Just for fun, I'd like to compose a list of all the ships shown (or more likely, NOT shown) in TOS that could quite possibly have a new design made for the Enhanced version of each ep the said vessel was featured in.
Here's my list:
The Antares from "Charlie X",
Harry Mudd's Class-J cargo ship from "Mudd's Women",
The Gorn ship from "Arena",
The space battle between the Enterprise and Klingon ships in "Errand of Mercy",
The Orion ship in "Journey To Babel",
The Klingon scout ship in "Friday's Child",
Three new ship designs to represent the stock-footage Connies, and a new design for the Woden, in "The Ultimate Computer",
The wreckage of the S.S. Beagle in "Bread and Circusus".
Any others I missed?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I don't think they will/should change the Connies in "The Ultimate Computer," because they're all supposed to be top-of-the-line starships for a major battle exercise. Although variety would be cool, I think it's reasonable to keep them the same.
I absolutely agree with all the others, though.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
They've already revealed(albeit it in a very coy way) that the Antares and Orion ship will be made. I'm looking forward to those, as well as the J Class you mentioned. There was a good design for that ship in one of the Last Unicorn RPG books.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I don't think they're creating effects shots beyond those that already exist in the episodes. Probably a shot of the Antares docking with the Enterprise will replace the shot of the E at the beginning of "Charlie X," and the ships above that were represented by simple flashes of light will probably be likewise replaced, but I wouldn't expect any space battles in "Errand Of Mercy" or the Beagle in "Bread And Circuses," as there are no corresponding FX in the original episodes.
I also doubt that they will use different designs for the Connies in "The Ultimate Computer." The image of those ships fighting each other is too iconic to change.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
The Gorn ships in the "Starfleet Academy"-game looked like shit. Like they'd been made in play-do with a cookie-cutter. "Klingon Academy" wasn't much *better. Hope these people can do better, without using Jem'Hadar nacelles.
*Of course, maybe the Gorn did use giant orbital cookie-cutters, they didn't seem very dexterious. Guhaw-haw.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
Bele's starship from "Let that Be Your Last Battlefield." Although I think the dialogue conveniently states the ship is invisible.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
The Celestial Queen in "The Conscience of the King".
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Astral Queen.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
How about Clint Howard's giant Times Square New Year's Eve ball?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shik: Astral Queen.
*smacks head* Dammit, I always knew that the name of the prison ship in BSG sounded familiar! I never took the time to look it up, but each time the name was mentioned, I thought to myself, "Where is that name from?" (And then I forgot/neglected to follow up on it.)
Anyone else think that the Klingon "scout" from "Errand of Mercy" should look like a vague predecessor to the Bird-of-Prey? (Ignoring that ridiculously-overengineered ENT design, of course.)
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
No. I'm a firm believer that the Klingons got the BOP from the Romulans during th etechnology exchange, and that it wouldn't be in widespread use that quickly.
--Jonah
Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
How do you explain the early BoP in Enterprise then - which occurred prior to ST:ToS?
Ciao! Art
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I imagine he ignores it.
In an odd way it would be nice to see Mudd's ship as being the same Class-J from ENT. Albiet just a front section, sans the large cargo pods. Maybe re-textured to fit in with the TOS look.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I suspect that the "in-house" CBS guys are not bothering to pilfer Paramount's stable of models, and instead coming up with their own stuff. So, *if* we see something new, it'll be a new design (or a new CG model of a pre-existing one).
Mark
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Enterprise is a blight on the face of Trek. With nuBSG, I can watch it for its own merits without thinking of it as BSG. With Enterprise, I had constant reminders throughout that it was supposed to be Trek, but poorly executed on a variety of levels (though not the acting). So yeah, I ignore any Klingon ship referred to as a Bird-of-Prey prior to "The Enterprise Incident".
--Jonah
Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
And with that logic - Kirk and Spock never found "God"...
As sad as it might be, or as much as it might not fit your personal "canon" - it was shown on screen.
That and the Eaves Romulan BoP.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
But there's a crucial difference between "Star Trek V" and Enterprise. Namely, it was shown that the entire four years of ENT was in fact just a holoprogram created by Commander Riker. TPTB would have you believe that just the series finale was a holoprogram, but they'd be wrong.
I mean, how else would you explain the 22nd century looking amazingly like the 24th, unless someone from the 24th century was doing the writing? I mean, c'mon, they even had a Klingon ship called the Bor'tas and a guy named Duras, not to mention both the Ferengi and the Borg!
That said, in retrospect I'd have to agree that changing the Connies to new designs in "The Ultimate Computer" would be the wrong thing to do, considering that the Lexington, Excalibur & Potemkin are obviously considered canon Connies by now. However, I'm looking forward to seeing whatever design they've come up with for the Antares.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
There could be some very important differences in the looks of the Connies though, just as the Nimitz class has distinguishing features.
The thing that got me about the whole Borg episode is why didn't those few just take over the Earth? They were 24th century Borg what was REALLY going to stop them? Dumb...REALLY dumb fanboy plot.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Wizartist II: "Dumb...REALLY dumb fanboy plot."
Wasn't that the premise of the whole show?
Regarding the look of the Connies, as all of the major differences would be techological (weapons systems, different scanners and so forth) given Matt Jeffries design ideals (ie everything being accesable from the inside) there would be few external differences between on Connie and another.
The differences that I can think of that you'd get away with off the top of my head would be the nacelles, the deflector (spike and or dish), the bridge module, the sensor dish/array, and the hull markings (not just the name and registry, but the ones under the enginering hull, the black triangles on the saucer etc. since we are never explicitly shown what they are for). Or an extra hole/slidy door thingy here or there. Point is, there's lots of scope, but it would be subtle. Then again Star Trek fans are all pedantic anoraks (raises hand), so we'd probably spot them all and spend weeks talking about them.
Any one else got any ideas of what you could change?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Search the archives - I'm sure I was concerned that after hearing about the Ferengi appearing in season 1 that they'd find a way to bring in the Borg.
Anyhoo, Star Trek V was an alcohol or bean and alcohol induced dream, shared by three people due to the effect of the alcohol and/or beans on a certain Vulcan's telepathic mind.
The laughing Vulcan, the weird deck numbers the dreamy landscapes - it all points to being a dream.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
"But there's a crucial difference between "Star Trek V" and Enterprise. Namely, it was shown that the entire four years of ENT was in fact just a holoprogram created by Commander Riker. TPTB would have you believe that just the series finale was a holoprogram, but they'd be wrong."
Its rather obvious that wasn't the intent of the episode, and I doubt that, or anything close to that will ever be the position taken by anything close to official Trek.
Like it or not, these things 'happened' as far as Trek history is concerned, as have many other unpopular things. We can chose to ignore them if we like, but unless the producers of this project have a specific vendetta against Enterprise, I very much doubt they will.
You can't please everyone anyway, if they were to ignore Enterprise, other people would complain just as loudly. I certanly wouldn't be happy if that was the course they took.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Doesn't anyone like the 'dream' idea of STV:TFF - it's not saying it didn't HAPPEN - it just happened in a alcohol/telepathic induced shared delusion.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Captain Boh: Apparently you failed to notice my winking smiley-face emoticon after I made that statement, implying that I was "just kidding."
See?
Posted by Boult (Member # 1269) on :
I don't mind the "new" ships but I am enjoying the 'Remastered' Star Trek: TOS!!
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
any reports on more cleaned up episode other than Miri, BOT and DitD?
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
I don't know if this is the Mudd episode where he's supposed to have a ship? I haven't seen these episode in years. The planet looks very cool. Unfortunately it also looks very CGI. Everyone seems to think the new shots blend in well, so I'll take their word for it, but from the stills they look jarringly CG.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The android's guts were very nicely done, as was the leaving the planet shot (which looks far better on TV than on screengrabs, BTW). Crappy episode though.
...but then, I'd have had the Planetkiller come along (after Enterprise was long gone) and destroy that planet- it would be a nice set-up for the Doomday Mchine and would explain Data's novelty.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Nice - I like that ending! Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Perhaps Starfleet eventually had all the androids destroyed because they didn't want the technology to fall into the wrong hands or some BS reason like that and it would take Soong to reinvent an android.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
How many TOS episodes had Androids?? "Mudd's Women", "What little girls are made of" - what else?
Maybe the difference was that Data had a positronic net - which seemed to be hard to accomplish - although the Bak'u seemed to know of that technology.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
I Mudd: A whole civilization of androids.
What are Little Girls Made of?: A scant few android survivors from the Andromeda Galaxy. They have the ability to create more androids, though.
Requiem For Methusalah: The immortal Mr. Flint created an android Reyna, and had back-up models in storage.
Return to Tomorrow: No androids seen on-screen, but Scotty assists in creating android bodies for the three alien "essences" inhabiting Kirk, Spock and Dr. Ann Mulhall (played by Diana Muldaur). Scotty is impressed and confused by the advanced technology used in these androids, stating it would take "gears and pullys" to work the insides, not some glob of jelly.
Tomorrow is Yesterday: Mr. Atoz created robot duplicates of himself to help run the library that no one visited.
Shore Leave: Enterprise crew interact with robot characters and illusions on Omicron Delta.
No, I Mudd isn't the episode where Mudd has a ship. That would be the first Mudd episode "Mudd's Women." Mud and the three women are beamed from his ship before it explodes.
The Baku seem familiar with android technology and so does Adriane Mackenzie, the woman colonist/engineer from TNG "Ensigns of Command."
Additionally, TOS had sentient computers in the form of Nomad and M-5. There is enough technology around to make it seem robotics should be more commonplace in Trek. Granted, those two sentient machines went nuts, but it should be possible to create some droids along the lines of servant robots, construction robots, etc...
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
I've always wondered why robots were never a big part of Trek, aside from budget. However, in the Schizoid Man, Dr. Ira Graves had what appeared to be a robot on the wall of his home.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Didn't Norman mention that the race that created himself and the other androids were also from the Andromeda galaxy?
And that was a nice ending shot!
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Yeah so who ever created Norman and his android buddys might also have created the androids from What are Little Girls Made Of?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
To be fair, I always assumed Mr. atoz was useing alternate temporal versions of himself, not androids....I mean, he's got the time window thnger right there.
The stuff from Shore Leave was more likey holograms -but it's been a while- did they ever specifically say it was robots?
The baku did not specifically say they were familliar with androids- only "positronic device" (Angi at least seems not to consider data a lifeform). If Trek ever does another "jump forward" it's probable that most of their computers are positronic in nature- maybe a mix of bio-neural and positronic even.
As to Scotty's notion of "gears and pulleys", I'd wager he was drunk- he's not half the engineer of Welshy!
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Welshy!
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Jason, the constructs in "Shore Leave" were described as "cellular castings". They were definite physical objects, and the tech seemed to be more bio-botanical than electronic, as it was sufficiently advanced to repair McCoy after being run through with a lance.
--Jonah
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Hmmm..pretty far off from "robot" though. Maybe computer-controlled plantforms?
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Captain Boh: Apparently you failed to notice my winking smiley-face emoticon after I made that statement, implying that I was "just kidding."
See?
I can't be expected to see things at 04:45 AM damn it!
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Looks like Arena is the next episode to air. The promo only shows the Gorn ship as a blob, but hopefully it'll be shown closer up.
The torpedoes are also worth noting. They look more like the torpedo effect we see in all the other movies and series.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Johnny, did you notice that when the Enterprise left orbit and increased speed its impulse engines glowed red?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Bumping this thread.
Okay, now that we've seen the new Gorn ship, let's revise my list:
1. The Antares.
2. Harry Mudd's Class-J cargo ship (I just hope they don't re-use the Horizon from ENT, although I don't think they will)
3. I could have sworn there was a space battle between the Enterprise and unseen Klingon ships at the beginning of "Errand of Mercy" but I guess I was wrong.
4. The Orion ship in "Journey to Babel."
5. The Klingon scout ship in "Friday's Child."
6. The Woden in "The Ultimate Computer."
7. Again, I thought there was a scene where they found the Beagle's wreckage (without an accompanying FX shot).
8. One I missed before: The S.S. Aurora from "The Way to Eden." I hope they will replace the "Backwards-Tholian-with-Federation-like-nacelles" ship with something more interesting.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I think they already stated they wont be useing anyone else's models- precluding any ENT ships from showing up.
Posted by Joshua Bell (Member # 327) on :
Just saw the revised "Menagerie, Part I"
They did some nice stuff with footage from "The Cage", especially the zoom in to the bridge - instead of a wobbly mess, it now seems like the camera is sinking through a semi-transluscent bridge dome.
Sadly, I don't think they tweaked the Enterprise model at all with pointy thingies on the nacelles, but you don't get to see it very well either.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I'm pretty sure I saw spikes on the youtube footage. Besides, didn't they use a pointy nacelled Enterprise on "Mirror Mirror"?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Yup. The "The Menagerie" version has the spikes, but it also has glowing ramscoops, as opposed to the nail-polish-dark ones in "Mirror, Mirror".
It's a damn shame that the re-somethinged episodes are significantly cropped versions. I'd much rather see the eps restored to full original length, and perhaps played 7 % faster for modern market. There probably isn't any hope of getting the cut scenes re-processed for the DVD releases...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Bumping this thread.
Okay, now that we've seen the new Gorn ship, let's revise my list:
1. The Antares.
2. Harry Mudd's Class-J cargo ship (I just hope they don't re-use the Horizon from ENT, although I don't think they will)
3. I could have sworn there was a space battle between the Enterprise and unseen Klingon ships at the beginning of "Errand of Mercy" but I guess I was wrong.
4. The Orion ship in "Journey to Babel."
5. The Klingon scout ship in "Friday's Child."
6. The Woden in "The Ultimate Computer."
7. Again, I thought there was a scene where they found the Beagle's wreckage (without an accompanying FX shot).
8. One I missed before: The S.S. Aurora from "The Way to Eden." I hope they will replace the "Backwards-Tholian-with-Federation-like-nacelles" ship with something more interesting.
9. Astral Queen from "The Conscience of the King".
Just because they wont use othere people's models doesn't stop them from creating their own cgi model of a similar ship. Otherwise they wouldn't have shown the CGI Enterprise because there was a connie seen in Enterprise too.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
That's silly reasoning since the Enterprise is the "hero" ship of the show and the people over at TOS remastered could could probably give two shits about what ships appeared on Star Trek: Enterprise. Personally I too would want to see a different design for Mudd's ship.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
I think it would make nice continuity for the J-class to be the same as the one in Ent, but a totally new, TOS style ship would be far more exciting.
As for the scenes cut from the syndicated episodes, CBS has given the impression that the episodes will be released in full on DVD, including those missing minutes.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:9. Astral Queen from "The Conscience of the King".
I thought that the reason why the Enterprise was there to ferry Karidian et. al was because the Astral Queen never showed up.
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
quote: Originally posted by Dukhat: 6. The Woden in "The Ultimate Computer."
I got to thinking about this early this morning during a slow period at work. It hit me that it would be fun if the new design was based on the old "Leif Ericson" model AMT did back in the 60s. Seeing as Matt Jefferies designed the model, I think it would make a better fit for the show's look than a modern "from scratch" design.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat:
quote:9. Astral Queen from "The Conscience of the King".
I thought that the reason why the Enterprise was there to ferry Karidian et. al was because the Astral Queen never showed up.
Oh - yeah - it didn't?? Did Kirk speak to someone and say 'oh no they can come with us'?
*shrug*
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Woodside Kid:
quote: Originally posted by Dukhat: 6. The Woden in "The Ultimate Computer."
I got to thinking about this early this morning during a slow period at work. It hit me that it would be fun if the new design was based on the old "Leif Ericson" model AMT did back in the 60s. Seeing as Matt Jefferies designed the model, I think it would make a better fit for the show's look than a modern "from scratch" design.
An entire clique of modelers have been working on that for a couple of years now.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Behold Fesarius!
Posted by Chris (Member # 71) on :
Sweeet. It doth rock my world as well.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
I like it! Much better than the 60's Christmas ornament.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Looks like a concept sketch rather than anything from the episode, but if they're going for that more complex look then I approve. If the balls had been smooth it would've looked too simplistic and flat(a bit like the Enterprise's hull did in the early remastered eps...). These hints of detail and scale are an improvement and will look snazzy in HD.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Yup. The "The Menagerie" version has the spikes, but it also has glowing ramscoops, as opposed to the nail-polish-dark ones in "Mirror, Mirror".
It's a damn shame that the re-somethinged episodes are significantly cropped versions. I'd much rather see the eps restored to full original length, and perhaps played 7 % faster for modern market. There probably isn't any hope of getting the cut scenes re-processed for the DVD releases...
Timo Saloniemi
I had heard that there is an edit available that isn't cut for time, but the networks are obviously not going to use that when they should have their advertising instead.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
So, why exactly does Balok have such a huge ship? It seems so tiny inside, and the impression I've had is that he's the only person on board. Is it an inverse TARDIS or something?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Just to look impressive, probably.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Two classic possibilities there...
-Balok's vessel is extremely advanced and capable, a single-pilot Death Star or a manned Culture ship.
-Balok's vessel is the last remnant of a crumbling empire, and most of the stuff that the thousands-strong crew would operate is no longer functioning. It still makes for an impressive yacht, and a good bluff.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Or it's a very advanced kind of hologram...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Chris: Sweeet. It doth rock my world as well.
Aye verily!
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Two classic possibilities there...
-Balok's vessel is extremely advanced and capable, a single-pilot Death Star or a manned Culture ship.
-Balok's vessel is the last remnant of a crumbling empire, and most of the stuff that the thousands-strong crew would operate is no longer functioning. It still makes for an impressive yacht, and a good bluff.
Timo Saloniemi
Who says it only serves as a spaceship? It's large enough to be anything from a spaceborne nature preserve to a colony ship that served it's original purpose... It could even be many smaller ships combined for easy warp travel and dispersed to protect/attack an entire system.
Another possibility is that it's a raw-materials miner, with the spheres serving a basic shape for processed elements to be broken down into whatever via replicator tech at a later date. Or a self-replicating ship design that would eventually make something like a Dyson Sphere.
It would be keen if Balock had gathered up all the potentially destructive stuff his crumbling empire left lying around (so no one could destroy themselves with it) and made the giant ship from it all....it would even be cool to see someone take that notion on as a crusade- LOTS of tech left lying about in Trek- the Hussnok for example.
Whatever it's intended function, the power needed to move that bitch into warp would be serious- strange no one ever mentions the First Federation again- even in passing.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Maybe Balok was the First Federation. That would explain the lack of mention hereafter.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
To the casual viewer or absent-minded fan there would be confusion since the term Federation nowadays is associated with the United Federation of Planets.
About the Fesarius, perhaps the ship was largely automated making it necessary for only one person to be around, probably to make sure everything was running smoothly and get wasted on tranya.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Yeah... when I said explain, I meant in a longwinded fanboy sense.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Well if you want to know, when I first saw the episode, I thought that the First Federation and the United Federation of Planets were one and the same so it made the plot seem a bit strange to me. But I was very young then.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Perhaps they did not wish to anger Asimov fans.
I seem to remember that DC Comics had a now-Commander Bailey show up in a panel in some issue bringing "greetings from the First Federation, captain." I think it was one of the "Trial Of James T. Kirk" issues.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
New Shots of the Enterprise including one shot where the Enterprise zips away from the pilot ship.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
That was cool seeing the light from the probe, the Fesarius and the pilot ship reflecting off the surface of the Enterprise.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Bumping this thread again.
Revision #3 to the wish list:
1. The Antares - In about a month, the remastered "Charlie X" will be shown, and according to Okuda's hint in an interview, there will be a new design. Hopefully it won't look anything like the NX-01.
2. Harry Mudd's Class-J cargo ship.
3. "Errand of Mercy" showed the battle between the Enterprise and five or six Klingon ships, but they were all D-7's.
4. The Orion ship in "Journey to Babel" - check!
5. The Klingon scout ship in "Friday's Child" - uh, scout ship gone, D-7 in it's place (*sigh*)
6. The Woden from "The Ultimate Computer" -according to the same Okuda interview as above, there will be a new design for the Woden as well.
7. S.S. Beagle wreckage from "Bread and Circuses" - alas, no BoBW-style wreckage for the Beagle, just a few tiny pieces of wreckage that float by for a few seconds.
8. The S.S. Aurora from "The Way to Eden."
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
I forget which ship they were talking about, but didn't Okuda or Dave Rossi say they'd be basing one of the new ships on a TAS design? I think it was Harry Mudd's ship.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
TAS had automated freighters in "More Tribbles, More Trouble," and the Woden was an automated freighter, so I'd guess that's the ship that will look like the TAS version.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
One that wasn't on the list, and was actually one of the better alien designs in TOS, the ion ship from Spock's Brain has been updated.
Personally, I don't think it needed redesigning, even if it was a bit of a clich� of a rocket ship.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
What!? No more penis ship!?
NOOOOOOO! Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I certainly wouldn't want my penis to look like that. Or the new ship, for that matter.
I *do* like the notion that they're trying to reflect what ACTUAL ion propulsion should look like, though.
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Yet this ship is apparently supposed to move at warp speed, so making her ion drive look real-worldish is actually counterproductive...
Hmh. Perhaps the ion drive was just cunning fakery, intended to lull our heroes to false security. And beneath that "innocent ion ship" appareance lay a high performance warpship capable of outrunning combat starships.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Maybe they just wanted to get away from a ship that looks like it's from Flash Gordon.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: I certainly wouldn't want my penis to look like that. Or the new ship, for that matter.
Mark
quote:Maybe they just wanted to get away from a ship that looks like it's from Flash Gordon.
No, that would be the spaceship from the movie Flesh Gordon.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
I wonder if the remastered "ion ship" will have any moving parts, like the orion ship from Journey to Babel Remastered.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
A bit more than Spock's Brain deserves really. Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
That's the thing... I think they're using the fact that "Spock's Brain" is almost universally accepted as the worst TOS story EVER, to play around with it a bit more than par.
Mark
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Really I found "And the Children Shall Lead" to be worse than "Spock's Brain" caused at least "Spock's Brain" had no children who manage took over a starship!
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
That's where they make the wanking gestures to invoke the drag queen, right?
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
FX Reel is up. Aside from the new ship and glacier, nothing too fancy was done.
They should've redone the map graphic.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Well at least they cleaned it up the light glare on the map.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
It was a poor choice to turn the ion drive ship into something as conventional as a ball with run-of-the-mill engine pods. Considering that in the TOS universe ion drive is unlike the ion drive in the real world (not sure whether Spock found it "fascinating"), that ship ought to look outlandish.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Trekmovie has some short excerpts from an interview with Dave Rossi where he reveals more new bits:
�will do something that demonstrates how versatile starships are designed to be as they confront the mysteries and dangers of the frontier.
"Ultimate Computer" (unscheduled�2nd season�probably Fall 2007 in syndication)
�trying to figure out how to get the most of the war games battle into existing shot times while respecting the intent of the original work of the editors. It�s always a daunting task to use the original cut times and requires a lot of thought, but ultimately is very satisfying for us. Poor Excalibur�I love a good starship battle and we�ll be trying to squeeze as much out of this one as we can!
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Fuck. They're going to make the Intrepid a Constitution, aren't they...?
--Jonah
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
AND use Jein registries for the ships in "Ultimate Computer".
I guess it's unavoidable. But at least they won't work a flashback graphic of the Republic into "Court Martial" to show that she would have been a Constitution, too...
I hope.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
So TOS is going to come out on HD-DVD? I thought Blue-Ray was where it was at?
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
The Okudas decide most of the nitty gritty details, so I'd expect to see most of the 'conjecture' in the Encyclopedias become canon. Or revised canon, rather.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
(Hey, so, it looks like details about the next film are starting to come out?)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
So here we have our first Jein registry.
Or at least the first new Constitution registry that goes explicitly against the idea that there are about a dozen ships named consecutively from NCC-1700 upwards. While some of the registry here is obscured, the second digit isn't 7 (although we can still choose whether to think of it as 6 or 8, I guess).
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I wonder if the Antares will be NCC-501... Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Looked like a 6 on the registry to me.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, it is 6: the registry no doubt is the Jeinian-Okudaic NCC-1672.
But we can pretend it is 18something if we wish to think that this batch of ships began with NCC-1700 and had at least somewhat systematically registries higher than that. Although a fat lot of help that is, when NCC-1017 is already reconfirmed, and "The Ultimate Computer" looms around the corner.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:I wonder if the Antares will be NCC-501.
I'm just hoping it won't look like the NX-01.
Of course, I'm still hoping that it will look significantly older than the Constitution class, so that at least there will be no way in hell that it'll be confused as the class ship for the TNG's U.S.S. Hermes. (And yes, I believe that the Antares being the first of it's class, as mentioned in the Encyclopedia, is just a mistake).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Well, it is 6: the registry no doubt is the Jeinian-Okudaic NCC-1672.
But we can pretend it is 18something if we wish to think that this batch of ships began with NCC-1700 and had at least somewhat systematically registries higher than that. Although a fat lot of help that is, when NCC-1017 is already reconfirmed, and "The Ultimate Computer" looms around the corner.
I don't find this surprising at all, considering that Okuda is playing a significant role in the "remastering" process. Even leaving that factor aside, the Jein Constitution registries are invariably to be found in all contemporary licensed source materials, both "fiction" and "non-fiction." This is clearly the "official" stance that they intend to stick by.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Shit. That means they just designed my Draylax-class surveyor (as I assigned Antares as). Well, I suppose it could work still.
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
That looks more like the cargo drones than anything. Bah. I would have preferred Bjo Trimble's design (enhanced by Reverend).
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
It's been a long, long time since I've seen "Charlie X," but didn't dialogue suggest the Antares was a freighter? I think the new design looks quite appropriate for the circumstances... an old, clunky-looking rustbucket to contrast with the sleek, shiny Enterprise. A heck of a change for Charlie.
(I'm quite fond of the Trimble design too, of course...)
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Science vessel, laddie.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
In fact, I believe the ship gets alternately described as a freighter, a survey ship, and a science ship during the course of the episode. I recall Kirk having trouble making up his mind about what "Earth Colony 5" was called, too.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Dialogue tags it with four distinct (yet obviously not mutually exclusive) descriptions: 1. "...cargo vessel Antares..." 2. "A transport ship..." 3. "...science probe vessel Antares..." 4. "A survey ship with 20 men aboard..."
It's difficult to see from that pic, but it looks like the registry is indeed NCC-501.
-MMoM Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Wow, and I think it's also one of the first true references to scaled ship elements side-by-side, with the nacelles looking like they were copied from the Connie CGI model...
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Oh, I don't think so. This looks like a highly accurate copy of the "More Tribbles" droneships, complete with nacelles that lack the Enterprise taper, have bigger intercooler thingamabobs, feature a collar around the bow dome and so forth. Only the bow windows, dorsal bulge and sensor dish have been rearranged or removed.
Perhaps not the design I'd have chosen - the Huron could have been a more plausible freighter here, what with having a crew and all, and an all-new ship would of course have been cool. But this is better than the Concordance / Brian Pimenta design that looked like a generic starship rather than a freighter.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
...Hmm. On a second look, it seems that the Antares is the TAS cargo drone with a whole new squarish "crew module" bolted onto the bow, ahead of the sensor dish.
Which goes nicely with Todd Guenther's modular view of the design. By his interpretation, what we see would be just the core module that provides propulsion, plus a crew module and a forward ventral bulk cargo hold.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Fabrux: That looks more like the cargo drones than anything. Bah. I would have preferred Bjo Trimble's design (enhanced by Reverend).
I actually think this design is more suitable, especially considering the modular approach which is a good way to reconcile what a 20 person cargo-transport-science-probe-survey-ship should look like. My way was to shrink it down and stick on a couple of modular pods.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
I have to agree with one of the posters on Trekmovie, this is one of the most impressive shots I've seen from TOS:R so far. The design is very fitting IMO and the render is perfect. It's even got that nice blueish tinge that has been missing from a lot of these CG shots.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Well this is some nice remastered work. I feel that now the ships in The Ultimate Computer must all be new designs mainly because a chance to show new and original designs was missed in the Errand of Mercy episode.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
We've already seen Potemkin, Lexington, Escalibur, and Hood as Connies, so they'll keep them as Connies. The only reason for a new design for Antares is that we've never seen it until now.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
...However, the same logic might not hold for the Woden, which we did see but which certainly could use an update.
I'd be quite happy if they made her into another TAS-style droneship, just without the forward crew section.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dat: We've already seen Potemkin, Lexington, Escalibur, and Hood as Connies, so they'll keep them as Connies. The only reason for a new design for Antares is that we've never seen it until now.
I know but I want more TOS designs, damnit!
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: ...However, the same logic might not hold for the Woden, which we did see but which certainly could use an update.
I'd be quite happy if they made her into another TAS-style droneship, just without the forward crew section.
Timo Saloniemi
I had a similar thought. Actually that may be the exact reason they chose to use this design for the Antares; so they can save some time/effort/money and re-use it down the line for the Woden.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Ooh. A TAS cargo drone with a crew module. Very nicely done!
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
I think unmanned Woden now MUST BE a standard TAS cargo drone! Or maybe a Huron without it's bridge.
All they need to do now is slip in Arex or M'Ress into background somewhere (I kid, I kid).
By the way, I've also designed a ship that was meant to be Antares, but I went more for the survey/science ship look than for the cargo/transport look. Oh well.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Was that your barely-seen Capella-class?
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Yeah. I think I've have to rename her.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Why? I don't see a problem with the name. Just don'te use Antares.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Well, in my most recent articles, I've been naming ships of a class consistently, so all ships of the class would have names of the same type. Antares should be in a class of ships with star names.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Um... Like "Capella"?
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Yeah. There's plenty of stars out there that you can easiuly not use Antares.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I think he means that he'll have to rename the class since the Antares has now been seen to be of a different design. I'm not quite sure of the reasoning there, though, as there should be plenty of star system/planet names to have more than one class following that scheme.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Our simian friend is correct. I had intended for Antares to be a member of my "Capella" class, but since Antares is now a revised robot cargo ship, I'm going to rename the class.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
I'm not against selected liftings from TAS, but I have to say that just on a warp dynamics standpoint that thing takes a massive smelly diarrheic dump on things.
I can't think offhand of any other ship in the history of Trek besides the Borg cube that wasn't laid out in such a way as to suggest some sort of aerodynamic-like thought. Even the flying bricks went with their smallest-area side forward.
That having been said, though, I'm loving the render quality. This shot looks great. The orbital shots being shown from Omega Glory look like cartoons.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
quote:warp dynamics standpoint
Oh c'mon, that's just being silly. Is there any reason at all to believe that at any point Star Trek ships were required to be aerodynamic?
By the way.. is it only me, or does this Antares actually look quite like the DY-100, contour-wise? If you sort of squint your eyes, it does look a bit like this.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
So here's some questions:
1. Does this mean that the Antares and the TAS cargo drones are the same class of ship?
2. Can we finally rule out that the Antares is NOT the class ship of the TNG Antares-class U.S.S. Hermes? I mean, there's no way that Picard would have used a ship that old in his tachyon grid fleet.
3. Ergo, does this also mean that the Antares is not necessarily the first ship of her class, as the shiplist in the Encyclopedia suggests, and that the NCC-501 registry making more sense than if it was NX-501?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
IMHO:
1. It's a little difficult to say, yet. The Antares does look very much like the cargo drone with a bow crew module attached, but there are some variations such as the sensor/deflector dish placement, etc. We may have to reserve judgement until we see what the Woden looks like or get some further clarification from Okuda or somebody.
2. If we couldn't rule it out before, why should we be able to now? Whatever her specific design, I think we all envisioned the Antares as being some kind of TOS-like design. If movie era ships are still being used (and, what's more, being built) in the TNG era, then I see no reason why this design couldn't still be around as well, especially since it's proabably a fairly simple, utilitarian, and low-maintenance vessel. Of course, there's no reason why it need look like this anymore, though. The TOS aesthetics have probably long been refitted out.
3. On the contrary, I would rather tend to think the very fact that they used the registry from the Encyclopedia should lend more credence to the class designation from the same source.
Still, I am now a bit confused as to what this means regarding the Xhosa design from DS9, which had TOS-style computer interfaces and a dedication plaque designating it as Antares-class...
On the other hand, this point brings up again a question that has so far been skirted by us in our discussion of these "remastered" episodes: Are they actually to be taken as re-writing the canon account of things, superceeding the originals, or simply an interesting and fun diversion? Until more time passes, it's hard to tell.
-MMoM Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Still, I am now a bit confused as to what this means regarding the Xhosa design from DS9, which had TOS-style computer interfaces and a dedication plaque designating it as Antares-class...
But the Xhosa, Norkova, et. al weren't Starfleet vessels. Federation ships, perhaps, but not Starfleet. So there could be a Federation/civilian Antares class, and a separate Starfleet Antares class, which has been discussed before. The same thing goes for the "U.S.S. Whorfin," which was a Starfleet ship, which most likely had nothing to do with the Federation Whorfin-class transport ships that look nothing like Starfleet vessels.
In turn, my issue about the class of the S.S. Antares is that it appears here on TOS-R as a definite Starfleet vessel, with Connie-type nacelles and a Starfleet registry. Howver, I still stand by my belief that this design would not be operating by TNG time, if only because it's even older than the TOS Connies, which are definitely not operating by TNG time.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
The Connies may not be around in their TOS configuration, but there has been some evidence of refitted Connies being around; namely, the Connie wreckage at Wolf 359 in BoBw and that of the Olympia in "The Sound Of Her Voice" (DS9). In addition, contemporaries such as the Oberths, Mirandas, Excelsiors, and Constellations are abundant. Also keep in mind that the "Redemption" tachyon grid blockade fleet was hastily cobbled together from whatever ships were available, including several that were undergoing repairs at the time and were pressed into service despite not being considered ready by the yard superintendant.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: IMHO: 2. If we couldn't rule it out before, why should we be able to now? Whatever her specific design, I think we all envisioned the Antares as being some kind of TOS-like design. If movie era ships are still being used (and, what's more, being built) in the TNG era, then I see no reason why this design couldn't still be around as well, especially since it's proabably a fairly simple, utilitarian, and low-maintenance vessel. Of course, there's no reason why it need look like this anymore, though. The TOS aesthetics have probably long been refitted out.
3. On the contrary, I would rather tend to think the very fact that they used the registry from the Encyclopedia should lend more credence to the class designation from the same source.
Still, I am now a bit confused as to what this means regarding the Xhosa design from DS9, which had TOS-style computer interfaces and a dedication plaque designating it as Antares-class...
On the other hand, this point brings up again a question that has so far been skirted by us in our discussion of these "remastered" episodes: Are they actually to be taken as re-writing the canon account of things, superceeding the originals, or simply an interesting and fun diversion? Until more time passes, it's hard to tell.
-MMoM
I know folks have said the main reason we only seen mostly the existing physical models from the movies is because they didn't build any other types of feddy ships during TNG for regular use. Other than the kitbash ships for BoBW's, they used nothing else truely original. why?
because nobody at Paramount either told 'em to, or they said, no $ availible when they did ask. There are also other possiblities that could have prevented them from doing so.
One: What if FC (or who ever the 70's Saladin/Federation sket maker was. His name eludes me)'s estate used Paramount of using designs of ships simular to theirs? I mean, that's one of the possible reasons B-Bird made the 2 nacelle oath, right?
Two: FASA, on their defunctness designs or SFB's?
I'm lossing my chain of thought but hopefully someone will reconise my ideas/concerns, neh?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:One: What if FC (or who ever the 70's Saladin/Federation sket maker was. His name eludes me)'s estate used Paramount of using designs of ships simular to theirs? I mean, that's one of the possible reasons B-Bird made the 2 nacelle oath, right?
Two: FASA, on their defunctness designs or SFB's?
It's "FJ," as in Franz Joseph. And I doubt the "estate" of Franz Joseph would have sued Paramount; FJ didn't even care about the show itself. He just made his book for his kid daughter. And Gene pulled his "Starship Rules" out of his ass just to discredit FJ's work because they had a falling out. Unfortunately, Mike Okuda took the rules seriously because he knew nothing of this little spat & just wanted to follow Gene's vision.
And as for the FASA designs, the less said about them, the better.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
...And SFB designs are just kitbashes of the Connie.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry:
quote:warp dynamics standpoint
Oh c'mon, that's just being silly. Is there any reason at all to believe that at any point Star Trek ships were required to be aerodynamic?
Where "aerodynamic" = streamlined and/or warp-dynamic, then yes there is reason, simply because they all are to some extent.
I can't imagine any other reason why one would expend all the time and effort making such curvy and/or tapered hull surfaces, undercuts, and so on. If it weren't required or at least more efficient in some capacity, everybody would just fly in cubes or cylinders or other more readily engineered and easy-to-build shapes.
As for the Antares issue, I concur with the Picard-scraping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel idea and the civilian Antares.
The meatier issue for me is that of TOR being canon. Given the old Viacom split there's something of a power-sharing arrangement in regards to Trek, and thus a power vacuum in regards to Trek canon policy, inasmuch as there is no longer one obvious ranking individual with say in the matter. Viacom's Paramount Pictures is making the new JJ Abrams film whereas CBS Corp's CBS Paramount Television is doing TOR, and even if they were in cahoots there would inevitably be differences. (Even the StarTrek.com guys are not-so-quietly lobbying folks to go with TAS canonicity.)
Thus, in the new interregnum it's really up to folks themselves.
As for me, I'm following "last known good" sort of thinking inasmuch as procedures are concerned. Thus under normal circumstances and given that these are supposed to end up the definitive versions of TOS episodes for the franchise's longevity, I go with TOR as the new canon. After all, in the next-gen DVD era of Blu-Ray, it's all that's gonna be released.
Besides, I'd wager that the question will become moot in the future. TOR will be the one that's available and the one that new generations will know and see. Thus I'd have to go with the idea that TOR is the new TOS canon on that basis also.
The alternative would be to further fracture the fanbase by having an elitist camp of original-original folks pooh-poohing the revisionist-original folks, kinda like those people who reject post-70's Trek. But that would be quite silly.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: [...]I go with TOR as the new canon. After all, in the next-gen DVD era of Blu-Ray, it's all that's gonna be released.
That's not what I understand. I've heard they're planning to release both and continue to make them available side by side, like with Speilberg's redux of ET.
quote: The alternative would be to further fracture the fanbase by having an elitist camp of original-original folks pooh-poohing the revisionist-original folks, kinda like those people who reject post-70's Trek. But that would be quite silly.
It's more akin to the Star Wars thing, and somehow I suspect that in that case it will remain the originals--warts and all--that are remembered and perpetuated in the long run...
-MMoM Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
But what is the big deal? The TOSR episodes have not reshaped TOS's continuity the way the Special Edition Star Wars have reshaped continuity.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
That just reminded me of an interesting side point - my son recently got the Lego Star Wars II game for the Gameboy Advance, and in the cantina scene, Greedo *doesn't* shoot!
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Not to that extent, no. However, to single out one particular example, what shall we say in the future when asked what the Eymorg ion ship looked like?
It may be less serious than the question of whether Han or Greedo shot first, but there's a clear contradiction there.
-MMoM Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Originally posted by B.J.: That just reminded me of an interesting side point - my son recently got the Lego Star Wars II game for the Gameboy Advance, and in the cantina scene, Greedo *doesn't* shoot!
I just played that level the other day and it looked to me like they both shot at about the same time, similar to the revised version of the movie.
I'll have to go rewatch the cut scene. Glad Star Wars II has that.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
The choice of the Robot Cargo Ship over Huron might have come down to access to blueprints. The Robot ship was blueprinted, printed (on real paper!), and sold by mail order and at conventions back in the 1980s, whereas Huron wasn't blueprinted until recently and is only available on the Internet.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
BTW, since they're going to do a shot of the Intrepid for "Court Martial," I really hope somebody realizes/remembers that her registry is NCC-1831 and not NCC-1631...
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Err...strike that; reverse it. Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
None of these changes have anything at all to do with anything that happens in the episodes, though.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
And here I thought we were all geeks here...
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Not Sol System, evidently. Pfft.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
What now? That's the difference between this and Star Wars, is my point. None of the new visual effects affect the plots in any way. The script says "Outside, a spaceship" and outside there's a spaceship. The content, or at least the essential content, is unaltered. And thus I don't see the potential for really meaty nerd rifts.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Don't get me wrong, I agree with your fundamental point, objectively. TOS was never about the special effects; they were simply there to provide a framework for the stories and characters. In that respect, any changes being made are indeed negligible in the grand scheme of things. On the other hand, however, I have a few of my own personal issues regarding the whole "remastered" affair.
For one, I almost universally find the juxtaposition of vintage live action footage with contemporary CGI to be distracting in the extreme and a far greater challenge to suspension of disbelief than what was there before.
I also hold the opinion that ST and SW are historical documents that ought to be preserved as they are and appreciated as such. Tweaking them to appeal to those who can't get past the "cheesy" FX just seems like pandering to me, no matter how reverent those involved may be toward the source material. Furthermore, since pretty much all SFX eventually end up looking dated anyway, updating them is ultimately a Sisyphean task. (IMO, this is even more true in the case of CGI than in that of practical FX.)
Finally, in another vein entirely and at the root of my "geek" comment, is the fact that (for reasons which are not even entirely clear to me) I find a great deal of enjoyment in nitpicking and obsessing over the not-really-so-significant-in-the-grand-scheme-of-things details of the ships of ST. (A big factor in why I find this board interesting is that others here seem to feel the same way.) Thus, the inherent contradictions in this revisionist thing pose a bit of a conundrum for me. I find some of what they've done to be interesting, but I don't like the idea of having to disregard what it has replaced.
-MMoM Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
When the bad effects distract from the (sometimes) good stories, it's a good thing to update them- fantastic and imaginative new designs help too. Longtime fans get a "new" enjoiment from watching for updated scenes.
TNG next- please!
Posted by Zipacna (Member # 1881) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: I also hold the opinion that ST and SW are historical documents that ought to be preserved as they are and appreciated as such.
Indeed. While it is folly to suggest Star Trek is at the same level as such works of literate, reworking then should be as much anathema as say rewriting Shakespeare or Chaucer. To most people Trek is just television, but you can look at Trek and see commentary on the age and so forth. It is as much a document of social history as anything else, and coming in 40-years later and tweaking things in a way takes away from the underlining meaning of Trek. The whole idea of Trek is to embrace differences and accept, to coin a phrase from the series, infinity diversity in infinite combinations. To come back years later and say "oh this isn't good enough, lets change things" flies right in the face of accepting differences as being meaningful and valid. If Trek and it's fans can't even accept a few outdated effects, what hope does that give for the future of humanity?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: When the bad effects distract from the (sometimes) good stories, it's a good thing to update them
Saying they looked "bad" in the first place is really ridiculous and shortsighted, though. They were state-of-the-art for television at the time, and were just as innovative as any other aspect of the series.
Moreover, as I said above, the fundamental flaw in this is thinking that somehow FX that are state-of-the-art now are going to hold up any better in the long run. Because digital technology and techniques are evolving much faster than the practical methods of yesterday, it takes an even shorter time for CGI to look outdated than it does modelwork. Look at any movie with heavy CGI FX from more than a couple of years ago. Look at the first SW special edition! Hell, look at the first season of ENT!
Are you saying you'll want to see ANOTHER "remastering" after another couple of decades have gone by? You see where my reference to Sisyphus was directed?
quote:fantastic and imaginative new designs help too.
All the designs on TOS were new and imaginative at the time. The only reason some people think otherwise now is because they've been over-exposed and over-stimulated by 40 years of latest-and-greatest-next-big-things in eye candy.
quote:Longtime fans get a "new" enjoiment from watching for updated scenes.
True enough, but that's only because of the novelty of it at the moment. Once that's worn off, it will just seem like a gimmick and we may also be left with some continuity glitch headaches and canon-shock hangovers that make us wish it never happened.
Besides, if your enjoyment of the series has now become about watching for updated FX, then you've sort of missed the point. Good effects can distract from good stories just as much (or more) than bad effects.
-MMoM Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
In a way this reminds me a little of watching an old WW2 movie. I forget which movie it was but there was a scene where a US General patted the barrel of an M48 Patton tank and said "Well, soon we'll be getting rid of this junk and getting the new M4 Shermans". While those with little knowledge of military equipment would buy that scene as is I can't help but think about the fact they are using (at the time) a modern tank to fill in as a historical vehicle. When you see a typical WW2 movie now, (such as Saving Private Ryan or Pearl Harbor)they are usually trying to be historically accurate with the equipment depicted. In a way, we could look at the remastered Trek as trying to be more 'historically accurate'. Certainly "The Doomsday Machine" was a more 'accurate' depiction of what you would expect from that type of space battle with all the debris and the damage to the Constellation.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"While it is folly to suggest Star Trek is at the same level as such works of literate, reworking then should be as much anathema as say rewriting Shakespeare or Chaucer."
Except, people do that all the time. Every summer here in St. Louis, there's a "Shakespeare in the Park" series. This year, they did Much Ado about Nothing. As a Western.
Shakespeare's plays have been set in almost every setting imaginable at one time or another. Obviously, most of those settings are not the ones in which they were written. That's a much bigger alteration than changing the shape of a spaceship that shows up on the screen for five seconds.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Believe it or not, I hate that kind of thing, too. Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Reappropriation and adaptation of shared stories is how new stories are often generated. What is Star Trek without Forbidden Planet and van Vogt's Voyage of the Space Beagle? For that matter, Shakespeare's stories were just cribbed from the popular culture of the day.
So, you know. Let a thousand remixes bloom, I say.
Also, NO GETTING PSYCHED ON / NO CULTURE ICONS
Also also, given that a defining characteristic of Star Trek was that it was produced by a culture just in the middle of waxing powerful across the whole globe, maybe new Star Trek needs to be written by some young idealist in India or China. (Actually, I'd pay huge amounts of money to see Chinese or Indian Star Trek.)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Though I think we're probably veering off in two different directions here, with me up on the ramparts defending the cultural commons and Mim arguing for the preservation of existing works as-is; which two things aren't at odds.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: ...maybe new Star Trek needs to be written by some young idealist in India or China. (Actually, I'd pay huge amounts of money to see Chinese or Indian Star Trek.)
Chinese Star Trek would follow the same overriding theme that's in Chinese literature, Chinese television, Chinese movies, Chinese soap operas: Life is sad. Don't overthrow the Emperor. Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
quote:Originally posted by Zipacna:
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: I also hold the opinion that ST and SW are historical documents that ought to be preserved as they are and appreciated as such.
Indeed. While it is folly to suggest Star Trek is at the same level as such works of literate, reworking then should be as much anathema as say rewriting Shakespeare or Chaucer. To most people Trek is just television, but you can look at Trek and see commentary on the age and so forth. It is as much a document of social history as anything else, and coming in 40-years later and tweaking things in a way takes away from the underlining meaning of Trek. The whole idea of Trek is to embrace differences and accept, to coin a phrase from the series, infinity diversity in infinite combinations. To come back years later and say "oh this isn't good enough, lets change things" flies right in the face of accepting differences as being meaningful and valid. If Trek and it's fans can't even accept a few outdated effects, what hope does that give for the future of humanity?
If the idea of Trek is to embrace differences, then why can't some Trek fans embrace different(and better)effects. And what does all this have do with humanity's future?
Also, I can watch Star Trek with the old effects: I've been doing that for all 19 years of my life.
Posted by Joshua Bell (Member # 327) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mars Needs Women: If the idea of Trek is to embrace differences, then why can't some Trek fans embrace different(and better)effects.
I don't think anyone is imagining a pogrom to burn all extant copies of Classic TOS DVDs. Everyone can enjoy their own.
I think the original question can be boiled down to "when there is a contradiction, is TOS or TOS-R now considered canon?" Never underestimate the longevity or ferocity of debates over canon.
quote: And what does all this have do with humanity's future?
It's actually quite relevant. Watch any film from the last 15 years and you can fairly accurately date it by the size of the mobile phones. Watch any film from more than 15 years ago and there are many plots which simply don't make sense if you try and place them in the modern world of ubiquitous communication.
Heck, we were watching Star Wars last night with my son. The whole first half of the movie is basically Vader chasing after the stolen plans of the Death Star. In the modern world, the Rebel Alliance would have simply broadcast the plans to the equivalent of the Internet so everyone could have a copy and analyze the flaws. Yes, yes, the SW fans can rationalize it some way, just as the ST fans can rationalize any plot hole. That's not the point - the point is that certain assumptions about "the way the world works" are changing.
As my son grows up, presumably with an iPhone embedded in his hand and a always-on broadband Internet connection, a Google search never more than a few seconds away, streaming blogs about his life in realtime to his worldwide cluster of friends, plugged into virtual and augmented realities, will he be able to look back and enjoy "historical documents" as they were created in the past?
If humans can't handle a past that's too different from the "now", it's going to have a hard time adapting to an ever changing, ever accelerating future.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shik:
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: ...maybe new Star Trek needs to be written by some young idealist in India or China. (Actually, I'd pay huge amounts of money to see Chinese or Indian Star Trek.)
Chinese Star Trek would follow the same overriding theme that's in Chinese literature, Chinese television, Chinese movies, Chinese soap operas: Life is sad because we have 1 Bling people, we have enough that we don't give a flyling fuck of 'em. Don't overthrow the Emperor cause who will service the divine country's need for Scat?
Though maybe i'm thinking German-trek (but then what is the first phrase?)...
Anyway, to steer the thread into oncoming traffic, i have a Q. A couple days ago, i was Youtubing TOS-R related materials, mostly the SFx reels (as identified as). mostly it was TV broadcasts edited to show only the remastered stuff. Well i was watching the Immunity Syndrome (The one with the amoeba and the USS Intripid) and the begining of teh episode title, they showed a conny with no light behind her, then a the E underway nearby. Dunno if anyone noticed this but WAS that brief odd fotage the Intripid? Is so, was the NCC clear enough?
It wasn't so from the fotage i've seen (and since you've discussed the Exeter 1672/1706 thingie...)
get my point?
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
If you're referring to this then no, it's the Enterprise, you can clearly see 1701.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Yeah, it would have been interesting to see the Intrepid, but unfortunately it never appeared in the episode.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: If you're referring to this then no, it's the Enterprise, you can clearly see 1701.
Sorry. i suppose it was the way it appears in edited form that made me consider it...
still, that would be a nice idea to include a brief camio, Ja?
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I have seen just a few complete remastered episodes now besides the ubiquitous spoilers. But enough to settle on simple (yet not completely clear-cut) rules:
1) If TOS-R updates or corrects the look of TOS without adding or replacing anything, I see TOS-R as the more accurate depiction of the very same events. Examples: phaser beams whose angles and colors were fixed, Class-M planets now with clouds.
2) If TOS-R adds something that may not have been visible in TOS, I may accept it just as well. Examples: ShirKahr in "Amok Time", the new Orion ship.
3) IF TOS-R replaces something of TOS with something else, I see this as an incursion, and TOS has precedence. Examples: the new ship in "Spock's Brain", the D7 instead of the scout ship (however blurry it used to be).
Of course, there are moot cases, just like the many planets whose basic appearance was changed. Strictly speaking, they all fall into category 3.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Hmm. Would the improved chronometer in "Naked Time" be a Category 1 or 3 event? It "corrects" a clear flaw (the minutes-rolling-at-61-rather-than-60-second-mark one) but also "replaces" most of the details regarding that doodad, by fiddling with the labels.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Everyone seems to think the new shots blend in well, so I'll take their word for it, but from the stills they look jarringly CG.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)