USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[CorporalCaptain]

Same here, but I've come to the conclusion that there is a certain expectation of what Starfleet ships of this era are to look like. Since they don't, they must fit in to another box. It's all categorizing.

I can't speak for others, but that has literally nothing to do with what's going on with my reaction.

The original NCC-1701 was the first fictional spaceship I fell in love with, over 40 years ago.

Before you think, "Aha! He's biased!" I've been to the rodeo of reimagining the Enterprise, in 1979 for TMP.* I also fell in love with that version. I'm perfectly open to new versions of my first love.

If the Discoprise looked better, I wouldn't mind, but it's just fugly. It completely lacks the grace of both the TOS and the TMP version.

* - As far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant for this discussion that in terms of continuity the TMP version was a refit. There are certain facts and realities production-wise. The TOS models were unsuitable for use in motion picture filming in the late 1970s. It was a foregone conclusion that a new model had to be built. Aesthetics had shifted somewhat over the course of 15 years also, naturally. Tweaks of the design were inevitable and a practical necessity, regardless of story. Ditto for sets and costumes. Accounting for all these differences by labeling them as in-universe technical progress, either explicitly or implicitly, was a natural thing to do. But regardless of the in-universe rationale, the production reality was that the TMP refit was the "movie version" of the TOS starship.

So, I've been to this rodeo before, accepted, and fell in love with a redesign, one that was thoughtfully and skillfully executed.

The Discoprise just ain't that. Production realities apply here: tweaks were inevitable. That's fine. The ones they chose weren't that great, though. Anyway, that's the outside. next stop: the inside (*crosses fingers and prays*).

 

[fireproof78]

i'm not really talking about preconceptions of what ships of this era should look like, i'm more puzzled by the approach taken by the production designers. the aesthetics of discovery's fleet are sort of all over the place, but in general the ships are angular with boxy nacelles, some share components across classes or have similar features like two antennas sticking out of their deflectors or three bussard collector domes, stuff like that.

the enterprise is curvy and - from what i can tell - has no major components from any of the other classes we've seen on screen (except for the windows). it's totally fine to explain away the lack of consistency with the rest of the fleet in-universe, but i think as a production design ethic, it would've given the show a little more visual cohesiveness if the enterprise had discovery's nacelles or deflector dish or impulse engines or something, anything to tie it all together.

i like this enterprise design, i also like discovery's design. i just don't think they look like they belong in the same fleet.

Given how many years Starfleet ships and designs serve in the Fleet, seeing the overlay of multiple designs makes sense to me.

I can't speak for others, but that has literally nothing to do with what's going on with my reaction.

The original NCC-1701 was the first fictional spaceship I fell in love with, over 40 years ago.

Before you think, "Aha! He's biased!" I've been to the rodeo of reimagining the Enterprise, in 1979 for TMP.* I also fell in love with that version. I'm perfectly open to new versions of my first love.

If the Discoprise looked better, I wouldn't mind, but it's just fugly. It completely lacks the grace of both the TOS and the TMP version.

* - As far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant for this discussion that in terms of continuity the TMP version was a refit. There are certain facts and realities production-wise. The TOS models were unsuitable for use in motion picture filming in the late 1970s. It was a foregone conclusion that a new model had to be built. Aesthetics had shifted somewhat over the course of 15 years also, naturally. Tweaks of the design were inevitable and a practical necessity, regardless of story. Ditto for sets and costumes. Accounting for all these differences by labeling them as in-universe technical progress, either explicitly or implicitly, was a natural thing to do. But regardless of the in-universe rationale, the production reality was that the TMP refit was the "movie version" of the TOS starship.

So, I've been to this rodeo before, accepted, and fell in love with a redesign, one that was thoughtfully and skillfully executed.

The Discoprise just ain't that. Production realities apply here: tweaks were inevitable. That's fine. The ones they chose weren't that great, though. Anyway, that's the outside. next stop: the inside (*crosses fingers and prays*).

Well, that was well written. The TOS Enterprise is my favorite starship of all time so I can get the love. I just love seeing so many variations of the Constitution class. Obviously, the reaction to the Discoprise will vary but I'm not going to malign it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

You're not kidding. The pylons are arguably the worst part of the DSC redesign.

On the other hand, I think those pylons are the BEST part of it. They take a deeply uninspired deign and make it reminiscent of the classic movie Enterprise, which everyone has fond fuzzy nostalgic memories of.

 

[Rahul]

Weird to think that a variation of the Enterprise design created for an inferior prequel series is now determining the design of the Enterprise. That's some snake-eating-its-tail stuff.

Yeah, absolutely.
Don't get me wrong: I actually really LIKE the NX-01 as a design, and that includes the hull color and aztec panelling.

But Jesus Christ, the original Enterprise NCC 1701 is something completely different! That ship should have stayed the way it is, and even if they felt the need to upgrade it: Upgrade the original design. DON'T just slap the visual design of later productions on it! That's just lazy, and the result is inferiour in every regard!

If you want to remaster the original Enterprise, THIS is how it should have been done:
https://trekmovie.com/2006/09/08/more-images-from-edenfx/

 

[Tuskin38]

Given how many years Starfleet ships and designs serve in the Fleet, seeing the overlay of multiple designs makes sense to me.

Yeah this is my thought.

i'm not really talking about preconceptions of what ships of this era should look like, i'm more puzzled by the approach taken by the production designers. the aesthetics of discovery's fleet are sort of all over the place, but in general the ships are angular with boxy nacelles, some share components across classes or have similar features like two antennas sticking out of their deflectors or three bussard collector domes, stuff like that.

the enterprise is curvy and - from what i can tell - has no major components from any of the other classes we've seen on screen (except for the windows). it's totally fine to explain away the lack of consistency with the rest of the fleet in-universe, but i think as a production design ethic, it would've given the show a little more visual cohesiveness if the enterprise had discovery's nacelles or deflector dish or impulse engines or something, anything to tie it all together.

i like this enterprise design, i also like discovery's design. i just don't think they look like they belong in the same fleet.

We had overlapping design styles in the TNG era. Remember all those Miranda’s and excelsior?

Plus even some of the ships from the same era didn’t match. The Akira looked nothing like the Intrepid and Sovereign. The intrepid looked nothing like the Sovereign and Norway. Not to mention the Steamrunner and Defiant.

Also remember, in-universe the Enterprise launched at least 10 years before DSC Season 1. So it is possible it’s older then the other designs seen in the show, coming from a different design era.

One real reason is probably because the Enterprise was designed after Bryan Fuller left the show. Eaves said he didn’t start working on the Enterprise until Mid 2017, and if you look at the dates on on some of the images they are dated September 2017

 

[Jadeb]

Yeah, absolutely.
Don't get me wrong: I actually really LIKE the NX-01 as a design, and that includes the hull color and aztec panelling.

But Jesus Christ, the original Enterprise NCC 1701 is something completely different! That ship should have stayed the way it is, and even if they felt the need to upgrade it: Upgrade the original design. DON'T just slap the visual design of later productions on it! That's just lazy, and the result is inferiour in every regard!

If you want to remaster the original Enterprise, THIS is how it should have been done:
https://trekmovie.com/2006/09/08/more-images-from-edenfx/

The weird thing to me is that the NX-01 design was created specifically to differentiate it from the 1701 -- to make it look older and less sophisticated. So now the Enterprise needs to look more like a ship from 100 years earlier? How does that make sense?

I'm always baffled by how they decide when to worry about design lineage in a reimagined universe where they've largely decided to ignore it. We get stuff like that great, faithful phaser right next to the (until recently) unrecognizable Klingons and the schizophrenic Enterprise design.

 

[XCV330]

The weird thing to me is that the NX-01 design was created specifically to differentiate it from the 1701 -- to make it look older and less sophisticated. So now the Enterprise needs to look more like a ship from 100 years earlier? How does that make sense?

To make it not look like a model that was built in the mid 1960's. You may not agree with the reason, but that's the reason. But its pointless, everyone has stated their own opinions on this ad nauseum.

I'm always baffled by how they decide when to worry about design lineage in a reimagined universe where they've largely decided to ignore it. We get stuff like that great, faithful phaser right next to the (until recently) unrecognizable Klingons and the schizophrenic Enterprise design.

Some stuff looks mostly fine as-is, some stuff needs a rework. TOS Enterprise looks great on TOS, even the remaster. Personally, I think it would have looked okay on Discovery, but I like the new version fine. I can't believe this is still being rehashed over and over.

 

[Jadeb]

To make it not look like a model that was built in the mid 1960's. You may not agree with the reason, but that's the reason. But its pointless, everyone has stated their own opinions on this ad nauseum.

Sure, I don't argue that. But that doesn't address the logic of making it look like a ship from 100 years earlier. Especially when the Discovery fleet is already so all over the map in terms of design.

If they want to add Aztecing, add Aztecing. I don't need a fanservice sweet to make the modernization go down easier.

 

[Saul]

They take a deeply uninspired deign

Thems fighting words boy.

 

[Tuskin38]

I don't think the detailing on the DSC Enterprise makes it look less advanced, I think it makes it look like it descended from the NX-01. I honestly don't see anything on the DSC Enterprise, other then the nacelle caps and the torpedo tubes that comes directly from the NX-01.

 

[Blamo]

i'm not really talking about preconceptions of what ships of this era should look like, i'm more puzzled by the approach taken by the production designers. the aesthetics of discovery's fleet are sort of all over the place, but in general the ships are angular with boxy nacelles, some share components across classes or have similar features like two antennas sticking out of their deflectors or three bussard collector domes, stuff like that.

the enterprise is curvy and - from what i can tell - has no major components from any of the other classes we've seen on screen (except for the windows). it's totally fine to explain away the lack of consistency with the rest of the fleet in-universe, but i think as a production design ethic, it would've given the show a little more visual cohesiveness if the enterprise had discovery's nacelles or deflector dish or impulse engines or something, anything to tie it all together.

i like this enterprise design, i also like discovery's design. i just don't think they look like they belong in the same fleet.

From what I can gather the fleet is made up of ships designed in different periods, with some like the Walker class dating back to a few decades after the formation of the Federation.

Starfleet seems to be at a similar point to the Starfleet of early-TNG. They've had a century of peace, they've become rather complacent and that's led to their fleet being made up of mostly ancient ships.

The Nimitz-class is their newest ship supposedly (along with the Crossfield-class, which it shares similar nacelles with), but it feels like it's intended primarily as a command vessel not an exploration vessel. I get the feeling that only the Constitution-class is designed for deepspace exploration, hence the different nacelle design and much larger deflector dish. The rest of the fleet aren't really meant for prolonged warp travel.

Despite being a decade after launch, the Constitution-class is like the Galaxy-class in early TNG. You had the Galaxy class... and then you had the Constellation-class, the Excelsior-class, the Oberth-class and the Miranda-class. Come to think of it, there's actually more consistency in design in Discovery, it's just we're more aware of the lineages in TNG.

 

[Tuskin38]

The Nimitz-class is their newest ship supposedly

Eh? There is no on-screen evidence for either for this.

 

[Ronald Held]

The1701 should have remained as before and the new ships fit in better.

 

[Tuskin38]

The1701 should have remained as before and the new ships fit in better.

I don't think new 2018 fans want something from the 1960s.

 

[ozzfloyd]

I don't think new 2018 fans want something from the 1960s.

I'm not a new fan and I certainly do not want a 60s aesthetic.

 

[JamesRye]

Interesting post here - they did HAVE to make it 25% different.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...&set=pcb.253459022034550&type=3&theater&ifg=1

Contradicting earlier Facebook posts that he made, John Eaves writes that:
"The 25% has nothing to do with canon or legal, but in terms of how much to change the details from the original TOS Enterprise. It is a good percentage to change the look of something either pushing back in time or forward of what ever we are doing that is established. That is all there is too it"

Probably it had to be different in order to sell more toys.

 

[Tuskin38]

Probably it had to be different in order to sell more toys.

Yeah, I've been saying that since this came up.

Also facebook really doesn't like me, it won't let me see that link either when logged in.

 

[Blamo]

Eh? There is no on-screen evidence for either for this.

I can't for the life of me remember where I read it, but supposedly it's a prototype. However you're right, there's no onscreen evidence.

Edit: Well I did a search and found no mention, so I could have just imagined it.

 

[Tuskin38]

I'm not a new fan and I certainly do not want a 60s aesthetic.

I grew up on DS9 and Voyager in the 90s, but I also love TNG and TOS.

Dunno if that makes me a new fan or an old fan

 

[Saul]

Interesting post here - they did HAVE to make it 25% different.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...&set=pcb.253459022034550&type=3&theater&ifg=1

Contradicting earlier Facebook posts that he made, John Eaves writes that:
"The 25% has nothing to do with canon or legal, but in terms of how much to change the details from the original TOS Enterprise. It is a good percentage to change the look of something either pushing back in time or forward of what ever we are doing that is established. That is all there is too it"

That's 75% different to what he said last time.

In a deleted facebook post I believe he had answered it was "legal reasons".