The space station in "The Ultimate Computer", reamstered
- Thread starter Wingsley
- Start date
Well, that's true. I just chalk that up to the new guys thinking modern audiences wouldn't "accept" it otherwise. I don't happen to agree, but...gotta let the kids have their fun, I guess.
I figure it's more about giving it sufficient detail to look good in HD.
Also to get the most out of the money they spent on its construction, amortizing its cost across more episodes.
Which brings us back to Gene Roddenberry's "whoosh" in space. Audiences expect it. A truly high technology ship with no visible seams or rivets—like Klaatu's ship (or was it Gort's ship?) in THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, or the C-57D in FORBIDDEN PLANET—would probably look "unreal" to the naked eye. The foreshortened horizon in real Moon photos looks nothing like the Bonestells from DESTINATION MOON.
A real USS Enterprise might be glass smooth—with no "windows" to show scale, either. Since it's a fictional creature of the screen, visual conceits win the argument.
Goodness, ACCOUNTANTS IN SPACE—Space—ace—(echo dying).
Why couldn't they have used Matt Jefferies other space station design?
M.
Now you're talking.
Shtar Trek Remashtered
Neil
Wrong Connery era. Think "you only live twice".
Why couldn't they have used Matt Jefferies other space station design?
M.
Not bad, but each of the round segments would be solid, not hollow. The station would be a place where all of the Enterprise crew could luxuriate on "shore leave" along with the crews of other ships, and not feel crowded at all.
Great shape. Would be right at home in TOS.
Because CBS wanted to play it cheap and went with their own in house Digital team who were not quite ready for Prime Time players.
Eden FX (who did In a Mirror Darkly) put in a bid for the gig but CBS turned them down.
I mean, it's only Star Trek. Who cares?
Spockboy
Why couldn't they have used Matt Jefferies other space station design?
M.
Not bad, but each of the round segments would be solid, not hollow..
Excuse me? They WOULD BE solid?
You're quite sure are you?
Are you from the future?
or do you just work for NASA?
LOL!
Because CBS wanted to play it cheap and went with their own in house Digital team who were not quite ready for Prime Time players.
Eden FX (who did In a Mirror Darkly) put in a bid for the gig but CBS turned them down.
I mean, it's only Star Trek. Who cares?
This is the same CBS who 50 years ago trolled GR to get ideas for Lost In Space. (mumbling)
I seem to recall that they did make sure that all five Constitution-class ships in this episode were different. Different lighting in the hulls. More lights on the four crewed ships, and less on the M5 run Enterprise. Also that the lights in the next and secondary hull were in different patterns of each ship so that they didn't look entirely cookie cutter the same. That is in addition to the ships each having their own names and hull numbers. (unless the orginal which just split screened the same shot of Enterprise four times)
Big whoop.
Oh, not so much, really. The current CBS had actually been the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, after Westinghouse bought CBS, changed its name, and spun off all that dowdy old appliance- and electric-equipment business into a new firm called Westinghouse.
Then, of course, the new CBS (really Westinghouse) were taken over by Viacom, which was created by CBS in the early 70s to syndicate their old programs but spun off back when Skylab was still a going concern. After the Viacom takeover, they changed the name back to CBS, and spun off a new corporation called Viacom. These maneuvers may sound a little daft, but that's just how capitalism works.
Really, about all the current CBS has with the CBS of 1964 is a couple of station number allotments.
Given the company's limitations, that is a surprising amount of detail for "the cheaper option". I wonder if Eden FX would have even considered that?
Yes, they did a wonderful job on the frosting. Too bad the cake sucked.
That's right. And to focus more specifically on the TV arm: CBS Television Studios, the TV production division of CBS Corporation, is basically the same entity as Paramount Television, which was basically the same entity as Desilu Studios. (When Gulf + Western bought the Paramount film studio and the Desilu TV studio, they combined them under the Paramount name, but they retained roughly the same division of labor.) That's an oversimplification, granted, but essentially Star Trek has always been associated with the same TV production studio, coming along with it as it's changed hands and had its name changed in the process.
Most artists, given the chance to revise their past work, would gladly do so. Any creation is the result of a process of trial and error and reconsideration, so you'll probably never find an artist or writer who considers the published/released version of their work to be absolutely flawless; they'll surely have had second thoughts about aspects of it after the fact, or will focus on the imperfections that they never got the chance to fix.
Similar threads
