USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
Yeah, suuure you did....
<snicker>
j/k
(I'm pretty sure there's one or two ladies out there that would love to meet a 'Tricky Dickie')
Those are the terrible aspects of it. The bulbous engines and the melty pylons are such an eyesore. Whilst DSC version is not amazing either, it is at least much better. It could use Kelvinprise's beautiful, smooth hull texture though.
How does it do that? That's the part that doesn't make sense to me. Call it a reboot, if you want but I fail to see how it changes personal enjoyment and think it is disingenuous to the art form.
Because it means you basically give up trying to reconcile it with the previous Trek, which is kind of a chore given the lackadaisical attitude to the continuity this show has embraced.
Plus, the only reason to call it a reboot is specifically to avoid "polluting" the original franchise with the new stuff, because one doesn't fully enjoy that new stuff. I admit that I watched ENT as a reboot in order to avoid getting annoyed at the continuity issues, but it's still prime canon, whether I like it or not.
G
Gonzo
Guest
It just does not fit anywhere in the lineage which makes it feel like a throwaway design, plus its upside down design does not really work either, I guess they had to go with something I just find it strange that they chose that.
I like the Discovery myself and while it doesn't exactly fit perfectly in the design lineage that can at least partially be explained by it being a testbed and science vessel.
Perhaps the original plan for the series would have kept the Shenzou intact for longer before all the changes were made and showrunners changed.
What do you mean by upside down design?
Here's a thought:
When watching DSC, imagine that the TOS to come will happen just like we orginally saw, but looking like DSC makes things look.
And when watching TOS, imagine DSC happening exactly like we're seeing now, but with a TOS aesthetic.
The events are independent of the visuals.
When watching DSC, imagine that the TOS to come will happen just like we orginally saw, but looking like DSC makes things look.
And when watching TOS, imagine DSC happening exactly like we're seeing now, but with a TOS aesthetic.
The events are independent of the visuals.
There will always be the option of viewing all of Trek as something akin to Voyager's episode 'Living Witness'....that everything is someone's take on what happened and what things looked like.
See also 'All in the Family' and what happened when the refrigerator broke down.
See also 'All in the Family' and what happened when the refrigerator broke down.
STOP MAKING SENSE!!!!
Excellent point.
The same could be applied to the Mad Max movies, as well. Any inconsistencies between them (such as the fact that in the first two films, Max's child is a son, whereas in Fury Road it's a daughter) can be explained as all of the films being different stories being told about Max, by parties unknown.
That's way too reasonable.
But it goes beyond the look. DiscoTOS "Balance of Terror" won't have Spock talking about cloaking devices being theoretical, DiscoTOS Pike isn't a sexist knob and so forth. I made a thread about the changes but some were upset by the suggestion, despite it being indisputable.
Exactly. I had the thought a while back that if one watched TOS then went blind, and only listened to Discovery, you realy wouldnt be able to tell there was that big of a difference (except perhaps the phasers sound different and some reuse of sound effects from Berman era shows). For all of the holo-stuff that makes some people crazy, a blind person familiar with TOS would have just assumed they were looking at viewscreens (well until Pike started lampshading everything).
JJprise is also very 50's, it's just inspired by muscle cars in a rather wholesale way. It's also very anachronistic. It's a 2000's take on 50's design, which unless you're careful can come off cartoonish. They,IMO, weren't that careful (or it's a deliberate attempt to be fantastical) so the massing ends up like a cartoon.
Details on the JJprise were otherwise cribbed from other Enterprises, all of which came from different design eras and therefore the assembled whole looks kinda kitschy and postmodern. Which is inline with how those movies treated the source material, for better and worse.
I think he was talking about visuals, mostly.
G
Gonzo
Guest
The bridge is on the underneath of the saucer, it looks like the whole ship is upside down.
Would have been nice to have found out why that particular design choice was made, whether that was an in universe choice or just a flight of fancy by the designers.
Mind you at least it makes the bridge less of a target.
Whilst not liking the new stuff may be a common motivator, it is not necessarily so. I really like Burton's Batman films, and I quite enjoy the Gotham TV series, but if I were trying to constantly justify how the latter makes sense as a prequel to the former I'd be giving myself a lot of unnecessary headache.
For some reason, when i was a kid I thought Enterprise's bridge was on bottom of the saucer. I assume that I must have realized the errror of my ways when I got the FJ blueprints...
Similar threads
