What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Macintosh]

There's a lot of things that can be said about the Enterprise-D's design, but it doesn't look generic. I'll take the Enterprise D's curves any day and twice on Sunday over the E's angled flatness.

The Enterprise-D has a timelessness to its curves that later designs have just lost. Why are there so many impulse engines now? why are there so many angles and widgets and extra vents on the nacelles? Why have these darker panels and ridges and steps on the saucers in particular? What does that get you over the sleek minimalism of the Galaxy-class? These things aren't speedboats or gunships. They don't need to look fast or look powerful to be fast or be powerful – the fastest and most powerful ship in the entire galaxy is a giant bloody cube for god's sake. The Galaxy-class looks ambitious, and assured, and advanced. It looks like a repudiation of a more narrow militaristic mindset, whereas the Enterprise-E looks like an embracement of it.

And even the interior is more memorable to me. The D's bridge is two levels with the horseshoe, where the E's is a single level and more closed-in.

Oh god, this, 100%. One thing I've NEVER liked about the Enterprise-E is its bridge. It's just a very generic circular "Star Trek-y" bridge, and the only character it has is all those weirdly shaped downlit steps everywhere. The Enterprise-D bridge is incredibly distinctive, with an actual design ethos behind it.

 

[Shat Happens]

Design-wise, the E-E is the most unremarkable of the Enterprises, including the C.

The Titan-A/Enterprise-G is a monstrosity. Its only excuse to be that ugly is to justify Captain Shaw's chronic crankiness.

 

[BillJ]

The Enterprise-E looks like they took the Connie-refit, Excelsior and Voyager, put them in a blender and then stomped on it.

Not a fan.

I also dislike the lettering scheme. What was cool as a one-off has become remarkably silly.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

The E sucks.

 

[Tallguy]

The Enterprise-D bridge is incredibly distinctive, with an actual design ethos behind it.

Never repeated. Never even hinted at.

 

[fireproof78]

The problem is, if the people that make the things you don't like see many people liking he things they make, they'll make more things like that, and not the things you like.

Good.

 

[fireproof78]

The Galaxy-class looks ambitious, and assured, and advanced. It looks like a repudiation of a more narrow militaristic mindset,

It looks like a boat anchor.

 

[Macintosh]

It looks like a boat anchor.

And the Enterprise-E looks like a hunchbacked dessert spoon, what's your point?

 

[Macintosh]

The Titan-A/Enterprise-G is a monstrosity. Its only excuse to be that ugly is to justify Captain Shaw's chronic crankiness.

If we had to have a more "back to basics" PIC-era ship as a new Enterprise (and frankly I don't think they should have had the Enterprise-F, never mind the Enterprise-G) then I'd have much rather they used an Excelsior II.

 

[fireproof78]

And the Enterprise-E looks like a hunchbacked dessert spoon, what's your point?

Neither are great starship design work.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Here’s one.

I do like SNW, but overall it’s my least favourite of the streaming Treks.

For me it goes:

1) PIC
2) LDS
3) DSC
4) SNW

I still haven’t seen anything of PRO beyond the first episode.

 

[Tallguy]

I still haven’t seen anything of PRO beyond the first episode.

It certainly gets a lot more Star Trek-y than that.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

It certainly gets a lot more Star Trek-y than that.

So I’ve heard. It’s a time factor more than anything else. I’ve got this nebulous list of shows I want to watch and probably 10% of it makes it.

 

[Paul755]

It’s not my favorite but I don’t think the E-D is ugly. But I do think the best version of its bridge was in Generations.

I flat out love the E-E but it’s bridge always felt a bit too cluttered.

But the E-D introduced a bad trend with the three chairs in the center. I prefer to see ships more the like the NX-01, 1701-A, Defiant, etc… that had one chair for the Captain. Don’t even get me started on the weird side by side thing Voyager has going on.

if we are talking overall just…ugly designs. It doesn’t get worse than the Enterprise B (fat and too many little “extras”) and the Enterprise F (shoulda stayed a non-canon fan design). Those ships…woof.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I didn’t like the D as a kid, but I’ve really come to appreciate it as I’ve got older. I think it’s my favourite Enterprise overall, if not my favourite ship design in Trek.

 

[Poldon]

Paramount should replace the shots of the Enterprise in TOS with the Disco/SNW-prise.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Oof.

 

[BillJ]

Paramount should replace the shots of the Enterprise in TOS with the Disco/SNW-prise.

Why not. They’ve already shit on the show with the 2006 remastered effects.

 

[Cr0sis21]

Why not. They’ve already shit on the show with the 2006 remastered effects.

I hardly think it's shitting on the show. If they could have made things look that good in the 60s, they would have. This isn't like a Star Wars "Han shot first" kind of thing. They aren't digitally removing Shatner to add in Paul Wesley.

I love DS9, it's by far my favorite series, but if they decided to redo some of those later space battles (especially the ones from What You Leave Behind) to take out the reused effects and replace them with what the producers really wanted to do, I'd jump for joy.

 

[BillJ]

I hardly think it's shitting on the show. If they could have made things look that good in the 60s, they would have. This isn't like a Star Wars "Han shot first" kind of thing. They aren't digitally removing Shatner to add in Paul Wesley.

Art is defined by its limitations. Star Trek was a product of the 1960’s, as such, it should be left alone. If someone wants to put their stamp on it, then just remake it. The work of the 60’s shouldn’t be overwritten just because something newer and flashier comes along.