TOS from the perspective of Enterprise

[Darkwing]

The difference is this: TNG was written and set after TOS, and failed to mention Tellarites, which is one kind of writer's mistake. ENT was a prequel, and included too much that would never be seen in TOS, since it was already done. But Nu-trek assumes ENT in it's background, so it's easy to just say "Timeline 1: TOS and TNG+", and "Timeline 2: ENT & nu-Trek", and just assume Riker has access to a holodeck program based on scans of the Guardian of Forever.
But I really don't have a problem with the idea that TOS is timeline 1, TNG+ is timeline 2, and ENT/nu-Trek is timeline 3. I just wish they'd get a good writer for plot and stop going for kewl factor.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

just assume Riker has access to a holodeck program based on scans of the Guardian of Forever.

What.

 

[JJohnson]

From the perspective of Enterprise, pushing that forward a century, do you think the original series Enterprise would have such huge corridors, rooms, etc? Or more like the motion picture in proportion?

 

[Albertese]

From the perspective of Enterprise, pushing that forward a century, do you think the original series Enterprise would have such huge corridors, rooms, etc? Or more like the motion picture in proportion?

If you look at the actual blueprints of the various sets, you'll see that all of the series share pretty similar proportions. In fact many of the later series sets were just redressed versions of the sets built for TMP, which themselves were meant to be similarly sized as the TOS sets.

I wonder if the minimalist nature of the TOS visual language just makes it seem bigger as there isn't so much crap everywhere to lend a sense of texture...? Also, the later sets have more and more ceilings, this also might make the TOS sets seem bigger than they really are.

--Alex