An image search for "radar dish" appears to disagree. Sure, it could use a little detail, but it's not like round dishes actually fell out of fashion at some point.
USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
What are you talking about?
TV Star Trek had ended. And then Fuller/Kurtzman started it again. They rebooted it.
It's mostly the cross section curves.
The head on view makes it look bad too.
Because the NX dish is based off an old style, which is what we are looking at. They are not the same, the older style will always look older.
Its not that its round, its the profile. You are seeing round dishes, but none that look like this, which is pre up dated. The issue is, we know the Walker is older than the NX. The Ships we have saw on the show all look like they fit between the walker and Crossfield. None of them have a dish this dated. It just does not fit the ship at all. Look at the dish on the Shenzhou, and tell me that is an older and less advanced dish.
The walker isn’t older then the NX
I've always chalked the "R" up to some in-joke that Mitchell was rubbing into Kirks face.
Something between the two of them that always pisses Kirk off.
Maybe he's the Remastered version of Kirk.
The Shenzhou's dish is a different shape to account for the fact it isn't facing the direction of travel. Otherwise, it's just details.
Perhaps it's the long stem that gives the dishit a 'dated' look?
Maybe if it hugged the secondary hull a bit tighter it would be more aesthetically pleasing?
I do like the light glow that shines through parts of the one depicted up thread.
That also gives it a bit more dynamic contrast which improves it's look.
Maybe if it hugged the secondary hull a bit tighter it would be more aesthetically pleasing?
I do like the light glow that shines through parts of the one depicted up thread.
That also gives it a bit more dynamic contrast which improves it's look.
Honestly, most of what you mention here doesn't bother me either. These were mostly trivial details, not plot-relevant. Moreover, of the seven examples you offer, five fall into the forgivable category of "early installment weirdness," and the other two were retcons that didn't interfere with anything previously established... and even so, one of those two (Spock's half-brother) was "out there" enough that it elicited a lot of negative reactions at the time.
What we're talking about here is qualitatively different. Retroactively redesigning the franchise's "hero ship," for example, or "reimagining" the franchise's single most prominent adversary race, are not so easy to handwave away.
You understand what a circular argument is, right? Can you explain what it is exactly about the Enterprise's deflector dish that makes it look "older" to you other than by saying "because it does!"?
They've resigned the Klingons a couple of times. I kind of expect it. Nothing wrong with redesigning the hero ship either. That should be expected to. Small potatoes. If they change something major, like Pike never commanded the Enterprise, then I'd have a problem.
Subjective, I would say.It is if they create a group of character as flat and uninspiring as the one's we have now.
Easily? No. Can be? Yes. Satisfactorily? Will depend on the person.
Also this.
Yeah, and a 1985 Mustang looks older and cruder than a '57 Chevy, but that's a bit misleading, isn't it?
It's not like a computer reboot. It's a series reboot you're talking about. We commonly use "reboot" to mean "start over" as in "start from scratch" (see : Casino Royale), not just "make more movies after a hiatus".
Its not just a different shape, its a pure up more advanced seeming design. Look at the design of any other DSC ship, you will not see the retro dish. Details are everything for a visual image.
I have a few times now. It has a set retro look that IRL has not been used in decades. No modern dish looks like this, its a retro look and design. Look at all other dishes on DSC ships, many are supposed to be older classes, yet do not have a dated and simplistic dish design.
This is a false argument.
I think I'd like this even more with a few less touchscreens and a bit more of this:Found these renders but couldn't find the original artist (Artist if you made these please say so I can give proper credit). Really neat take on the DSC style on a 1701 layout. The window probably needs to be a bit smaller but overall could very much see this in the new/old 1701 design.
PIKE BRIDGE by Jason Soto, on Flickr
PIKE BRIDGE2 by Jason Soto, on Flickr
I did say it could use some more detail.
I think I'd like this even more with a few less touchscreens and a bit more of this:
Why would they go from touch screens to buttons and then back to touch screens?
Why do some people hate touch screens?
Telephones went from voice commands to digital dialing, to analog buttons, to digital buttons, and now voice commands are an option again.
Similar threads
