The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > A Thought - New Enterprise in a Remastered ST:TOS
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-04-2008, 06:21 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTJG Iferal View Post
It absolutely could be done. It HAS been done. It looks like this:

True. However, I have to point out that this is the Enterprise-A. A later version of the Enterprise that followed a forward progression of time and technology. We are looking into the past (before TOS), not the future (after TOS). So the original design should have been retained, just updated and modernized. Also, I really like the ST:VI bridge. Almost as much as I like the TOS version.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-04-2008, 06:26 AM
mmoore's Avatar
mmoore mmoore is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: OKUSA
Posts: 1,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim View Post
Put the real Enterprise into the new movie . . . It could have been done. Don't try to tell me it couldn't.
Sure, it can be done. This is how you do it:

__________________
"Are you out of your Vulcan mind?"
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-04-2008, 06:27 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

This is a topic people will always be divided on: what is more important, in-universe consistency or portraying something futuristic from today's perspective.
As you pointed out, one could change the TOS bridge such that it looks like the original yet still futuristic.
I think the job is too hard, keeping the look but eliminating anything which is outdated today, so I am all for the new design. But as I said, people are divivded upon which is more relevant.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-04-2008, 06:32 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmoore View Post
Sure, it can be done. This is how you do it:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
This is a topic people will always be divided on: what is more important, in-universe consistency or portraying something futuristic from today's perspective.
As you pointed out, one could change the TOS bridge such that it looks like the original yet still futuristic.
I think the job is too hard, keeping the look but eliminating anything which is outdated today, so I am all for the new design. But as I said, people are divivded upon which is more relevant.
It still could have been done. What we're seeing here is change for the sake of change. Not necessarily for the sake of a good story.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-04-2008, 06:41 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

The design of the E has nothing to do with the story.
And it is changed to make it look believable on the big screen, which is hard to accomplish with a CGI version of a 60s model without new texture. My best guess was that they would keep the look design and only changed the texture, but now some other minor things are changed as as this picture from the trailer shows, they are indeed minor. If anyone just sees the trailer once and missed the construction scene, he or she would not see any differences.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-04-2008, 06:44 AM
LTJG Iferal's Avatar
LTJG Iferal LTJG Iferal is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim View Post
Also, I really like the ST:VI bridge. Almost as much as I like the TOS version.
I do as well. I thought it was superior to the various bridges in ST's I-IV. I think it's the same bridge from STV, not sure. In any case, it is yummy.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-04-2008, 07:22 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
The design of the E has nothing to do with the story.
And it is changed to make it look believable on the big screen, which is hard to accomplish with a CGI version of a 60s model without new texture. My best guess was that they would keep the look design and only changed the texture, but now some other minor things are changed as as this picture from the trailer shows, they are indeed minor. If anyone just sees the trailer once and missed the construction scene, he or she would not see any differences.
I beg to differ. The design of the E has everything to do with the story. Without the ship, there would be no story. And "MINOR" differences?!?! And if you look at the construction scene in the trailer, you won't see any differences? Did you see the same trailer I did? Because I noticed a lot of differences. Pardon me Horatio, you have always been the calm voice of reason and logic on these boards, and I admire you for that, but I have to vehemently disagree with you on this one. The differences between the "Abramsprise" and the real NCC-1701 from TOS are radical, not minor. Anyone who has watched TOS knows this. Most are just too stubborn to admit it. And it would take more than just a line of dialogue in the movie to explain such a radical departure from the traditional Connie design.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-04-2008, 07:30 AM
Yagami Crewman's Avatar
Yagami Crewman Yagami Crewman is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Goose Creek, South Carolina
Posts: 1,141
Default

"She's nothing like her original specs..."

"Tell me about it... Who came up with these changes anyway?"

Cut to close up of Spock...

(Best we could do in 2 hours.... )

* Again I'm a fan of the original design, but we're not going to get it so this is my best attempt to find a hand hold here.
__________________
Ever notice that many of the same people who want variety in life frown very hard on vanilla... But without Vanilla, Baskin Robbins just wouldn't BE 31 flavors.

Last edited by Yagami Crewman : 12-04-2008 at 07:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-04-2008, 07:44 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,078
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim View Post
I beg to differ. The design of the E has everything to do with the story. Without the ship, there would be no story. And "MINOR" differences?!?! And if you look at the construction scene in the trailer, you won't see any differences? Did you see the same trailer I did? Because I noticed a lot of differences. Pardon me Horatio, you have always been the calm voice of reason and logic on these boards, and I admire you for that, but I have to vehemently disagree with you on this one. The differences between the "Abramsprise" and the real NCC-1701 from TOS are radical, not minor. Anyone who has watched TOS knows this. Most are just too stubborn to admit it. And it would take more than just a line of dialogue in the movie to explain such a radical departure from the traditional Connie design.
So what are you expecting at this point in the lead up to the release? A total redo of the effects? A total script (that no-one here has seen) re-write?

It has nothing to do with stubborness and everything to do with the fact that these decisions are above our heads, have been made by the people making the film and are past changing.

Now these discussions can (and will) go round and round as many times as anyone likes, but it's all moot anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-04-2008, 07:48 AM
delliott101 delliott101 is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 74
Default

Here's the thing..

JJ says this movie is in canon and everything. From what I have read, from his POV, this movie should fit flawlessly within TOS. THIS is the problem with the design.

If JJ hasn't been saying this and that it was just a "reimagining" or a "reboot" then no problem. All the redesigns wouldn't cause this much of a stir.

Despite what JJ has said about this movie, it does NOT fit into established continuity (from what I have seen), so that's how I'm going into it. Yeah, I would love to have seen the REAL enterprise, but this new one will have to do.
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 11:10 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.