The OFFICIAL new Enterprise - Let the critiques begin!
- Thread starter Professor Moriarty
- Start date
saul said:
I don't have access to any graphics programs at the moment, or I'd do a comparison myself, but note that, at least in the trailer itself, the primary hull appears to be four decks thick at the outer rim.
Adjust your comparison pics accordingly.
trevanian said:
TheMacMan said:
Paper maché. Note the spelling.
Neat. how do you do that?
Ya gotta know the ASCI code.
On your keyboard, hold down the ALT key, while on the keypad type 0233. When you let go of the ALT key you'll get é.
I got a chart of such things with a program a looooong time ago and make sure I vere lose it.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Forbin said:
trevanian said:
TheMacMan said:
Paper maché. Note the spelling.
Neat. how do you do that?
Ya gotta know the ASCI code.
On your keyboard, hold down the ALT key, while on the keypad type 0233. When you let go of the ALT key you'll get é.
I got a chart of such things with a program a looooong time ago and make sure I vere lose it.
It that only because you guys have to use an American keyboard?
All I have to do is hit one key next to the backspace-key and then type the letter I need éééééé ááááá óóóóó ííííí ýýýý úúúúúúú
This isn't true at all. Just because they came to the same trendy conclusions doesn't mean they bothered to explore the alternatives. Let's face it, Hollywood is filled with ex-waiter/ex-ecutives who latch onto what has been successful for someone else, and then insist that everything else should follow that formula. What I really don't understand is these same people's tendencies to option a well-known property, presumably because that property is recognized as having proven successful elsewhere, and then proceed to strip out the very things that set it apart from the rest of the chaff. In this case, how does making Star Trek resemble every other recent sci-fi production, including a number of Trek movies that weren't exactly blockbusters, constitute 'visionary' or 'radical' thinking? Bigger and busier aren't, by definition, better. And again, we come down to this: the 'unwashed masses" wouldn't know the difference between a reimagined Enterprise and a one like Vektor's, which maintains both the form and spirit of the original in a package that would be both classic and acceptable to those same 'unwashed masses' used to the high-tech style of recent films, and at the same time, his design clearly strikes a chord with a good representative sample of hardcore fans. Both sides win!
I don't really see that this math is all that hard to follow.
I don't think that's relevant to any decisions made by talented people like Abrams and his design staff. Calling people "ex-waiters" is just dismissive rhetoric.
Leonard Nimoy is, among other things, an ex-vacuum cleaner salesman; Hemingway an ex-hobo and Einstein an ex-patent clerk.
In fact, the studio executives and producers both at the time of "Enterprise" and the entirely new groups running things now understood that there is no commercial future in pandering to the "hard core fans," which is what I was referencing in the Vance/Vektor exchange. This is smart.
If they somehow picked that common sense up in the course of waiting tables somewhere - well, actually, that's not terribly surprising when one thinks of it; a lot of bright kids pay their way through school and travel by that method.
^I don't have any clue either. All this discussion over a trailer that was made while the move was just wrapping up pre-production and heading into principal photography. I feel fairly certain in saying that what we saw in the trailer is not going to be what ends up in the final film cut. ILM probably is still working on the animatics right now. Yea, this might have been a first pass on the Enterprise, but she'll be further refined as the wrap principal photograph and continue through post production. My guess would be that the Enterprise may drift more towards the original look, but that's all up to J.J. as ILM brings him progress shots and animatics as the film progresses. I also suspect Paramount will have something to say about the final look too.
Q2UnME
Q2UnME
From what I've seen of this Enterprise, it really only confirms my expectations that Abrams simply does not have the creative wherewithal to make me excited about this movie. Using the original design would have, ironically, shown some creativity and originality on his part. And honestly, that might have been cool but I wouldn't have expected that from anyone. There are simply too many people who would not have accepted it. On the other hand, I personally really would not have cared if they hadn't used the original design if they'd actually come up with something that was at least a little new and artistically interesting. Aping current trends simply doesn't cut it.. for me, anyway.
I think a lot of people are going to like this movie because it's going to bring Star Trek back from c-list to b-list but that's just not enough to truly make me excited. I'll watch it and probably even have fun doing it, but at the end of the day I imagine it'll still be a big giant shrug.
Papier-mâché
Or in English, paper mache...
Just format the language in Word to get the accents. No biggy.
Or in English, paper mache...
Just format the language in Word to get the accents. No biggy.
If all that were happening, or does happen, I would be/ will be, inclined to agree with you, Captain.
I just don't see any evidence that all of that is happening yet.
I'm willing to wait until the movie comes out.
There's a good chance I hate Nemesis, and a ton of what has become of Star Trek since about Voyager's fourth season
every bit as much as you, Captain RA.
But at least I waited until I saw Nemesis before I hated it.
By the way, I didn't pay to see it. I borrowed the DVD from the Library.
I would have liked to have claimed to be clairvoyant or to have not seen it because of something I heard,
but in truth it was because in my city it seemed like it was in the theater a month or less before it was given the boot.
Ironically, I was walking up Royal Street here in New Orleans with it in my hand on the way to return it to the library
when I saw William Shatner trying to talk on his cell phone.
I'd like to say I said something witty like, "Save Trek from crap like this movie!!!"
but as it turned out I was too surprised by the rudeness of the people who stood less then 3 feet from the guy
who was clearly trying to avoid them hearing a personal conversation.
So I just walked on, commenting "Jeez, can't a starship captain make a phone call without you people breathing down his neck!"
I felt sorry for the guy. Then I remembered all the homes he owned, horses and ranch due to his popularity.
So feeling sorry for him passed after awhile. But I was still struck at how rude some fans can be.
The experience did remind and make me more angry at the time about Patrick Stewart's
blaming the fans for "not getting" what he thought was a fantastic movie.
As far as Patrick Stewart is concerned,
let him spend a few years signing autographs at Car Shows
for a living the way Shatner had to for years
- then come back and tell us Trek fans how stupid we are.
Stewart doesn't have to do that because his show was a success the first time.
Holytomato said:
"Should the women be in one piece micro minis?'
"I'd like to see more variations, but sure. After all, that was the style during that period of Star Trek."
Do women in the military, and NASA wear micro minis?
Rmember, The Cage, and Where No Man Has Gone Before had female Starfleet officers...wear...P A N T S tm!
So, in Star Trek XI female Starfleet Officers must wear...
P A N T S tm!
"Fans who grew up after the Cold War will never know the pleasure of school house drills where you ducked under your desk in a pretend nuclear attack drill.
We all knew that if the real thing ever came we might as well kiss our asses goodbye while we were ducking and putting our heads between our legs.
Well into the late '70's early '80's there was always that chance that someone would screw up and a small confrontation or accident lead to nuclear war."
Let's see 9/11, plastic wrapping, and duck taping will save us! tm.
Kids today have no idea tm.
:roll eyes:
"So great it was canceled with even worse ratings at the end than "Enterprise" and largely became a self-parody and embarrassment to the entire sci-fi genre? You mean that NuBSG?"
Let's see Razor, and a Season 4.
I don't see a Cancelled tm here.
Failure means its not camp. It's not made like it was in 1966.
Star Trek must appeal to the hardcore fans.
Remember how successful Nemesis and Enterprise were?
Oh, right....Enterprise was Cancelled tm.
Its 2008
Long live Star Trek!
:thumbsup:
I'm confused as to whose points you are discussing,
and your points aren't too clear there as well.
I didn't see too many people above holding up either Nemesis or Enterprise as good examples of Trek.
For good reason.
Ever since the about the fourth season of Voyager, as B & B began to demand that virtually everybody that wrote for them churn out more "Big Idea" Sci-Fi in which every episode across two and finally a third series became more and more grandiose, overly melodramatic and more and more devoid of character development then the previous episodes.
If anything, Deep Space Nine and Voyager de-evolved as a series after B & B converted all but a few writers and guest writers to their "Big Idea" style of Sci-Fi writing.
Nemesis' stated aim was to draw in new viewers, but it was little more then a TNG two episode show brought to the big screen with the commercials cut out.
Just as B & B claimed Enterprise was designed to introduce new viewers who had never seen Star Trek
to the Trek universe.
Without having ever seen a single episode of Trek,
Enterprise was allegedly designed by B & B as a series that a total non-fan could understand from the get go and fully appreciate.
I still have the TV guide interview somewhere where B&B actually states that total bunch of BS!
However, by the end of the pilot episode the "Temporal Cold War" crap created a THREE SEASON STORY ARCH that would have to be a seasoned fan to understand any part of the series past the first hour or so...
So for those reasons I don't see anyone holding up either Nemesis nor most of Enterprise(there were maybe a dozen good episodes, most of them in the last year)
as examples of either Traditional Trek or good Trek.
I have no doubt or argument that Trek needs a reset.
It needs to become a less politically correct, harder edged franchise that still mantains a positive view of the future without that future appearing to be filled with the increasingly pansie-assed boring bureaucratic federation dweebs of the future.
Earlier Trek was about Explorers and Pioneers.
Not Bureaucrats in comfortable unisex jumpsuits who did their exploring in the equivalent of Luxury liners(Enterprise D through ...) in enough safety and comfort to bring along and house entire families as shown in some episodes of TNG.
It's time Trek tackled the grit and danger involved instead of painting Federation service as some Disney adventure.
Starship Polaris said:
Stewart doesn't have to do that because his show was a success the first time.
My point is I think he believes he's endeared more
fan appreciation and loyalty then he ever will have.
I took Shatner's Saturday Night live skit in stride,
(not that I had too much of a choice, it was dead on
accurate on a lot of levels) and didn't hold any
grudges against the guy because he has proven over the
years that he truly seems to like the fans.
Even if he doesn't like us as much as I give him credit for,
at least the guy has spent countless hours days and years
responding too and entertaining us.
Stewart has yet to attempt to do any of that.
Not to mention that Nemesis key premise could not
have been set up in a more stupid, inane and idiotic,
totally incompetent way in terms of filmaking.
The most dramatic part of the entire movie should have been the moment
when we saw Picard's clone.
Yet there was no setup.
No decent flashback that thoroughly showed us a younger Picard
so we would even know this guy was RELATED to Picard MUCHLESS A CLONE!
Jeez!
What should have been the most dramatic part of the movie just let people sitting there
through an explanation that occurred AFTERWARDS which instead should have occured BEFOREHAND.
Instead, due to the music, the timing, framing etc it was obvious
that this was a major turning point of the movie, yet we were just left sitting there thinking
"Who the hell is this guy?!?" as they went into the explanation as to why the moment THAT JUST PASSED,
should have been dramatic
- BUT WASN'T!!!
That plus the fact that most of the cast made the movie with all the enthusiasm of another episode of TNG,
and we were to be lectured by Stewart that Nemesis' failure was OUR FAULT?!?
I don't think so, Patrick Stewart!
Don't make an incompetently filmed, incompetently executed two part TNG episode,
claim it was REALLY the best Trek movie ever - we were just too dumb to see it -
and then blame us for your incompetence, Mr Stewart.
So many people seem to know so much about the movie...
Yet far as I know, no one has seen it yet.
Do remember that stuff on the net, no matter where we THINK it might be coming from,
is still just stuff on the net.
I've heard gossip at work that after passing through just three people is almost unrecognizable from the first story I heard.
It's why no one should ever depend on it.
Multiply that line of gossip by thousands or more and you begin
to get an idea of how little we probably really do know about this movie.
Not to mention the fact that Trek's handlers have on countless occasions leaked nonesense, fake storylines,
yada yada yada to intentionally mislead people.
Even if that's not the case who really can say they know how the movie
is going to come out when the guys who are making it don't know?
They are constantly considering re-writes and have because of this
pointed to the writers' strike as a major reason the release date cannot be 100% guaranteed.
So how the heck do so many people claim that this is being done and that is being down when, even if accurate(unlikely),
what is being done could be changed and/or scrapped entirely by the time the final film is in the can?
Maybe good things are being done that will ensure Trek's future.
Maybe things will be done in this movie that will
help lead to the demise of Trek in film or TV for years to come.
How about we see the movie before pronouncing her dead or alive?
