Thanks for the kind words.
USS ENTERPRISE HAYNES OWNERS MANUAL (Part 3)
- Thread starter Starlock
- Start date
I liked all of them. It's past time that Trek had characters who are fun to watch and attractive, again.
I don't think anyone can reasonably take issue with this. If Trek is to be commercially viable it must be likable. But this has little to do with the aspect of the Abrams approach that bears on this Haynes book -- if everything you see is on the surface, if it's all done for how it looks at a glance, if little thought is given to how it functions and would be used over time and affect the people that use it... then what is there to put in a book that details the setting? Sure, the Haynes book is about the original 1701, but I believe the point is still valid. Trek is into a different stage in its storytelling evolution. The diminishment of setting began with the failure of TMP, because setting was Gene Roddenberry's favorite thing to obsess over. As his role in making Star Trek diminished, so did the role of those aspects of the production to which he lavished attention.
The success of later incarnations of Star Trek under Bennett and Berman and Abrams shows that from a commercial perspective, Roddenberry's attention was misplaced. But to fans of excrusciatingly wrought settings, and authors of books detailing those settings, there will be little to work with. That such fans are the most likely buyers of such books goes a long way towards explaining, in my opinion, the sad state of such publications.
TMP was a failure (to the extent that it even WAS a failure) because Paramount saw Star Wars, and decided that they needed to make it into their own special effects blockbuster (and to do it in-house, using people who, compared to Dykstra, Trumbull, and the folks who continued on at ILM after Dykstra left, were a bunch of clueless yutzes).
"Snotty Kirk" grew up without even an absentee father, and with a jerk for a stepfather. Whereas the Kirk whom Shatner played adored his Starfleet officer father, and (in one of Diane Carey's novels) when he did get a bit screwed up (I suppose that being a witness to the atrocities of Kodos the Executioner will do that to a kid), Bob April was there to help "Geordie" Kirk snap little Jimmy out of it.
Who knows what life in the Abramsverse did to Scotty? Remember, we've got a ship assembled in an Iowa cornfield (instead of in orbit, from sections beamed up from San Francisco), that's brand new when Kirk takes command, instead of 20 years old.
"Snotty Kirk" grew up without even an absentee father, and with a jerk for a stepfather. Whereas the Kirk whom Shatner played adored his Starfleet officer father, and (in one of Diane Carey's novels) when he did get a bit screwed up (I suppose that being a witness to the atrocities of Kodos the Executioner will do that to a kid), Bob April was there to help "Geordie" Kirk snap little Jimmy out of it.
Who knows what life in the Abramsverse did to Scotty? Remember, we've got a ship assembled in an Iowa cornfield (instead of in orbit, from sections beamed up from San Francisco), that's brand new when Kirk takes command, instead of 20 years old.
Basically, JJ treated the established Star Trek continuity like an Etch-A-Sketch and gave it all a good shake.
Problem is, he can't draw much except stairs.
Getting back to the book, I'm sure I'll at least give it a good looking over, searching for the nice little nugget of an idea amongst the pile of manure. Overall, though, I'm not expecting anything particularly earth shattering.
Problem is, he can't draw much except stairs.
Getting back to the book, I'm sure I'll at least give it a good looking over, searching for the nice little nugget of an idea amongst the pile of manure. Overall, though, I'm not expecting anything particularly earth shattering.
This book reminds me of the ones that have come before that also initially got my antenna up and then slowly it lowers as I notice what's wrong.
I went CRAZY when I first laid eyes on FJ's Booklet Of General Plans way back in the '70s after having my thirst whetted by the illustrations in The Making Of Star Trek. And then I went equally nuts for FJ's Star Fleet Technical Manual. After pouring over them endlessly I began to notice one thing after another that was off. But it must be said that I still considered those works gold and they inspired me to pursue my own stuff.
Then came Shane Johnson's Mr. Scott's Guide To The U.S.S. Enterprise. And after that the TMP blueprints and McMaster drawings (which I know were done earlier, but I didn't get to see them until later). Personally I think the TMP blueprints and McMaster's work are the best of the lot. Then later I came across the drawings of Alan Sinclair and Charles Casimiro.
Phil Broad's construction drawings (posted on his cloudster site) helped inspire me to do my own shuttlecraft drawings in a way that I just wasn't seeing anywhere else. And I must add that I had enormous help from many folks here on the TBBS as well as those on Hobbytalk.
Then there's numerous folks like aridas, CRA, Shaw and others and their amazing efforts to really flesh out the interior of the TOS E. And now we've got some folks actually modeling the ship deck-by-deck in 3D. And they're not just trying to reconstruct something passable as a collection of sound stages, but modeling the ship as if it were a real vehicle.
We've come a long way and that's part of what makes this Hayes book so disappointing. It whets our appetite and many of us (including myself) will still get it out of great curiosity, but it could have been so much better.
I went CRAZY when I first laid eyes on FJ's Booklet Of General Plans way back in the '70s after having my thirst whetted by the illustrations in The Making Of Star Trek. And then I went equally nuts for FJ's Star Fleet Technical Manual. After pouring over them endlessly I began to notice one thing after another that was off. But it must be said that I still considered those works gold and they inspired me to pursue my own stuff.
Then came Shane Johnson's Mr. Scott's Guide To The U.S.S. Enterprise. And after that the TMP blueprints and McMaster drawings (which I know were done earlier, but I didn't get to see them until later). Personally I think the TMP blueprints and McMaster's work are the best of the lot. Then later I came across the drawings of Alan Sinclair and Charles Casimiro.
Phil Broad's construction drawings (posted on his cloudster site) helped inspire me to do my own shuttlecraft drawings in a way that I just wasn't seeing anywhere else. And I must add that I had enormous help from many folks here on the TBBS as well as those on Hobbytalk.
Then there's numerous folks like aridas, CRA, Shaw and others and their amazing efforts to really flesh out the interior of the TOS E. And now we've got some folks actually modeling the ship deck-by-deck in 3D. And they're not just trying to reconstruct something passable as a collection of sound stages, but modeling the ship as if it were a real vehicle.
We've come a long way and that's part of what makes this Hayes book so disappointing. It whets our appetite and many of us (including myself) will still get it out of great curiosity, but it could have been so much better.
You're so full of wit.
Wha... wait, TMP was a failure? WTF?
This incapacity of Abrams to do anything worthwhile creatively is no doubt why he is living the life he is and his critics...are not.
I only meant that insofar as it appears to have not earned Roddenberry the kind of ongoing influence over the TOS films that he had in the making of that film. Although I interviewed him once, I'm so far outside the loop to not have a clue as to whether and what he might have lied to me about. Maybe he didn't want ongoing influence. I don't know. I do know that's not the picture he painted.
Good for him. And that's supposed to be meaningful? The world is full of people who've done well while manufacturing crap. I wouldn't give my life for his for anything. I may be just a working stiff, but at least I know I've never profited by fucking someone or something over.This incapacity of Abrams to do anything worthwhile creatively is no doubt why he is living the life he is and his critics...are not.
Your constant boner over this guy and his movie gets really tiresome.
TMP being considered a failure is in the eyes of the beholder. It was successful enough in the regard that Paramount saw tangible proof of large interest for Star Trek and the viability for more films. Critically it could be called a conditional disappointment, but I'd hardly call it a failure. And TMP has shown itself to have aged well. With the perspective of time it comes across much better particularly in light of what's followed since.
Last edited:
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
This incapacity of Abrams to do anything worthwhile creatively is no doubt why he is living the life he is and his critics...are not.
Paris Hilton is doing even better than Abrams is. Let's hear it for Star Trek II: The Spockie and the Nottie
George W. Bush did pretty well, too. I mean, he was the President, for crying out loud. How on Earth could he do anything wrong, and who are we to criticize him? Bill Gates is a billionaire, the richest man on Earth, who are people to criticize his products? After all, he's living the life he is, and his critics... are not.
This incapacity of Abrams to do anything worthwhile creatively is no doubt why he is living the life he is and his critics...are not.
And that, ladies and gents and fanboys all, is wit.
That's odd, my Books a million still has it at January. Then too, they won't carry Ships of the Line either.
Might be best to wait till it hits the shelves at your local book vendor...
Pre-ordering with Amazon is always a pain. If the book is delayed, they usually keep bugging you asking if you still want it "if you don't notify us, we'll assume you want to cancel." It forces you to take an action, when, IMHO, they should just assume you wouldn't have ordered the goddam thing if you didn't want it, and send it to you when they get it. This time, they just decided I don't want it. So screw 'em, I'll get it at B&N when it comes out.
When did you order it from Amazon? Earlier in the year, they had the book up for pre-order, which I had used to pre-order - but that particular version soon became "unavailable", so I canceled that order and placed it again using the newer version. Perhaps you pre-ordered the now-unavailable version?
In fact, they still have two links for the same book:
"Unavailable" Link: http://www.amazon.com/U-S-S-Enterprise-Manual-Haynes-Workshop/dp/1844259412/
"Pre-Order" Link: http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-U-S-S-Enterprise-Haynes/dp/1451621299/
In fact, they still have two links for the same book:
"Unavailable" Link: http://www.amazon.com/U-S-S-Enterprise-Manual-Haynes-Workshop/dp/1844259412/
"Pre-Order" Link: http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-U-S-S-Enterprise-Haynes/dp/1451621299/
'Conditional Disappointment' - what an inspired phrase! Plus it can be applied to all Trek ever! Genius!
If you have no intention of copyrighting it, I would like to formally adopt it.