Discussion in 'Star Trek: Discovery' started by Syd Shanshala, Oct 30, 2017.
They work just fine.
...Certainly they'd be fine in DSC, which features lots of such pylons.
But arguing that something in Trek would "not be fine" is futile, because once it's in Trek, its fine by default. The Makers don't hold any polls on what to insert and what to leave out, not before, not during and not after. They just dictate. And so far, they have dictated the 1960s design upon us time and again.
No it doesn't.
Nothing in DSC has matches the Connie's aesthetic, why would they not change it to match?
Using the exact TOS design would stand out like a sore thumb.
The ones on the Shenzhou and the Gagarin are just as "thin" - them being a tad shorter hides the fact somewhat.
What does the Millenium Falcon have to do with this? Star Wars ships are cluttered with a bunch of messy, useless pieces of exterior junk to add to the industrial, "lived-in" look of that universe. And it works just fine for that setting.
Star Trek ships should have a sleek and smooth aesthetic as a reflection of modernistic futurism, rather than being brutish and cluttered like those hulking beasts of SW.
And not for the lamb's cry either.
At a very minimum, the Constitution would need a full re-texture to match the grahical quality and aesthetic of Discovery.
However, if she does show up, I get the feeling she'll have a nearly full redesign to fit in better with the rest of the Federation ships we've seen.
They are fan made, but using photos of the original model after the restoration process.
And don't forget: Discovery can be seen in Spacedock in TSFS with an apparent refit of thin pylons and round nacelles!! (left side of image, for those who haven't seen it before)
Unless it does. Fans don't have veto power over retcons; if they decide that it does, then it does.
While that is unlikely in principal, the fact is the DSC starship, uniform and prop designs are ALOT closer to what we saw in TMP than in TOS.
More importantly, this has already happened once. The art department of the Kelvinverse films borrowed alot more elements -- in terms of style and shape -- from the TMP version than the TOS one. The design and placement of the phaser banks, the torpedo launchers, the aztecing on the hull plates, the window placement, docking ports, the exterior design of the shuttlebay,the glowing deflector dish, even the bridge window being in roughly the same place as the TMP ship's forward sensors (and the similar design of the bridge dome). In the end, it's not a question of IF they will use the TMP design as a basis, it's a question of how much of it they will actually incorporate into the finished product. We can be pretty sure they won't use the actual TOS design as-is and are going to modify it somehow, probably a marriage between some TOS and TMP design elements. It's just a question of what is the baby going to look like?
Because the Kelvin bridge borrowed heavily from the TOS Bridge where the JJPrise borrowed more from TMP.
Isn't that more or less what they did for the Star Trek Remastered USS Enterprise?
The TOS Connie would be fine. Check out this QMX model. It's got the texturing of the Discovery ships. It would fit in just fine.
Full sized link. https://i.imgur.com/utwVI0H.png
What retcons? There have never been any retcons, which is the relevant point here. "Reboot" has never happened to Star Trek: it has always claimed that everything that used to be, still is. Which is something Star Trek can do particularly well, because it hops from century to century, being almost uniquely capable of leaving bridges burning brightly behind without any need to rebuild them of different materials. Heck, they redo their guns and clothes once a decade, twice in some, and this is never an attempt to claim that the previous version never existed.
That's another fallacy there - that any incarnation of Trek would have a "style" to stick to. Every spinoff so far has been in contradiction of that: they are all fine mixing styles, usually to deliberate dramatic effect.
And neither retconned, rebooted nor contradicted anything in doing so. They just showed yet another style in Trek, one among many.
This was not an attempt to claim that TOS didn't look like TOS. It was a nice chance to show what TOS could have been instead of TOS, but wasn't.
The whole concept of redoing an existing Trek element is an odd fantasy that has no basis in Trek history so far. Whenever something in Trek has been reshown, it has been reshown as it was, with great care and deliberation, down to choosing actors that maximally resemble the originals (although obviously there's much less success there than in carefully redoing old props, costumes, sets and visuals). There is no a priori reason for DSC to launch an all-new practice in this respect.
I just had a thought. Discovery has taken Star Trek space scenes into new dynamic territory. Back in the old days we're used to seeing ships backlit and super imposed on space backgrounds. With modern technology, Discovery's rendered lighting has a more realistic feel. I was experimenting with a photo of a Master Replica's enterprise model and put it against a Discovery esque space background and tried my best to give it the dynamic Discovery lighting.
That looks great.
For the life of me, I just cannot get why so many think that the original Constitution is an inherently primitive-looking design. It's slim, sleek, and streamlined, reflecting a modernist design aesthetic.
Thank you. I don't get it either. I guess it's not 2017 enough for some.
I agree. The Grey Lady is still sexy as hell.
In fact: That was exactly what the creators intended! To show how much technology had progressed until the future of TOS. It wasn't easy to built a model with such small pylons. But it was worth it, just to show audiences how much better material they must be using in the future.
Also the reason why the Enterprise model is very top-heavy, and not bottom-heavy (which would be easier to construct as a studio model): To make absolutely clear that this is a spaceship, and NOT bound by gravity!
I was never the biggest TOS fan and it's my favorite looking of the enterprises, the A, a close second, the B a close third, the D, a close fourth, and then I just don't care after that.
Separate names with a comma.