The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > General Star Trek Discussions > Enlisted personnel in ST?
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 06-25-2009, 02:56 PM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Cool - I never knew that. But then why wasn't Sulu in grey? Why was Chekov (security chief) in tan while the rhaandarite security officer on the bridge was in grey? They must have struggled to find the right costumes for everyone.

I'm hoping that Diamond Select produce some more TMP figures as I want to produce loads of extra customs figures based on the red deck scene. I'm still mystified on the colour scheme but that tip will help. Cheers!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-26-2009, 09:00 AM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauln6 View Post
Cool - I never knew that. But then why wasn't Sulu in grey?
During TMP, helm was moved from command to bridge operations.
Quote:
Why was Chekov (security chief) in tan while the rhaandarite security officer on the bridge was in grey?
Chekov was considered the chief weapons officer and it was thought of as a bridge position in TMP.
Quote:
They must have struggled to find the right costumes for everyone.
Partially. It was also to prevent everyone on the bridge from wearing the same uniform color and making it look too monochromatic.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-26-2009, 10:54 AM
Kiko Kea Kiko Kea is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 464
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauln6 View Post
One of the things I disliked most about the new film was the suggestion that a cadet could become a captain instantly, no matter how good he seems. A captain needs experience. Fast-track him to full lieutenant - maybe. Make him a first officer - quite possible. Elevate him through the ranks rapidly - if he proves to be that good, then why not? Put him in charge of the Federation flagship with one mission under his belt - Are you crazy?
Don't get me started! After such a fun, terrific movie, it was like being talked down to. The (un)willing suspension of belief...
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-27-2009, 01:31 PM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

I thought it was a sign of the times. The young uns are deluded into believing that success is instant rather than something that has to be worked for. It's why we ended up with the credit crunch isn't it?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-27-2009, 11:05 PM
Kiko Kea Kiko Kea is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 464
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauln6 View Post
I thought it was a sign of the times. The young uns are deluded into believing that success is instant rather than something that has to be worked for. It's why we ended up with the credit crunch isn't it?
A good point.

Too, I was watching a TOS episode last night while piecing a little quilt, and it came to mind that several female guest stars on the show were older. Today, typically, you would not have an older woman was a love interest. Yet, the Rom commander Spock flirts with is not a young chick, and neither is Miranda Jones of "Is There No Truth in Beauty?"
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-28-2009, 12:51 AM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Spooky! I was thinking that too just yesterday! Maybe we were separated at birth? What card am I holding up?

The current cast is a bit like High School Musical in Space. However, we have to be practical. They will most likely only make one film every three years so a younger cast increases the longevity of the franchise. I'm more irritated at the suggestion that all the characters are of similar age. Bones and Scotty were (I think) about 23 years older than Chekov so if it is 2258, they'd both be about 36 (ignoring Chekov's age adjustment) so I suppose that Urban and Pegg aren't too far out. I think Uhura (who I think was 27 in TOS) should only be 18 in 2258 so I hope they're going to move the franchise forward a few years.

I think in some ways that it is a shame that Phase II didn't go ahead. Persis was reasonably young while Majel and Grace were both in their forties. In the Rec Deck scene there are lots of middle-aged crew. In later films though the older women were replaced by much younger Saavik and as a consequence, their characters were not treated as recognisable enough to be included in the new franchise and that has led to a depressing imbalance in the sexes.

If we stick with the theme of officers v enlisted personel - younger crew would normally be plain old crewmen and a handful of ensigns. We're being expected to accept that we have the federation's flagship with an 18-year old chief communications officer, a 20-year old chief helmsman, and a 17 year old chief navigator under a 25-year old captain and first officer. Even Spock is a higher rank than he was nine years later in TOS - why was that necesary? This is Star Trek not Doogie Hauser. Why not set the film in 2265 and stick with reasonably mature characters instead? It was odd to try to shoe-horn everybody onto the ship at the same time.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-28-2009, 05:15 PM
Kiko Kea Kiko Kea is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 464
Default

Well, I don't keep up with the dates- was totally confused by TOS. At least the new one makes more sense.

Making Chekov 17 is just odd- is he supposed to be an Academy grad? I think not. Otherwise, age-wise, I'm OK with them. NOT with Kirk being made captain, however that's a whole 'nother rant.

I would have preferred they have Kirk spend time on another ship, as in TOS, and not be promoted directly to captain, etc but for movie purposes, that would not work. Same with the others- they had to bring them all together. Oh, well....at least we have Trek again!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-29-2009, 03:24 AM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

And as soon as we have Rand my master plan will be complete mwaa ha haaa (cough)

I was taking the ages from my old FASA RPG. I think official or quasi official birth dates are out there somewhere, most of them based on the actors' real ages. Kirk was 34 and Chekov was 22 in 2267 - that's all I know for sure. Spock's age has been listed as similar to Kirk possbily a year older - I thought that was a mistake given Vulcans' longevity and his long career in Starfleet but it's still doable. If the Cage was 13 years in the past in 2266, Spock would have been a lieutenant at 21 - a bit young but not OTT. Although some have mentioned that Kirk states that Pike was around his age in the Menagerie, that would make him a Captain at 20 in the Cage, so I think Kirk was making a generalisation that Pike wasn't an old man but he was clearly at least 10-15 years older than Kirk.

Last edited by Pauln6 : 06-29-2009 at 03:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-29-2009, 10:11 PM
chasco's Avatar
chasco chasco is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
-Later in TNG, O'Brien is seen wearing a single hollow pip which he will wear well until after his transfer to DS9. In a later DS9 episode, O'Brien officially declares his rank as "chief of operations." He is also called at one point as "senior chief specialist."

-Finally, O'Brien is given a new insignia--a small embroidered striker patch with three chevrons and two small dots. While he is still referred to simply as chief, the insignia is actually consistant with that of a senior chief specialist in the US Navy.
I think some of these are 'positions' not 'ranks' (same goes for some of the TOS crew, eg Chapel).
Using a real-life example -
  • In 1942, James Doohan was an Aide-de-Camp
  • In 1943, he was a Gun Position Officer
  • By 1944, he had been 'promoted' to Command Post Officer (overseeing several GPOs)
However, in all three cases his rank was Lieutenant.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-30-2009, 12:04 AM
Pauln6's Avatar
Pauln6 Pauln6 is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chasco View Post
I think some of these are 'positions' not 'ranks' (same goes for some of the TOS crew, eg Chapel).
Using a real-life example -
  • In 1942, James Doohan was an Aide-de-Camp
  • In 1943, he was a Gun Position Officer
  • By 1944, he had been 'promoted' to Command Post Officer (overseeing several GPOs)
However, in all three cases his rank was Lieutenant.
I don't get it - he was in the military for three years as a lieutenant? Why wasn't he a captain by 1942?
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 02:55 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.