The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > More detailed acceptance of Enterprise
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: What do you think about the Enterprise details?
Don't like the saucer. 1 0.93%
Don't like the neck. 21 19.63%
Don't like the engineering section. 24 22.43%
Don't like the pylons. 18 16.82%
Don't like the nacelles. 27 25.23%
Everything looks great. 55 51.40%
The entire ship doesn't deserve the name. 12 11.21%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 107. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-20-2008, 07:58 PM
Damage75's Avatar
Damage75 Damage75 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,593
Default

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionTrek08 View Post
Do you mean a poll which doesn't offer six negative choices and only one positive choice?
Yes....lol...good idea!

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
Oh, geez...I thought this was a thread about a more acceptance of the TV series Star Trek: Enterprise.

My bad...
Easily confused....all of this prequel talk makes most think of ENT
__________________


You people have ruined "Star Trek The Next Generation" for me. You are absolutely the most insufferable group of jackasses I have ever had the misfortune of spending an extended period of time with. I hope you all f@*#! die. - Stewie after spending the day with the TNG cast.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-20-2008, 09:52 PM
Ferrous's Avatar
Ferrous Ferrous is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 181
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TroubledTribble View Post
I have replica models of all of the Enterprises, except the "D", I really HATED the look of that pregnant guppie saucer. And the sad thing is, that was the last ship Gene Roddenberry had any input on the design of. I like this new ship for two reasons. 1) It looks "enough" like the old "E" to suit me. 2) They have made it look like a truly functional ship. Hasn't any of you thought, 'How in the hell can the Bussard collectors collect or emit any type to space gases if they are covered over???' Sorry, but I'm an old Navy man and I was a radar and weapons system technician for the ten years I was enlisted and common sense tells you that for gases to be collected or emitted there has to be openings to space.
So yes, I do like the new "E" because someone with common sense and technical know how designed this ship to answer all these questions. This ship doesn't look like a model, it looks real and functional!!!!
I had an adverse reaction to the "D" as well but it eventually grew on me.

The new re-envisioned Enterprise does look more functional like the refit version from the movies. I was always bothered by the lack of detail of the original from the 60s. Especially when they fired weapons. There was never a clear indication where the weapons were coming from. Atleast now you can see the phaser banks and the torpedo tubes.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-21-2008, 10:12 AM
thypentacle's Avatar
thypentacle thypentacle is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Eastern U.S.
Posts: 369
Default my 2 cents... no wait... dollar value is down... 1.2 cents

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionTrek08 View Post
It's funny, because a bunch of members thought the same thing, then began posting comparison photos with the TOS E, and the neck/secondary hull placement isn't that far off at all. But other proportion ratios make it look a bit different than if you isolate the two designs at the neck joint.

I agree with that, but even from the standpoint of someone seeing this ship and not knowing at all what the old one looks like can see the dish area seems out of place and sticks out too far on this design, if they just look long enough and compare the ratios of the other parts... and that does not erase the fact that if you photoshop this version and move just the saucer and neck forward a bit it looks a billion times better.

I just don't understand how they could not see this flaw being that they wanted a more 'streamlined' version. Stretching it out too much would be an easier mistake than making it look squished together like crumpled paper. (saucer pushed back/nacelles pinched closer together)

Just my opinion, I'll still buy the DVD of the movie but I won't be buyin the ship toy like I was going to... unless someone does a mod of it with the saucer/neck fixed and puts it on ebay... HINT HINT.

And maybe, though this is hoping for too much, a really dedicated fan with uber skill will do a fan edit version of the movie at some point with a new ship and actual color overlaid on the uber boring white interior sets... uuungh. iBridge... *pukes* lol

Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-21-2008, 11:34 AM
CAPTAIN MOUSE's Avatar
CAPTAIN MOUSE CAPTAIN MOUSE is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Placerville,CA
Posts: 2,564
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by thypentacle View Post
Don't like neck/engineering section placement. They look OK but the saucer and neck parts are set too far back on top of engineering section... darn near the middle. Like they hit a wall going forward and those parts got crunched back... or to use a gun term... it looks half cocked. lol

Like I said in another post, this placement makes the navigational dish part look way too far out in front like a 'big-nose'... but like many have said, perhaps this pic is not fully accurate so I'll just hope for the best.



Rest of it is fine btw... interesting new mix of style as compared to previous ship looks.
Half-cocked? That is a interesting analogy Pent. But as they say to each is own.
BTW love the avatar..blessed be
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-24-2008, 10:11 PM
radoskal's Avatar
radoskal radoskal is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 952
Default

everything was cool....except...where the hell is the forward sensor array...that was one of the things I hoped they'd keep, its a really distinguishing piece of the 1701...instead they replaced it with a NCC1701-A deflector dish...the whole thing looks more like the refit ENT from the films than the original TV series ship..but they could have done a lot worse.
__________________
Mom, how many times do I have to tell you, Track is what athletes run on. Trek is what the Enterprise goes on.

-Free Enterprise
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-24-2008, 10:15 PM
Livingston's Avatar
Livingston Livingston is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Along the Kessel Run
Posts: 4,964
Default

I think it's still a dish, they've just pushed it back into the housing quite a bit more and given it the blue sheen the refit has and all the subsequent ships had. It seems they went with a hybrid of the original deflector and the refit/TNG era deflector.

I also hoped they'd keep the original dish design but it far more resembles the refit than the original, deflector-wise!
__________________


"Death, delicious strawberry flavored death!"
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:56 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
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.