The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/index.php)
-   Star Trek XI: The Movie (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   New-E, Look at it in another way (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4059)

Juan Martinez 11-13-2008 12:52 PM

New-E, Look at it in another way
 
I've been thinking about the look of the new Enterprise and have been coming up with some ideas on accepting it instead of the of whole cannon/original/batman debate. Here is what I have thought of.

1. If the technology and funding was available, would the original Enterprise looked more different. It did in TMP for the big screen with better tech and better funding. I doubt many people would want to see the original 60's enterprise on screen that looks outdated, they want something more modern. I think of it like this, it doesn't matter what the ship looked liked, its about the story of her adventures. If you cut and paste in the new ship and backgrounds/bridge in with the old footage, the story would still be the same.

2. It would make more since that the refit of the new enterprise wouldn't be hard to make it into the TMP Enterprise. Not such a drastic change.

3. As for keeping with cannon, I have only one idea who the movie would stay in with cannon. Of course, we all know it envolves time travel. If Nero, Spock, or whoever travels back in time, probably before Kirk was born and changed the timeline from that point, it would have changed the planning stages of the constition class starship. The purpose may have been changed from exploration to warship. It would only take a small change that would have thrown off the whole ship. It may have thrown off the construction date from Robert April's time to Pike's time. Because of this, it is closer to TMP technology timeframe and the ship was built with more TMP tech than the TOS stuff.

4. Thats the way the ship looked when she was first built, then it was refitted to the original 60's design. I don't know why it would take a step back then 2 steps forward again to TMP. This idea doesn't make much since.

Saquist 11-13-2008 12:58 PM

1. throwing money at a project does not make it better. I'm not sure if it ever has.
2.You're completely wrong. It is structually a completely different animal. (except) the saucer. You know this.
3. We already known canon is out the door. This isn't about canon.
4. Why the appologizing for this design? You can't want Trek that badly that you'll swallow...what I can only call...poison just to get it. If it taste, looks, and smells bad...don't eat it.

MrQ1701 11-13-2008 12:58 PM

I am not concerned with Canon issues regarding the new E. At first look it just evoked a gag reflex!! Same for the bridge with all the "pretty" lighting. Some may point to canon as their reason for disliking what we have seen so far of this new Trek movie, but not me. My reasoning is based solely on my personnal taste.

MrQ1701 11-13-2008 01:00 PM

I don't agree with Saquist, Canon is NOT "out the door". The same could be said about much of the Trek that is "canon"

kevin 11-13-2008 01:04 PM

You can't be certain canon is out the door until the film is seen. There is only a theory it is, which is unsubstantiated until the conclusive evidence i.e the completed, edited and released film, is there to be seen.

And if say, there is another version of the ship by the end of the film with another bridge more closely resembling TOS (bearing in mind time travel's involvement) does anyone seriously believe that would be an image that would be released early on? No, it wouldn't, because it would be the ultimate final revelation saved for the film. Not that I necessarily believe that is what may happen, but it's as likely as any other event in the absence of definitive proof.

Juan Martinez 11-13-2008 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrQ1701 (Post 115337)
I don't agree with Saquist, Canon is NOT "out the door". The same could be said about much of the Trek that is "canon"

That is true. My first thing was trying to think of a way that would keep all this new stuff with cannon. Then I thought of it as cannon only with a different look. Now I'm thinking on how we'll have to throw out most of TOS cannon or alter it to fit the movie if it is accepted. I guess the reason I wrote this is that I have a hope it will stay with cannon and he found a way to do so.

tomcatjosh 11-13-2008 01:10 PM

This Will Just Be New Canon..

MrQ1701 11-13-2008 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomcatjosh (Post 115345)
This Will Just Be New Canon..

Exactly!! As long as we are NOT told that Kirk's middle name is Tom, no "canon" has been violated by this movie, in my opinion

number 3 11-13-2008 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrQ1701 (Post 115336)
At first look it just evoked a gag reflex!! .

couldn't have said it better myself


futility is resistable

TriggerMan 11-13-2008 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrQ1701 (Post 115348)
Exactly!! As long as we are NOT told that Kirk's middle name is Tom, no "canon" has been violated by this movie, in my opinion

Why would it be Tom? It obviously started with an R before "Where No Man Has Gone Before." Therefore, they are disrespecting canon and disrespecting Gene. Allow me to weep now.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.