Thoughts on the USS Shenzhou (Trailer Edition)

[MFB]

I like the NX class a lot so I think the exterior of the Shenzhou looks good too. But I am not a fan of the warp nacelles. I don't know why the producers abandoned the typical TOS nacelles. (Or other retro elements from TOS.)

The interior of the Shenzhou is too polished, too smooth with dark and cold colors - even at red alert. Not a very nice environment. At the same time I think there is not much to look at. Of course there are many shapes but not much detail or texture. Especially the corridor set ... looks like a set and not a "real" place. Sarus console on the bridge is a bit low.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

No, it's that Doug Jones is way too tall. He's 6'3" and ridiculously skinny, making him look even more tall than he is.

Mark

PS - "Freestanding console" = a console not directly attached to a wall.

 

[BillJ]

I thought it was a Klingon ship from a distance. Really didn't see enough of it to make a determination.

 

[psCargile]

We put the bridge on the bottom where most of the re-entry frictional heat builds up, but shields, so whatever. . . .

 

[LtChange]

You know what. If they really really want to (I really hope they don't want to) they could explain this too. Just imagine, the Discovery will meet up with a Constitution class starship, Cmdr Burnham beams aboard and she is surprised by what she sees: a ship exactly built like in the TOS. She asks: this looks so simple, so basic, why is that? The engineer on the ship replays: when they have designed the Constitution class they have decided that this ships will go into long voyages, first for 5 year missions than for 10-20 years and we thought that keeping it as simple as possible, without the technology of the advanced Federation technique we can help the crew minimize the problems they could run into operating the ship and also it is easier to repair if something really goes wrong in the long mission. And suddenly we can have all the TOS connies as cannon and present and still have advanced starships.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

You know what. If they really really want to (I really hope they don't want to) they could explain this too. Just imagine, the Discovery will meet up with a Constitution class starship, Cmdr Burnham beams aboard and she is surprised by what she sees: a ship exactly built like in the TOS. She asks: this looks so simple, so basic, why is that? The engineer on the ship replays: when they have designed the Constitution class they have decided that this ships will go into long voyages, first for 5 year missions than for 10-20 years and we thought that keeping it as simple as possible, without the technology of the advanced Federation technique we can help the crew minimize the problems they could run into operating the ship and also it is easier to repair if something really goes wrong in the long mission. And suddenly we can have all the TOS connies as cannon and present and still have advanced starships.

I would hate to see this. The TOS connies look goofy and out of place. The Movie ones would fit better, but I personally and wanting to see a redesign to fit the current ENT derived look. Not the Gods awful Kelvin ships those, ugh.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

The TOS connies look goofy and out of place.

Hardly. Done right they look amazing and like they belong.

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

Exhibit C

 

[BillJ]

When a TOS Connie was paired up with the NX-01, it made the NX-01 look kinda sad.

 

[Mudd]

I would hate to see this. The TOS connies look goofy and out of place. The Movie ones would fit better, but I personally and wanting to see a redesign to fit the current ENT derived look. Not the Gods awful Kelvin ships those, ugh.

Absolutely Right™ .

 

[CorporalCaptain]

We've had our "Trials" and "Mirrors," and anyway anyone can copy and paste. The Connie isn't worth having unless it's reimagined and rebooted.

 

[Mudd]

Yep.

Maybe two or three years down the line?

 

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

Hardly. Done right they look amazing and like they belong.

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

Exhibit C

I love these edits! All the ship needs is some updated textures and some nice lighting. If you pair this up to an NX or Shenzhou the Connie looks down right advanced if you asked me.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Maybe two or three years down the line?

Sweet!

 

[Mirror Mirror]

Hardly. Done right they look amazing and like they belong.

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

Exhibit C

Not a one of those IMO looks like it belongs. When they pulled it in ENT the NX made it look old and goofy and totally outclassed. It was a 1960's model. They went away from it as soon as the movies hit. It really does not belong in a post 1st contact/ ENT universe as is.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Not a one of those IMO looks like it belongs. When they pulled it in ENT the NX made it look old and goofy and totally outclassed. It was a 1960's model. They went away from it as soon as the movies hit. It really does not belong in a post 1st contact/ ENT universe as is.

Me and apparently this editor of io9 beg to differ.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/artist-puts-original-1960s-enterprise-model-into-star-t-1688267780/amp

 

[Mudd]

If io9 has ever published any worthwhile content I'm sure it was accidental.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

I do think this type belongs however.

 

[uniderth]

Not a one of those IMO looks like it belongs. When they pulled it in ENT the NX made it look old and goofy and totally outclassed. It was a 1960's model. They went away from it as soon as the movies hit. It really does not belong in a post 1st contact/ ENT universe as is.

Because 'muh greeblies!

Generally whether or not something looks advanced depends on perspective rather than the actual shapes involved. If we're used to seeing flat panels, then curved panels look advanced. If we're used to seeing curved panels then flat panels look advanced.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

Because 'muh greeblies!

Generally whether or not something looks advanced depends on perspective rather than the actual shapes involved. If we're used to seeing flat panels, then curved panels look advanced. If we're used to seeing curved panels then flat panels look advanced.

Its not that, its just a known dated styling. The whole thing screams 1960's. Trek itself revamped the ship and came up with a laughable excuse ( refit) that changed everything, including size and number of decks

They tried just updating the Textures ( on the outside) in though a mirror darkly, but they could not hide what it was. Its like a car, you know what decade its from by looking at it and it looks its age, no matter how you change it. This is not always bad, but it does mean you can not place a 68 Camaro , next to a 2017 one and call them the same decade. Sure they have a similar styling, but are clearly not from the same decade.

This is the Issue, the 1960's connie, will always look like a 1960's connie. Those designs are the sore thumb of trek because it moved away from that look at once. Nothing after TOS looks like that, Its out of place and even Gene was OK with decanonizing the whole thing.

So what you do is you take it and rebuild it, you make it fit the post ENT look. Even a cleaned Up and retexturized TMP ship looks far more in line and fitting than a 60's era ship.

 

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

Its not that, its just a known dated styling. The whole thing screams 1960's. Trek itself revamped the ship and came up with a laughable excuse ( refit) that changed everything, including size and number of decks

They tried just updating the Textures ( on the outside) in though a mirror darkly, but they could not hide what it was. Its like a car, you know what decade its from by looking at it and it looks its age, no matter how you change it. This is not always bad, but it does mean you can not place a 68 Camaro , next to a 2017 one and call them the same decade. Sure they have a similar styling, but are clearly not from the same decade.

This is the Issue, the 1960's connie, will always look like a 1960's connie. Those designs are the sore thumb of trek because it moved away from that look at once. Nothing after TOS looks like that, Its out of place and even Gene was OK with decanonizing the whole thing.

So what you do is you take it and rebuild it, you make it fit the post ENT look. Even a cleaned Up and retexturized TMP ship looks far more in line and fitting than a 60's era ship.

This is a good point. I wouldn't mind seeing this, however...

I do think this type belongs however.

I have never been a fan of this :/ It might be the camera angle, I don't know. But this is not what I envision when I think of what you're suggesting.