[ September 24, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
There's a good view of the shuttlebay doors in "Rump Roast"
The ISS and the rocket ship are almost definitely from the intro... you can see the cross-dissolving charts that were mentioned in a previous message.
Said rocket ship has an engine configuration that strikes me as somewhat familiar..
Is that an orbital tether connecting up to the structure beside (and possibly adjoining) the spacedock? Corr...
The Nav Deflector/Sensor Dish paraphanalia is certainly nifty.
The ship is rather copper when well-lit, as shown in the shot with Admiral Williams. But cut back on the ambient light and it fades into the Ent-E spectrum. I like.
[ September 24, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
posted
Sadly, neither Global nor CTV snapped up the network rights and instead Moses "Do everything yourself" Znaimer grabbed them.
As a result, Enterprise will be on Wednesdays at 8 on Znaimer's local independent channels --CityTV Toronto, CKVU Vancouver, and New VI Victoria (although the latter channel doesn't kick off until Oct 4, meaning it'll miss the first two eps) -- and then repeat the following Sunday nationwide on upper-cable-tier-only SPACE! (which he also owns) at 8.
But all is not lost if Znaimer's reach does not extend into your hometown... syndication rights went out in all the other major markets. A-Channel, who run independent stations in the Praries, will show it on Wednesdays at 7 on their Winnipeg station and, in a rather cool move, show it a day earlier, Tuesdays at 8, on their Calgary and Edmonton stations. The CTV affiliate in Atlantic Canada, ASN, will show it there on Thursdays at 8.
So, yeah, in Toronto, it'll be on CITY, which can be obtained with a television and an old coat hanger.
[ September 24, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
ISS?!?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
posted
The aspect ratio of the shots is 1.71:1, pretty close to 1.78:1 (16:9) of the widescreen format the series will be filmed in.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
The International Space Station has its supporters and its detractors.. Am I to assume from your concise yet specific commentary that you are a detractor?
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Well, no matter what I think of ISS, it should NOT be in Star Trek.
What'd I tell ya, Bernd?
@#&@!*$^(!@*$&...
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
posted
Er...unlikely to exist in a Star Trek universe with Eugenics Wars and DY-100 ships with artificial gravity? Of course, Voyager has ignored both already, and yes, the timelines of our universe and the Star Trek universe do overlap to an extent. However, the 1990s is exactly when they start to diverge. Introducing the ISS here means stretching the established Star Trek timeline to the breaking point.
On a more general note, and on the other hand, maybe this is where we must start looking at "Enterprise" as a variation on the established Star Trek universe, just as Arthur C. Clarke saw his 2010 as a variation on 2001, 2061 as a variation on both 2001 and 2061, and 3001 as a variation on all three. In fact, if you look carefully at 3001, in some places it seems like Clarke places the events of 2001 in 2031! Why? It turned out we didn't have a moon base and the other tech in the 1990s, so he changed the timeline.
Braga clearly sees his show this way, so there is no need to be angry about inconsistencies; it simply means the universe of this show, and perhaps that of Voyager, isn't necessarily continuous with the rest of the Star Trek universe. Let's group this and Voyager into one category, DS9, TNG, and TOS in another. That's just one way of making the split.
Consider this: Rick Berman said in the TIME magazine article on "Generations" that "Star Trek" isn't his vision of the future. It really isn't a realistic future at all. So why the ISS in a Berman show? To me, this says: "With this show, I change my mind, you ARE in a future that is 70% extension of the present day, and only 30% Star Trek." It's really a different show from the ground up.
It's true that we can rationalize just about anything, but in doing that we'd be destroying the artistic integrity of not just this, but every Star Trek show. It has worked so far because the timeline of TNG, DS9, VOY was established by a consistent group of people, and was distant enough from TOS not to conflict. Now, it's going to be more difficult, though not impossible, because TOS is no longer a floor to jump off whereever you want; it's a ceiling which says exactly how far you can go with "Enterprise". Berman and Braga have to watch for it to keep their fanbase, but they really seem to want a different kind of show.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
