The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Why modern designs are logical
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-23-2009, 11:29 AM
starbase63's Avatar
starbase63 starbase63 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 1,727
Cool

No, he didn't.

That's not the original Enterprise nor is that the original design of the bridge updated.

That's an almost completely redesigned ship and bridge.

I'm talking upgrading the original designs, not wholesale changes like Abrams did.

Outside of the enlarged sensor dish and the fact it has a suacer shaped hull and warp nacelles of some kind, does the Abomination look much like we know Pike's ship actually did?

__________________
Never keep a Vulcan waiting...
Admin, sb63's Star Trek Logs, member of the Trek Webmaster Program
STL is now also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/StarTrekLogs
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-23-2009, 11:32 AM
DNA-1842's Avatar
DNA-1842 DNA-1842 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, Europe, Terra - ZZ9 PluralZAlpha
Posts: 3,594
Default

But I am sure that this film would have been quickly strangled by the owning company if this film had been a carbon copy of the 60's version.
__________________
Gronda Gronda to all Zarking Hoopy Froods! Bowties are cool.
I Am A Friend Of


(And an indirectly founding patron of the Elizadolots Avatar Thingy.)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-23-2009, 11:33 AM
starbase63's Avatar
starbase63 starbase63 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 1,727
Cool

But that's not what we're talking about, DNA...
__________________
Never keep a Vulcan waiting...
Admin, sb63's Star Trek Logs, member of the Trek Webmaster Program
STL is now also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/StarTrekLogs
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-23-2009, 11:58 AM
DNA-1842's Avatar
DNA-1842 DNA-1842 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, Europe, Terra - ZZ9 PluralZAlpha
Posts: 3,594
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starbase63 View Post
But that's not what we're talking about, DNA...
Sighs... Are you sure? Read the comments you directed at me, because I thought we were...
__________________
Gronda Gronda to all Zarking Hoopy Froods! Bowties are cool.
I Am A Friend Of


(And an indirectly founding patron of the Elizadolots Avatar Thingy.)
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-23-2009, 12:27 PM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DNA-1842 View Post
But I am sure that this film would have been quickly strangled by the owning company if this film had been a carbon copy of the 60's version.
That would be Case #3: Abrams and company couldn't use the exact same designs from the TV show because CBS would have sued Viacom. The designs could be similar, but they couldn't be identical.

There's a reason why the saucer section looks so much like the one from TMP and why the phasers resemble those from TSFS, IMO--Viacom owns the rights to those designs, but not the ones from TOS.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-23-2009, 12:34 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCC-73515 View Post
Let the number of movie watchers be 100 and the number of Trekkies be 10. 5 of them are defenders of the 60s design in a 2009 movie.

There were two possibilities to make this movie.

Case 1: 60s designs are used, no visual canon is violated.
100% of the Trekkies and 10% of the general audience will watch this movie.
Result: 20 viewers.

Case 2: Modern designs are used, everything looks different and more futuristic, although the general shapes are still present.
50% of the Trekkies will watch this (assuming that the 60s defenders boycott it) and 50% of the general audience will follow them.
Result: 55 viewers.

Which is better for the future of our beloved franchise?
Case 1 could end the saga forever. Star Trek would be considered something old and the Trekkies will be considered nerds.
Case 2 could increase interest in our beloved franchise and keep it alive for unlimited time. And the MESSAGE of Star Trek would continue to spread! Trekkies could be seen as people who stand up against discrimination and want a better future.
How are you arriving at your numbers? Show your work.
__________________
"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
  #17  
Old 01-23-2009, 12:47 PM
MigueldaRican's Avatar
MigueldaRican MigueldaRican is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 765
Default

There's another option you're skipping over too.

A lot of the cynics toward this movie have made the argument that instead of a prequel featuring a recast of existing characters, they should have gone with new material entirely. I can't really argue against that. All arguments that I've heard against that opinion are very weak. For instance "Failed recent movies and the failed Enterprise show is probably the reason they decided not to risk another new addition" is an argument, but very weak. It ignores the fact that there still exists the option to take such an approach. With good writers comes a smaller risk.

I can actually understand that position about wanting a new Trek, not a revised old one. But I still, so far, like Abrams idea very much.
__________________
01001110011011110010000001101101011011110111001001 10010100100000011000100110110001100001011010000010 00000110001001101100011000010110100000100000011000 10011011000110000101101000
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-23-2009, 02:15 PM
jsarnett jsarnett is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starbase63 View Post
You mean two stacked options, NCC...

What about the option where the original ship design is just updated with modern CGI and detailed a bit more, and the original set designs are used but updated with touchpad instrumentation, flat screens, plastics instead of plywood, etc...

Maybe be fair and add that option as well?
To me, it would be hard to buy anything based in the 60's vision of the 23rd century now, since every electronic gadget we have in 2009 looks far more advanced than what they thought up for the 23rd centruy back then....to me, to be believeable, they really had to make it more futuristic...and I am sure by the time the actual 23rd century rolls around, what our 2009 vision of it was will be so antiquated that it will be a joke.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-23-2009, 04:04 PM
starbase63's Avatar
starbase63 starbase63 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 1,727
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by DNA-1842 View Post
Sighs... Are you sure? Read the comments you directed at me, because I thought we were...
If I wrote the comments, then yes, I'm sure...
__________________
Never keep a Vulcan waiting...
Admin, sb63's Star Trek Logs, member of the Trek Webmaster Program
STL is now also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/StarTrekLogs
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-23-2009, 05:02 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarnett View Post
To me, it would be hard to buy anything based in the 60's vision of the 23rd century now, since every electronic gadget we have in 2009 looks far more advanced than what they thought up for the 23rd centruy back then....to me, to be believeable, they really had to make it more futuristic...and I am sure by the time the actual 23rd century rolls around, what our 2009 vision of it was will be so antiquated that it will be a joke.
The way brain-to-computer interfaces are developing, any kind of manual interface will be outmoded by then. Practical "telepathy" via embedded long-range network will be prevalent, and knowing whether you're communicating with a machine or a fellow human via long-distance network will take extreme skill.

If there is deep space exploration at that point, it will be limited by the lifespan of the pilot or the storage capacity of the combined pilot and the vessel he or she is operating. Massive 400-meter starships will be unnecessary and/or impractical.
__________________
"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
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 02:26 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.