U.S.S. Kelvin pic! (and more -- large images)

[Locutus of Bored]

Thats the thing, TMP was based two years after TOS era, TWO years and all that difference between Enterprises, external and internal.

What makes you think TMP was based two years after TOS?

The actors were a decade older. There had been a lot of changes in rank. There had been a lot of changes in technology. Personalities had changed, too.

Nothing established the exact date of the movie; we only learned that it had been at least 2.5 years since Kirk had last been to space, and 18 months since the Enterprise had last sailed. Those things could have easily happened eight years after the end of TOS.

There was every possibility that the creators thought that TOS and TMP took place on their respective decades: TOS in the sixties (be it 2260s or perhaps 2560s) and TMP in the late seventies or even eighties. And having TMP in the late 2270s would be an excellent thing for chronology, as it would allow for Voyager VI to be launched "over three centuries ago" even if the first Voyagers were launched in the seventies...

"Though it was a blatant violation of the Prime Directive, Kirk saved the Pelosians from extinction, just as he had the Baezians and the Chenari many years earlier. Finally, in the year 2270, Kirk completed his historic five-year mission, and one of the greatest chapters in Starfleet history came to a close."
----- Icheb in VOY 'Q2.'

That places TMP in 2272 at the earliest and more likely in 2273.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Also, Kirk (in TMP) says that he's been Chief of Starfleet Operations for 2 1/2 years.

 

[Classic Fan]

Thats the thing, TMP was based two years after TOS era, TWO years and all that difference between Enterprises, external and internal.

What makes you think TMP was based two years after TOS?

The actors were a decade older. There had been a lot of changes in rank. There had been a lot of changes in technology. Personalities had changed, too.

Nothing established the exact date of the movie; we only learned that it had been at least 2.5 years since Kirk had last been to space, and 18 months since the Enterprise had last sailed. Those things could have easily happened eight years after the end of TOS.

There was every possibility that the creators thought that TOS and TMP took place on their respective decades: TOS in the sixties (be it 2260s or perhaps 2560s) and TMP in the late seventies or even eighties. And having TMP in the late 2270s would be an excellent thing for chronology, as it would allow for Voyager VI to be launched "over three centuries ago" even if the first Voyagers were launched in the seventies...

Timo Saloniemi

Thats true but i didnt really want to go into that much detail. I was trying to keep it a brief 'for instance' type of thing. Yeah, 10 years between TOS and TMP, but the script is written in a way that suggests two years (18 months) refit and two years at starfleet HQ for Kirk.

The audience get the jist of what the writers are saying that each different era (60's and 70's) has its own retrospective feel to it. And yes, i took it as 5-10 years, cos i filled the gap with my own imagination of what couldve gone on, but in teh case of having laid on a plate for a none fan audience, it was scripted to suggest two years. Thats what i was trying to say, but didnt want to go into that much detail.

 

[datas_cat_spot]

I don't know about doctors, but engineers at my school can get silver pinky rings upon graduation. Maybe it's something like that.

Now that you mention it, I do see a ring on Scotty's hand... maybe?

 

[st_ent]

WHOA!!!

http://i386.photobucket.com/albums/oo307/st_ent/ent_st09.jpg


[ALSO NOT FROM THE MOVIE!!! Converting inline image to link - M']

 

[Classic Fan]

I have only just noticed...




























































POINTY FRAKING SIDEBURNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





































POINTED. SIDEBURNS.

 

[SalvorHardin]

hmmm, is that page stretching Enterpise for real ?

 

[Classic Fan]

hmmm, is that page stretching Enterpise for real ?

I was thinking that, convenient its posted with all the other shots, but it could be. Looks like Gabriel Koerners Entperise.

 

[ST-One]

hmmm, is that page stretching Enterpise for real ?

I was thinking that, convenient its posted with all the other shots, but it could be. Looks like Gabriel Koerners Entperise.

No. It was built by a guy named MadKoiFish at SciFi-meshes and Foundation3D

 

[StCoop]

I base it on all of the recent photos we are discussing here. Absolutely nothing bears any direct visual connection with TOS. There are things *styled* after the Trek we know (uniforms and ships), but these clearly do not pre-date TOS in any way, shape or form. The production design is far more advanced than TOS.

The bridge graphics, for example, look more advanced and high-tech than TNG, just as USS Kelvin looks more like a TNG or movie era starship.

The uniforms don't look like they pre-date TOS...they look like a later, more sophisticated evolution.

A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money.

As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing.

 

[Ethros]

Looks shit


Sorry that's not a very detailed analysis of those pictures. I could give one, but at the end of the day that's what it would boil down to
(Based purely on those pictures of course)

 

[Enterpriserules]

The uniforms are ok...... they seem a little over done. The crew looks ok. The Bridge looks..... too white, too clean and too sterile. It also seems way too busy.

 

[Qonos]

Re: U.S.S. Kelvin pic!

I burst out laughing at this pictures, it looks like a Sci-Fi channel original movie. Maybe if the explosions are nice I'll be able to enjoy it the same way I do the new Knight Rider.

I mean

COOOOL TOTALLY SWEET BRAH

You're right...it looks like a 21st Century Big Budget film, rather then a 1960's TV show.

I said it looks like a Sci-Fi channel original movie. That's... not really a good thing.

If it really looked like a Sci-fi Channel Original movie... Dean Cain would be Kirk.... And he's not so.. SHOOOSH...

 

[Qonos]

FINALL! something. I like it ,but how is the bridge change going to be explained or dealt with?

remember this movie isn't just a prequel... some aspects are a reboot.

 

[Qonos]

As will I. As will all those who say they won't. We KNOW every true fan will be there, I only hope the complainers aren't doing it in the cinema. I'm practicing my backhand just in case.

Sorry, but I've been a fan since I was little and I think this all looks really silly and out of place, so I probably won't be spending 8 bucks to go see it. That doesn't make me any less of a "true fan" than you, and I think your attitude is more irritating than any fanboy complainer could muster. Shame on you.

Our first Trek Geewunner... If you're a transformers fan you'll know what I'm talking about. And Fanboy complainers who have complaints based on "How I think it shoulda been done are the worst. We don't need that in Trek, that stagnation is what led to Voyager and Enterprise. It's time to allow another Take and another look, or Trek has no future.... The visual look doesn't matter as long as Gene's original spirit is in the story. One of the things the last two series didn't have.

It's a reboot/prequel combo.. Head on over to donmurphy.net where you can ask Robert Orci all kinds of questions about the film if you like because he has a standing Ask Robert Orci thread over there. I think this bridge looks alot better than the one on Enterprise. You also have to remember that these guys KNOW what they are doing they (Orci and Kurtzman) Helped Bay and Speilberg bring TF's to a mainstream audiance hiting 700 million dollars worldwide with that film. They have a great record with movies right now, and J.J. Abrams is a capable director who's done very well with his movies recently too.

I'm not feeling the Black Shirt myself, but the explaination makes sense.. He's the captain, he should stand out a bit.

I'm not trying to get you in an uproar but you sound like if this movie didn't have an 1960's b movie look to it, you aren't going to be happy with it. The differance between then and now is that the tv show had the best special effects for it's time. Times and tech have changed so calm down, check the story out first instead of the superfical crap that really doesn't make trek trek at all.

 

[Rincewiend]

 

[Enterpriserules]

As will I. As will all those who say they won't. We KNOW every true fan will be there, I only hope the complainers aren't doing it in the cinema. I'm practicing my backhand just in case.

Sorry, but I've been a fan since I was little and I think this all looks really silly and out of place, so I probably won't be spending 8 bucks to go see it. That doesn't make me any less of a "true fan" than you, and I think your attitude is more irritating than any fanboy complainer could muster. Shame on you.

Our first Trek Geewunner... If you're a transformers fan you'll know what I'm talking about. And Fanboy complainers who have complaints based on "How I think it shoulda been done are the worst. We don't need that in Trek, that stagnation is what led to Voyager and Enterprise. It's time to allow another Take and another look, or Trek has no future.... The visual look doesn't matter as long as Gene's original spirit is in the story. One of the things the last two series didn't have.

It's a reboot/prequel combo.. Head on over to donmurphy.net where you can ask Robert Orci all kinds of questions about the film if you like because he has a standing Ask Robert Orci thread over there. I think this bridge looks alot better than the one on Enterprise. You also have to remember that these guys KNOW what they are doing they (Orci and Kurtzman) Helped Bay and Speilberg bring TF's to a mainstream audiance hiting 700 million dollars worldwide with that film. They have a great record with movies right now, and J.J. Abrams is a capable director who's done very well with his movies recently too.

I'm not feeling the Black Shirt myself, but the explaination makes sense.. He's the captain, he should stand out a bit.

I'm not trying to get you in an uproar but you sound like if this movie didn't have an 1960's b movie look to it, you aren't going to be happy with it. The differance between then and now is that the tv show had the best special effects for it's time. Times and tech have changed so calm down, check the story out first instead of the superfical crap that really doesn't make trek trek at all.

I really liked the bridge from the NX-01. I thought that it was one of the highlights of the show. The new bridge looks way too bright and looks too much like an iPod. I would have liked to see it be more of a cross between Ent-A bridge from STVI and the NX-01. I think that would have looked much more realistic and futuristic all at the same time. This new bridge looks like a fanboy threw up and that is what came out.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I really liked the bridge from the NX-01. I thought that it was one of the highlights of the show.

Agreed.

I like this bridge a lot, though.

 

[JuanBolio]

On what do you base this? The bridge?

I base it on all of the recent photos we are discussing here. Absolutely nothing bears any direct visual connection with TOS. There are things *styled* after the Trek we know (uniforms and ships), but these clearly do not pre-date TOS in any way, shape or form. The production design is far more advanced than TOS.

The bridge graphics, for example, look more advanced and high-tech than TNG, just as USS Kelvin looks more like a TNG or movie era starship.

The uniforms don't look like they pre-date TOS...they look like a later, more sophisticated evolution.

So what? Did you expect to see primitive, 60's era graphics on the screens? Grinding computers with digitized voices? Cardboard control panels? The Kelvin looks fine for a pre-TOS era ship. I think you're mistaking high production values for over-advancement of technology. If Gene had had the choice back then, he'd have gone with these designs over the ones he was forced to go with, no question about it.

 

[Qonos]

I really liked the bridge from the NX-01. I thought that it was one of the highlights of the show. The new bridge looks way too bright and looks too much like an iPod. I would have liked to see it be more of a cross between Ent-A bridge from STVI and the NX-01. I think that would have looked much more realistic and futuristic all at the same time. This new bridge looks like a fanboy threw up and that is what came out.

And after seeing what we had in TOS, TNG, DS9, and even VOY. The Enterprise bridge on Enterprise looked far too removed from the tech it was supposed to be heading towards This bridge from the pics I seen looks Trek to me. Is it bright? Yes, but then so was the TNG bridge, and for the most part so was the TOS bridge although not as Bright aw what we are getting. I think the lighting of the bridge is suppose to help the feel of the movie. It's supposed to be optimistic, and dark and mellow tones don't help that. Your art direction will help set the tone of the movie. Just like red and yellow are hunger colors White is a saftey color associated with making you feel safe, hence why it is used in hospitals.