The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Stxi Wtf?
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #421  
Old 08-27-2011, 02:23 PM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Futureguy View Post
"Hot" Engineer...

Is she the "first" female to character the role of an engineer at the level the show portrayed? She originally was the assistant engineer, but was promoted because the "guy" engineer was a doofus...
No - it was even cooler than that - engines turned her on so she was shagging the engineer and diagnosed the problem while erm... on her back. The captain fired him and hired her - smart move!

As an aside, one of the biggest beefs I had with NuBSG was that we had no Cassiopeia. Enara is a great example of how a hooker - I mean socialator - could have been a really cool character! Six took on a bit of her role but they never named her.
__________________
Angels of Acheron: http://www.youtube.com/user/pauln6
Reply With Quote
  #422  
Old 08-27-2011, 07:55 PM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
Serenity comes on Dish Network all the time. So I've seen it as of this last year....and it was really good.

But I just wasn't expecting "NO" space battles in the series with what I saw in the movie..... I'd check it out if I knew where to find it....it seems with all the programing that SyFy has to use for reruns they seem to really like running the gatoroid, Megashark ala stupid FX movies over and over and over and over again rather than going to Farscape, Firefly or others.
I think the Firefly series on DVD is available for relatively cheap.

Yeah, SyFy really over does the cheesy monster of the week flick.
But, their chief of programming, one Bonnie Hammer, who came over from the likes of Lifetime/Oxygyn, is wanting to turn it into anything BUT a sci-fi channel.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #423  
Old 08-28-2011, 12:15 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

That's money for you.

Imagine Lesser
(If you can)
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #424  
Old 08-28-2011, 01:58 AM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saquist View Post
That's money for you.

Imagine Lesser
(If you can)

Or..

Imagyn More ha ha ha
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #425  
Old 08-28-2011, 07:23 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Okay. More anti jj-trek stuff

In 2009, a movie was released. This movie was called “Star Trek”. It was directed by one Mr. J. J. Abrams and written primarily by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. Orci and Kurtzman claimed to be Star Trek fans while Abrams stated on numerous occasions that he never really cared for Star Trek and was more of a Star Wars fan. Abrams also stated on numerous occasions that he was not making this movie for Star Trek fans and that he wanted to inject some “rock n’ roll” into Star Trek to make it more like Star Wars. The ad campaign prominently stated “This Is Not Your Father’s Star Trek” and “Forget What You Know” in an attempt to distance this new franchise from the original Star Trek upon which it is (loosely) based. When the movie was released, it was apparent (to me anyway) that this was most definitely not the Star Trek we all know and love. At first, the movie was supposed to be an origin story of how the TOS crew came together aboard the USS Enterprise under James T. Kirk’s command. Later, when the first pictures started to emerge and everyone saw how different the sets, ships, and props looked compared to all previous versions of Star Trek, the story changed. It transformed from a TOS origin story into an alternate reality story about the origins of an alternate reality version of the TOS crew and how they came together aboard an alternate reality version of the Enterprise under the command of an alternate reality version of James T. Kirk. They tried to cover up the fact that they were basically re-booting the Star Trek franchise by claiming this new Trek universe was a branch off the original TOS/TNG timeline caused by a time travelling Romulan named Nero (the movie, however, does not bear this out – more on that later). Basically, the explanation was that in the TNG-era 24th century, Nero the angry Romulan gets pissed at Spock because he didn’t save Romulus from being destroyed by a galaxy-eating supernova (Yeah, I know, a supernova can’t destroy a whole galaxy – This is just one example of the hokey science Abrams used in his Twilight Zone version of Star Trek). Spock tries to use something called “Red Matter” to create a black hole (more hokey science – and, it turns out, just another way for Abrams to get a big, red ball into another of his projects) to absorb the supernova but he’s too late. By the time he gets there, the super-duper nova has destroyed Romulus (why he couldn’t predict the speed of the nova’s expansion and compensate for it is beyond me. Technically, they should have seen this coming decades in advance and prepared for it. Do Vulcans and Romulans of the Abramsverse not have high-tech instruments that can measure the intensity of a supernova???). When he creates the black hole to absorb the rest of the incredibly implausible sooper-dooper nova and tries to escape, Nero intercepts him and they are both pulled into the black hole. Supposedly, when Nero exits the black hole, he has gone back in time 154 years (25 years after Nero emerges from the black hole, OldSpock tells NuKirk he’s from 129 years in the future.). This is supposed to be when the timeline “branches off” according to the writers. Supposedly, according to Orci, the TOS/TNG timeline is unaffected by Nero’s interference. Only the “branched” timeline feels the effects. Supposedly, Nero’s interference in the branched-off timeline somehow causes technology to advance exponentially faster than in the original universe. Hence the highly advanced technology present in the movie that does not correspond to anything we saw in TOS or the TOS-era movies. It also causes the Enterprise NCC-1701 to be built on the ground (!?!?!) in Riverside, Iowa instead of the San Francisco Fleet Yards as it should be. Instead of simply “updating” the look of the TOS universe to make it more modern, they completely redesigned everything. There is absolutely nothing in this movie that bears even the slightest resemblance to what we saw in The Original Series (except, perhaps, the communicators used on the Kelvin, and the gold/red/blue uniforms).
Reply With Quote
  #426  
Old 08-28-2011, 07:23 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

The simple elegance of the TOS bridge and the Enterprise herself have been exaggerated and caricaturized to the point of being almost comedic. The Abramsverse version of the bridge has been affectionately dubbed the “iBridge” because it looks like a cross between an Apple store and the jewelry department at Belk. Everything is blazing white and there are blinding spotlights everywhere that appear to shine directly into the actors’ eyes all the time. That had to be annoying. And there are the “oh-so-80’s” glass panels with the etched circuit board lines on them that look ridiculous. It is also a lot bigger than the TOS bridge. And then there’s the “viewindow”. Never, in the history of Star Trek has a starship had a “window” on the bridge. There is also a second ring of stations on the iBridge that were not there on the TOS bridge. In addition, the iBridge seems to be at the front of a complete deck on the Abramsprise that houses the transporter room, the medical bay (“Sick Bay” to those who are familiar with Star Trek), and a network of other corridors and unidentified rooms. The TOS bridge had only one turbolift, and so does the iBridge. However, on the iBridge, there is another door on the opposite side of the iBridge from the turbolift that accesses the corridor that leads to the transporter room among other rooms and corridors. And there are also some kind of big, glass panels on the iBridge that weren’t there on the TOS bridge. Then there are the two “waitress stations” behind and to the left and right of the Captain’s chair. Nobody seems to know exactly what those are for, not even Abrams it seems, but the TOS bridge didn’t have them.
Reply With Quote
  #427  
Old 08-28-2011, 07:24 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

The Abramsverse version of the Enterprise is a travesty. It’s one of the ugliest starship designs I have ever witnessed. Ryan Church, at the direction of Abrams, pulled, stretched, and distorted the original TOS Enterprise’s lines completely out of proportion. His version is so bloated and misshapen as to be almost a parody of the original design. Matt Jeffries’ Enterprise was beautifully simple. It actually looked like something that could possibly be built by Earth space agencies of the future. It was almost perfectly proportioned, well balanced, and most elegant in its simplicity. While most other space ship designs in the 1960’s were cone-shaped with giant stylized fins and rocket exhaust sparking out of their tails, the Enterprise was a total departure from that design philosophy. Instead of rockets, the Enterprise had warp nacelles. Instead of a cylinder with a cone tip and big fins, the Enterprise had a saucer connected to a secondary hull. The original TOS Enterprise design was revolutionary in 1964 and is just as ahead of its time now as it was then. The Abrams version, unfortunately, can’t make that claim. I doubt it will be considered a modern classic 40-odd years from now. The Abramsverse version of the Enterprise is so derided by many fans as to have earned the nicknames “Abramsprise”, “JJ-Prise”, “Squiderprise”, “Crappyprise” and “Fuglyprise”, among others. It’s a terribly disproportionate design. The only thing the Abramsprise shares in common with the Enterprise is that it has a saucer, two warp nacelles, and a secondary hull. Where the Enterprise’s warp nacelles were roughly cylindrical with an ever-so-slight taper toward the rear, the Abramsprise’s nacelles are enormous and taper to almost a point at the rear giving them a “cone” shape. It’s as if Ryan Church took the slight taper of the Enterprise nacelles and exaggerated it to the point of caricature on the Abramsprise. The Enterprise’s secondary hull is also roughly cylindrical with a more pronounced taper toward the rear. The Abramsprise’s secondary hull looks like a partially squeezed tube of toothpaste, big at the front and tiny and flat toward the rear. It is also too small as compared to the rest of the ship (when using the Enterprise as a benchmark). The Abramsprise’s saucer (almost a carbon copy of the TMP refit saucer) is absolutely enormous in comparison to the rest of the ship. It makes the ship look “front-heavy” (although we know in space weight makes no real difference). Where the Enterprise’s saucer was just the perfect size compared to the other components of the ship, the Abramsprise has a saucer that is comedically disproportionate compared to the rest of the ship’s components. Another difference that makes no logical sense is the nacelle end caps, or “bussard collectors”. On the Enterprise (and just about every single starship in the history of Star Trek that had bussard collectors), they’re red. On the Abramsprise, they’re blue. Why? Why change the color of the collectors? I guess Abrams had his big, red ball with the red matter and couldn’t have the ship’s warp nacelles taking the glory away from the red matter? I don’t know. It just didn’t make a lick o’ sense. It’s just another example of change for the sake of change. And then there’s the size issue. According to interviews with Abrams, Church, and ILM, the Abramsprise was originally supposed to be about the same size as the TMP refit Enterprise. However, at some point during production, the size of the ship was increased to Galaxy class proportions. Unfortunately, the details of the ship such as bridge dome, airlocks, and windows/viewports weren’t sized down in proportion to the increased size of the ship. Therefore, the Abramsprise looks about the same size as the TMP refit throughout most of the movie. There are only a couple of scenes where it looks bigger. The shuttle bay scene when NuKirk and NuBones arrive on the Abramsprise, and…well…that’s the only one I can remember off the top of my head. It looked normal size everywhere else. Because of that one shuttle bay scene, they decided that the ship was going to be something like 700 meters long. That’s ludicrous. But the stupidest part of the whole Abramsprise debacle is that in the movie, the ship was depicted being built on the ground! Never, ever, in the history of Star Trek as we know it has a starship ever been shown being built on the surface of a planet. Every time we’ve ever seen a starship under construction or being repaired or refit, it has always been in orbital spacedock. Even the NX-01, which is 100 years older than the TOS Enterprise, was built in orbital spacedock. It just makes no logical sense to build something that massive on the ground when its entire life cycle will be spent in outer space. It would be simpler and much more logical to build it in space. But, if Abrams didn’t put the construction site on the ground, he couldn’t have had his Star Wars homage with NuKirk looking up at the construction site just as Luke Skywalker looked up at the twin suns of Tatooine (BTW, Abrams actually said that’s what that scene was meant to emulate).
Reply With Quote
  #428  
Old 08-28-2011, 07:25 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

And that’s not the only Star Wars reference in this movie. There are many more. Moviegoers unfamiliar with the Star Wars franchise may not have noticed them. But those of us who are fans of both Star Trek and Star Wars could easily notice the various references to Star Wars that Abrams threw into his “Trek Wars” stew. These are just the ones that I noticed. There are probably many more.
The most deliberate reference to Star Wars, and the most difficult to notice, is R2D2 floating across the viewindow of the Abramsprise after it arrived at Vulcan. This kind of thing has been done in the movies forever. In the “Battlestar Galactica” miniseries, we see a Firefly class transport through a window as Laura Roselyn discovers she has cancer. If I remember correctly, in “Star Trek: First Contact”, we see the Millennium Falcon during the battle scene with the Borg. In “Serenity”, when Mal and crew are investigating the planet Miranda, the transport they go into is called the “C-57D”, from “Forbidden Planet”. Therefore, R2D2 floating past the viewindow is nothing new in the movie industry. Had that been the only SW reference, I wouldn’t have such a problem with it. However, it was only one of many.
When Captain Pike gives the order for the Abramsprise to go to the aid of planet Vulcan, he says “punch it”. The phrase by itself isn’t that big a deal. However, in this instance, it is significant in that it is the same thing Han Solo says in SW when the Falcon goes to light speed. If one didn’t know of Abrams’ fondness of Star Wars, this wouldn’t have been as significant.
The new warp effect in the Abramsverse is remarkably similar to the hyperspace effect used in Star Wars. It also appears to be similar in that in the Abramsverse, Federation starship sensors don’t seem to work while at warp. If they did, the Abramsprise wouldn’t have come out of warp into the debris field of the starships Nero destroyed over NuVulcan. This scene is very similar to the scene in SW in which the Mellinium Falcon comes out of hyperspace in the middle of a meteor shower that used to be the planet Alderaan. Another similarity is that a planet was destroyed in Star Wars and a planet was destroyed in Abrams-Trek. This particular scene was quite probably the most obvious SW reference in the entire movie.
The sound effects are another reference to SW. Most of the vehicle sounds in the movie have that “oscillating” sound reminiscent of the Pod-Racers in “The Phantom Menace”. The sound effects for the shuttles sounded like the cars from “The Jetsons” crossed with a classic VW Beetle exhaust note. NuKirk’s motorcycle sounded like worn out brake pads scraping on a warped rotor (I know this because I have heard this sound before). Spock’s “Jellyfish” was definitely rockin’ the pod-racer sound effects. The Abramsprise, however, sounded more like two pieces of sheet metal scraping against each other, a horrible noise. In the battle scene onboard the Narada close to the end of the movie, the phasers NuKirk and NuSpock were using sounded much like the Naboo Blasters from “The Phantom Menace”. The phasers also resembled the Naboo Blasters in that they had a shiny metal finish. The phasers also apparently operated like SW blasters as well. Instead of firing a continuous beam like every single hand phaser ever seen in the entire history of Star Trek, the JJ-Verse phasers fire what appears to be plasma bolts, just like SW blasters. By contrast, the Romulan disruptors sounded a lot like the Storm Trooper blasters from the SW movies. Naboo blasters = Good Guys, Storm Trooper blasters = Bad Guys.
The 3-D holographic projectors used aboard the Narada to show Captain Robau images of OldSpock and the Jellyfish appear to be very similar to the holographic communicators used in Star Wars. Both are monochrome and translucent and both “flicker” in pretty much the same manner.
The Abramsprise being built on the ground could be considered as another SW reference in that we saw enormous Star Destroyers being constructed and launched from the surface of a planet in one of the prequels, I can’t remember which. I’m surprised Abrams didn’t want to show the Abramsprise effortlessly lifting off the Earth’s surface and into space just like the giant ships did in Star Wars.
Delta Vega is another example of a blatant Star Wars reference. In TOS, Delta Vega was a desolate, uninhabited planet rich in crystals and minerals located at the edge of the galaxy near the Galactic Barrier. There was also a “lithium cracking station” on the original Delta Vega. In Abrams-Trek, Delta Vega has been relocated to a very close proximity to planet Vulcan and changed from a desert-type planet into an ice planet. This is obviously a direct reference to Hoth from “Empire Strikes Back”. After NuSpock sends NuKirk off the ship and down to NuDelta-Hoth (as I like to call it), there is another scene that is a direct reference to Star Wars. It’s been called the “There’s Always A Bigger Fish” scene. NuKirk is being chased across the snow-covered surface by a wampa-like critter when suddenly, a giant multi-legged lizard-like monster bursts out of the ice and chomps down on the wampa critter. This scene was an homage to the scene in “The Phantom Menace” when Qui-Gon Jin and Obi-Wan Kenobi were leaving the underwater Gungan city and being chased by a big fish-like creature. All of a sudden, a bigger fish creature comes out of nowhere and chomps down on the smaller fish. Qui-Gon then states: “There’s always a bigger fish.”
On NuDelta-Hoth, there was a Federation outpost (instead of the lithium cracking station) manned by one NuMontgomery Scott and his little sidekick, Keesner. Many fans have equated Keesner with Jar-Jar Binks. He was completely unnecessary and yet another homage to Star Wars. Personally, I’d like to see Keesner dropped off on NuDelta-Hoth and eaten by the wampa critter.
The hallways and corridors on the Abramsprise are also similar in many ways to ships in the Star Wars franchise. They have shiny floors and completely white walls. In some ways, the corridors on the Abramsprise remind me of the corridors on Princess Leia’s Counselor ship from “A New Hope”.
There are probably many more references to SW in this movie, but this is all I can remember off the top of my head. I’ll have to sit through the movie again to find more. And I don’t know if I can do that any time in the near future.
Reply With Quote
  #429  
Old 08-28-2011, 07:28 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Now let’s get to the possible canon violations. Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman like to claim that they didn’t violate any canon because their movie takes place in an alternate reality and doesn’t affect the original TOS universe. I’d like to believe that as well. According to the writers, everything up to the point that Nero emerges from the black hole in 2233 is supposed to be unchanged from the original timeline. At that point, the timeline “branches” off to form the alternate reality where the movie takes place, thereby allowing the original TOS timeline to continue unaffected. That sounds all well and good until you begin to examine certain aspects of the movie and comparing them to what we know as “canon”.
Unfortunately, we don’t have a canon point of reference for the 2230’s with which to compare the USS Kelvin. However, the Kelvin is simply too advanced looking and enormous to be a 2230’s era starship. It had to be monstrous to hold all the shuttles we see at the end of the opening sequence. If it were comparable in size to a 23rd century Constitution class ship, the entire secondary hull would have to be a giant shuttle bay to hold all those shuttles. But in the Kelvin we see an implausibly enormous power plant-style engineering section. However, we don’t see much of the shuttle bay except for when Captain Robou’s shuttle leaves the ship on its way to the Narada. In that scene, the shuttle bay doesn’t seem large enough to accommodate the 20-odd shuttles we see at the end of the scene. This turns out to be another “size” fluctuation issue that crops up on several occasions in the movie, most notably with the “Gigantoprise” later on in the movie. Another issue with the sequence is the stardate system used. Robau tells Nero that the stardate is 2233-04. This appears to be an Earth-centric, Gregorian calendar stardate system. Because we don’t have a 2230’s canon point of reference, we can assume that this may have been the system used by Starfleet in the 2230’s. However, Nero seemed to understand that stardate, which makes little sense because Nero is supposed to be from the TNG-era 24th century. The stardate system used in that timeframe is not a Gregorian-type system. It is possible, however, that Nero may have known about early stardate systems used by Starfleet…but this is highly unlikely. Why would a Romulan miner need to deliberately study centuries old Starfleet stardate systems? Another odd aspect of the USS Kelvin’s design that doesn’t conform to known Starfleet ship designs is the warp nacelle. The Kelvin is a single-nacelle design. That in itself isn’t really an issue. The way the warp nacelle appears to operate is. In the opening scene of STXI, George Kirk pilots the Kelvin on a collision course with the Narada. Earlier in the scene, we hear dialogue stating that the Kelvin’s warp drive has been knocked out. When George Kirk sends the Kelvin on the collision course with the Narada, we see the rear tip of the warp nacelle light up like a rocket exhaust. If the warp drive was disabled, why was the nacelle powered? The illuminated tip of the nacelle resembled a thruster or impulse engine. Do starships in the Abramsverse have impulse engines built into the warp nacelles? Never in the history of Star Trek has a warp nacelle operated like the one on the Kelvin. Even if we don’t have any canon facts about the 2230’s, no Starfleet ship before or after that timeframe operated like that. It’s as if the set/prop designers simply did not do any research. If I remember correctly, I saw an interview somewhere that actually said Abrams wanted the warp nacelles to act like rockets. Can you believe that???
Reply With Quote
  #430  
Old 08-28-2011, 07:28 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

One of the mandates set by Mr. Roddenberry for the original Star Trek was that the Enterprise would not be powered by conventional rockets. He didn’t want to see any rocket exhaust from the engines. And that has been the case throughout the entire history of Star Trek…until Abrams-Trek. The entire design of the Kelvin was an exercise in “change for the sake of change”. Ryan Church actually did some early designs for the Kelvin that actually looked like they could have come from the Star Trek that we know. But those designs were rejected by Abrams. Apparently because they looked too much like Star Trek ships for his taste (my opinion). There have been several alternative USS Kelvin designs floating around the internet that look 500% better than the one in the movie. Most of them are basically TOS Constitution class ships reconfigured to single nacelle designs. That’s what should have been done in JJ-Trek, in my opinion. At least that one part would have borne some resemblance to Star Trek as we have known it.
In the original universe, the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 was launched from the San Francisco fleet yards in 2245 under the command of Captain Robert April (non-canon, but generally accepted). Captain Christopher Pike took command some time prior to 2253 (“The Menagerie” took place in 2266 and “The Cage” took place 13 years prior according to Spock). Pike commanded the Enterprise until approximately 2265 when he was promoted to Fleet Captain and James T. Kirk took command (it is generally accepted as canon that the first season of TOS was the second year of Kirk’s first five-year mission, and in “The Menagerie” Kirk said he met Pike when he was promoted to Fleet Captain and took over the Enterprise from him). In JJ-Trek, the Abramsprise wasn’t launched until 2258 and commanded by Christopher Pike, 13 years later than in TOS. This also precludes Pike’s experience on Talos IV (unless it happened while he was in command of a different ship) since it happened in 2253 in the TOS universe. It could be argued that Nero’s appearance in 2233 somehow changed Starfleet’s design schedule, thereby postponing the Enterprise’s commission date by 13 years. However, I find this unlikely. Somehow, the appearance of Nero in 2233 also had the effect of completely altering Starfleet’s design philosophy and speeding up technological development. One other possibility is that the Abramsprise isn’t the first of her type. There could have been a more traditional Constitution class Enterprise prior to the Abramsprise that was launched in 2245 under April’s or Pike’s command. It was never stated in the movie that the Abramsprise was the first of her type, just the “newest” flagship. Pike could have had his Talos IV experience as Captain of the Enterprise prior to its “refit” in 2258. This is just a theory of mine that I’ve been tossing around. But there’s nothing in the movie that would contradict it in any way.
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 12:08 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.