quote:Originally posted by blssdwlf: But, the original 1701 will always to me look better than any "re-imagined" version. (And the refit-1701 will just be as untouchable ) They got them right the first time.
So the Enterprise-A looks just as good as the original, even though a "re-imagined" version (which is pretty much what the Ent-A is) would never look as good as the original?
Buh?
Buh?
The E-A isn't "re-imagined" unless you are smokin crack
Read it again. Both the original connie and the refit were done right.
If you're ruffled and think the Ent-style is how everything should look, thats your opinion like I have mine.
[rant] The next thing you'll know, we'll see "re-imagined" Defiants, Excelsiors, Reliants, E-Cs,E-Ds and Constellation classes.
And then "re-imagined" X-Wings, Y-Wings, A-Wings, Star Destroyers, Babylon stations, Starfuries, Vipers (oh wait, too late, someone already did that ) [/rant]
Oh where was I, that's right, the refit isn't "re-imagined" because its a new ship. Not someone coming along and saying, hey, this is the exact same ship that was in TOS (wink wink).
Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
You say that the original is the best design. No attept at "re-imagining" it would make it better, since it was perfect the first time. It didn't need changing.
The refit Enterprise was, to all intents and purposes, a "re-imagining". They took the original design, and modified it, to make it look better.
You say that the original is perfect. You say that any reinterpretation of the design would be rubbish. You say that the refit Enterprise is also perfect.
See?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"Oh where was I, that's right, the refit isn't 're-imagined' because its a new ship. Not someone coming along and saying, hey, this is the exact same ship that was in TOS (wink wink)."
Eh? It was the same ship. It just had different outsides stuck on it. And some different insides. But it was the same ship. That's why it's called a "refit".
But, really, it was a sort of reimagining. They were saying "here's how we should have done the ship in the first place, if we could have". Just like the Klingons.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by TSN: It was the same ship. It just had different outsides stuck on it. And some different insides. But it was the same ship. That's why it's called a "refit".
Bullshit: a refit is a upgrade of an existing system to accomidate new tech or fic design flaws: not replacing every single part, inside and out. That's just building a whole new ship....slowly.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Bullshit: a refit is a upgrade of an existing system to accomidate new tech or fic design flaws: not replacing every single part, inside and out. That's just building a whole new ship....slowly.
Officially, it's a refit. In any universe based on physics and engineering, it's a new ship. Which do you choose? Ah, the joys of being a Treknolophile...
posted
I think they started refitting the old Enterprise, kinda got on a roll and eventually replaced everything. Realising that they could've built two new ships in the same amount of time, they officially called it an "extensive refit" to cover their own asses with Admiral Nagura.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Irrespective of the "in-universe" events, the Enterprise as redesigned for TMP was, from a production standpoint, a definite re-imagining of the ship from the original series. They took the basic layout of the ship and updated it to suit the bigger budget and better production values that a film project provided over a TV project.
By the way, I do not wish this to be misconstrued as a bashing of either the original or updated designs. (They're both good, though personally I do like the original better.) But to say objectively that the refit wasn't intended as a "re-imagining" is ridiculous. It most certainly was.
Now, with that out of the way, the "ENT-style" version. It looks terrible. Very ungainly and lacking in grace, and the drab coloration only amplifies its ugliness. 'Nuff said. (And this is coming from someone who is largely fine with the appearance of the NX-01, even though I *do* wish it was made to look more retro.)
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Its probably because "re-imagining" equates for me to "out-universe" events of writers/producers/powersthatbe coming along and writing off what existed before (the original "in-universe" and replacing it with "re-imagined" material as done in BSG re-imagined). The refit isn't "re-imagined" to me because it did not attempt to erase the existence of the original.
I do get what psyliam is trying to get at, but I don't agree with the interpretation.
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
Irrespective of the "in-universe" events, the Enterprise as redesigned for TMP was, from a production standpoint, a definite re-imagining of the ship from the original series. They took the basic layout of the ship and updated it to suit the bigger budget and better production values that a film project provided over a TV project.
By the way, I do not wish this to be misconstrued as a bashing of either the original or updated designs. (They're both good, though personally I do like the original better.) But to say objectively that the refit wasn't intended as a "re-imagining" is ridiculous. It most certainly was.
Now, with that out of the way, the "ENT-style" version. It looks terrible. Very ungainly and lacking in grace, and the drab coloration only amplifies its ugliness. 'Nuff said. (And this is coming from someone who is largely fine with the appearance of the NX-01, even though I *do* wish it was made to look more retro.)
posted
Well, the in-universe refitting was simply an excuse to re-imagine the ship from the creative/production staff's standpoint. But I understand your point, and I recognize the distinction. I think we can agree that it is a good thing that there are no plans to do a BSG-type remake of Star Trek.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
The problem with reimaging things is that some people will like the new stuff more and pretend that it retroactively wipes the old stuff from existence, and some people will like the old stuff more and pretend that it proactively wipes the new stuff from existence. And then they will beat each other senseless over it.
-------------------- ".mirrorS arE morE fuN thaN televisioN" - TEH PNIK FLAMIGNO
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
And the Naboo fighters being dull will have to stand for Jason. I feel they are a great addition to the otherwise boxy and grey SW-ships, inspired by the same sleekness and aesthetic excellence that the P-51 Mustang has.
The only drawbacks I see with the Refit Enterprise is that they made the nacelle-pylons widen towards the nacelle instead of towards the main hull, making the pylons look like bell-bottom pants to me. Same with the "neck", should've had a broad base that thinned towards the saucer. All this from a profile POV, natch. Also, launchers firing backwards out of the neck, like with that last version of the Constitution class.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
And surely the nacelles would have looked more like bell-bottom pants if they were wider at the bottom than at the top, since, er, that's what bell-bottom pants look like?
Still, at least we can agree that the "reimagined" Red Dwarf looked shit.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I think he means the America (sub)class or whatever it was called. Enterprise II class I think it was really called. The USS America NCC-1847? was a member. Basically a refit Connie with modified impulse housing, widened nacelle pylons and an aft torpedo launcher.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) They got them right the first time. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
) 
Printer-friendly view of this topic
