That certainly seems to be the way it's used here.
What's so great about the TMP refit?
- Thread starter Shatnertage
- Start date
That certainly seems to be the way it's used here.
"Hater" is simply an antonym for "fan", and the use of the word is just an acknowledgment that someone isn't a fan of something. That's all there is. It was probably seen as being easier/less white-bread to say than "detractor."
EDIT: Nothing wrong with that, of course. Don't be hatin' on me...
EDIT: Nothing wrong with that, of course. Don't be hatin' on me...
Last edited:
I-Am-Zim
Captain
Because that nuEnterprise pic is so horrible I feel obliged to post a link to this:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/STXI-Enterprise-sheet-1.jpg
Haters can hate all they want: That ship is lovely.
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
Because that nuEnterprise pic is so horrible I feel obliged to post a link to this:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/STXI-Enterprise-sheet-1.jpg
Haters can hate all they want: That ship is lovely
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
Oh, please
.It's an Enterprise without the TOS camp or TMP fragile.
Because that nuEnterprise pic is so horrible I feel obliged to post a link to this:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/STXI-Enterprise-sheet-1.jpg
Haters can hate all they want: That ship is lovely
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
QFT.
Because that nuEnterprise pic is so horrible I feel obliged to post a link to this:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/STXI-Enterprise-sheet-1.jpg
Haters can hate all they want: That ship is lovely
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
Well to be fair, the saucer section is okay. The engineering hull and the nacelles are grossly misshapen though.
Because that nuEnterprise pic is so horrible I feel obliged to post a link to this:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/STXI-Enterprise-sheet-1.jpg
Haters can hate all they want: That ship is lovely
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
Oh, please
It's an Enterprise without the TOS camp or TMP fragile.
And without the TOS and TMP elegance.
Hello i love all theStar Trek Enterprise's and yes i like the Enerprise J but my fav one is the U.S.S. Enerprise NCC-1701 refit it just look's great it look's like a real warship and thank you KingDaniel for showing us that lovely shot of that lovely ship . 
Star Trek foraver
Star Trek foraver
I-Am-Zim
Captain
Because that nuEnterprise pic is so horrible I feel obliged to post a link to this:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/STXI-Enterprise-sheet-1.jpg
Haters can hate all they want: That ship is lovely
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
Oh, please
It's an Enterprise without the TOS camp or TMP fragile.
Nothing "campy" about the TOS ship. Where is that coming from? And the TMP refit is far from fragile. Both are beautiful, well proportioned and elegantly simple designs. But the Abramsprise is still BUTT...ASS...FUGLY
I-Am-Zim
Captain
That's more accurate but still butt-ass-ugly!
Oh, please
It's an Enterprise without the TOS camp or TMP fragile.
Nothing "campy" about the TOS ship. Where is that coming from? And the TMP refit is far from fragile. Both are beautiful, well proportioned and elegantly simple designs. But the Abramsprise is still BUTT...ASS...FUGLY
I love the TOS and TMP Enterprises, but if you're so far into blind devotion you can't see the 50's sci-fi style cheesy plain cylinders and saucer on the TOS Enterprise and the paper-thin nacelle pylons on the TMP one then you're beyond help.
And call it "fugly" all you want, but the STXI ship is the USS Enterprise NCC-1701. No amount of "mine's better!" will make it go away - but feel free to try. Reach for the sky, kid!
The TOS-E's tapered cylinder nacelles aren't cheesy; they're simple, elegant and functional-looking. And the slender, swept-back pylons on the TMP refit are sleek and graceful.
The JJ-prise's proportions are ALL wrong. And you want to talk 1950s sci-fi esthetics? What's with those cowls, scoops and fins on the nacelles? They look like Harley J. Earl designed them -- while he was drunk.
De gustibus non est disputandum, to coin a phrase.
That has to be the dumbest thing I've read this month.
Well I have to say everyone loves the U.S.S Enterprise but i love the TMP refit she has all the right curves in the right places . And who remembers how good she looked in the drydock scene from TMP watching kirk fall in love with his ship again was amazing .
As fans we will always argue over which is the best looking U.S.S Enterprise i never liked the TOS enterprise but i,ve noticed and relised she,s as beautiful if it a was not for that design who,s knows what she have looked like.?
The original Enterprise is a saucer with three cylinders. There is little detail. It's not far in advance of rocket ships and flying saucers of really old sci-fi.
I like the design, but it's in the same niche as the Adam West batmobile now.
Oh, please
It's an Enterprise without the TOS camp or TMP fragile.
Nothing "campy" about the TOS ship. Where is that coming from? And the TMP refit is far from fragile. Both are beautiful, well proportioned and elegantly simple designs. But the Abramsprise is still BUTT...ASS...FUGLY
I love the TOS and TMP Enterprises, but if you're so far into blind devotion you can't see the 50's sci-fi style cheesy plain cylinders and saucer on the TOS Enterprise and the paper-thin nacelle pylons on the TMP one then you're beyond help.
And call it "fugly" all you want, but the STXI ship is the USS Enterprise NCC-1701. No amount of "mine's better!" will make it go away - but feel free to try. Reach for the sky, kid!
I like the new old big E but the Abramsprise look's like some thing out of a 1930's Buck Roger's move .
To be fair, that was intentional. Matt Jefferies said in an interview he had to fight to keep people from adding a lot of stuff to the Enterprise's hull. He believed that things should be hidden within the hull rather than be exposed to "space elements."
I can buy that. Personally, I think the only real detail that is missing from the original Enterprise are some maneuvering thrusters (RCS jets) along the saucer section like the later ships do, but otherwise I can go with the idea of things like sensor/communication pallets being imbedded within or flush with the outer hull layers.
The TMP version of the ship has the advantage of not only much interesting detail but the proportions of the parts were refined somewhat from the TOS ship - giving a little more heft to the engineering hull, for example, so that the saucer didn't dominate quite as much.
My favorite remains the TOS ship. One of the things I like about the JJPrise is the extent to which the engines are derived from the TOS vessel - the thing I liked least about the TMP ship were the engines.
Beyond a certain point all of this is a fetish, though - most human beings are bored during the extraordinarily lengthy fly-around of the vessel in ST:TMP, and Kirk's fascination with the ship came over time to verge on the creepy.
My favorite remains the TOS ship. One of the things I like about the JJPrise is the extent to which the engines are derived from the TOS vessel - the thing I liked least about the TMP ship were the engines.
Beyond a certain point all of this is a fetish, though - most human beings are bored during the extraordinarily lengthy fly-around of the vessel in ST:TMP, and Kirk's fascination with the ship came over time to verge on the creepy.
Similar threads
