislikes, if there are a lot of them."

The real reason that some complaints about this trailer are so voceriferous is that when some people are "getting their fix" other folks aren't.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

aridas sofia said:

Is someone with his head up his ass about whether or not this film caters to him and his need for minute detail a twit? Oh, yes. Very much so. Very much so.

In fairness, it is reasonable for someone to complain that something does not appeal to his tastes. That is exactly the thing he is most qualified to comment on -- his own tastes. It is then up to others to decide on appropriate evidence whether they have similar tastes.

The question of whether this design matches the original is multifaceted. Some will complain because they embrace the interconnected "canon" that renders Trek some kind of big story. Some will complain that they will miss seeing on the big screen an artistic vision and sense of style that they enjoyed on TV. I could care less about "canon" but love Matt Jefferies' art, so I will miss seeing it. But I will also be the first to say a well-conceived story that is served by an altered artistic vision will be well worth seeing.

At this point however, none of this can be determined.

Oh, I agree completely; however, unlike you who is rational and constructive in your criticisms, I tire of others whose sole purpose is to stir the shit and come across as holier-than-thou when it comes to other's enjoyment. Robert April has done more than voice a complaint, he's gone out of his way to steer conversations into the denouncement of those who might, god forbid, enjoy the movie.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

This whole thing might be irrelivent anyway. The images we've seen might not even be in the movie. Back to the Future created 'stand alone' teasers and trailers and stuff that were only quick draft stuff.

 

[Data Holmes]

middyseafort said:

aridas sofia said:

Is someone with his head up his ass about whether or not this film caters to him and his need for minute detail a twit? Oh, yes. Very much so. Very much so.

In fairness, it is reasonable for someone to complain that something does not appeal to his tastes. That is exactly the thing he is most qualified to comment on -- his own tastes. It is then up to others to decide on appropriate evidence whether they have similar tastes.

The question of whether this design matches the original is multifaceted. Some will complain because they embrace the interconnected "canon" that renders Trek some kind of big story. Some will complain that they will miss seeing on the big screen an artistic vision and sense of style that they enjoyed on TV. I could care less about "canon" but love Matt Jefferies' art, so I will miss seeing it. But I will also be the first to say a well-conceived story that is served by an altered artistic vision will be well worth seeing.

At this point however, none of this can be determined.

Oh, I agree completely; however, unlike you who is rational and constructive in your criticisms, I tire of others whose sole purpose is to stir the shit and come across as holier-than-thou when it comes to other's enjoyment. Robert April has done more than voice a complaint, he's gone out of his way to steer conversations into the denouncement of those who might, god forbid, enjoy the movie.

Indeed.

 

[David cgc]

Forbin said:
Sheep = those who accept anything the powers-that-be dole out, subsuming reason or artistic taste, as long as they get their fix.

But, if you accept only that which the powers-that-be doled out, past tense, then you're a refined individual of discerning taste.

Also, this is probably the last thing subject you want to consider in the light of reason and taste. Is it really tasteful to just go over the same one or two 42-year-old designs, constantly reassembling it and dissecting it? Is it really reasonable to fiddle with different special effects, designs, and costumes and then condemn the people who are actually in charge of the damned thing for doing the same thing?

 

[Santaman]

Back on topic, I think the "thing" they show isn't even remotely close to the 1701 which is a dissapointment for me personally...

 

[Arlo]

I'm having a wonderfully perverse pleasure watching the lunatic fringe lose their frikkin' minds over the particulars of this movie. Gonna be a fun year

 

[Santaman]

LOL

I'm not going to get all worked up about it, I just like the good old 1701 design a lot and the later refit, Vektor, Prof Moriarty etc showed so many times that there's nothing wrong with the original E that I am a tad dissapointed that TPTB can't come up with anything close to what they have demonstrated.

 

[ancient]

The original Enterprise is my favorite design. Just because I'm not throwing a fit over the very limited view of the ship we got in the trailer, it doesn't make me a 'sheep', it just means that I'm willing to watch the Movie and give the new design a chance. Abrams isn't trying to make us 'forget' the classic ship, or pretend this is the same one that we saw in the 60's show. He just wants to make a movie. Based on the old show.

 

[Arlo]

Santaman said:
LOL

I'm not going to get all worked up about it, I just like the good old 1701 design a lot and the later refit, Vektor, Prof Moriarty etc showed so many times that there's nothing wrong with the original E that I am a tad dissapointed that TPTB can't come up with anything close to what they have demonstrated.

I like them too, but as we haven't even SEEN the whole ship in it's final form, I'm not ready to pass judgement. I'll chime in on that matter the day after the movie opens.

 

[largo]

that's the elephant in the room, though, isn't it?

what will the klingons look like?

 

[ancient]

The elephant in the room turned out to be that little welder guy standing on the huge redesigned ship.

New ship? Meh.

Guy with torch? NOT. FANON.

 

[Holytomato]

"I'm having a wonderfully perverse pleasure watching the lunatic fringe lose their frikkin' minds over the particulars of this movie. Gonna be a fun year"

Yes! :thumbsup:

Wait til they find out Nyota Uhura is wearing...

P A N T S



"I just like the good old 1701 design a lot and the later refit, Vektor, Prof Moriarty etc showed so many times that there's nothing wrong with the original E that I am a tad dissapointed that TPTB can't come up with anything close to what they have demonstrated."

But...the ships they designed are not the design we saw in DS9's Trials and Tribblations. Which is THE DESIGN used on TOS from 1966-1969.

So, if you must follow CANON tm then you must comdemn theVektor, Prof Moriarty etc designs as VIOLATIONS OF CANON tm.

 

[The Doctor]

Personally, I'm surprised that the Big E looks as close to the original as it does. For the vast majority of the viewing public that go see this movie, the new design will be indistinguishable from the old.

Myself, I always liked the Koerner-prise, so seeing this new incarnation going in a similar but more subuded direction is a good thing in my books.

 

[Forbin]

Holytomato said:

"I just like the good old 1701 design a lot and the later refit, Vektor, Prof Moriarty etc showed so many times that there's nothing wrong with the original E that I am a tad dissapointed that TPTB can't come up with anything close to what they have demonstrated."

But...the ships they designed are not the design we saw in DS9's Trials and Tribblations. Which is THE DESIGN used on TOS from 1966-1969.

So, if you must follow CANON tm then you must comdemn theVektor, Prof Moriarty etc designs as VIOLATIONS OF CANON tm.

Not as long as they're fans doing it for fun, and Paramount isn't using those meshes to replace the existing Enterprise in an official production. Or is the difference between fan projects and real movies too hard to grasp?

 

[Vance]

I am a canon violator.

My TOS ships have gangways.

... this... unit... must... die.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

Geez.. now you went and made Vance self-destruct! What a mess....

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The Stig said:
Personally, I'm surprised that the Big E looks as close to the original as it does. For the vast majority of the viewing public that go see this movie, the new design will be indistinguishable from the old.

That's true, at least from the angle we've seen.