The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > The TOS futures....future?
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-03-2008, 04:57 AM
Zardoz's Avatar
Zardoz Zardoz is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere In The Future
Posts: 31,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
That is essential ST, not to walk around with the drawn colt, yet of course neither walk around with no colt at all. The first is provocative and leads inevitably to aggression and the latter is just naive when some bad thugs are roaming the galaxy.
That's the way of the UFP and since sci-fi is always about us, this is also the way to create something like a United Earth or at least less wars and moee worldwide cooperation.

And for our cannonite Saint, the NCC-1701 is no war ship like the Defiant. This is real not superficial stuff like, how will the interior design look like, but essential for the story.
Good points Horatio!
__________________
"High Priestesses Of Zardoz" By Eliza's Starbase Of Avatars Copyright 2009."
"Zardoz Speaks To You, His Choosen Trek Fans."
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-04-2008, 07:19 PM
jla1987's Avatar
jla1987 jla1987 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brenden freeze View Post
Retro with a polished approach on modern times.
That's what I'm thinking we'll see and I look forward to it. Hopefully the next trailer will show us a glimpse of the Enterprise
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-04-2008, 07:27 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz View Post
But until recent Trek films/shows weapons were allways for defnse only, and used as a last resort.
That doesn't mean they'd go half-arsed on making their ships survivable and KISS-simple in design for the purposes of easier repair/maintenance. Making things rugged and sturdy isn't the same as arming them to the teeth, those are two separate though interwoven design objectives.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-05-2008, 02:20 AM
Zardoz's Avatar
Zardoz Zardoz is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere In The Future
Posts: 31,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
That doesn't mean they'd go half-arsed on making their ships survivable and KISS-simple in design for the purposes of easier repair/maintenance. Making things rugged and sturdy isn't the same as arming them to the teeth, those are two separate though interwoven design objectives.
I am not sure where this is coming from, are you refering to DS9's Defiant?
__________________
"High Priestesses Of Zardoz" By Eliza's Starbase Of Avatars Copyright 2009."
"Zardoz Speaks To You, His Choosen Trek Fans."
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-05-2008, 04:38 AM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

No, this goes back to explain the 'smooth' exterior and rather 'clunky' interiors of Kirk's 1701 by way of the design being a 'ruggedized' one meant to better survive the rigors of space and space combat.

Of course Kirk's ship wasn't strictly a warship like Sisko's Defiant -- but obviously there would be times when it would be called to serve as a combat vessel as well. A brutal war with the Romulans, cold war with the Klingons - if we include Enterprise in continuity then we have even more military conflict with alien species - humans may have 'evolved' even by Kirk's time, but they certainly didn't evolve into wimps or cowards, nor into fools who strolled around unknown regions of space defenseless.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-05-2008, 04:48 AM
Zardoz's Avatar
Zardoz Zardoz is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere In The Future
Posts: 31,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
No, this goes back to explain the 'smooth' exterior and rather 'clunky' interiors of Kirk's 1701 by way of the design being a 'ruggedized' one meant to better survive the rigors of space and space combat.

Of course Kirk's ship wasn't strictly a warship like Sisko's Defiant -- but obviously there would be times when it would be called to serve as a combat vessel as well. A brutal war with the Romulans, cold war with the Klingons - if we include Enterprise in continuity then we have even more military conflict with alien species - humans may have 'evolved' even by Kirk's time, but they certainly didn't evolve into wimps or cowards, nor into fools who strolled around unknown regions of space defenseless.
TOS wasn't about Starfleet being a militaristic venture. It was about explorations, and weapons were for defense only.

Now the films changed that alot and brought more of miltaristic feel to the franchise.
__________________
"High Priestesses Of Zardoz" By Eliza's Starbase Of Avatars Copyright 2009."
"Zardoz Speaks To You, His Choosen Trek Fans."
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-05-2008, 05:10 AM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zardoz View Post
TOS wasn't about Starfleet being a militaristic venture. It was about explorations, and weapons were for defense only.

Now the films changed that alot and brought more of miltaristic feel to the franchise.
The way I remember it, that military feel had always been there, and Nick Meyer only brought it to the foreground -- primarily, let us note this, through the art direction/visual storytelling angle. Nothing in the actual script was any more militaristic than TOS's scripts up until Star Trek VI.

But that visual storytelling certainly did lend a whole new air, didn't it? It lent the setting a new voice, and thus colored the overall impression of the stories told within it. (Although I always liked the "Nick Meyer era" uniforms, they remind me of RCMP uniforms more than anything else...)

The difference in the character portrayals also changed; with the exception of Star Trek IV, we rarely if ever saw any of the characters laugh or even smile. Nick Meyer didn't so much militarize Star Trek as made it much more serious in the way the characters were depicted. That was probably the reason why Star Trek IV had the lighter tone it did. With II and III having such dark plotlines, he may have felt that he was making Trek too dark and needed to throw fans a lighthearted curve ball to break that pattern.

Star Trek V, probably the weakest of the Trek film franchise until Berman and Braga took their shenannigans to the big screen, was all about the pain, one of the reasons (besides lackluster writing in general) why that film was widely regarded as a poor effort on the franchise's part.

Star Trek VI, while having the strongest military theme of any preceding film, actually carried Star Trek's theme better than any other -- hope conquering doubt and altruism triumphing over mistrust.

But Nick Meyer only changed dialed up two minor details that had always been there. Starfleet had always been a quasi-military organization (even when early episodes still called it the United Earth Space Probe Agency rather than Starfleet) and that seriousness had always been there (when Chris Pike and Dr. Boyce sit in his quarters discussing Pike's thoughts of resignation after the loss of Enterprise crewmembers on Rigel.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-05-2008, 05:17 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
The way I remember it, that military feel had always been there, and Nick Meyer only brought it to the foreground -- primarily, let us note this, through the art direction/visual storytelling angle. Nothing in the actual script was any more militaristic than TOS's scripts up until Star Trek VI.

But that visual storytelling certainly did lend a whole new air, didn't it? It lent the setting a new voice, and thus colored the overall impression of the stories told within it. (Although I always liked the "Nick Meyer era" uniforms, they remind me of RCMP uniforms more than anything else...)

The difference in the character portrayals also changed; with the exception of Star Trek IV, we rarely if ever saw any of the characters laugh or even smile. Nick Meyer didn't so much militarize Star Trek as made it much more serious in the way the characters were depicted. That was probably the reason why Star Trek IV had the lighter tone it did. With II and III having such dark plotlines, he may have felt that he was making Trek too dark and needed to throw fans a lighthearted curve ball to break that pattern.

Star Trek V, probably the weakest of the Trek film franchise until Berman and Braga took their shenannigans to the big screen, was all about the pain, one of the reasons (besides lackluster writing in general) why that film was widely regarded as a poor effort on the franchise's part.

Star Trek VI, while having the strongest military theme of any preceding film, actually carried Star Trek's theme better than any other -- hope conquering doubt and altruism triumphing over mistrust.

But Nick Meyer only changed dialed up two minor details that had always been there. Starfleet had always been a quasi-military organization (even when early episodes still called it the United Earth Space Probe Agency rather than Starfleet) and that seriousness had always been there (when Chris Pike and Dr. Boyce sit in his quarters discussing Pike's thoughts of resignation after the loss of Enterprise crewmembers on Rigel.
Well that is not the Star Trek future I saw in the series, so you might wanna understand that there are people who don't wanna the see the ICC-1701 and the Terran Empire but rather the peaceful UFP. I neither wanna see how Trek turns in Star Wars.
Your holy grail is precise design copy, mine is Trek's concept of peaceful cooperation and exploration, no matter on which ship.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-05-2008, 07:26 AM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
Well that is not the Star Trek future I saw in the series, so you might wanna understand that there are people who don't wanna the see the ICC-1701 and the Terran Empire but rather the peaceful UFP. I neither wanna see how Trek turns in Star Wars.
Did you happen to miss episodes like "Balance of Terror" or "Day of the Dove"? I didn't. Did you notice that even in Nick Meyer's tune-up of the visual side of Trek for ST:II, that film was not a military story but a personal revenge story in what Blake Snyder would call the "Superhero" model? Or that Starfleet's hierarchy is a military one? I'm not saying Star Trek is a military drama like "A Few Good Men", that's not where all the stories go nor do I disagree with you when you say they shouldn't. But some of them have, and purely from a design perspective, for Starfleet to take that into account with ship designs after NX-01 makes NCC-1701's design sensible and precautionary.

Not to say Starfleet designed the lady to be a pure combat vessel, any more than Volvos are deliberately designed to be crashed into things -- but with both, the respective possibilities are taken into account and protected against.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-05-2008, 07:38 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
Did you happen to miss episodes like "Balance of Terror" or "Day of the Dove"? I didn't. Did you notice that even in Nick Meyer's tune-up of the visual side of Trek for ST:II, that film was not a military story but a personal revenge story in what Blake Snyder would call the "Superhero" model? Or that Starfleet's hierarchy is a military one? I'm not saying Star Trek is a military drama like "A Few Good Men", that's not where all the stories go nor do I disagree with you when you say they shouldn't. But some of them have, and purely from a design perspective, for Starfleet to take that into account with ship designs after NX-01 makes NCC-1701's design sensible and precautionary.

Not to say Starfleet designed the lady to be a pure combat vessel, any more than Volvos are deliberately designed to be crashed into things -- but with both, the respective possibilities are taken into account and protected against.
You are right and the 'few windows' point is very fitting, but I'd still like to know why they put the bridge on the very top of the ship, at one of the most vulnerable spots
I don't want to bother you with ENT, but there was a nice 'bad dream / alternate future' episode, Twilight, where the vulnerability of the bridge module was shown:


I think one can summon up Starfleet's concept with "wear a colt, but don't run around with it drawn". Having no defensive capability would be naive with Klingon bullies and the Romulan Star Empire as territorial aggressor around, but Starfleet only defends itself. No 'preemptive strike' doctrine and stuff like that.
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 01:52 PM.


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.